Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ganley looking good in Early Tallies

Options
1…1112131416

Comments

  • Options
    #452
    TimHanley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 45 ✭TimHanley


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    Still, he did get 13.7% of the vote when he ran, and this is many months later, with way more exposure. So one could still make the argument that he could have swung 13.7% of the vote at least, assuming not many people have changed their minds either way since then. What was the margin by which the referendum was defeated again?

    We are both well aware of the margin.

    I seem to remember that it was vastly different to what the Irish Times found in their "independent" polls released in the run up to the vote. Must be a conspiracy in there somewhere.


  • Options
    #453
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    TimHanley wrote: »
    We are both well aware of the margin.

    I seem to remember that it was vastly different to what the Irish Times found in their "independent" polls released in the run up to the vote. Must be a conspiracy in there somewhere.

    Perhaps, but it's got little to do with the post mortem of Ganley's influence on the affair we're involved in here.

    Personally I think he was given way to much credit for his influence by the powers that be, and the media. I think it suited them to make him the 'acceptable' face of the no campaign, rather than dealing with SF, COIR or the Socialists.


  • Options
    #454
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    TimHanley wrote: »
    Would you like a list of articles. Everyone was well aware of the "radical, nut job, military" Ganley long before the vote.
    That's simply not true and at this stage you're either basing your opinion on the circles you move in or you are simply being disingenuous.

    I would be very politically aware and even I only had a vague knowledge of the man or Libertas at that stage. If you even do a search of his name here, you'll find that of 193 threads mentioning the guy, only 38 were started before the referendum.

    You should talk to taxi drivers more often and refer to the UK broadsheets a little less, if you want to more accurately gauge what your average punter is thinking.


  • Options
    #455
    TimHanley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 45 ✭TimHanley


    The Corinthian wrote: »

    You should talk to taxi drivers more often and refer to the UK broadsheets a little less, if you want to more accurately gauge what your average punter is thinking.

    I am sure the Daily Star and RTE done a host of stuff on the Ganley fella.

    Anyway I thing the EU vote has shown what the people think of Deccers, that being not half as much as the pro Lisbon crowd would have us believe.


  • Options
    #456
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    TimHanley wrote: »
    Bit of an idealised vision there. They are elected to represent the will of the people, you seem to think they are there to dominate and fool the "stupid masses".

    They're not elected to "represent the will of the people", because such a thing is impossible - no representative can know the will of the people on every single decision they are presented with. They are elected to represent the interests of the people, according to their own best judgment.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #457
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    Still, he did get 13.7% of the vote when he ran, and this is many months later, with way more exposure. So one could still make the argument that he could have swung 13.7% of the vote at least, assuming not many people have changed their minds either way since then. What was the margin by which the referendum was defeated again?

    It's surely more probable that the 13.7% of the vote Ganley picked up were regular No voters anyway. Right-wing Catholic conservative voters are usually panicked into voting No at EU referendums - that's the whole point of the No side abortion claims.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #458
    TimHanley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 45 ✭TimHanley


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    They're not elected to "represent the will of the people", because such a thing is impossible - no representative can know the will of the people on every single decision they are presented with.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    Well they certainly know the "will of the people" on the Lisbon Treaty.


  • Options
    #459
    TimHanley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 45 ✭TimHanley


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    It's surely more probable that the 13.7% of the vote Ganley picked up were regular No voters anyway. Right-wing Catholic conservative voters are usually panicked into voting No at EU referendums - that's the whole point of the No side abortion claims.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    Speculation. Remember Ganley was placed in the North West, from what I recall 70% vored NO to Lisbon in that area. What happened to all the other "stupid people" who were fooled by Ganleys propaganda on Lisbon?


  • Options
    #460
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    TimHanley wrote: »
    Well they certainly know the "will of the people" on the Lisbon Treaty.

    Now if only the will of the people was fixed forever in time...

    amused,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #461
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    TimHanley wrote: »
    Speculation. Remember Ganley was placed in the North West, from what I recall 70% vored NO to Lisbon in that area.

    Yes, that's pretty much the point I was making. I can't really see Yes voters as voting for Ganley.
    TimHanley wrote: »
    What happened to all the other "stupid people" who were fooled by Ganleys propaganda on Lisbon?

    Couldn't say - I know we get a lot of them round this way, though.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #462
    TimHanley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 45 ✭TimHanley


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    Now if only the will of the people was fixed forever in time...

    amused,
    Scofflaw

    Do you not realise that this argument can be turned right back on you?

    How about every election ever held is rerun, how about thism how about that. That is amusing.


  • Options
    #463
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    TimHanley wrote: »
    Do you not realise that this argument can be turned right back on you?

    How about every election ever held is rerun, how about thism how about that. That is amusing.
    They are rerun. That's why the same party hasn't been in office since the republic was founded.


  • Options
    #464
    TimHanley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 45 ✭TimHanley


    humanji wrote: »
    They are rerun. That's why the same party hasn't been in office since the republic was founded.

    Oh here we go. And why do we not have another election this year?


  • Options
    #465
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    TimHanley wrote: »
    I am sure the Daily Star and RTE done a host of stuff on the Ganley fella.
    No doubt; but the the vast majority, if not all of it, after the referendum.
    Anyway I thing the EU vote has shown what the people think of Deccers, that being not half as much as the pro Lisbon crowd would have us believe.
    Deccers? Is that what you call him?

    I think your analysis is flawed, however. Ganley and Libertas certainly had an effect upon the first referendum - they ran a well timed, efficient and slick campaign.

    The problem was that on a political level he's a PR car crash; military contracting, Neocon think tanks, Eastern European business ventures? Did any of his people think about preparing for the inevitable 'exposes' and sensationalism (and lets face it, the material is a sub editors dream)? Unfortunately politics is about being squeaky clean on the surface, even if in reality the guy could well be a paragon of virtue when compared to Bertie. People are fickle, I'm afraid:

    "Perché delli uomini si può dire questo generalmente: che sieno ingrati, volubili, simulatori e dissimulatori, fuggitori de' pericoli, cupidi di guadagno; e mentre fai loro bene, sono tutti tua, ófferonti el sangue, la roba, la vita è figliuoli, come di sopra dissi, quando il bisogno è discosto; ma, quando ti si appressa, è si rivoltano." - Il Principe, Cp XVII

    ("Because this is to be asserted in general of men, that they are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, covetous, and as long as you succeed they are yours entirely; they will offer you their blood, property, life, and children, as is said above, when the need is far distant; but when it approaches they turn against you.")


  • Options
    #466
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    TimHanley wrote: »
    Do you not realise that this argument can be turned right back on you?

    How about every election ever held is rerun, how about thism how about that. That is amusing.

    Elections are 'rerun' at intervals stated in the constitution, or when the government otherwise falls, again as provided for in the constitution. Referendums, on the other hand, have no stated rerun interval or occasion, but are called by the government as and when the government wants them.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #467
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    TimHanley wrote: »
    Speculation. Remember Ganley was placed in the North West, from what I recall 70% vored NO to Lisbon in that area. What happened to all the other "stupid people" who were fooled by Ganleys propaganda on Lisbon?

    European elections in that constituency would tend to go along party lines (though still a strong Independent/protest vote) whereas Referendums obviously don't.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #468
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    Elections are 'rerun' at intervals stated in the constitution, or when the government otherwise falls, again as provided for in the constitution. Referendums, on the other hand, have no stated rerun interval or occasion, but are called by the government as and when the government wants them.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    Indeed, 3 of them in about 18 months in the early 80's.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #469
    TimHanley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 45 ✭TimHanley


    The Corinthian wrote: »
    No doubt; but the the vast majority, if not all of it, after the referendum.

    This is not true. As I said,I can throw up links for the next week.



    The Corinthian wrote: »
    I think your analysis is flawed, however. Ganley and Libertas certainly had an effect upon the first referendum - they ran a well timed, efficient and slick campaign.

    And again, the pro lisbon parties would have us believe this, the facts of the matter have been shown in the EU election.


  • Options
    #470
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    TimHanley wrote: »
    Oh here we go. And why do we not have another election this year?
    Scofflaw answered this one perfectly. If you want to change it, get into politics and enact change. If it's a good idea, all the people will be behind you. And once you're in power you can decide if there'll be any reruns of referendums you don't like the result of. It's win/win for you, so off you go.


  • Options
    #471
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    TimHanley wrote: »
    This is not true. As I said,I can throw up links for the next week.
    And again the majority of exposure and public recognition occurred after the referendum.
    And again, the pro lisbon parties would have us believe this, the facts of the matter have been shown in the EU election.
    What has been showed exactly?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #472
    TimHanley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 45 ✭TimHanley


    The Corinthian wrote: »

    What has been showed exactly?

    Deccers has been shown to have nothing like the support pro lisbon people would have us believe. That much is obvious.


  • Options
    #473
    TimHanley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 45 ✭TimHanley


    humanji wrote: »
    It's win/win for you, so off you go.

    Good Idea. Just need the money to fund the campaign, mind you I hear there was a young black fella in America who rose from nowhere to take over the presidency. Maybe Tim Hanley could be the Irish version.

    http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638


  • Options
    #474
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    TimHanley wrote: »
    Deccers has been shown to have nothing like the support pro lisbon people would have us believe. That much is obvious.
    Ganley never had that much support, but his anti-Lisbon message did - don't confuse the two.

    Additionally, you are still clinging to the fantasy that he was a household name before the referendum, which is completely false. Most didn't have a notion who he was until after the event.


  • Options
    #475
    ManFromAtlantis
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,483 ✭✭✭ManFromAtlantis


    should ganley be embarrassed after calling for a re-check ?

    not half as embarrassed as the count procedure that led to the 'misplacement' of 3000 votes... this is the real story here.


  • Options
    #476
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    The Corinthian wrote: »
    Ganley never had that much support, but his anti-Lisbon message did - don't confuse the two.

    Additionally, you are still clinging to the fantasy that he was a household name before the referendum, which is completely false. Most didn't have a notion who he was until after the event.

    I'm not sure you're not arguing two different things here. Ganley certainly did get a lot of media coverage before the referendum. However, most people still didn't know who he was - outside those interested in politics.

    In a similar sense, after all, there are all kinds of celebrities who get huge amounts of coverage in the media, and I haven't a clue who they are.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #477
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    The Corinthian wrote: »
    Ganley never had that much support, but his anti-Lisbon message did - don't confuse the two.

    Additionally, you are still clinging to the fantasy that he was a household name before the referendum, which is completely false. Most didn't have a notion who he was until after the event.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/declan-ganley-irelands-mysterious-mr-no-843559.html

    Here's a UK Independent article about Ganley from 2 days before the Referendum, in which they refer to him as
    Ireland's Mysterious Dr. No

    The description of the article states:
    The campaign against the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland is buoyant, thanks in large part to the zeal of Declan Ganley. But the question remains: who is bankrolling him?

    So he was both mysterious and well known, and everyone knew all about his background but there were open questions as to his bankroll.

    I personally think the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

    I would say people who bothered to investigate who this Libertas were found out a bit about him, and people who took their claims at face value didn't bother investigating.


  • Options
    #478
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    Here's a UK Independent article about Ganley from 2 days before the Referendum
    Well no doubt it convinced every UK Independent reader in Ireland...

    As Scofflaw pointed out, I'm certainly not denying that there was coverage prior to the referendum, only that it had not made an impression on your average guy on the street. Most of the significant (Irish-based) coverage came after.


  • Options
    #479
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    The Corinthian wrote: »
    Well no doubt it convinced every UK Independent reader in Ireland...

    As Scofflaw pointed out, I'm certainly not denying that there was coverage prior to the referendum, only that it had not made an impression on your average guy on the street. Most of the significant (Irish-based) coverage came after.

    I think you've missed the thrust of my post, which was not that coverage existed 2 days before the vote, but that such coverage referred to him as mysterious implying that he was still not well known, just 2 days before the vote.


  • Options
    #480
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    I would consider myself somewhat politically-aware, and I never heard of the man before the Lisbon campaign.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #481
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I would consider myself somewhat politically-aware, and I never heard of the man before the Lisbon campaign.

    The only reason I knew about Ganley during the campaign was that I decided to do my own research on 'Libertas', suspecting them at the time of being a Justin Barrett vehicle.


Advertisement