The main political parties are worried by the near 40 per cent supportfor the No campaign, writes Patrick Smyth.
No newspaper editor likes the idea of loyal readers turning to another product on a non-publication day. And so it is with politicians.
That nearly 40 per cent of the voters should back something supported by parties which have barely 20 per cent support in the Dáil gnaws at party managers as much as any damage done to the European project.
As Mr Roger Cole, of the Peace and Neutrality Alliance, put it yesterday: "We shouldn't be getting 40 per cent. We shouldn't be on the horizon . . . Anything over 20 per cent is remarkable."
He believes the result of the two referendums will put a brake on the integrationist gallop of many Irish politicians. Not least because they see their own supporters now open to the persuasive charms of the Greens, Sinn Féin, the Socialist Party .
So will the trauma of the two polls force a rethink of European policy among Irish politicians, particularly in the context of the Convention on the Future of Europe? Its deliberations could produce material for another referendum here as soon as 2004.
The analysis on both sides of the divide is very mixed. The Yes optimists believe they are winning people round to the case for a deeper Europe, the Yes pessimists that we must hasten slowly.
Acknowledging "referendum fatigue" and a general sense of tiredness throughout the EU at the Union's constitutional navel-gazing, the President of the European Parliament, Mr Pat Cox, wants to see the Convention "do something that would last a generation, and draw a line under Europe's endless introspection".
He believes the Convention will produce a broadly acceptable draft EU constitution that leaves nation states as the fundamental building blocks of the Union - "a Europe of united states not a united states of Europe".
Dr Garret FitzGerald, a strong supporter of the European project, is optimistic. He insists that no change of course is necessary. "If we get a sensible outcome from the Convention underscoring more democracy and openness in the EU, it should go through."
And Labour Party president Mr Proinsias de Rossa MEP has no worries about making the case for yet more pooling of sovereignty. "I spent my time during the campaign explaining the value of qualified majority voting. Once one gave concrete examples, like social policy and environmental policy, people accepted the argument."
The general president of SIPTU, Mr Des Geraghty, echoing an emphasis on the debate within the Union rather than about it, argues that the resounding vote "clears the way" for the crucial political debate "about what kind of Europe we want".
Prof Brigid Laffan, the leader of the Alliance for Europe group, insists that the result "makes the next one easier. We really began to engage with the voters on the issues".
That the level of understanding of the issues has been raised is common ground between all the campaigners. For Mr Anthony Coughlan it puts No campaigners "in a strong position to defeat the Union State Constitution Treaty that is now being prepared for 2004".
That view is shared by Mr Joe Higgins TD, of the Socialist Party, who argues that the real integrationist agenda of the establishment will be revealed more clearly next time, and that there are economic chickens coming home to roost. The No campaign's highlighting of issues like privatisation, he believes, will have been vindicated. Green Party leader Mr Trevor Sargent says, however, that the integration process will not be slowed. "Irish politicians are not calling the shots in Europe . . . and even less now."
His party colleague, Mr John Gormley, says the referendum, is an example of what should happen throughout the EU and wants to see the Oireachtas starting already to debate the draft constitutions for the Union being produced by the Convention.
He is less adamant than most No campaigners about opposing the extension of majority voting, but insists that the Council of Ministers must be reformed to copperfasten the equality of member-states. The debate has got to be more honest about the reality that the EU is not simply a collection of independent nation states, he says.
On the Yes side, particularly among Fianna Fáil supporters, there is a wariness about the future. The Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, Mr Tom Kitt, emphasises the need to bring the concerns of the people to the Convention. And he talks of extending a sympathetic hand to what he sees as the moderate mainstream of the No vote.
The Minister of State for Justice, Mr Brian Lenihan, argues that "people want clarification out of the Convention, not deepening".
But he says he is struck and puzzled by the extent to which the "little-Irelander" mentality persists in the ranks of the left, Sinn Féin and the Greens.
And the Minister for Justice, Mr McDowell, warns of the particularly close scrutiny in Ireland which will face anything coming out of the Convention.
Former Fine Gael leader Mr John Bruton, a member of the Presidium of the Convention, agrees. Every issue raised will have to pass two tests, he says - is it a good proposition? And, how will it be presented or misrepresented back home?
Fianna Fáil's national organiser Mr Seán Sherwin echoes the views of many seasoned politicians by admitting that many TDs, like their voters, simply did not know enough about the EU.