High Turn-out - bad for Government?

mike65

The turnout across the country is being described as high, up to 40% here in the Deise by teatime for example (must be the weather!).

Does a high turnout equal bad news for the incumbants? I reckon it does as it appears there is a 'drive' on to get those not previously elected, into the Dail which would favour FG in particular I think.

Mike.

upmeath

mike65 wrote:

it appears there is a 'drive' on to get those not previously elected, into the Dail which would favour FG in particular I think

Cullen out!
Crooked schnakey hoor! He even had his fist in matters here in Meath a couple of years ago, 120 miles up the road!

DaBreno

mike65 wrote:

Does a high turnout equal bad news for the incumbants? I reckon it does as it appears there is a 'drive' on to get those not previously elected, into the Dail which would favour FG in particular I think.

Mike.

I was wondering that myself. I reckon that high turnouts usually occur when people have a lug on with the Govt. Everything was rosy in 2002, the turnout was poor. Are people more motivated to change the govt? Me hopes so.

AidoCQS

The indo yesterday was raving about voter appathy and that it was going to be a low turnout due to a move to the centre by parties, are they mad? The most closely contested election in the history of the state and everyone stays at home

Stephen

A jihad on Cullen! Seriously, why do people vote for that arrogant asshole?

burnedfaceman

the election of tds who are colossal fcukups such as cullen and roche illustrate that the gombeen irish man is alive and well as our parish pump politics

AidoCQS

FF tried to hide them, they managed (see attached), now watch them reappoint em

fricatus

Stephen wrote:

A jihad on Cullen! Seriously, why do people vote for that arrogant asshole?

Because he's our arrogant asshole, that's why!

For 20 years we in Waterford have had to put up with crumbs from the government table. Until about 2003, not a sod was turned on a national road within 20 miles of this city. At the same time, the Jack Lynch tunnel, Quincentennial Bridge in Galway, the dual carriageway into Sligo, etc., were all being built. Nothing here. Then Cullen gets in and now we have a new outer ring road, plus a second river crossing and a motorway being built to Dublin. All justified, but would we have got what we deserved without a cabinet minister? Of course not!

That's why people voted for Cullen and will vote for him again this time.

Badabing

By the looks of things it cud be 70% which would be great for Ireland, to say it favours the opposition is hard to tell as the goverment parties would also benefit, a 'circle the wagons' kind of approch.

AidoCQS

I dont know if you spotted it but their is alot of development going on throughout the country.. I think they call it celtic tiger

The question is if you want more roads or consultants

Villain

Was Cullen out around Waterford canvassing? he was very quite on national media.

upmeath

fricatus wrote:

Cullen gets in and now we have a new outer ring road, plus a second river crossing and a motorway being built to Dublin. All justified, but would we have got what we deserved without a cabinet minister?

I might be from the other end of the country but I've quite a few friends in Waterford/Tramore and they all say that while he brought about the necessary infrastructural changes (which a lot of Waterford people have argued would have happened anyway whether it was Cullen or Deasy allocating the funds, FF or FG in power) he's done S.F.A. for the hospital, the I.T. or local schools, and social housing provision in the county is the worst in the country outside Leinster.
What a wonderful arsehole you have for yourselves there, good on you Fricatus, up the Deise, down the Cullen.

mike65

Was Cullen out around Waterford canvassing? he was never quite on national media.

If he was it was disguised as someone else!

Mike.

ps this thread is not about Cullen.

Villain

mike65 wrote:

If he was it was disguised as someone else!

Mike.

ps this thread is not about Cullen.

Sorry Typo just edited.

Gobán Saor

Back to the original question.....!

I reckon a high turn-out is good for the incumbent Government. Basically, the people who're angry and pissed off will be motivated to come out anyway, whereas those who are happy and contented might stir themselves.......if the weather is OK/there's nothing on the telly/they can drag themselves out of the pub etc.
So high turnout = more contented folks voting = good for incumbent government?

fricatus

Gob&#225 wrote: »

Back to the original question.....!

I reckon a high turn-out is good for the incumbent Government. Basically, the people who're angry and pissed off will be motivated to come out anyway, whereas those who are happy and contented might stir themselves.......if the weather is OK/there's nothing on the telly/they can drag themselves out of the pub etc.
So high turnout = more contented folks voting = good for incumbent government?

I would tend to agree with you. I read an interesting opinion piece a few weeks ago by John Waters in the Times, where he basically said "good weather: good for the incumbent government, bad weather: good for the opposition".

This evening in Waterford it was sunny with a light breeze. A lot of people had obviously walked up to the polling station, even though it's about 15 minutes away from where anyone really lives (Ballygunner National School for those who know the area). Got to be good for the government I think.

Is it true it's been raining in parts of the country though? That could be interesting - a high turnout in some areas, a low one in others.

murphaph

But it was a miserable day at the last election and the opposition got hammered.I feel the high turnout favours the opposition.

Sierra Oscar

Gob&#225 wrote: »

Back to the original question.....!

I reckon a high turn-out is good for the incumbent Government. Basically, the people who're angry and pissed off will be motivated to come out anyway, whereas those who are happy and contented might stir themselves.......if the weather is OK/there's nothing on the telly/they can drag themselves out of the pub etc.
So high turnout = more contented folks voting = good for incumbent government?

To be honest I think you could counter that with the fact that those that are happy with the current gov could convince themselves to vote as they will most likely be well aware that the current gov is under serious threat.

CrowdedHouse

I voted about 7:30 pm,the ballot box was almost full,had to stuff the paper in,first time I ever noticed that.

Our man in Havana

I had to ballot stuff at 11 am. High turnout is indeed on the cards!

There were queue's in the polling station in arklow town that I voted in and the box was full too.
The other polling stations in the town were crowded also.

nesf

murphaph wrote:

But it was a miserable day at the last election and the opposition got hammered.I feel the high turnout favours the opposition.

The last election wasn't a competition though. I think it's simple, it's a tight election so more people can be bothered to vote. The last time FF was so far ahead that a lot of people didn't bother voting because they figured it wouldn't make a difference.

Lennoxschips

in most countries higher turnout is said to benefit the left

Lennoxschips

Lennoxschips wrote:

in most countries higher turnout is said to benefit the left

It didnt benefit them in France...

nesf

Tristrame wrote:

It didnt benefit them in France...

Or in the last US presidential election.

gandalf

nesf wrote:

Or in the last US presidential election.

Errr the US is Right or more Right

Lennoxschips

Tristrame wrote:

It didnt benefit them in France...

perhaps royal would have gotten even less otherwise?

don't know how true it is, but "higher turnout = good for the left" is generally what you hear. could be a load of nonsense of course!

Villain

I think the reason a high turnout is often seen to favour the left is because those living in lower class areas don't often turn out in the same numbers as the middle class so when the turnout is up it is usually from lower class areas, its only a theory though.

mike65

I think higher is good for FG/Lab, the last time it was'nt a contest so the non FFers proberly stayed away, this time its all to play for.

Mike.

nesf

gandalf wrote:

Errr the US is Right or more Right

Ah, tis all relative.

irish1 wrote:

I think the reason a high turnout is often seen to favour the left is because those living in lower class areas don't often turn out in the same numbers as the middle class so when the turnout is up it is usually from lower class areas, its only a theory though.

It's generally (from what I've read) more of a factor in a two party or two alliance election versus what we have with a highly fragmented left and centre.

DMC

An 80's style election is possible. FWIW, I think a high turnout will favour the big 2, and squeeze the PD's, Labour and the Independents. 2002's low turnout hit FG's support more than others, of course.

FG will probably gain a few seats at the expense of Labour, which helps neithers ambitions.

So long as we don't get an 80's style economy afterwards