Can Greens capitalise on Labour ambiguity?

flogen

bk wrote:

One second, 50% of people said that they would consider SF more favourably, there is a big difference between this and actually voting for them.

From Pat Leahy's article on the matter (not available on the site by the looks of things):
"More than half of all voters (56 per cent) said they would be more likely to vote for Sinn Fein if the party decided to support policing in the North."

Either way, I said the percentage would consider voting for Sinn Fein as a result of PSNI support, which IMO is the same as looking on them more favourably than before.

lostexpectation

yeah but what ministry/position would they get? in either gov

they wouldn't get near minister for developement (above all else) Dick Roche's job

Múinteoir

lostexpectation wrote:

yeah but what ministry/position would they get? in either gov

they wouldn't get near minister for developement (above all else) Dick Roche's job

Well since they're not tied in with anyone already, they're in a very good position to name their terms after the election, if their support is needed by either side to get into government.
They're certainly not going to get Taoiseach or Finance, but I can see them punching well above their weight in cabinet. People automatically assume they'll get Environment alone, but Environment is a fairly toothless ministry in all fairness (just like the EPA) and the Greens know that. So that on it's own would be a crap deal for them.
If they have a strong hand when the dust has settled, I could see them wrestling Transport, amongst others, from their coalition partners. Possibly Foreign Affairs (Greens got that in coalition in Germany). But one things for sure, if their support is badly needed by someone, that someone will be making a lot more concessions than the Greens will.

Múinteoir

bk wrote:

One second, 50% of people said that they would consider SF more favourably, there is a big difference between this and actually voting for them.

True, but it does increase their potential for votes a lot. But what it seriously increases is SF's attractiveness for transfers. Until now SF have been very transfer repellent for many voters. Although they may not start voting SF #1, many will now be prepared to transfer to SF. And transfers are vital for smaller parties.

ballooba

flogen wrote:

Fair enough - not sure where you get the national 1st pref percentages (or did you just work them out constituency by constituency yourself?

They're on Wikipedia. Search for "Irish General Election". There are specific pages for each election.

flogen wrote:

What kind of results did you find then? Although I do expect this years transfers to be quite different for a number of reasons, namely the FG/Lab pact, the change in perception some have of the PDs, the boost to the Greens via the international environmental movement and the changing face of Sinn Fein as a result of their recent Ard Fheis (according to the Red C/SBP poll over 50% of voters would consider voting for them as a result of their decision).

I expect:
PDs - down.
Greens - up.
Sinn Fein - up.

ballooba

The_Minister wrote:

I've said this soooo many times that I might as well just put it in my sig. PDs are more similar to Fine Gael then Fine Fail.

Ideologically maybe. In practice however?

Also, It's Fianna Fail btw.

ballooba

Latest poll FYI, from MRBI, in tomorrow's Irish Times:
FF 37 (-3)
FG 26 (-1)
Labour 11 (nc)
SF 9 (+2)
Green 8 (+4)
PDs 1 (-1)

Múinteoir

Apparently the Greens are up from 4% to 8% in latest IT poll. Main parties both down. PDs at 1%!

*Edit: Sorry, Balloba in before me!*

flogen

ballooba wrote:

Latest poll FYI, from MRBI, in tomorrow's Irish Times:
FF 37 (-3)
FG 26 (-1)
Labour 11 (nc)
SF 9 (+2)
Green 8 (+4)
PDs 1 (-1)

Yup, not so much an improvement for FG/Lab as a drop for FF/PD - as before, however, the Greens hold the balance and either coalition would work... so how is a vote for Green a way of helping them not go into bed with FF?

Múinteoir

flogen wrote:

Yup, not so much an improvement for FG/Lab as a drop for FF/PD - as before, however, the Greens hold the balance and either coalition would work... so how is a vote for Green a way of helping them not go into bed with FF?

Sargent saying he would resign as leader rather than go in with FF maybe? Pat Rabbitte certainly hasn't been that blunt about it. It's not a 100% guarantee, but Sargent is a very popular leader and he'd know the party mood. He's unlikely to say something like that if he's wasn't very sure of his position.

flogen

M&#250 wrote: »

Sargent saying he would resign as leader rather than go in with FF maybe? Pat Rabbitte certainly hasn't been that blunt about it. It's not a 100% guarantee, but Sargent is a very popular leader and he'd know the party mood. He's unlikely to say something like that if he's wasn't very sure of his position.

Did he? I was sure I saw Sargent naming a number of existing ministers who would have to go before the Greens went in with FF (Martin Cullen, for example) - that doesn't strike me as something someone with no intention of taking part would say - when did he say it?

ballooba

When I said this:

ballooba wrote:

I expect:
PDs - down.
Greens - up.
Sinn Fein - up.

I wasn't expecting this poll.

Yes Fine Gael lost one point. But it's nothing compared to the FF/PD loss.

Trevor Sargent's views on FF coalition are here btw:
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2006/1120/1163947706651.html

flogen

Thanks for the link on Sergent - obviously it doesn't rule out a FF/Green coalition, but naturally it does push things somewhat in FG/Lab's favourite... I still wouldn't call a vote for Green a vote against FF.

ballooba wrote:

They're on Wikipedia. Search for "Irish General Election". There are specific pages for each election.

OK - got the percentages from here, as suggested, and used the following method to work out potential seating (should transfers remain largely the same this time, which I really don't expect to happen):
Divided percentage of 1st pref vote against number of final seats (A); then got the percentage from the polls for each party and divided that number against A...
So, for example... FF got 41.5% of the 1st pref vote in 2002 - out of this they got 81 seats... 41.5 into 81 is .5123. In the latest SBP/Red C poll, FF got 42%... 42% divided by .5123 is 82 - so this method projects them to get 82 seats based on 42% 1st pref support.
Is this the same way you did it?

Anyway - at the risk of boring people further with figures, my total results are as follows:
FF:
GE - 41.5% (81 seats); SBP/Red C - 42% (82 seats); IT/MRBI - 37% (66 seats)
FG:
GE - 22.5% (31 seats); SBP/Red C - 21% (29 seats); IT/MRBI - 26% (35 seats)
Lab:
GE - 10.8% (20 seats); SBP/Red C - 12% (22 seats); IT/MRBI - 11% (20 seats)
PD:
GE - 4% (8 seats); SBP/Red C - 3% (6 seats); IT/MRBI - 1% (2 seats)
Green:
GE - 3.8% (6 seats); SBP/Red C - 7% (11 seats); IT/MRBI - 8% (12/13 seats)
SF:
GE - 6.5% (5 seats); SBP/Red C - 8% (6 seats); IT/MRBI - 9% (7 seats)

The various coalition combinations (including the more unlikely ones) are as follows:

SBP/Red C
FF/PD - 88 seats; FF/Lab - 104; FF/Green - 93; FF/PD/Green - 99; FF/Lab/Green - 115; FF/SF - 88; FG/Lab - 51 seats; FG/Lab/Green - 62 seats, FG/PD - 25

The ones in italics are the potential majorities, and as you see, they all involve FF... infact, FF are just 1 seat short of a single party majority themselves... Even FG/Lab/Green is 20 seats short of the FF holding.

IT/MRBI
FF/PD - 68 seats; FF/Lab - 86; FF/Green - 79; FF/PD/Green - 81; FF/Lab/Green - 99; FF/SF - 73; FG/Lab - 55 seats; FG/Lab/Green - 68 seats, FG/PD - 37

Obviously today's poll is a slight bit better for FG/Lab, or should I say worse for FF... contrary to what the percentages may suggest the most obvious coalition is FF/Lab, and again, contrary to the percentages, Green support for FG/Lab is only enough to match a much weakened FF/PD, rather than top it.
Again, the only potential coalitions are involving FF (and Lab, unless you can get the Greens and SF to support FF), and even a grand coalition of FG/Lab/Green/PD/SF would be 6 seats short of a majority (not to mention the most unlikely coalition in the history of the country!)

Just a comment on the method -while it does take some account for transfers, I think it will prove just as inaccurate as standard 1st pref polls.. Sadly with a PR system it's very hard to poll accurately, even through the most complex of methods. Either way it's not looking good for FG/Lab... or FG/Lab/Green.

ballooba

Not quite the way I was doing it. I look at the number of seats FF/FG/PD/Lab/Green/SF got with that percentage of 1st Prefs. i.e. the last time they polled that percentage.

At 26-28% (last 4 MRBI polls) FG is at the same level it was at for the 1997 G.E.

flogen

ballooba wrote:

Not quite the way I was doing it. I look at the number of seats FF/FG/PD/Lab/Green/SF got with that percentage of 1st Prefs. i.e. the last time they polled that percentage.

At 26-28% (last 4 MRBI polls) FG is at the same level it was at for the 1997 G.E.

Ah - but what do you do when you find a polling percentage that the party has never gotten in an election (for example SF's high, the PD's low etc.)?

Also doing the above criss-crosses transfers, and if you go back far enough you'll find a very different political situation which, in transfer terms, is completely irrelevant to today... I'm not saying the technique I used is more accurate, because I think plenty has changed in 5 years to make last time's transfers unreliable if not irrelevant, but I think it's at least the most relevant to today's situation (specifically in relation to green issues and support for SF on the policing motion)

ballooba

flogen wrote:

Ah - but what do you do when you find a polling percentage that the party has never gotten in an election (for example SF's high, the PD's low etc.)?

That's where the method falls down. Interesting where the figures are available though.

Regarding the 1% party, the PDs. I don't want to get ahead of myself on the predictions front. I do think the Socialist Party have a good chance of getting more seats than them this time round though. Less chance of Joe Higgins rolling over for Bertie.

flogen

ballooba wrote:

Regarding the 1% party, the PDs. I don't want to get ahead of myself on the predictions front. I do think the Socialist Party have a good chance of getting more seats than them this time round though. Less chance of Joe Higgins rolling over for Bertie.

On the PDs - I think they are hard to poll nationally due to their concentrated base, although I don't expect them to better 2002, in fact I think McDowell would do well to hold that figure.

Re the Socialist Party, I agree that they're very much an unknown quantity... they're always part of the Other category in the major polls* and I think they'll be boosted by their anti-War, Anti-Shannon usage policies (something the major parties have all shied away from), as well as their actions in the Corrib dispute (for that area at least, the rest of the country probably don't care too much.)

That said - it all depends on how many candidates they field and how good they are at pushing themselves. I'd bet the party wishes it had more Joe Higgins's, but he seems to be a once off.

*Can anyone tell me how the polling works actually - are interviewees presented with a list to chose from, or do they just pick an option based on their own opinion? I imagine it's the former, but I wonder if the firms/papers keep an eye on any of the smaller parties, namely Socialists, to see if they're worth accounting for on their own...

ballooba

flogen wrote:

On the PDs - I think they are hard to poll nationally due to their concentrated base, although I don't expect them to better 2002, in fact I think McDowell would do well to hold that figure.

I would be looking more towards their 1997 result.

Rock Climber

ballooba wrote:

I would be looking more towards their 1997 result.

I wouldnt.
I'd look at constituencies that they have a t.d in and poll there.
It's nonsensical to draw conclusions from a poll taken from a nationwide sample to figure out the seats for either the pd's or SF as both parties are stong in particular constituencies only.

That means polls will suggest thet SF will get more T.D's than real results due to SF supporters being spread out across all constituencies wider than say the p.d's.
Ergo polls are a distortion for them.
Equally they are a distortion for the pd's (they hint at lower seats than the actual)because locally they have strong candidates/sitting t.d's.
Local factors affect both those parties so anything wrote about either around national polls saying they are up or down , about to landslide or be demolished is pure spin doctoring rubbish in my opinion.

ballooba

Rock Climber wrote:

I wouldnt.
I'd look at constituencies that they have a t.d in and poll there.
It's nonsensical to draw conclusions from a poll taken from a nationwide sample to figure out the seats for either the pd's or SF as both parties are stong in particular constituencies only.

I have looked at constituency polls for my own constituency at least.

McDowell is not looking too good there.

lostexpectation

I thought environment (local gorvernment) was massive ministry, which isn't about the environment.

anyway going like the german greens when they get into power means going not really very green at all, and I bet if the greens get in they'll go all Stern Report Green ie (how will the rich deal with the environment).

ballooba

Sargent has reiterated his position on Fianna Fail here:

Irish Times 03.02.2007 - Author: Miriam Donohue wrote:

Sargent says he will not enter FF coalition

Green Party leader Trevor Sargent has reiterated that he will not lead the party into coalition with Fianna Fáil despite the party's strong performance in the latest Irish Times /TNS mrbi survey.

In an interview in November Mr Sargent said he would step down rather than lead the party into coalition with Fianna Fáil.

Yesterday Mr Sargent told The Irish Times that his position has not changed since his interview with TV3's The Political Party programme.

"I won't be leading the Green Party into coalition with Fianna Fáil."

However, he said he would lead an independent party into a general election, after which he would be open to negotiation "with all parties".

Asked if this was not a contraction, Mr Sargent said it was not as he was stating that the party would be open to talks with all parties "but I do not see myself leading the party into coalition with Fianna Fáil due to its culture of bad planning, corruption and bad standards".

He said: "What I intend to do is reflect the mandate that I will be given by the members. But it is very doubtful that we could ever go into coalition with Fianna Fáil."

He said the "carry-on" in the Fianna Fáil tent at the Galway races epitomised what was part of the culture of the party.

"A sociologist would say that it is easy to change technology and policies, but it's not easy to change a culture."

Mr Sargent said the opinion poll, which shows the Greens with 8 per cent support, up 4 per cent on the previous poll, reflected what the party was picking up on the ground. However he said it may be over-inflated, and he felt their true standing was at 6 per cent

He said the party was determined to give new political leadership in areas of energy and climate, issues which now have resonance with people all over the country, including farmers and business people.

"Our time has come, and the time is urgent. An energy revolution is needed."

Mr Sargent said the party now had 33 candidates selected to contest the election, but the target was to run a candidate in each of the 43 constituencies.

Meanwhile, the Greens accused Tánaiste Michael McDowell of looking through the wrong end of the telescope when it comes to the environment and the economy, and of deliberately misrepresenting the party's position on taxation.

Reacting to claims by Mr McDowell on radio that the Greens would increase corporation tax to 16 per cent if in government, the party's finance spokesman Dan Boyle said the Greens at their convention last year approved the Taxing Smarter policy document, which stated that at the forthcoming general election the party would be campaigning on a platform of not changing the rate of corporation tax or the rates of PAYE taxation.

Meanwhile both Fine Gael and Labour said yesterday the opinion poll results were a reflection of the desire for real change by the people.

The Fine Gael leader, Enda Kenny, said the poll was an indication that people want change.

It was also a reflection of a Government that has been in power for too long and out of touch.

He said it epitomised the response in the Dáil this week by the Taoiseach and Tánaiste to the unfolding crisis in the health sector.

He said this was the highest January poll that the party had had in five years.

"There is a challenge there. People do want change, and myself and Pat Rabbitte are determined we will deliver that change.

" We have a set of candidates focused on winning seats in the election."

The Labour Party's environment spokesman, Eamon Gilmore, said the polls since May 2005 showed there was a clear possibility of Fine Gael and Labour delivering change.

A spokesman for the Labour Party said the poll findings disposed of "the myth" of recent months that the election was over and the outcome a foregone conclusion.

Múinteoir

ballooba wrote:

Sargent has reiterated his position on Fianna Fail here:

It's about the fourth time he's said that in the last two years, too. yet some people seem not to hear.

InFront

I wish Rabbitte would come out with the same thing, that way people would be convinced that a vote for the Labour party is one that will put them into power with FG, and not help FF back onto the government benches. I don't think Labour are planning on doing that - but it would instill a lot more confidence in the opposition vote.

Múinteoir

InFront wrote:

I wish Rabbitte would come out with the same thing, that way people would be convinced that a vote for the Labour party is one that will put them into power with FG, and not help FF back onto the government benches. I don't think Labour are planning onm doing that - but it would instill a lot more confidence in the opposition vote.

Personally I trust Rabbitte, but not the other backstabbers in his party. Et tu Howlin?

flogen

M&#250 wrote: »

Personally I trust Rabbitte, but not the other backstabbers in his party. Et tu Howlin?

How is Howlin a backstabber?
Just because people in parties have differing views on different things doesn't make them a backstabber - I think he's towed the party line quite well in spite of his own personal objections.

ballooba

flogen wrote:

How is Howlin a backstabber?
Just because people in parties have differing views on different things doesn't make them a backstabber - I think he's towed the party line quite well in spite of his own personal objections.

I'd have to agree with that TBH. He hasn't come out against Pat. His views aren't a secret.

The most important thing for me is that we give FG/Lab/Green the numbers so that this does not arise. The priority for Fianna Fail at the moment is to divide and conquer. I hope they fail, but it's a long windy road to the spring, so who knows.