Wexford Election Speculation

cython

xclw wrote: »

i think that they should do a politics class in schools for 6th years. just once a week to teach them about all the different parties.

I disagree with this, as I believe that if someone is afforded the right to vote, they have the responsibility to inform themselves about who they are voting for. JC history used to explain the origins and splits between parties when I studied it, which gives some indication of what the parties are about, and to be quite frank, a lot of party policies change more often than a syllabus for something like that could/would be revised/updated, making it somewhat ineffective.

xclw wrote: »

the reason i'm saying this is because i'm in 6th year and theres people in my year old enough to vote and they thought you just put a tick beside the politician's name, they didn't understand the whole no. 1, no. 2.... concept.

This is what CSPE is meant to be for, better to fix the issue there than try to introduce another overlapping class for 6th years, especially as there are many more people leaving school between JC and LC than before JC, due to the ages involved

xclw wrote: »

I couldn't believe it, the same people want to vote mick wallace cos he came up to us in a pub after the mocks and started putting his arm round them asking to vote for them he was fairly drunk too, bit of a creep if ya ask me but people think he's funny and "different". anyone can wear a pink shirt they just chose not to

A class explaining party policies would not really help insofar as independent candidates are concerned, and could arguably unfairly bias against the same candidates, if people have to go to greater lengths to find out about them, compared to having parties presented in their education, albeit with the limitations I outlined above.

ya-ba-da-ba-doo

I voted FG 1,2,3 Labour 4, Wallace 5.. gave my 13th and 14th to FF.

Hoping Twomey gets in, the best man for the job in Wexford.

Judgement Day

ya-ba-da-ba-doo wrote: »

I voted FG 1,2,3 Labour 4, Wallace 5.. gave my 13th and 14th to FF.

Hoping Twomey gets in, the best man for the job in Wexford.

I'm still intrigued as to why somebody who gives FG, Labour etc. the high preferences would vote right down the list for people like FF. :I voted No.1. Wallace and No.2. Cody in an effort to keep FG in their box - and no others. Is it because RTE used to put it out that people should vote all the way down the list?

ya-ba-da-ba-doo

Judgement Day wrote: »

I'm still intrigued as to why somebody who gives FG, Labour etc. the high preferences would vote right down the list for people like FF. :I voted No.1. Wallace and No.2. Cody in an effort to keep FG in their box - and no others. Is it because RTE used to put it out that people should vote all the way down the list?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation

Basically I'm saying i want FF to be at the very bottom of the list. By only giving say 3 places, you're saying that every person you haven't given a place to is equal in preference to you.

Judgement Day

ya-ba-da-ba-doo wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation

Basically I'm saying i want FF to be at the very bottom of the list. By only giving say 3 places, you're saying that every person you haven't given a place to is equal in preference to you.

That reflects exactly what I feel - that everybody apart from Wallace is rubbish. Cody was just a tactical vote. If you vote all the way down the list you may help elect somebody who you don't want to elect - surely?

ya-ba-da-ba-doo

Judgement Day wrote: »

That reflects exactly what I feel - that everybody apart from Wallace is rubbish. Cody was just a tactical vote. If you vote all the way down the list you may help elect somebody who you don't want to elect - surely?

Are they equally rubbish? By all means if you feel that they're all the same, then don't fill out the whole sheet.


You say that I could help elect a candidate who I don't want to elect. This isn't true as in my vote i've said that I would rather elect this individual candidate than every other lower ranking candidate.

By just leaving blanks you're saying you value each 'blank' candidate as equal, and if the vote goes to a count which passes your number of choices, you have no opinion on the rest of the candidates.

Lyanna

jd wrote: »

My view is that religion/Christian Indoctrination or whatever it is called these days should be dumped from the school curriculum.

I'd replace it with philosophy/political history and include some Christian Philosophy as well eg Newman or Kierkegaard. I'd make it an examinable subject too.

It is an examinable subject; I sat it in the Leaving in 2008. It's actually a fairly modern curriculum with a lot of emphasis on secular ethics and non-Christian religions, plus some very basic philosophy, not all of which was Christian (I remember Socrates, Plato, St. Augustine, Descartes and Nietzsche all featuring, and probably a few more too). I also did my project on conflicts between religion and science, in which I came down heavily in support of science. It was the most interesting class I had for the Leaving and I'm an agnostic veering onto atheist.

That being said, I'd also love for philosophy and political theory to be Leaving Cert subjects. However, there's nothing wrong with teaching religion too as long as it's taught on a factual basis instead of indoctrinating students.

Judgement Day

Lyanna wrote: »

It is an examinable subject; I sat it in the Leaving in 2008. It's actually a fairly modern curriculum with a lot of emphasis on secular ethics and non-Christian religions, plus some very basic philosophy, not all of which was Christian (I remember Socrates, Plato, St. Augustine, Descartes and Nietzsche all featuring, and probably a few more too). I also did my project on conflicts between religion and science, in which I came down heavily in support of science. It was the most interesting class I had for the Leaving and I'm an agnostic veering onto atheist.

That being said, I'd also love for philosophy and political theory to be Leaving Cert subjects. However, there's nothing wrong with teaching religion too as long as it's taught on a factual basis instead of indoctrinating students.

Are you in the right forum?

jd

From twitter
Wallace on about 15% in North Wexford. That means he's heading for seat and may top poll...

bmaxi

ya-ba-da-ba-doo wrote: »

Are they equally rubbish? By all means if you feel that they're all the same, then don't fill out the whole sheet.


You say that I could help elect a candidate who I don't want to elect. This isn't true as in my vote i've said that I would rather elect this individual candidate than every other lower ranking candidate.

By just leaving blanks you're saying you value each 'blank' candidate as equal, and if the vote goes to a count which passes your number of choices, you have no opinion on the rest of the candidates.

In the Wexford constituency there are candidates of whom I have no opinion and those of whom I have low opinion, I left all of those off my ballot paper. The problem, as I see it, with voting down the paper is, you may be keeping a particular candidate in the race until another candidate, of the same party or leaning, is elected or eliminated, thus giving them the chance to benefit from transfers which might not favour a candidate you prefer.

bruschi

Judgement Day wrote: »

That reflects exactly what I feel - that everybody apart from Wallace is rubbish. Cody was just a tactical vote. If you vote all the way down the list you may help elect somebody who you don't want to elect - surely?

I had my top preferences at the top, and then voted down through the rest to keep the FF 2 at the botom. By doing that, it keeps others ahead and gives FF more chance of being eliminated. There was a lot of crap from 7-12, and there was an independant woman on the list who I hadnt heard of or seen anything from before last night. by voting 1-12, it gives more strength to others at the top and keeps the FF pair at the bottom. by not voting through to the bottom, it means they would have a help if others had given them preferences. it wont help the middle group get in, because the only way they could get through is if one of my top ones got eliminated, so it just makes sure the bottom pair got no advantage from my polling card.

I wantted a change, and did not want to see FF get in, so by voting the whole way down, it makes it a better chance of that happening.

Judgement Day

Some of us don't understand how PR works - it's more than thirty years since I touched on it at school and I make no claim to fully understanding it but to give any vote, no matter how low, to a candidate you despise (FF) makes no sense - to me. Perhaps some PR expert could give us a definitive explanation?

bruschi

Judgement Day wrote: »

Some of us don't understand how PR works - it's more than thirty years since I touched on it at school and I make no claim to fully understanding it but to give any vote, no matter how low, to a candidate you despise (FF) makes no sense - to me. Perhaps some PR expert could give us a definitive explanation?

well in my case, giving them my last 2 places (even though I didnt put a number beside them) but if I did, it would mean every other candidate would have to be eliminated for them to get my preference, so it would have to go to 13 counts, which in reality, wont happen. so in effect, even if I had given them my last 2 numbers, it wouldnt have made a difference as if they are still in by then, it means everyone else is gone.

will1977

Congratulating to Mick Wallace. Great to see him get in. At long last we have
Someone different to ff/fg who to me are are the same, just different names

fifth

FF/FG are not the same, that's a bit ignorant. Mick Wallace, a man with no policies, a man who won't be accountable for anything has taken a seat from possibly a good Fine Gael candidate. I think most people in Wexford didn't know who to vote - didn't bother reading into the various parties policies - and were relieved when they saw a 'familiar face' on the ballot papers. This isn't how things should work.

Lyanna

Judgement Day wrote: »

Are you in the right forum?

It's off-topic, but I'm responding to a post on this thread which came up via a side discussion on teaching politics in the Leaving Cert so students would know about voting. So yes, actually.

doyler101

i was in at the count in wexford just there now. Howlin is definitely in and by the looks Wallace is too. there will be 2 fine gaels and chances are Darcy will miss out. and then Browne or Connick will take the final seat. thats whats been said anyway.

You see one way of looking on it when you voted was Fine Gael are gonna get in with or without labour so maybe we should have given the 3 fine gael lads our 1,2,3 because that way we will have 3 tds with more power than an independent will have. and then the labour lads after that.

I wouldn't be a fan of fianna fail in any way but at the same time i feel sorry because connick or browne have contributed a lot of their time to politics and might miss out because of wallace who his majority of votes were because he's a bit of a novelty candidate. And for all we know in 6 months he could be declared bankrupt and we'll just have to re-elect.

the amount of spoiled votes in there is unreal, maybe people forgot their glasses and couldn't read the instructions but seriously why would you tick the boxes when it says vote 1,2,3 etc. some votes had like a 1,2,3 and a tick maybe and others just had a heap of ticks.

also didn't bertie ahern spend millions on a electronic voting system and storage for it? why can't it be used?

dk89

I have a question because i heard people saying that because he's an independent Wallace will get €25000 more a year or approximately that much. is that true?

To be honest I don't like Wallace at all and really feel he shouldn't got in, i mean his campaign was "I can't promise anything" that just shows he's quited before he's started and won't persevere and bother whereas other people will because he has the excuse i said I might not deliver anything. Also he has said that he is doing it just for the money. Now maybe I'll be wrong and maybe he will really try create jobs and businesses in wexford, and develop our schools and save the a&e and if he does I'll admit I was wrong about him because its just my opinion of him and as long as he actually does something for the benefit of us, since he'll be representing us I'll be happy. but at the same time i think he wants to go up to the dail, insult a few people, and start arguments and then come home and laugh about it while the taxes we pay are injected into his bank account for doing nothing.

Judgement Day

God help us who on earth would vote to put Browne or Connick back in? As for the voting, it's as I said previously a lot of people don't understand PR and some don't even understand the basics of voting. According to this http://electionsireland.org/result.cfm?election=2007&cons=232 over 800 voters spoilt their votes in County Wexford in the 2007 General Election and I would guess the bulk of those did so by accident. Some are probably repeat offenders.

HeavyRunner

funkyflea wrote: »

Mick Wallace, a man with no policies, a man who won't be accountable for anything has taken a seat from possibly a good Fine Gael candidate.

Is Darcy a good candidate and is he a better option than Wallace. Just because your dad was a TD ....

doyler101

well wallace is in, i hope you are all ready for when we have to re-elect in 6 months when he becomes bankrupt

Murtinho

oohh the bitterness, accept the democratic decision and get on with your lives

timmywex

WALLACE, Mick (01) IND 17.6% 13329

*HOWLIN, Brendan LAB 14.6% 11005
TWOMEY, Liam FG 12.2% 9230
*D'ARCY, Michael FG 11.1% 8418
*KEHOE, Paul FG 11.1% 8386
*BROWNE, John FF 9.7% 7352
*CONNICK, Sean FF 8.8% 6675
CODY, Pat LAB 5.9% 4457
KELLY, Anthony SF 5.8% 4353
DWYER, John IND 1.2% 908
O'BRIEN, Séamus PBP 1.0% 741
FORDE, Danny GP 0.5% 391
ROSEINGRAVE, Siobhán IND 0.2% 175
DE VALERA, Ruairí IND 0.2% 119



A rough guide to numbers, quote is 12,590, Howlin is safe aswell, and two FG, either browne or Connick will get in on transfers id reckon, hard to say though

Badabing

timmywex wrote: »

WALLACE, Mick (01) IND 17.6% 13329

*HOWLIN, Brendan LAB 14.6% 11005
TWOMEY, Liam FG 12.2% 9230
*D'ARCY, Michael FG 11.1% 8418
*KEHOE, Paul FG 11.1% 8386
*BROWNE, John FF 9.7% 7352
*CONNICK, Sean FF 8.8% 6675
CODY, Pat LAB 5.9% 4457
KELLY, Anthony SF 5.8% 4353
DWYER, John IND 1.2% 908
O'BRIEN, Séamus PBP 1.0% 741
FORDE, Danny GP 0.5% 391
ROSEINGRAVE, Siobhán IND 0.2% 175
DE VALERA, Ruairí IND 0.2% 119



A rough guide to numbers, quote is 12,590, Howling is safe aswell, and two FG, either browne or Connick will get in on transfers id reckon, hard to say though

Browne to get 5th seat, either jumpship or D'arcy to miss out.

Supertech

As I see it we had a choice in this election to break the cycle of FF / FG Governments. Electing a party simply because they aren't as bad as the crowd that are in power is not enough. In effect we are powerless to do very much about the economic situation we are in - we can't get out of the **** we're in without assistance from somewhere outside of the country. We can argue about the interest rate or the timescale over which we pay back what we get, but ultimately, this will make little difference to the man in the street. Fair enough Wallace was vague about what he stood for in terms of economic policies, but he was clear on one thing - reform in Irish politics, and reform in the Dail. If he's only in there as a thorn in the side of the establishment parties to keep forcing them to think outside of the box, then he gets my vote every time and good on him. There was history made in Wexford today in that the cycle was broken, and a voice which is not controlled by a party whip was elected, heading the poll, and that in my opinion, is a good thing !!

will1977

funkyflea wrote: »

FF/FG are not the same, that's a bit ignorant. Mick Wallace, a man with no policies, a man who won't be accountable for anything has taken a seat from possibly a good Fine Gael candidate. I think most people in Wexford didn't know who to vote - didn't bother reading into the various parties policies - and were relieved when they saw a 'familiar face' on the ballot papers. This isn't how things should work.

Is that sour grapes I hear ? Your not connected to the FG party by any chance ? If you are and that is your attitude to local voters, you should say nothing at all. Shocking attitude to have. :rolleyes:

effemall

Well done Mick Wallace. Now I hope you enjoy yourself representing some extremely bitter constituents

effemall

funkyflea wrote: »

FF/FG are not the same, that's a bit ignorant. Mick Wallace, a man with no policies, a man who won't be accountable for anything has taken a seat from possibly a good Fine Gael candidate. I think most people in Wexford didn't know who to vote - didn't bother reading into the various parties policies - and were relieved when they saw a 'familiar face' on the ballot papers. This isn't how things should work.

Mick Wallace has taken a seat from a fine geal candidate because more people believe in a Mick Wallace type person. Who the fcuk do you think you are telling me I dont know how to vote

Supertech

The truth of the matter is that today the people of Wexford have shown (by virtue of their first preference votes) that they are tired of the same old nonsense from candidates from the main parties flogging the same old tired rubbish in slightly different variations. There is little difference between FF and FG in terms of policy; Labour fought an independent campaign up until this week when it became clear that the only way they would go in to Government is if they cosied up to FG; SF would have needed to increase their vote nationally by multiples of 10 to have any effect on Government (and even if that had happened, many of their policies are completely off the wall) so in reality, voting for Independents made sense if you wished to register a protest for change, and to have one elected is a major development.

Many people complained before and during the campaign about the way business is done in the Dail, TD's salaries and expenses, the amount of days the Dail sits and so on. The difference is that in Wexford the votes did the talking. Wallace's election is a triumph for democracy .... he is clearly the candidate who resonated most with the Electorate here. No promises only to attempt to change the status quo. Those who protest most today will be the ones who believed the tripe from the main parties or indeed are affiliated to them.

As for the notion that Wallace has taken a seat from a 'good Fine Gael candidate' , what about the remainder of the candidates on the ballot paper ? Are they not 'good' because they're not Fine Gael ? How do you know he won't perform admirably from the first day he enters the Dail ?

Democracy rules in Wexford today !! Fair play to the Model County

bruschi

doyler101 wrote: »

well wallace is in, i hope you are all ready for when we have to re-elect in 6 months when he becomes bankrupt

why is going to be bankrupt. he has already addressed this issue, and yet you talk about other people being misinformed and not reading party mandates, maybe take your own advice before you distribute inuendo and lies.

dk89 wrote: »

Also he has said that he is doing it just for the money. .

your whole post is full of lies, but this is the worst one. show me where he said he is in it for the money and I'll retract, but you cant peddle lies like that

again, why does wallace have to prove himself moreso than the other candidates. what exactly have they done for the 20 or so years in politics in Wexford?

The voting in of Mick has shown the disillusionment of the electorate in Wexford. People are sick of liviing in a county with damn all job creation and no stimulous being injected into the county. we are left behind in all aspects, and have one of the worst unemployment stats at the moment. we need a change, and at least Wallaces vote, whether it is for him, or against others, shows the people of Wexford are pi$$ed off with politics and the cronyism that is rife in it.