The Six counties European Election Thread/Poll

[Donagh]

I did notice that none of them were deemed important enough to warrant having a wiki page set up about them unlike the previously quoted academic and as i've said its difficult to see how they are qualified to speak about recent population trends. Maybe you can point me in the right direction though.

Or maybe you could do your own research.

[delboy]

I did notice that none of them were deemed important enough to warrant having a wiki page set up about them unlike the previously quoted academic and as i've said its difficult to see how they are qualified to speak about recent population trends. Maybe you can point me in the right direction though.

Or maybe you could do your own research.

Or maybe you could do yours and not just pull out a few random names with tenous or non-existent links to the discussion matter in the hope that no will notice.

[Donagh]

Or maybe you could do yours and not just pull out a few random names with tenous or non-existent links to the discussion matter in the hope that no will notice.

Eh? I've placed my arguments and supporting evidence on this Board for anyone to refute and all I've gotten from yourself, Eg and  in response are groundless opinions. At least Roger, God love him, has the garden centre Prods to support him. Now if you'll forgive me, I'm on sabbatical for the next few days doing some research overseas again and I must find my passport. I'll pass on your regards to Billy and Jack in Greenwich after I get though passport control.

[delboy]

Or maybe you could do yours and not just pull out a few random names with tenous or non-existent links to the discussion matter in the hope that no will notice.

Eh? I've placed my arguments and supporting evidence on this Board for anyone to refute and all I've gotten from yourself, Eg and  in response are groundless opinions. At least Roger, God love him, has the garden centre Prods to support him. Now if you'll forgive me, I'm on sabbatical for the next few days doing some research overseas again and I must find my passport. I'll pass on your regards to Billy and Jack in Greenwich after I get though passport control.

Well done most remember that tatic, pull out a few random names from the internet and when challenged, spout some irrelevant nonsense and exit stage left 

[Tonto]

Donagh, now, I'm not trying to be confrontational but just state my view of what might happen in a referendum for a United Ireland.

I think those who equate voting for the SDLP/Sinn Fein as voting for a united Ireland are mistaken.

Ask yourself: why have nationalists, north or south, never even attempted to draw up a blue-print for what a united Ireland would look like?  After all, such a blue print would, IMO, have to be forthcoming before the electorate were ever seriously asked to state a choice; united Ireland or United Kingdom?

It's only speculation, of course, but I think that the reason is simple; to do so would alienate a great many SF/SDLP voters because all of a sudden "shit, my job in the Civil Service is under threat"; or "shit my job within that British company will go" or "we'll have to pay to go to hospital" or whatever would be what would turn so many "nationalists" off.  And turkeys wouldn't vote for Christmas.

Now people on here might say this is a typical unionist with his "comfort blanket" or whatever.  But nationalists, if they want to be taken seriously, should stop dealing in concepts and romantic images of a "32 county Irish Republic" bla bla bla.  Lay your cards on the table and then let the people decide.

Without dwelling on your rather crass argument that those Fenians too fond of the Queen's shilling, the answer to your question is that there are no blueprints because it  needs the input of unionists and the Irish/Brit governments and so far for their owns reasons they've refused to do so. That'll change as we progress and the inevitable becomes visible.   

I think you reveal your own "crassness" with your use of the "F" word in an attempt to feign oppression.

And yes, I happen to think that many, many people are motivated by material things.  Some nationalists/Catholics/republicans or whatever aren't and will undoubtedly go to the polling booth all misty-eyed that they are striking a blow for mother Ireland against the Saxon oppressor if there ever is a referendum on the issue.  But I think you underestimate what you consider your own community if you think that they all follow the simplistic notion that "32 county Ireland = good, UK = bad".

Good luck with convincing unionists to draw up a plan for a UI, btw

[Maguire01]

The Before and After...

[slow corner back]

I notice that in about three pages of EGs posting he has not addressed the fact that for the first time unionism could not cobble together two quotas and that he was completly and utterly wrong about the alliance party designation at stormont. Keep up the BS EG you are very good at it.

[Gaoth Dobhair Abu]

Unionism = Ostrich = Simple truth = Things are a changing

[Tonto]

Unionism = Ostrich = Simple truth = Things are a changing

Yes, we all have our head in the sand.

Meanwhile, Sinn Fein continue to administer British rule, support a British police service, the Union Flag still flies above Belfast City Hall and the border still exists.  Sorry, who's delusional?

[ziggysego]

Ian Paisley Snr and Jim McAllistar are squaring up to each other in the news. Ian has challenging Jim to take him on it Antrim at the Westminister elections to be ready for a spankin'.

[Evil Genius]

I notice that in about three pages of EGs posting he has not addressed the fact that for the first time unionism could not cobble together two quotas

Pay attention at the back of the class!

In post #293, I posted the following:

Quote from: slow corner back on June 09, 2009, 09:19:16 PM
"There is one simple fact from this election, for the first time unionism could not muster up two quotas end of story"
My reply:
"It is only 'end of story' in your one-eyed narrative. The important part of the 'story' which it suits you to ignore, is that the only reason Unionism could not muster two full quotas was because this was the first time the Unionist vote was split fairly evenly between three candidates with strong support, rather than two"

he was completly and utterly wrong about the alliance party designation at stormont.

Not so. For in the past, the Alliance Party has designated itself "Unionist" in order to ensure Resolutions which require a minimum level of cross-community support go through at Stormont.
They are, however, generally opposed to such a procedure requirement, since they believe it serves only to entrench sectarianism within the system, so they now classify themselves as "Other" (to be consistent).
The Alliance Party has never designated itself as Nationalist.

Late Edit: I have just noticed that during the Border Poll in 1973, despite a Nationalist boycott, and their own reservations over the wording of the Poll etc, the official Alliance Party policy was to vote to retain the Union...

Keep up the BS EG you are very good at it.

Er, if I was "very good at it", surely it wouldn't be so obviously BS? 

[Evil Genius]

So again, if you have anything to challenge anything I've posted on the Board I'd like to hear it. I can only assume from your avoidance that you don't.

Oh right, if I choose to let certain of your numerous posts pass, it must be that I am deliberately "avoiding" them, presumably on the basis that I am incapable of rebutting them, then?
No conceit on your part, there...

[Maguire01]

Quote from: slow corner back on June 09, 2009, 09:19:16 PM
"There is one simple fact from this election, for the first time unionism could not muster up two quotas end of story"
My reply:
"It is only 'end of story' in your one-eyed narrative. The important part of the 'story' which it suits you to ignore, is that the only reason Unionism could not muster two full quotas was because this was the first time the Unionist vote was split fairly evenly between three candidates with strong support, rather than two"

There are 2 ways of looking at this:

1 - The 3 Unionist candidates combined got 237,436 first preference votes. Divide that by 2 and you fall short of 2 quotas.

2 - At stage 3, (following transfers from Alliance, Greens and Allister,) the 2 remaining Unionists (Dodds and Nicholson) had 247,943 votes between them - which is just over 2 quotas, even if it wasn't split evenly to allow both to reach the quota.

[Evil Genius]

i give up eg, what percentage of the total population in ni do you believe to be unionist/nationalist

In terms of voting at NI-wide elections, I am happy to go by the most recent EU Election, whereby the 3 main Unionist Parties polled 49% of the vote between them and the 2 Nationalist Parties 42.2%. And from their transfers, I would guess that Alliance Party voters reflect a similar percentage split, if pushed on the constitutional issue.

However, since such elections are invariably skewed by issues such as Party loyalty, effective/ineffective campaigning, individual personalities etc, they should not be taken as definitive on the question of whether NI people are "Unionist" or "Nationalist" in the sense of wanting to retain or abolish the Union.

Were there to be a simple Border Poll, I am confident that the pro-Union vote would be several points above the 50%+1 mark required to maintain the Union. So that if forced to put a figure on it, I'd guess the slpit would be 55-45% in favour of the Union. I say this for several reasons.

Firstly, it is pretty much undeniable that more of the Unionist population stays at home on Election day than Nationalists; however, I am confident that many of the "stayaways" would come out to vote in a Border Poll.

Second, in the EU election, the Unionist party campaigns were divided, internecine, badly organised and with unappealing candidates, compared with their Nationalist counterparts. Such factors would not be relevant to a simple Border Poll.

Third, I believe that a certain proportion of those who vote for Nationalist parties at normal elections might be reluctant to vote for a United Ireland in a Border Poll, essentially for economic reasons. If I had to guess, some SF voters may either abstain or spoil their votes, with some SDLP voters possibly even voting to maintain the Union. Of course, I could be wrong about that, or the actual numbers may be inconsequential, but I have no doubt that there are virtually no people who vote for Unionist candidates in elections who would vote for a United Ireland in a Poll.

In support of such an opinion, I would point to two pieces of evidence. On the last occasion when we had such a Poll, the pro-Union vote came to 57.5% of the total electorate. Granted, that was far back in 1973, and the total turnout represented only 58.1% of the electorate. That said, however, with the Nationalist parties all boycotting the Poll, it was always absolutely certain that the result would bepro-Union, so individual Unionists will not have faced the fear of defeat, or even a close vote, to provide an incentive for turning out.

The second piece of evidence came with an ESRC Opinion Poll conducted as recently as 2007:
http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2007/Political_Attitudes/NIRELND2.html
This indicates that 66% of the population favour NI remaining within the UK in the long-term, whether by direct rule/integration, or with devolution. A mere 23% favoured a United Ireland as a long term solution, with the remaining 11% favouring either Independence for NI, or "Other", or "Don't Know".
Of course, such a hypothetical exercise has little of the immediacy or direct consequences of an actual Border Poll, so it cannot be taken as proof of anything. That said, however, it was also conducted when the Celtic Tiger was "roaring" (as opposed to the present "roaring drunk!"  ).
I strongly suspect that changes in the UK and ROI Economies since, might persuade some moderate Nationalists to "vote with their wallet" were a new Border Poll to be conducted today.

[dodgy umpire]

that survey, however reliable it is, shows the youth support a united ireland, and thus support for reunification should continue to rise