Did you vote Green and will you again?

gbh

Jackie laughlin wrote:

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.

I agree...a lot of people particularly in FF have a blind faith that the market can right everything. This Lassez Faire attitude is obviously not good enough when it comes to certain issues such as the environment. To me it seems FF wouldnt care if there was no government intervention in anything and that developers and industry would go on unchecked ruining the environment.

It would be better that oil remained cheap and plentiful if people needed it but started working right away on alternative fuels or on cutting back on unnessecary travel.

gbh

Grimes wrote:

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!

I think in the broadest sense Jackie was saying nationalist. Ie, someone who thinks that we should make an effort to preserve our heritage, which is a noble and worthwhile aim. Dont forget once you tarmac over something you cant restore it, so a debate should be had beforehand. But to be honest I cant why there isnt a way around this...what about a flyover, or a tunnel, or a split in the road...

Riamfada

gbh wrote:

I think in the broadest sense Jackie was saying nationalist. Ie, someone who thinks that we should make an effort to preserve our heritage, which is a noble and worthwhile aim. Dont forget once you tarmac over something you cant restore it, so a debate should be had beforehand.

and once any archaeologist puts a trowel into any site it cant be restored. All the "goodies" are taken from the site for study and its reconstructed as best as possible. As far as Lismullen (the tara site) there is literally only a few different shades of dirt in the ground. The motorway cannot be seen or heard from the hill or Tara.

nesf

Jackie laughlin wrote:

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.

The point is more fundamental. There is no real alternative to using oil based fuels for aircraft. The focus should be on finding alternatives to oil as a fuel in areas where it can be done rather that focussing on industries where alternatives don't really exist and which aren't enormous users anyway. The most effective way to reduce the amount of air travel and air transport is to raise the cost of it, and that's going to happen anyway. Towing aircraft doesn't solve the problem here, it just delays it a tiny bit which isn't much of a help.

Lazairus

bk wrote:

I think it is quite funny, many here who say they won't vote for the greens again seem to be actually FG/Labour supporters who only gave them their 3rd or 4th preference and are now pissed because the greens did the sensible thing.

People like you are no lose to them, as they will make up for that lose with transfers from FF people in the next election (assuming an election pact with FF).

The only people who really matter are the people who give the greens their first preference, in other words actually real green supporters. We should really only be interested in how these people will vote in the next election.

My feeling is that green core supporters (first preference green) will not react in such an emotional manner and will reserve their judgment to see how the greens do in government.

here here

Lazairus

i have voted green and will do so again , i feel its a shame with regards to tara , but people have turned a blind eye to our own history, its like building a motorway through the valley of the kings,in egypt.its just not on , i feel if you were to excavate the whole site and then put a tourist centre , you would make the money of the roadway ten fold.

Jackie laughlin

I'm not a stranger to libraries and, while not expert, I have made it my business to be informed. NO plausible argument has been advanced for building a motorway on that specific route. Anyone with the slightest shred of national pride would want it re-routed.

Whenever the question of doing ANYTHING about global warming is raised, the "percentage" opponents appear. They have a point in that tackling the main causes makes sense but these percentages ARE the problem. They add up. OK, I might be suspicious about the possible PR motivations behind the Virgin initiative but I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt. I'm all in favour of a tiny percentage reduction NOW.

The point about the Green Party is that they will never embrace a policy which might affect the rich lifestyle of some of their supporters. They are populists who TALK about global warming.

Múinteoir

Vegeta wrote:

No and Never.

Greens are anti any form of hunting and I cant support a party who hold that position.

They're not against drag-hunting actually.

Jackie laughlin

Even I thought the Greens had some standards. I'm shocked that they want to hunt people in drag.

Múinteoir

Jackie laughlin wrote:

Even I thought the Greens had some standards. I'm shocked that they want to hunt people in drag.

CerebralCortex

Jackie laughlin wrote:

....Anyone with the slightest shred of national pride would want it re-routed....

Since when were you given the power to decided what it meant to be proud of your country. Please explain this statement.

Mick86

Voipjunkie wrote:

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

Last time out was last month and the PDs managed a massive 2 seats. So that means that outside those two constituencies FF transfers to the PDs were few and far between.

Voipjunkie wrote:

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

We are discussing what I think will happen in the future. Pray tell where will I get a fact from the future to back up my thoughts.

Voipjunkie wrote:

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

Those who spent months telling all and sundry that they would never consider coalition with Fianna Fáil, who received votes on that basis and then U-turned at the sniff of a ministerial merc have no integrity.

Voipjunkie wrote:

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

No you told me that because I opposed the Greens in coalition with FF then I must support the Greens in coalition with FG. That's making my mind up for me and that is the way fascists work. By the way I wouldn't allow the Greens run Ballymagash UDC let alone enter a government.

Voipjunkie wrote:

All parties have a greed for power ...

Obviously they do.

Voipjunkie wrote:

bertie does not have to be an enviromentalist

No he doesn't he just claims to be on the basis of having watched a BBC documentary. I take it as some kind of subtle insult to his new partners. Thats how seriously he takes environmental issues.

Voipjunkie wrote:

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

The greens are there to absorb flak directed at FF. They'll do what Bertie and Cowen say or they can toddle across to the opposition benches.

Jackie laughlin

C.Cortex,
I'm flattered that across this whole site, which contains so many views, you should single out mine.

Well I'll expand a little. This country is plagued by pseudo nationalists (sometimes pseudo republicans). They are fond of honouring murderers and martyrs. Generally speaking they are unwilling to learn the language and appreciate or defend any aspect of Irish culture. Tara is part of Ireland's heritage. Anyone in favour of pushing a motorway through it can take to themselves any political label they wish but they would surely be taking the piss if they described themselves as nationalist.

gbh

Sort of agree with ya...seems the more you destroy etc, the more respected you are in terms of politics. But nationalism has different meanings for different people in different countries. I suppose the real debate regarding Tara is should we be put snails and archeology etc ahead of the improvement of peoples lives today. Its difficult to know the answer to that one.

CerebralCortex

gbh wrote:

Sort of agree with ya...seems the more you destroy etc, the more respected you are in terms of politics. But nationalism has different meanings for different people in different countries. I suppose the real debate regarding Tara is should we be put snails and archeology etc ahead of the improvement of peoples lives today. Its difficult to know the answer to that one.

Kinda what I was going to say in response.

Jackie laughlin

Nothing should be put ahead of human welfare. The motorway should have been routed to AVOID Tara.

Voipjunkie

Mick86 wrote:

Last time out was last month and the PDs managed a massive 2 seats. So that means that outside those two constituencies FF transfers to the PDs were few and far between.

No the PDs own first preferences were so low that they were out of the running most of the time before FF transfered outside of FF or when they did there own first preference vote was so low that the FF transfers were not enough.

Mick86 wrote:

We are discussing what I think will happen in the future. Pray tell where will I get a fact from the future to back up my thoughts.

Then don't portray it as fact. You stated the greens had already lost 13% of their vote not that you thought they might in the future that is a completely separate thing

Mick86 wrote:

Those who spent months telling all and sundry that they would never consider coalition with Fianna Fáil, who received votes on that basis and then U-turned at the sniff of a ministerial merc have no integrity.

That is not what the greens did they never ruled out Coalition with FF Sargent said he would not personally lead the greens if it came to it and he has been true to his word but the Greens always made it clear that their first preference was to get rid of FF and the PDs but that they would deal with them if they had to.
The problem is that people in FG and Labour took them for granted as being part of the mullingar accord although the Greens had never signed up to it

Mick86 wrote:

No you told me that because I opposed the Greens in coalition with FF then I must support the Greens in coalition with FG. That's making my mind up for me and that is the way fascists work. By the way I wouldn't allow the Greens run Ballymagash UDC let alone enter a government.

I'm not making your mind up for you I'm pointing out the realities that exist either the Greens share power with FF or with FG and there is no difference between the two. Your preference is to not have them in power at all thankfully that is not your choice alone.

Mick86 wrote:

No he doesn't he just claims to be on the basis of having watched a BBC documentary. I take it as some kind of subtle insult to his new partners. Thats how seriously he takes environmental issues.

So what he claimed to be a Socialist before I take that as seriously as his current claim

Mick86 wrote:

The greens are there to absorb flak directed at FF. They'll do what Bertie and Cowen say or they can toddle across to the opposition benches.

That is the Greens problem if you dislike the greens so much then you should be happy if your prediction proves correct

Múinteoir

Voipjunkie wrote:

The problem is that people in FG and Labour took them for granted as being part of the mullingar accord although the Greens had never signed up to it

Bingo! The uncomfortable truth that all the opposition likes to forget. There was no formal arrangement between the Greens and FG/Labour and the Green Party as a whole never ruled out going in with FF, ever. Indeed a motion was publically passed at the Green Ard-Fheis in 2005, to the effect that the Greens would not entertain a pre-election pact with anyone. The Greens stated that FG/Labour was their preferred option, but they never said that meant no deal with FF. Even if Trevor Sargent said he wouldn't lead them in in such a situation with FF. That was his personal decision alone.

Liam Byrne

M&#250 wrote: »

Bingo! The uncomfortable truth that all the opposition likes to forget.

Would it actually have mattered if they HAD signed up for it ? I mean, many of the Greens put their signatures on other stuff and still binned those promises when it suited them; if Tara and Shannon got shafted in the interests of power, you can be damn sure that Mullingar would have been shafted too!

is_that_so

M&#250 wrote: »

Bingo! The uncomfortable truth that all the opposition likes to forget. There was no formal arrangement between the Greens and FG/Labour and the Green Party as a whole never ruled out going in with FF, ever. Indeed a motion was publically passed at the Green Ard-Fheis in 2005, to the effect that the Greens would not entertain a pre-election pact with anyone. The Greens stated that FG/Labour was their preferred option, but they never said that meant no deal with FF. Even if Trevor Sargent said he wouldn't lead them in in such a situation with FF. That was his personal decision alone.

In government is better than in opposition. Say it long enough and it sounds true.

There is no denying the pragmatism of the Greens and Green members are unquestionably basking in the fact that they really think they can make a difference. I hope so.

Yet they appear to have become a party of "loose" principles virtually overnight. And Trevor Sargent, honourable man that he is and they are all honourable men and women, seems to have added nuances to the words "integrity" and "promise" that I had not thought existed.

One of the features of green TDs (Trevor Sargent the last time out excluded) is that they tend to come in on the later transfers, as an afterthought. That afterthought could go elsewhere the next time there is any kind of election.

Voipjunkie

Liam Byrne wrote:

Would it actually have mattered if they HAD signed up for it ? I mean, many of the Greens put their signatures on other stuff and still binned those promises when it suited them; if Tara and Shannon got shafted in the interests of power, you can be damn sure that Mullingar would have been shafted too!

That is pure speculation the Greens did not have a pre election pact with anyone so the issue of breaching one does not arise

None of the elected greens signed the pledge on shannon and they can not be held responsible for what Patricia Mckenna signed on her own behalf although it is a fact that McKenna was against the deal so she was true to her word as well .

Voipjunkie

is_that_so wrote:

In government is better than in opposition. Say it long enough and it sounds true.

There is no denying the pragmatism of the Greens and Green members are unquestionably basking in the fact that they really think they can make a difference. I hope so.

Yet they appear to have become a party of "loose" principles virtually overnight. And Trevor Sargent, honourable man that he is and they are all honourable men and women, seems to have added nuances to the words "integrity" and "promise" that I had not thought existed.

One of the features of green TDs (Trevor Sargent the last time out excluded) is that they tend to come in on the later transfers, as an afterthought. That afterthought could go elsewhere the next time there is any kind of election.

The greens pick up transfers all over the place the chances are that they might pick up more from FF voters in the future depending on how things go which might compensate for those they might lose from FG or Lab
Also they might be seen as more than just a protest party so people will take them more seriously in the future.

Heinrich

Voipjunkie wrote:

Also they might be seen as more than just a protest party so people will take them more seriously in the future.

The contrary could very easily be the case!

This is the sort of waffle that might irritate the voters!

Communications, Energy and Natural Resources Minister Eamon Ryan also said Dublin Bay’s coastline can be developed like the famous Venice Beach boardwalk in California

.

Would this be before or after we clean up the water in Galway and get blue flags for the one that need them?:rolleyes:

Mick86

Voipjunkie wrote:

No the PDs own first preferences were so low that they were out of the running most of the time before FF transfered outside of FF or when they did there own first preference vote was so low that the FF transfers were not enough.

In short nobody voted for the PDs outside of the two PD TDs constituencies.

Voipjunkie wrote:

That is not what the greens did they never ruled out Coalition with FF Sargent said he would not personally lead the greens if it came to it and he has been true to his word but the Greens always made it clear that their first preference was to get rid of FF and the PDs but that they would deal with them if they had to.

Rubbish.

Sargent was the leader of the Green Party. He spoke for the party when he said he would not lead them into coalition with FF. His resignation was the most cynical piece of political posturing in years proven by his acceptance of a Junior Ministry. And John Gormley made no bones about being in power with FF and the PDs

March 1st, 2007 Green Party Chairman John Gormley TD today launched his general election campaign in Dublin South East with a plea to party activists and voters to ensure that Fianna Fáil and the PDs are ousted from government.

“I know from speaking to delegates at our Convention last weekend that they want Fianna Fáil and the PDs out of government,” said Deputy Gormley. “There is an unquenchable thirst for change in the party.

http://www.johngormley.com/wp/2007/03/01/get-fianna-fail-and-pds-out-says-gormley/

John Gormley, 29 April 2007. Our election slogan is, 'it's time,' and it certainly is time. It's time to improve our public health service. It's time to end the gridlock and make the necessary investment in public transport. It's time to solve the problem of class sizes. It's time for well-planned communities with proper services. It's time that we tackle the biggest challenge facing humanity: climate change. But none of this will happen with Fianna Fail and the PDs in power. It's time for a change of government.

http://www.greenparty.ie/en/news/latest_news/gormley_welcomes_unprecedented_opportunity_for_greens_to_enter_government

Voipjunkie wrote:

So what he claimed to be a Socialist before I take that as seriously as his current claim

Well at least we agree that Bertie's coat of many colours is absolutely ridculous.

Voipjunkie

Mick86 wrote:

In short nobody voted for the PDs outside of the two PD TDs constituencies.

No some people voted for them not enough to get them elected thats all

Mick86 wrote:

Rubbish.

Sargent was the leader of the Green Party. He spoke for the party when he said he would not lead them into coalition with FF. His resignation was the most cynical piece of political posturing in years proven by his acceptance of a Junior Ministry. And John Gormley made no bones about being in power with FF and the PDs

[/QUOTE]


Hello
He said he would not lead them into coalition that is completely different from ruling out coalition in fact he went out of the way to not rule out the possiblity and the next question he was asked was while he would not lead them would he serve in the government and he said he would.
Now if as you suggest the greens were ruling out FF then the issue of whether he would serve in such a government would be irrelevant.
Sargent for my money has done exactly what he said he would do and gone further by refusing a senior ministry.
He spoke for himself when he said he would not lead the greens into coalition.

And the greens made it clear that their preference was to change the Government completely that was not possible given FGs refusal to speak to SF so the greens were not bound to anything their first preference was not available so they took the best option available to them.


What I don't understand is that you dislike the greens so much you obviously did not vote for them or intend to vote for them so why are you so upset by what they did

bk

Voipjunkie wrote:

What I don't understand is that you dislike the greens so much you obviously did not vote for them or intend to vote for them so why are you so upset by what they did

Because he, like many on this forum are not in fact green supporters, rather they are FG/Labour supporters who are just annoyed that the Greens supposedly betrayed them by not being idiots and deciding to stay out of government.

is_that_so

bk wrote:

Because he, like many on this forum are not in fact green supporters, rather they are FG/Labour supporters who are just annoyed that the Greens supposedly betrayed them by not being idiots and deciding to stay out of government.

There are many other reasons why people might be upset at the Greens not covered by this oversimplification.

This seems to a feature of the threads on this forum.

"You didn't win and you're just upset cos the Greens didn't make a deal with you".

Mick86

Voipjunkie wrote:

No some people voted for them not enough to get them elected thats all

Oh well done, the light finally dawns.

Voipjunkie wrote:

He said he would not lead them into coalition that is completely different from ruling out coalition

In real terms it isn't although if you are into splitting hairs I suppose you could make that point.

Voipjunkie wrote:

Now if as you suggest the greens were ruling out FF then the issue of whether he would serve in such a government would be irrelevant.

Gormley ruled out coalition on several occasions if you believe the Green's own press releases.

Voipjunkie wrote:

Sargent for my money has done exactly what he said he would do and gone further by refusing a senior ministry.

He spoke for himself when he said he would not lead the greens into coalition.

I suppose it never occured to you to question WHY he would not lead the Greens into coalition

Voipjunkie wrote:

And the greens made it clear that their preference was to change the Government completely that was not possible given FGs refusal to speak to SF so the greens were not bound to anything their first preference was not available so they took the best option available to them.

No democratic party would consider a pact with SF. The Greens knew that before the election. They have stated that the message they got from their supporters was that the PDs and FF must go. That was the mandate they received from their supporters and what did they do. They ignored them and voted for that government. Democracy in action.

Voipjunkie wrote:

What I don't understand is that you dislike the greens so much you obviously did not vote for them or intend to vote for them so why are you so upset by what they did

Because I live in this country ruled by corruption and dishonesty and the Greens are one of the props supporting another five years of it. Mind you they have proven themselves so two-faced and cynical that they fit right in with FF now.

Mick86

is_that_so wrote:

There are many other reasons why people might be upset at the Greens not covered by this oversimplification.

This seems to a feature of the threads on this forum.

"You didn't win and you're just upset cos the Greens didn't make a deal with you".

To make it quite simple for the Green supporters, I didn't give them any vote because I wouldn't want them in government with anybody.

Voipjunkie

Mick86 wrote:

Oh well done, the light finally dawns.

It hasn't dawned for you apparently you stated that the PDs did not benefit from FF they clearly did it was FF transfers that elected their 2 TDs

Mick86 wrote:

In real terms it isn't although if you are into splitting hairs I suppose you could make that point.

In the only terms that matter the fact that he said he would not lead them in a coalition and he is not
If you can find me anywhere that Sargent ruled out FF I would love to see it and again if he had ruled it out explain why he was asked would he serve as a minister
Your problem seems to be that you misunderstood what was clearly being said

Mick86 wrote:

Gormley ruled out coalition on several occasions if you believe the Green's own press releases.

Gormley never ruled out anything he was never in a position to rule out anything
Perhaps you could provide us with some of these press releases so we can evaluate them ourselves

Mick86 wrote:

I suppose it never occured to you to question WHY he would not lead the Greens into coalition

I believe that he was personally against coalition with FF given his experiences with members of the party whilst on Dublin County Council much as Pat Rabitte is personally against coalition with FF for personal reasons unlike Rabitte Sargent did not tie his party because of his own personal issues

Mick86 wrote:

No democratic party would consider a pact with SF. The Greens knew that before the election. They have stated that the message they got from their supporters was that the PDs and FF must go. That was the mandate they received from their supporters and what did they do. They ignored them and voted for that government. Democracy in action.

Why not they are elected the same as any other TD that is democracy in action.

People voting for the greens may well have preferred the PDs and FF gone but that preference was not a possiblity you would have a point if the FG/Lab coalition was possible and the greens turned their back and went in with FF but that was not the case

Mick86 wrote:

Because I live in this country ruled by corruption and dishonesty and the Greens are one of the props supporting another five years of it. Mind you they have proven themselves so two-faced and cynical that they fit right in with FF now.

And there would be no corruption if FG and Labour was in power because that is the way it was the last time they were in power:rolleyes: