Who you going to vote for?

Dades

Scofflaw wrote:

Did I already ask why so strongly anti-Green?

I try to be green in my own right without having it enforced on me, and frankly don't think the greens have a clue about what it takes to run the economy. That and they like building bus lanes over perfectly good roads.

TBH I'm mostly apolitical.

Tim Robbins

Schuhart wrote:

FF/PD don’t have magic economic policy. They just keep taxes low so that firms choose to set up here from abroad. I don’t want to go on for ages, but I know the reaction to this can be ‘well, isn’t that what you’re meant to do’. In short, no, as it leaves us in this Hobbit like existence of dependence on foreign markets without any real strategic appreciation of what that involves. The only new Irish company really flogging its ass around Europe is Ryanair, and its in a market that just can’t last.

PDs are also very pro competition.

That leaves Labour almost by default, but at least they do vocalise some useful policies like removing the idiocy from the decentralisation programme and having some positive vision for Dublin – other parties still seem almost apologetic that the city might actually have as much right to exist as Claremorris.

Labour are just full of spin and rhetoric, I see no good policies from them at all. Their campaign is full of nice wishes for a better life, but they fail to tell us how they are going to do it?
They are way too in with the Unions for my liking. I agree with the concept of the Union, but some of them have way too much say in this state and hold us to ransom.

JC 2K3

PDs are too pro-privatisation. The fact is that some things have to be publicly owned. Their policies widen the gap between rich and poor.

Tim Robbins

JC 2K3 wrote:

PDs are too pro-privatisation. The fact is that some things have to be publicly owned. Their policies widen the gap between rich and poor.

Agree something have to publicly owned. anything publicly owned in Ireland has a Union holding us all to ransom, I don't consider that publicly owned.

PDs brought in the minimum wage and it is now the highest in Europe.
Your arguments seem to be based on perception not evidence.

PH wrote:

I want to vote liberal damnit - and I'm thinking Green perhaps or Labour? any ideas?

PD s are only party to have no party whip for matters of conscience. That's about as liberal as Irish politics goes. Some of their legislation is liberal, Cafe Bar license, wanting to bring non nationals into the Gardai etc.

In fairness, Labour and Green have so ok ideas here. Labour are too in with the Unions, and some of Greens are not even scientifically literate - not to mention economically literate.

I am quite surprised how this vote is going. Do people read manifestos or follow politics?
* FG are algined with Christian Democrats in Europe.
* Some of the Greens ain't scientifically literate. They are completly against incinerators and propose no alternative. Stately cleary in their manifesto.
* Labour are run by greedy Unions. Unions that are not interested in Paternal leave, or immigrant rights but shafting all of us for more money.
* SF???? If you had issues with a dogmatic corrupt instituition SF bring it to the next level.

PDN

The PDs have posters all over Dublin reading: "Left Wing Government - No Thanks!"

I find this amazing since the alternatives to government (FG & Labour) are pretty centralist, and the PDs have spent the last few years in government with Bertie Ahern - who claims to be a socialist.

They seem to be clear enough that they are a right wing party.

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote:

The PDs have posters all over Dublin reading: "Left Wing Government - No Thanks!"

I find this amazing since the alternatives to government (FG & Labour) are pretty centralist, and the PDs have spent the last few years in government with Bertie Ahern - who claims to be a socialist.

They seem to be clear enough that they are a right wing party.

The PDs are absolutely useless at spin. Some other examples:
"We are closer to Boston than Berlin".
"We need inequality to have economic growth".
These are all actually true, and all the main parties also believe them, but they just don't say them.
Back to your point. The Left / Right analysis began at the French Revolution and it was actually the other way around. The Left were right wing and and the Right were what we would consider Left wing. Nowadays, these terms are out of date. There has been a complete convergence on economic thinking, which just leads to a load of illogical arguments.
Those posters should just have said:
"SIPTU running economic policy, No thanks." i.e. a dig at the difference between them and Labour.
The problem with their poster is that Irish people like to think of themselves as Left wing when in fact they are anything but.
Using my own anecdotal evidence: all my friends consider themselves lefties. I am the only one who does any volunteer work, give regularly to charity and refuse to buy expensive stupid presents.
Politics for most people is all about perception, not logic unfortunately.

Dades

It all seems a bit moot anyhow - it's not as if you vote for one party, and they run the country. Whoever gets is likely to be a mish-mash of three parties who may or may not have anything in common.

da_deadman

The Atheist wrote:

My personal feeling about Enda Kenny is that he would crack immediately under torture. In fact he wouldn't even get that far as he'd probably have made a deal with his captors at the expense of his fellow captives.

Bertie, on the other hand, would turn on the charm and successfully persuade the 'torturers' that he is, in fact, one of them. He will proudly claim to be one of only 3 socialists in the Dail, he will launch into a tirade against "aggressive secularists", and failing all other possibilites might shed a tear and blame it on the difficult times he faced following his separation. He has won over this nation again and again, surely a few 'torturers' would be no problem.

As for the original question, I'll be voting 1,2,3 in order of Greens, Labour, Fine Gael. As a Dublin South East constituent I feel it my personal duty to try and help ensure Michael McDowell does not get re-elected.

The Atheist wrote:

Anyone who admits to voting Green will receive a hemp sweater and one week ban.

Can I get the sweater in size Medium? The Small ones are a little too tight around the chest...

Dades

You cannot approach an election as logically as if you were choosing a set of curtains. Its politics! Promises made are forgotten very quickly. Alliances change. I'm agnostic when it comes to voting - I just don't like the greens.

stevejazzx

I know I'll get into trouble for this but I've never voted. I was thinking about it the other day when some American/Irish publisher was on newstalk harping on about how voting is a 'precious gift' and that people who don't vote are wasters essentially.
I was trying to reason with myself as to why I find it so uninspiring.
I came up with these 3 answers:

1. Corruption is inevitable.
Political Parties are all corrupt in some or always becomes corrupted when in power. I can't think of any party in Europe that hasn't been rampant with scandal the last five years. Look at Tony Blairs 'new' labour'. Blair announced his retirement last week and seemed in his closing speech to the nation to be a man of integrity. Even if he is, how could he control the actions of ministers around him? Is Iraq his fault or the combination of poor/manipulated intelligence combined with the political motives of the US? I woudl go for the latter.

2. Economy. Dependant on global markets not government.
I am yet to be convinced that a government can simply outline an econmic policy and then inact it when in power and viola a supercharged economy. Irelands current economy is a result due mostly to outside investment. Now I imagine some government teams would make a better job of it than others but really who is it that keeps the money floating around a country? Large comapnies.

3. General Population knowledge of the inner workings of government and individual party policy.
Honestly your average guy on the street is more than likley just voting randomly without even knowing it becasue his understanding of party poilcy and general government is so small. What s the point in using your vote without being fully clued up on everything going on. What percentage of people will be fully clued up going ot the polls on wednesday? Is 15% too high? Either way we're looking at about 80% worth of just loyalty, randomness or ignorant voting.

I'd like to vote but large scale elections can be a lottery. There is no real control element and everything in the run up to a general elcetion is all spin. I'd like to see an alternative way of electing government based on merit of Individuals. It's just hard to devise such a method without ruling out the possibility of corruption. That it appears is something that we'll just have to live with it.
Btw Labour would get my vote if I was to vote.

Tim Robbins

The Atheist wrote:

You cannot approach an election as logically as if you were choosing a set of curtains. Its politics! Promises made are forgotten very quickly. Alliances change. I'm agnostic when it comes to voting - I just don't like the greens.

I think that's a cop out.
There's tonnes of evidence of legislation and policy in manifestos.
You can get most votes in the Dail online
Not happy about the US using Shannon, well you can see which politicians voted for it:
http://www.gov.ie/debates-03/20Mar/Sect1.htm#3

Evidence for some Green party member being scientifically illiterate:
http://taint.org/2007/04/10/134819a.html

Most of the PD's promises came through. Go back through the archives and see the beginning of minimum wage:
Introducing it:
http://www.entemp.ie/press/1999/220699.htm
Defending it:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2000/0126/pay.html

Politics is not an exact science and there's is no "one true" answer but to say we can't use reason, evidence or it's like buying Curtains, I think is just a cop out
The reality is we atheists are not as logical as we think we are.

Stephen

I'm not loyal to any party, but I am voting Labour-FG-Green in that order. I want change! I'm sick of the corruption, waste and incompetence of the FF-PD government. Not to mention their squealing about us being a low tax economy as they pack on a few more stealth-taxes.

Scofflaw

Tim Robbins wrote:

PD s are only party to have no party whip for matters of conscience. That's about as liberal as Irish politics goes. Some of their legislation is liberal, Cafe Bar license, wanting to bring non nationals into the Gardai etc.

Speaking of perception not evidence - not once (in the 29th Dáil at least) has any member of the PDs voted against the Government vote - a feat managed by even Willie O'Dea!

You can check their voting records here.

cordially,
Scofflaw

da_deadman

Tim Robbins wrote:

I dearly wonder. In fact it would seem from the comments posted in this thread, very few atheists or posters here are approaching this election logically. There just seems to be loads of "argument by asertion" and pretty much no knowledge or interest of evidence. This is something we give out about when theists do it.

I then ask, what is more important to deal with logically, something that changes your life and those around you or some abstract meta physical question that you thought about differently when you are younger.
i.e. what's more important? dealing with the future or the past?

It seems like you were expecting every one here to be voting for the PD’s as you have decided that this is the most logical party to vote for. But for everyone there are a different set of issues that will affect them and they will therefore vote for the party they feel approaches these issues in the best manner.

With regards to the Michael McDowell comment I was being (slightly) facetious. There is clearly no “personal duty” to stop him being re-elected but I won’t vote for him based on my viewpoint of the politician. As an example, his leaflets that have come in my letterbox have stressed his opposition to the incinerator in Dublin Bay but I can’t reconcile that with the fact that the present government have proposed this incinerator.

Also, claims from the PD party to be the government watchdog (One Party Government? –No Thanks!) have, in my opinion, fallen down. The issue last year about the ‘loan’ for Bertie and then the saga recently when the PD’s held their meeting to decide whether to pull out of Government or not highlighted for me that they are not any sort of watchdog for Fianna Fail. (You may not think of these reasons as being the most logical but they were enough to sway me.)

I will vote for the Greens as I dearly hope they will have enough seats to be the ‘kingmakers’ and will be able to exert some influence in the next government. It’s pretty obvious that they will not be in a position to implement complete control over the country’s economy but I feel that they should have some influence on governmental policies. For example, I have heard them proposing to cut funding for new road development and increase development for public transport. I would fully support a reduced spend on roads and an increased spend on public transport – therefore, on this issue, I would gladly welcome their influence on the future government’s policies.

Other areas of their policies that appeal to me are animal welfare (from what I’ve seen, it is the Green Party that has the most detailed policies for this) and the promotion of cycling (including ‘safe cycling’ programs for school children).

The Atheist wrote:

Everyone knows hemp sweaters come in 'One Size Fits All'!

I guess that means that my sweater must have shrunk or else I’ve gotten bigger…

Tim Robbins

da_deadman wrote:

It seems like you were expecting every one here to be voting for the PD’s as you have decided that this is the most logical party to vote for. But for everyone there are a different set of issues that will affect them and they will therefore vote for the party they feel approaches these issues in the best manner.

No, I expect people who to look at evidence. I will happily change my mind if a godo argument can be made. I am shocked that very few (if none) have been made from what I think are an intelligent bunch of posters.

With regards to the Michael McDowell comment I was being (slightly) facetious. There is clearly no “personal duty” to stop him being re-elected but I won’t vote for him based on my viewpoint of the politician. As an example, his leaflets that have come in my letterbox have stressed his opposition to the incinerator in Dublin Bay but I can’t reconcile that with the fact that the present government have proposed this incinerator.

Fair enough, good point. Where do you think incinerators should go?
Do you know that the Greens are categorically against all incinerators and propose no alternative?

Also, claims from the PD party to be the government watchdog (One Party Government? –No Thanks!) have, in my opinion, fallen down. The issue last year about the ‘loan’ for Bertie and then the saga recently when the PD’s held their meeting to decide whether to pull out of Government or not highlighted for me that they are not any sort of watchdog for Fianna Fail. (You may not think of these reasons as being the most logical but they were enough to sway me.)

No I would agree with you there. Good point.

I will vote for the Greens as I dearly hope they will have enough seats to be the ‘kingmakers’ and will be able to exert some influence in the next government.

I would vote Green, if there was a good Green candidate. In my area it's McKenna the lunatic. No way I am voting for someone who thinks that about the MMR vacine.

Other areas of their policies that appeal to me are animal welfare (from what I’ve seen, it is the Green Party that has the most detailed policies for this) and the promotion of cycling (including ‘safe cycling’ programs for school children).

Good man, I would be with you on both of these. I regularly donate to ISPCA and I am member of DCC which is basically run by Green heads. I cycle every day and would be totally in favour of cycling as is McDowell.
Source his website:
http://www.michaelmcdowell.ie/
Section: Policies.

Good post, enjoyed it.
Excellant link Scofflaw, enjoyed that.

Dades

Tim Robbins wrote:

I think that's a cop out.

It would be a cop out if I didn't vote, which isn't the case. Just because you have satisfied yourself the PDs are great by looking "logically", doesn't mean other people haven't done the same thing the other way. Who's right?

Tim Robbins

Stephen wrote:

Not to mention their squealing about us being a low tax economy as they pack on a few more stealth-taxes.

Here's a good example of bad logic.
How do you define if a tax is stealth or not?
And so what if it is, surely you are committing this logical fallacy here:http://www.soyouwanna.com/site/syws/logic/logic2.html

As for the low tax economy, why not compare the tax you pay to the tax you would pay if you were living anywhere else in Europe? This can be done mathematically and can be hard to argue with. Then you are argument has substance.

Or why not be more specific? Pick a tax and argue that?
I think the biggest problem in the taxation system is the benefits to rich investors, section 23 and the U turn on the Bacon report best examples.
I blame the Minister for Finance, McCreevy for both of them.

As for other taxes, I think specific taxes, or consumer pay taxes are a brilliant idea. They are harder to dodge and make people think about where the money is going (or what it should be going) towards:
examples:
Plastic bag tax, Car tax, Bin Tax, TV License tax.

Go back to the 80s and self employed people paid no tax at all, now they have to pay their share. And if you don't like em, get a smaller car, or don't watch tv or cut down on your rubbish.

Tim Robbins

The Atheist wrote:

It would be a cop out if I didn't vote, which isn't the case. Just because you have satisfied yourself the PDs are great by looking "logically", doesn't mean other people haven't done the same thing the other way. Who's right?

PDs aren't great, I would say looking at the evidence and trying to derive arguments that they are the best option, Greens also not too bad.

However, I can't look at all evidence and would have thought the counter arguments here would have been evidence based. I will happily change my mind if I there is a good evidence based logical argument. I am being consistent here, I will do the same with God.
Some of the posts here seem to have no logic at all, and just seemed to be full or arguments by assertion based on dogma.
I think it's hillarious we give out to the Christians for things we clearly do ourselves.

Schuhart

Tim Robbins wrote:

PDs are also very pro competition.

Competition comes to Ireland as an EU import. It has very little to do with our Competition Authority doing dinky little reports, a lot to do with Brussels obliging EU Member States to throw open their markets and hardly anything to do with the PDs any more than any other party that doesn’t question our EU membership.

Tim Robbins wrote:

Labour are just full of spin and rhetoric, I see no good policies from them at all. Their campaign is full of nice wishes for a better life, but they fail to tell us how they are going to do it?

I’m not sure this holds water beyond the slogan. On national finances, all the parties bar SF are much of a muchness. Where Labour score somewhat in my books is in some of what they say on some topics. For the sake of argument, all parties mouth platitudes about the ludicrous decentralisation programme. Labour have undertaken not to mutilate the capital by moving policy areas to the sticks. That undertaking saves money, so I don’t see what the problem is.

Tim Robbins wrote:

I agree with the concept of the Union, but some of them have way too much say in this state and hold us to ransom.

This comment reminded me of a bit in Woody Allen’s Bananas when Miss America testifies sweetly that ‘There’s nothing wrong with difference, so long as you’re not too different because then you’re a subversive mother’.

Unions have a degree of access to power in Ireland that unions in other countries can only dream about. I take it you’ve heard of the whole partnership concept. If you’re looking for someone to stand up to unions, it’s hardly the current government.

joxerdaly

would like to see a change of goverment, but still want FF to be included. Would not trust any other party in charge of finance at the moment. Brian Cowan knows what he's doing and there is no one else in any other party with the experance to handle that port-folio. Lets face it, if finance is messed up there will be no money for all the extra beds, Gardai and classrooms that enda Kenny seems to be passing around like sweets.

Dades

Tim Robbins wrote:

I think it's hillarious we give out to the Christians for things we clearly do ourselves.

And I think it's hilarious you refuse to accept that some people don't see politics to be as black and white as you claim it is.

So lets all have a chuckle to ourselves.

Kudos for trying to relate this thread to this forum though!

Tim Robbins

The Atheist wrote:

And I think it's hilarious you refuse to accept that some people don't see politics to be as black and white as you claim it is.

So lets all have a chuckle to ourselves.

Straw man I don't think politics is black or white or an exact science, I said that in a previous post.
What I really don't understand is atheists who are usually logically minded and enjoy making jokes at those who are not but when you shift the problem domain they are ferociously illogical, refusing to look at evidence and use reason.

To quote a famous hippie:
'Let who he has not sinned cast the first stone".

I include myself in that. I have looked at some of legislation passed, most of the manifestos, but I could have looked at way more. Part of brain voting for PD is using perception and not logic.
I have looked at way more evidence than the average person, but there is a lot more I could look at. I think they are the cleverist. I am using pereception for this not logic. I'll admit it.

Kudos for trying to relate this thread to this forum though!

Thanks for allowing it.

Dades

Tim Robbins wrote:

Straw man I don't think politics is black or white or an exact science, I said that in a previous post.

Okay cool.

Tim Robbins wrote:

but when you shift the problem domain they are ferociously illogical, refusing to look at evidence and use reason.

Who here are you saying is refusing to look at evidence and use reason?

Zombrex

I think Tim is objecting to the "gut reaction" that people often use when picking who to vote for. Instead people should think about it and be able to explain why they voted for who they voted for with a rational explanation.

For example, they say that if it is sunny FF will be returned and if it is wet and windy (or both) it will be a FG/Labour government. The reason for this is that if it is sunny people are in a good mood and if it isn't they are in a bad mood and want to blame someone, ie the government

I think we can all agree that isn't a rational way to pick a government for the next half decade. The government have nothing to do with the weather

Of course there isn't really anything people can do about that, it is the nature of democracy that people are free to vote any way they want for what ever reason (as it should be).

Tim Robbins

The Atheist wrote:

Who here are you saying is refusing to look at evidence and use reason?

I think "refusing" may be a bit strong a word, but most of the posts seemed to be based on people's perception of the political parties, rather than any of the legislation passed over the last five years or any of the manifestos which contain proposals for next Dail.

People seem to be using intuition rather than logic. Do I really have to name names?

Tim Robbins

Wicknight wrote:

Of course there isn't really anything people can do about that, it is the nature of democracy that people are free to vote any way they want for what ever reason (as it should be).

You are quite right there Wicknight.
But, I think the pyschology of atheists here is interesting. We joke amongst ourselves at Christians refusal to use logic or reason, and for their inclinations to use dogma, intuition and perception. The irony is we do this ourselves albeit in a different problem domain. So what though? The words: Pot and Kettle and Black come to mind.

PDN

da_deadman wrote:

Also, claims from the PD party to be the government watchdog (One Party Government? –No Thanks!) have, in my opinion, fallen down. The issue last year about the ‘loan’ for Bertie and then the saga recently when the PD’s held their meeting to decide whether to pull out of Government or not highlighted for me that they are not any sort of watchdog for Fianna Fail.

A poodle with aspirations to be a rottweiler was probably never going to be the most effective watchdog.

Dades

Tim Robbins wrote:

But, I think the pyschology of atheists here is interesting. We joke amongst ourselves at Christians refusal to use logic or reason, and for their inclinations to use dogma, intuition and perception. The irony is we do this ourselves albeit in a different problem domain. So what though? The words: Pot and Kettle and Black come to mind.

Okay I've just read the whole thread again. There is some banter, a few cracks, and some good posts. But where is this general trend you keep pointing out that "atheists" won't exercise logic when going to the polls? I'll stop asking if you stop alleging it!

Tim Robbins

The Atheist wrote:

Okay I've just read the whole thread again. There is some banter, a few cracks, and some good posts. But where is this general trend you keep pointing out that "atheists" won't exercise logic when going to the polls? I'll stop asking if you stop alleging it!

You agreed with me in a previous by trying to argue politics wasn't logical so I shouldn't expect it. Here's what you said.

You cannot approach an election as logically as if you were choosing a set of curtains. Its politics!

You sound like you are contradicting yourself

Dades

I suggested politics wasn't as logical as you made it out to be.
That's different to someone not exercising logic when standing in the poll booth. You can only make so much sense out of chaos.

In this instance you are the theist (All hail the PDs); and I am the agnostic (Are any of these people worthy of my vote?). And we all know agnosticism is the only logical stance.