A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.

[JPGJOHNNYG]

60% would be great but the numbers will never work we will be waiting another hundred years for it. The current election results are always framed as oh look nationalism has stalled for 30 yrs it isn't growing no need for a border poll it is never pointed out the free fall of the unionist vote. Likewise opinion polls will have nationalism on 40%. The don't knows not only are they not ignored they are generally presented as default pro status quo. Personally I would prefer a border poll and lose but at least have a baseline figure to work with instead of all the bullshit going on to try and mask the figures and make it look like unionism still has it's 1922 2/1 majority.

[weareros]

The LucidTalk opinion polls that have United Ireland in low 40a are always if vote was held now. Suzanne Breen always buries the aspirational stat which I think was around 52 to 44 for United Ireland last year (for some reason no United Ireland LucidTalk commissioned by BelTel this spring), which to me shows the majority vote is there once they see what's on table (provided it's a good offer by Dublin around jobs, salaries, health - and yes some symbols/culture stuff).

[Franko]

Yes 60 % is right up there with paisley juniors supermajority crap. 50%+1 is enough the problem is if you include the neither in the polling then it's never getting above 45%. Ie a supermajority by stealth. The unionist tally could drop to 35 % in 10 yrs yet a poll still wouldn't happen as all the middle ground gets conveniently lumped in with pro status quo.

So you'd be confident that a poll showing 50+1 % is worth doing? And like the the Scottish one, set it back for 10, 20 years again? 2014 was the Scottish referendum 55% to 45% loss for independence, the Scots were confident late on that it would go through at the time as polls showed a very slight lead the days before..

When do the Scots go to the polls again? What can be learned from their effort to improve ours

Personally I'd prefer to wait 20 years and it defo go through than having to deal with the disappointment and smugness if it doesn't go through

For me, 50+1% is a recipe for disaster approach

What lost it for the Scots was the absolute landslide of last minute scaremongering around financial issues like pensions/trade/currency/benefits/national debt/EU membership etc etc.

Those issues for the most part don't apply in this instance as the 6 counties won't be going 'out on our own' but would be joining a hugely successful economy, which is part of a wealthy and relatively successful* trading bloc.  We are almost guaranteed to be financially better off.

The only scaremongering that will carry any water in this referendum is below:

Orange issues (will only frighten the bigots)
NHS (crumbling anyway)
Loss of dual access to trade (which the bigots want rid of anyway)

Anyone with a brain cell will see this for what it is.

[Wildweasel74]

So what happens if we won it by 50+1 then 10yrs later polls show people looking to go bck, so do we have another vote? Surely if we/u lose the first one, u be looking another poll over the nxt 10/20yrs.?.

[Wildweasel74]

My Dad said, what happens if we win the vote up here, but down south tells us to piss off with their vote, lol.

[armaghniac]

My Dad said, what happens if we win the vote up here, but down south tells us to piss off with their vote, lol.

There would have to be less slagging of the Freestate then.

[AustinPowers]

So what happens if we won it by 50+1 then 10yrs later polls show people looking to go bck, so do we have another vote? Surely if we/u lose the first one, u be looking another poll over the nxt 10/20yrs.?.

Sure why don't they redo the same sex marriage  referendum again , see if people feel differently  about it 10+ years later

[Armagh18]

Yes 60 % is right up there with paisley juniors supermajority crap. 50%+1 is enough the problem is if you include the neither in the polling then it's never getting above 45%. Ie a supermajority by stealth. The unionist tally could drop to 35 % in 10 yrs yet a poll still wouldn't happen as all the middle ground gets conveniently lumped in with pro status quo.

So you'd be confident that a poll showing 50+1 % is worth doing? And like the the Scottish one, set it back for 10, 20 years again? 2014 was the Scottish referendum 55% to 45% loss for independence, the Scots were confident late on that it would go through at the time as polls showed a very slight lead the days before..

When do the Scots go to the polls again? What can be learned from their effort to improve ours

Personally I'd prefer to wait 20 years and it defo go through than having to deal with the disappointment and smugness if it doesn't go through

For me, 50+1% is a recipe for disaster approach

What lost it for the Scots was the absolute landslide of last minute scaremongering around financial issues like pensions/trade/currency/benefits/national debt/EU membership etc etc.

Those issues for the most part don't apply in this instance as the 6 counties won't be going 'out on our own' but would be joining a hugely successful economy, which is part of a wealthy and relatively successful* trading bloc.  We are almost guaranteed to be financially better off.

The only scaremongering that will carry any water in this referendum is below:

Orange issues (will only frighten the bigots)
NHS (crumbling anyway)
Loss of dual access to trade (which the bigots want rid of anyway)

Anyone with a brain cell will see this for what it is.

NHS is a big one, but anyone with a brain will see the way it's going, pensions another one, plus dole/dla. The scaremongering needs to be all countered with the actual facts, if you're looking at it logically it's a no brainer. We're too small of an island for separate entities.

[Wildweasel74]

So Austin, we lose it,thats it for good then?

[Franko]

This shouldn't have to be explained but OK.

There is a mechanism currently within the UK statute book which allows for a vote to be held on the status of the 6 counties.

If the vote is unsuccessful, that mechanism doesn't just disappear, unless the law changes through another act of parliament.

David Cameron was forced under huge political pressure to create a similar mechanism for the Scots (he won that bet).

One could be created, in a hypothetical UI, to allow further votes but it's hard (not impossible) to see where the political drive for that would come from, given that unionists would be in a (sizeable and noisy) minority.

[AustinPowers]

So Austin, we lose it,thats it for good then?

No I wouldn't say  so

The economic factors are pointing towards  a UI. The north  being  better off   in  with the Republic, within the EU etc. we all know the usual unionist position, they'd rather be  poor in a UK than rich is a UI. To  alot of people, that sounds bonkers

What if the roles  were reversed though? Let's say a  border poll won, Ireland reunited. Economies of Britain and Ireland reversed in a few years.  Britain thriving, Ireland less so. Would nationalists consider rejoining the UK? (As a 6 county state, or all of Ireland). Would nationalists then utter the same phrases? Rather be poor in a reunited Ireland  than   join them hoors again?

Is a  reunited Ireland the "right" result? What you need to remember is a border poll is a two  way thing.  It could also be used to  strengthen the union. I actually think a border poll  in the next few years would suit unionists . We clearly aren't prepared (some don't clearly ever want to be), and I don't think a border poll would win if it happens in the next 4-5 years. Unionists should  use that result to kick the can down the road for another 25 years or so

The Scots voted in 2014. That's 12 years , and  when will  they go again? I doubt it'll be within the next decade. That's a  generation.