Full page Libertas Ad in Sunday Indo

[ibis]

I can't understand why Libertas think that appealing to people's awareness of the intricacies of EU will encourage them to vote no.

Broadly speaking, Irish people can be divided into a number of camps re. the EU:

1. People who understand what it is and who are supportive of it
2. People who don't understand what it is but who feel a sense of dependency regarding our relationship with the EU
3. People who don't understand what it is and feel threatened by it
4. Conspiracy theorists
5. People who don't care but who will vote
6. People who don't care but who won't vote
7. pfk1, who is going to vote No because he's obsessed with Bertie Ahern

Libertas can only realistically target Group 5, which is a substantial group in its own right, but the grand rhetoric approach isn't going to work for them.

If I was working for Libertas, I'd be promoting a very simple message:

This Treaty is a big deal; if you're not sure, you should do the responsible thing and vote no.

What about those who have read the Treaty and STILL object to it - why have you not categorized those people in your list above?

Well, because he's speaking broadly, rather than focusing on niches?

[Pax]

Going across ideology, --whether 'niche' in terms of political representation or views on single issues (which are not the same, particularly in Ireland)-- I think the stand out feature for the No side is both on the contradictory nature of much of the treaty, (it's a mess in other words) and on how these contradictions will be decided after the vote. Well vote here at least.

[dotski_w_]

I think the stand out feature for the No side is both on the contradictory nature of much of the treaty,

surely you mean the contradictory nature of their own arguments, i.e.

vote No, this treaty is bad for business (Libertas)

vote No, this treaty is for the benefits of big business (Socialist party)

vote No, this treaty will introduce a charter of rights which will cripple the economy (Future Taoiseach)

vote No, the charter of rights in this treaty will have no effect (He3)

vote No, this treaty will (in some way) result in us having privatised social services (socialist party)

vote No, this treaty will stifle Europe becoming a market orientated economy (Libertas)

vote No if you are against the war in Iraq (Socialist party)

vote No, we need a crusade against those Arabs, and we'll only manage it as America's side-kick (Ganley)

Sure, there are differences on the yes side, but they pale into insignificance with the "no" side.

edit - forgot 3 that contradict each other

Vote No - every EU country should be able to arrange its affairs without being told what to do by the rest of europe

Vote No - we're the only country where it's being put to a referendum, the others put it to their parliaments - this is undemocratic.

Vote No - this treaty is too complex for the layperson to understand


ahh, and that's without looking up Le Pen's quotes, and assuming Justin Barrett can resist the temptation to wade in ......

[adamirer]

A lot of people don't mind the mov to QMV in 60 areas. Europe simply can't operate on 27 nations being able to put a bullet to the head on every issue.

It's simply impractical and I've long felt the arguement that this is some big evil conspiracy to take away our 'power' (cough) is spurious.

[constitutionus]

i thought it got the point across very well.

seeing as the "YES" camp STILL havent got their act together i wouldnt underestimate its affect. particularly among the dont knows.

ive made no secret im voting no but the yes camp need to stop the slagging and get on with the campaign. the government and pro treaty parties are starting to look shambolic now.

[ibis]

So far the Yeses think it's ridiculous, and the Noes think it's great. It would be nice if we heard from an undecided!