Did you vote Green and will you again?

arybvtcw0eolkf

Although I'm not a Green party voter, I always gave the Green's credit for the party who would stick to their principles through thick and thin.

IMO they sold out, they proved their no better than the rest and although at the moment I'm not a Green voter after this debacle I'll never vote for them.

Someone said its a dangerous move for the Green's, well I'll back that one.

I think that F.F. and Bertie will eat the Green's alive over the next Dail.

Sonnenblumen

Clearly two points of view on future voting: Green voters/supporters basically holding view to see what happens over next 5 years and others ie 'non-Greens' who didn't and won't.

What surprised me why so many 'Save the World' junkies can quickly come to support/defend a party who for the last 20 years or more sold their arse and all besides to satisfy their own selfish lust for glory.

The greens are a doomed force now but it will be exciting to watch John Gormley defend the indefensible.

bk

As I expected, most people here aren't Green supporters,they are anti-FF supporters who simply gave the greens your third preference after FG/Labour.

Your opinions will be completely irrelevant come the next election. While the greens may lose your last preference, if they do a good job in government, they will get the transfer votes from FF voters and that generally is much more valuable then FG/Labour transfers. Just see how well the PD's did back in 2002 based on transfers from FF.

If the greens do a good job in government, they will become far more votable. A big problem up until now for them is that they have been seen as far too radical and hippy for most mainstream people to vote for them. But if they can act maturely in government then many socially, middle class mainstream voters will give them there vote. This in particular could cut into Labours vote.

bk

Sonnenblumen wrote:

What surprised me why so many 'Save the World' junkies can quickly come to support/defend a party who for the last 20 years or more sold their arse and all besides to satisfy their own selfish lust for glory.

But you see, you are missing the point, the "save the world" junkies as you put it, couldn't care less about politics or other parties history. They rightly only care about getting green policies implemented, who they do it with is irrelevant, after all FG are almost exactly the same as FF, with the same policies, etc.

So to a green voter (as opposed to a ABFF voter) then they will only care about how they perform in government, not if it is with FG or FF (basically the opposite side of the same coin).

Raskolnikov

If Eamon Ryan and John Gormley can make an impact in their respective ministries; I will go from giving them a high preference, to a first.

is_that_so

bk wrote:

As I expected, most people here aren't Green supporters,they are anti-FF supporters who simply gave the greens your third preference after FG/Labour.

Your opinions will be completely irrelevant come the next election. While the greens may lose your last preference, if they do a good job in government, they will get the transfer votes from FF voters and that generally is much more valuable then FG/Labour transfers. Just see how well the PD's did back in 2002 based on transfers from FF.

If the greens do a good job in government, they will become far more votable. A big problem up until now for them is that they have been seen as far too radical and hippy for most mainstream people to vote for them. But if they can act maturely in government then many socially, middle class mainstream voters will give them there vote. This in particular could cut into Labours vote.

Yet again some very vague presumptions about why people voted as they did. Be honest,you actually don't know.

If all of this comes down to being upset at people being "anti-FF" then admit that rather than accuse them of irrelevance. Take a little time to understand why some people did not want FF in power again. It is rank hypocrisy to suggest that "the people have spoken" only means the ones that you support.

Sonnenblumen

bk wrote:

But you see, you are missing the point, the "save the world" junkies as you put it, couldn't care less about politics or other parties history. They rightly only care about getting green policies implemented, who they do it with is irrelevant, after all FG are almost exactly the same as FF, with the same policies, etc.

So to a green voter (as opposed to a ABFF voter) then they will only care about how they perform in government, not if it is with FG or FF (basically the opposite side of the same coin).

IMO the relevance of any Green policies is unlikely to extend beyond some guy cycling to the Dail.

Park the ABFF and the errorneous claims of FF /FG similarities. The point here is that 'Save the World' Party sold their sold and that is the fundamental point. The strategy for policy implementation is nothing more than a base cop out most likely to lose voters rather than gain. Time will tell.
IMO they are less relevant now as a political force.

bk

is_that_so wrote:

Yet again some very vague presumptions about why people voted as they did. Be honest,you actually don't know.

Of course I don't know, but from reading this thread you would have to be blind not to see that those who voted green feel into two camps:

1) Real green supporters who gave them their first preference.

2) FG/Labour supporters who gave them 3rd or 4th preference.

is_that_so wrote:

If all of this comes down to being upset at people being "anti-FF" then admit that rather than accuse them of irrelevance. Take a little time to understand why some people did not want FF in power again. It is rank hypocrisy to suggest that "the people have spoken" only means the ones that you support.

Huh, I didn't say anything like that, instead I'm trying to give an unbiased analysis of the situation. I think you are the one who is projecting your opinion and views on what I actually said.

What I actually said is that everyone here seems to think that the greens will be wiped out in the next election. What I'm saying is that view is based on an emotional opinion from FG/Labour supporters who are angry at the greens for supporting a FF government.

What I'm simply doing is putting forward an alternative possible situation in 5 years where the greens don't get wiped out.

My scenario is just as valid as anyone elses, but then of course I'll get attacked for it here on this board because it doesn't follow the strong FG/LAbour following here on this board.

However I'll remind people that before the election everyone on this board was also saying that FF would be wiped out and that FG/Labour were guaranteed to re-enter government. Well this board was wrong on that and it could very well be wrong about the greens. This board isn't really a reflection of mainstream Irish opinions.

Red Alert

I'm in the constituency of Dublin South, and I gave Eamonn Ryan a very high preference. My natural vote was going to be Fine Gael and the Labour Party. Only in the past year or so I've become quite aware of green issues, and decided that it would be a good idea to help those policies into government. I was also terribly dissatisfied at what was on offer from Fianna Fail/PD's.

I know I was silly not to see through the green party's 'change of government' rhetoric without acutally commiting to the alternative government that was on offer.

The reason I gave Eamonn Ryan a vote therefore was to help tip things to make a good climate for an alternative to exist.

I will never vote for the green party again, and I am very disappointed in Eamonn Ryan, whom I genuinely admired as a new and clean politician.

bk

Sonnenblumen wrote:

Park the ABFF and the errorneous claims of FF /FG similarities.

If you were to invite a foreign political analyst to Ireland to review and categorise all the parties, they would tell you that both FF and FG are both just slightly right of center.

There are differences, FF is a populist party while FG is a legal-policy driven party. But from a greeen, leftist point of view, they would be seen as exactly the same. Most of their policies in the last election were almost exactly the same, low taxes, continue T21, increase Gardai numbers, etc. the only major policy they differed on was hospital co-location.

From the greens point of view, if they went into government with FG, they would have gotten almost the same as with FF. Remember FG said they wouldn't stop the Shannon stop over, they wouldn't stop building the M3, etc. So from a green perspective there is little difference between FG/FF.

Sonnenblumen wrote:

IMO they are less relevant now as a political force.

With just 6 seats, they have never been relevant as a political force, at least in government now they have a chance to become relevant.

gbh

To be honest FF have shown throughout their history that they have no core left or right wing ideology. They hitch their wagon to the ideology of whatever party happens to be able to make up the numbers for government. Bertie says he is a socialist. The party calls itself Republican, which is more left wing than right wing. When it suits they are left wing and if it doesnt they are right wing. When popular opinion is for Irish unity, so are FF, and when popular opinion is against unity they are against. Before the election they thought the Greens had crazy policies, but now they are in government with them. So FF ideology always depends on which way the winds of public opinion blows.

LostinBlanch

Raskolnikov wrote:

If Eamon Ryan and John Gormley can make an impact in their respective ministries; I will go from giving them a high preference, to a first.

You planning to vote in two different constituencies Ras? :rolleyes:

I think he meant greens in general.

Mick86

Voipjunkie wrote:

They did

Yes the PDs really benefitted from FF transfers.

Voipjunkie wrote:

how can you possibly know this

13% of party members who attended a conference voted against going in that in no way represents a split or a core vote share the earliest possible indication of any affect on the Green Party will not be known until the next opinion poll

I cannot know this. But I have a feeling that the Greens who were so put out about the pact with FF may split and form another party.

Voipjunkie wrote:

McKenna is just one member

One with integrity.

Voipjunkie wrote:

Well if you are against the greens sharing power with FF the only realistic alternative is to share power with FG unless you believe the greens could organise a 6 member minority administration to run the country:rolleyes:

Well thank you for making my mind up for me Herr Voipjunkie. Fascism is not dead.

Voipjunkie wrote:

Well those are Green policies that is what the people who voted green voted for

Yes indeed which is why there are only 6 Green TDs. Unfortunately FF's greed for perennial power has placed this minority in a position where it can try and inflict it's loonier policies on the rest of us.

gbh wrote:

To be honest FF have shown throughout their history that they have no core left or right wing ideology. They hitch their wagon to the ideology of whatever party happens to be able to make up the numbers for government. ...

Yes indeed. Bertie is now an environmentalist. He watched the entire series of Planet Earth on telly you know.:D

Garret

yes and yes

bk

Mick86 wrote:

Yes the PDs really benefitted from FF transfers.

Well actually in 2002 they did and got 8 seats, punching well above their core vote.

In this election, you could say that McDowell committed suicide for the PD's by threatening to leave the government just before the elections. A lot of FF voters didn't like that and punished the PD's for it by not giving them their transfer votes, thus the PD's almost getting wiped out.

Mick86

bk wrote:

Well actually in 2002 they did and got 8 seats, punching well above their core vote.

If a week is a longtime in politics then 2002 is millennia ago.:D

bk wrote:

In this election, you could say that McDowell committed suicide for the PD's by threatening to leave the government just before the elections. A lot of FF voters didn't like that and punished the PD's for it by not giving them their transfer votes, thus the PD's almost getting wiped out.

Or perhaps McDowell lost the floating vote by not pulling the plug on Bertie last autumn.

I seriously doubt that the Greens will stay in government for 5 years. Some crisis will rear it's ugly head and they'll pull out in which case the FF voters won't give them the transfers next time out. Alternatively they stay in coalition and the floating vote punishes them. Looks like a lose/lose situation to me.

gbh

The Greens did canvass on a policy of cleaning up politics and cleaning up Fianna Fail which is impossible to do of course. Its like saying your going to make the devil a better person or something. Its really a no win situation for the Greens. I think they may lose a lot of their core vote at the next election as people from the left return to the Labour party. Fine Gael may also pick up some of their seats. I dont see Fianna Fail voters giving the Greens their transfers, because ideologically FF voters have more in common with PDs than Greens.

John_C

Red Alert wrote:

I will never vote for the green party again, and I am very disappointed in Eamonn Ryan, whom I genuinely admired as a new and clean politician.

In fairness, I think you're being a bit harsh on the fella. You can't expect him to turn down the chance to implement his policies for fear of loosing third preference votes from FG supporters.

He's no less honest than he was this time last week.

Voipjunkie

Mick86 wrote:

Yes the PDs really benefitted from FF transfers.

Well rather than just mouthing off look at the counts and see where Harney got the 2200+ votes from that got her elected

Look at Galway west and the dismal inter PD transfer rate and compare it to the transfers that Mcdowell picked up from the last FF candidate about 40%+

That is not to mention that the 8 seats they won on 3.7% vote share last time out

Mick86 wrote:

I cannot know this. But I have a feeling that the Greens who were so put out about the pact with FF may split and form another party.

You cannot know this end of story your feelings mean nothing as you have nothing substantive to back them up

Mick86 wrote:

One with integrity

.

So those willing to compromise and perhaps actually get something done have no integrity

Mick86 wrote:

Well thank you for making my mind up for me Herr Voipjunkie. Fascism is not dead.

when you resort to fascist insults you have lost the argument you are complaining the greens went in with FF when I point out the alternatives I'am a fascist?:rolleyes: please

Mick86 wrote:

Yes indeed which is why there are only 6 Green TDs. Unfortunately FF's greed for perennial power has placed this minority in a position where it can try and inflict it's loonier policies on the rest of us.

All parties have a greed for power that is the point you cannot implement anything from the opposition benches

Mick86 wrote:

Yes indeed. Bertie is now an environmentalist. He watched the entire series of Planet Earth on telly you know.:D

bertie does not have to be an enviromentalist no more than the greens have to be rampant capitalists they have agreed to share power hopefully some of the green policies or at the very least some green input will come through in future decisions

gbh

Yet another typical piece of oppertunism by Bertie to say he saved the Corncrake and the red squirrel singlehandedly. No mention of of course of the people who first noticed the problem and really deserve the credit...Michael Noonan was spot on when he said "He's like the cock in the morning who thinks the sun rises because he sings". Leave it to the Sindo though to put it on the front page...Sindo is becoming a weekly election poster for FF.

Grudaire

Mick86 wrote:

I cannot know this. But I have a feeling that the Greens who were so put out about the pact with FF may split and form another party.

But didn't nearly 90% go for the deal????

The people who gave out were Shell To Sea, Tara etc etc.... not many were in the greens....

Heinrich

Cliste wrote:

But didn't nearly 90% go for the deal????

The people who gave out were Shell To Sea, Tara etc etc.... not many were in the greens....

The percentage was of those who actually made it to Dublin for the vote. To get a real picture you would need to know how many members there are in total and how many members could not have travelled as distinct from those who did not bother. The notice was rather short and indeed they were supposed to have finished the dealing on Friday midday so that the voting could have taken place during the weekend conference.

The *cough* leaders learned from Bertie's Thursday polling dayu choice.;)

Voipjunkie

Heinrich wrote:

The percentage was of those who actually made it to Dublin for the vote. To get a real picture you would need to know how many members there are in total and how many members could not have travelled as distinct from those who did not bother. The notice was rather short and indeed they were supposed to have finished the dealing on Friday midday so that the voting could have taken place during the weekend conference.

The *cough* leaders learned from Bertie's Thursday polling dayu choice.;)

In fairness you could argue that about any election we can only go on those who did vote not point in surmising what others may or may not have done.

The only thing I would say is that surely those who felt strongly one way or the other would have made the biggest effort to be there.

Jackie laughlin

There's a lot of talk here about principles and how the Greens have abandoned them. Surely a Green party would have Green principles. I find the Greens more populist than FF. My local Green TD will jump on any local bandwagon and leaflet intensively to make sure that we know he's done so.

The Greens waffle about global warming but have no policy on air transport.

However, I would support any compromise, any sell out by any party if TARA could have been saved. It is fundamentally important to anyone who has the slightest sense of what it is to be Irish or who sees any significance in great world heritage sites. OK, it's not a green issue but they did witter on about it. Straying from the point of this thread, this might be the place to say that anyone in favout of a motorway through the Tara valley could not seriously claim to be nationalist.

Hoops1888

Jackie laughlin wrote:

any sell out by any party if TARA could have been saved. QUOTE]

Someone was watching Q&A's.

Its funny I thought the hill of tara was a election issue but when they were talking about goverment with FF it wasnt even mentioned.

nesf

Jackie laughlin wrote:

The Greens waffle about global warming but have no policy on air transport.

As an aside, air transport is one of those that the market will take care of I feel. When oil prices rise, the air industry really feels the bite etc.

Jackie laughlin

NESF,
Is that Green Party policy?

We wait until fuel prices rise? Seriously??

Even Virgin Airlines are making some attempt to address this; they are looking at the feasability of towing rather than taxiing aircraft.

Not much to huff and puff about tbh
2-3% of global emmissions are the result of air travel currently.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6762477.stm

Riamfada

Jackie laughlin wrote:

this might be the place to say that anyone in favout of a motorway through the Tara valley could not seriously claim to be nationalist.

what crap.. Why dont you go to a Library and find out what Tara is, then go and see how the motorway "affects" the Hill of Tara and bring that point up again. too many people are going TARA TARA TARA and havnt got a monkeys what it is other then the "seat of the high kings.... tourist rubbish. I find it hilarious , interesting and also indicitive of the Irish ignorance of their own history for somone to say "you cant be nationalist and support the motorway" . That statement is wrong on so many levels!