Yet Another bogus Lisbon Poll

[lostexpectation]

didn't we just have one of these?

Support for Lisbon Treaty increases to 54% - The Irish Times - Mon, Jun 01, 2009

In the latest poll voters were asked how they would vote in the light of the commitment to allow Ireland to retain a European Union commissioner along with legal guarantees on other Irish concerns about neutrality, abortion and taxation.

what commitments? we haven't got any yet. how real are those commitments from the EU and Irish side

Voters were also asked if, in the light of the current economic crisis, they thought it was better to be part of the EU. A substantial 81 per cent thought it better to be part of the EU, (up 2 points since the last poll) 10 per cent thought it was not (no change) and 9 per cent had no opinion (down 2 points). The poll was conducted between Tuesday and Thursday of last week, among a representative sample of 2,000 voters in face-to-face interviews at 200 sampling points in all 43 constituencies. The margin of error is 2 per cent.

a case of asking a question you know the answer too or a case of looking for answers to question no one was asking? push polling perhaps

[ibis]

didn't we just have one of these?

Support for Lisbon Treaty increases to 54% - The Irish Times - Mon, Jun 01, 2009

what commitments? how reallt or those commitments from the EU and Irish side

The commitments that were agreed at the December European Council meeting, to be completed for signature by the member states at the June European Council meeting (or possibly a July special meeting), and that were signalled as being on track at the March European Council meeting.

a case of asking a question you know the answer too. a case of looking for answers to question non-one was asking push polling perhaps

Sure, because we don't have anybody suggesting that we'd be better off outside the EU - except of course all the UK redtops and the Torygraph plus all the libertarians round this neck of the woods...etc etc.

[FutureTaoiseach]

Indeed. Madame has decided, in the week that's in it, to bang the Lisbon drum in the hope that will will lose our critical-faculties with respect to the European project and again export a herd of sheep to Brussels/Strasbourg on the basis that if most agree to the whims of the euro-elites, that (in time-honoured euro-speak) we won't want to be "isolated" by being in the minority resisting the federalist-tide. The problem with that argument is that they weren't so keen on conforming to the majority-opinion when the Irish people voted not to ratify the illegitimate and thrice rejected Lisbon Treaty. Unfortunately for Madame and the rest of the system, the discerning Irish voter knows a pig in a poke when a snake-oil salesman is attempting to sell it to him (not that Madame is one - of course). The pig in the poke are the "assurances/guarantees", which have assumed mythical quality for their unlimited capacity for addressing the 'misunderstandings/confusions' that led the Irish people to vote no. The problem with them is multifaceted: Firstly, they have to exist - which they don't. Secondly, we need them on paper for them to mean anything. Thirdly, we need them in a Treaty beforehand to know they will be legally-binding. Fourthly, to be sure they are not just another of Fianna Fáil's broken-promises, we need them to actually be enshrined in a Treaty prior to Lisbon's ratification, or as part of the Lisbon ratification. Otherwise, they are snake-oil of the crudest order.

[hiding behind a poster]

Indeed. Madame has decided, in the week that's in it, to bang the Lisbon drum in the hope that will will lose our critical-faculties with respect to the European project and again export a herd of sheep to Brussels/Strasbourg on the basis that if most agree to the whims of the euro-elites, that (in time-honoured euro-speak) we won't want to be "isolated" by being in the minority resisting the federalist-tide. The problem with that argument is that they weren't so keen on conforming to the majority-opinion when it Madame believes voted not to ratify the illegitimate and thrice rejected Lisbon Treaty. Unfortunately for Madame and the rest of the system, the discerning Irish voter knows a pig in a poke when a snake-oil salesman is attempting to sell it to him (not that Madame is one - of course). The pig in the poke is the "assurances/guarantees", which have assumed mythical quality for their unlimited capacity for addressing the 'misunderstandings/confusions' that led the Irish people to vote no. The problem with them is multifaceted: Firstly, they have to exist first - which they don't. Secondly, we need them on paper for them to mean anything. Thirdly, we need them in a Treaty beforehand to know they will be legally-binding. Fourthly, to be sure they are not just another of Fianna Fáil's broken-promises, we need them to actually be enshrined in a Treaty prior to Lisbon's ratification, or as part of the Lisbon ratification. Otherwise, they are snake-oil of the crudest order.

For the love of sweet divine Jesus, would you EVER go and get yourself a life.

[mccafferty cat]

Indeed. Madame has decided, in the week that's in it, to bang the Lisbon drum in the hope that will will lose our critical-faculties with respect to the European project and again export a herd of sheep to Brussels/Strasbourg on the basis that if most agree to the whims of the euro-elites, that (in time-honoured euro-speak) we won't want to be "isolated" by being in the minority resisting the federalist-tide. The problem with that argument is that they weren't so keen on conforming to the majority-opinion when it Madame believes voted not to ratify the illegitimate and thrice rejected Lisbon Treaty. Unfortunately for Madame and the rest of the system, the discerning Irish voter knows a pig in a poke when a snake-oil salesman is attempting to sell it to him (not that Madame is one - of course). The pig in the poke is the "assurances/guarantees", which have assumed mythical quality for their unlimited capacity for addressing the 'misunderstandings/confusions' that led the Irish people to vote no. The problem with them is multifaceted: Firstly, they have to exist first - which they don't. Secondly, we need them on paper for them to mean anything. Thirdly, we need them in a Treaty beforehand to know they will be legally-binding. Fourthly, to be sure they are not just another of Fianna Fáil's broken-promises, we need them to actually be enshrined in a Treaty prior to Lisbon's ratification, or as part of the Lisbon ratification. Otherwise, they are snake-oil of the crudest order.

This is like a political form of Joyce's "stream of consciousness" style of writing, from Finnegan's Wake, etc.

Except written by a complete sadcase.

[Almanac]

The manufacture of consensus. Previous poll gave loaded question to which the only logical answer could be yes. Since people naturally tend to be conformist, in this poll bound to be an increase based on this created perception of support for the Lisbon Treaty.

[ibis]

The manufacture of consensus. Previous poll gave loaded question to which the only logical answer could be yes. Since people naturally tend to be conformist, in this poll bound to be an increase based on this created perception of support for the Lisbon Treaty.

So the polls during Lisbon 1 were manufacturing a No consensus? Don't tell me - there's a completely different explanation for those ones.

[FutureTaoiseach]

So the polls during Lisbon 1 were manufacturing a No consensus? Don't tell me - there's a completely different explanation for those ones.

The key difference is that they are introducing a hypothesis (assurances) this time into the question, and then presenting the findings as support for "Lisbon".

[ibis]

The key difference is that they are introducing a hypothesis (assurances) this time into the question, and then presenting the findings as support for "Lisbon".

That seems reasonable, given that the government only agreed to run a second referendum if such assurances were offered. That will be the basis on which the second referendum will be run - keep the Commissioner, guarantees on tax etc.

[FutureTaoiseach]

That seems reasonable, given that the government only agreed to run a second referendum if such assurances were offered. That will be the basis on which the second referendum will be run - keep the Commissioner, guarantees on tax etc.

We know all about Fianna Fáil and their "assurances" since 1997.

Last Updated: 25 April 2002
The Taoiseach has promised to keep taxes down, put more Gardaí on the streets, and end hospital waiting lists if returned to power. At the launch of the Fianna Fáil manifesto ahead of the 17 May General Election, Bertie Ahern also unveiled proposals for a new agency to raise finance for infrastructure projects.

Under the slogan, "A lot done, more to do", Fianna Fáil is stressing its record in Government as it goes before the electorate. It has also made new pledges, including a €200-a-week old age pension, a permanent end to hospital waiting lists within two years, and new legislation to give rights to the disabled.