My fingers have gone on strike, and refuse to write anything about this topic. Kidding aside, I have made a somewhat developed answer on another board, merely dealing with objections to the treaty itself, and to the way it was sold to those silly... to the most appreciated voters. Other interesting opinions about the Whole Thingy can be found in the same thread, though I was the only Frenchman on duty. Link is
here .
A succinct summary: the treaty was about as clear as muddy water, with various articles reducing other provisions, among other things. A clear picture is very difficult to get, even for scholars of legalese and pol sci. Check your knowledge of the proposed treaty by answering the following questions: what bodies hold power in the proposed treaty? Who do we elect directly? Who is responsible before whom? What are the differences compared to the current system? How are decisions taken? (Special cases where unaminity is required must be mentioned as well, as per articles IV 440 and 441... or was it 441 and 442? and linked articles) I did not like the picture I got, but I cannot be sure I read (and understood) everything related to the political institutions. Still, it seems *very* odd to vote on something the average voter is unlikely to fully understand, given the awful presentation of the Whole Thingy.
The campaign was the yes was about as convincing as... Well, let's just say the no vote has climbed in the polls thorought the "official" campaign (starting in early May or so). The arguments were vague to say the least, there was not much in the ways of emotion, and some examples were simply wrong. Add to that the marginalisation of the naysayers, and the felt omnipresence of the yes campaigners in the media, and you have the recipe for a failure.
Two quotes from the father of the treaty himself, the former French President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing (technically not supposed to campaign under French law); the effect of the quotes is kept, but I cannot recall their exact wording (it can be found if needed). "I would be the first to recognise the Constitution is a much better remedy for insomnia than most of the medecine they sell in drugstores." "The treaty could be cut by one third without removing anything important from it." Got to wonder why nothing was done to help matters eh? And a lovely quote from a right-wing meeting: "Only the decrepit old timers would say no". How persuasive.