The Official After Hours Presidential Election Thread **POLL RESET 23/10**

mike kelly

Happyman42 wrote: »

Michael D Higgins will make the Aras but SF will be the real winners.

Spot on. I'm still trying to figure out what Sinn fein stand for though (I like the fact that the gaurds hate them but that's all I know about them these days)

Bannasidhe

mike kelly wrote: »

absolutely crazy.

Why is that crazy?

mike kelly

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Why is that crazy?

because we would have thousands of people coming here to give birth so their kids could claim citizenship (as has already happened)

Bannasidhe

Happyman42 wrote: »

You are spot on Deedsie.
The Irish people will not stand by and watch somebody who stood up for their beliefs (whether they believed the same or not) be denigrated by lazy talkshop moralists like Gay Mitchell. Similarly, they are intelligent enough as a demographic to spot a pig feeding at the trough while telling us all that he is an 'open book'.
Thanks to this forum my vote will be going to McG on this occasion. The mainstream parties have conspired to get so many to vote SF in this election.
Once that Rubicon of voting SF has been crossed they will make incredible gains in the next general election, because if they vote for them once then it is easy to do it again. Michael D Higgins will make the Aras but SF will be the real winners.

Hear That? It's the sound of a deafening silence from the Pro-McG camp on the questions raised about his bank statements.

Lots of rhetoric - few actual answers.

Strange how the same people who were demanding answers about Norris and were quick to accuse his defenders of avoiding dealing with the issues raised are now not so forthcoming with explanations.

Bannasidhe

mike kelly wrote: »

because we would have thousands of people coming here to give birth so their kids could claim citizenship (as has already happened)

Ah.
I see....

brokenhinge

Dana had no problem winning the Eurovision for Israel, why should this US citizenship be a surprise.

Lord TSC

Happyman42 wrote: »

He has answered the questions about the IRA, who no longer exist. If a journalist has DEFINITIVE proof that he is telling lies, produce it. OPINION is of no value here, DEFINITIVE proof is required.
Then the same journalist should tell us all what difference it makes under the terms of The Good Friday Agreement to which 94% of the Irish electorate signed up to.
Because they have NOT done any of that makes them hypocrites for persisting.
The people are making up their own minds anyway, about how important it is.

And yes, his financial affairs like everybody else's should be questioned.

And now the "Ye have no proof" line gets trotted out :rolleyes: Its like arguing with a broken record. Shall we use the Mandela comparison from the big book of SF cliches next?

Here's what gets me. A journalist made some observations about MMG's supposed transparity, pointing out some holes in what was released. Rather than actually debate this point, the subject is immediatly shifted to the other candidates, in a bid to block actual discussion of MMG's political moves. When someone points this out, we fall back onto the "There's no proof" safety blanket...

But the problem is that while there's no definite proof, it's obvious to a blind man that MMG was involved in the IRA, and that the IRA did commit some terrible actions. Worse, you have a contingency of people who say "you can't prove anything, but we're proud of what he did", competly contradicting ther own point. People claim he's a hero in one breath who fought against the English, but then in the next, they turn round and defend him by trying to claim nothing happened! Which is it? Is MMG a hero or did he do nothing? The entire hero complex people have, and which he pushes himself, is based on the actions that no one wants to admit he actually did. It's a stupid nudge and wink scenario where everyone knows he did it, but by trotting out the "You can't prove it" line, he can't be held accountable by those who disagree with what he did.

mike kelly

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Ah.
I see....

I knew you would see reason

cowzerp

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Hear That? It's the sound of a deafening silence from the Pro-McG camp on the questions raised about his bank statements.

Lots of rhetoric - few actual answers.

Strange how the same people who were demanding answers about Norris and were quick to accuse his defenders of avoiding dealing with the issues raised are now not so forthcoming with explanations.

We can't give answers on his bank details as we simply don't have access to his bank-them questions should and will be asked to MMG

If it turns out he's hiding stuff he will get lashed too-as it stands now it's only a question that has not been answered yet, don't expect me to answer when i or other MMG voters simply cant.

All we can comment on is whats in the public domain.

mike kelly

cowzerp wrote: »

We can't give answers on his bank details as we simply don't have access to his bank-them questions should and will be asked to MMG

If it turns out he's hiding stuff he will get lashed too-as it stands now it's only a question that has not been answered yet, don't expect me to answer when i or other MMG voters simply cant.

All we can comment on is whats in the public domain.

so what if MMG has a lot of money in the bank? he deserves it for the work he has done

Morlar

What's strange about this is the way the people who support and defend Norris, who has NOT been forthcoming about his finances, (nor has he released the letters etc) are now attempting to target the ONLY candidate in the race (McGuinness) who has opened his bank account to the public.

efb

cowzerp wrote: »

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Hear That? It's the sound of a deafening silence from the Pro-McG camp on the questions raised about his bank statements.

Lots of rhetoric - few actual answers.

Strange how the same people who were demanding answers about Norris and were quick to accuse his defenders of avoiding dealing with the issues raised are now not so forthcoming with explanations.

We can't give answers on his bank details as we simply don't have access to his bank-them questions should and will be asked to MMG

If it turns out he's hiding stuff he will get lashed too-as it stands now it's only a question that has not been answered yet, don't expect me to answer when i or other MMG voters simply cant.

All we can comment on is whats in the public domain.

Interesting claims in the star about him meeting Det McCabe's killers while they were on the run...

cowzerp

mike kelly wrote: »

so what if MMG has a lot of money in the bank? he deserves it for the work he has done

I'm a MMG voter-the point i'm saying is we're expected to give answers for things that are out of our knowlege, I'm pretty sure it will come out that all is ok anyway.

mike kelly

I was going to vote for Norris until I found out that he is gay

Lord TSC

Morlar wrote: »

What's strange about this is the way the people who support and defend Norris, who has NOT been forthcoming about his finances, (nor has he released the letters etc) are now attempting to target the ONLY candidate in the race (McGuinness) who has opened his bank account to the public.

It works both ways; the people who support and "defend" MMG are often the ones who are so feirce in terms of demanding stuff from Norris when MMG spouts on about "moving on from the past".

And you're still ignoring the fact it's now been claimed MMG hasn't fully opened up his bank account, or is hiding something. There's no point only opening part of your financial situation and then calling others to do the same....

I mean, at least Cowzerp is giving a genuine reason why he's not going to comment much further, even if I think people who would use the same defence of Norris and the undisclosure of the letters would get torn apart for saying "I don't know whats in the letters, ergo I have no problem pretending everything's ok for now".

cowzerp

efb wrote: »

Interesting claims in the star about him meeting Det McCabe's killers while they were on the run...

And why am i quoted for that-a leader of sinn fein meeting them is hardly big news anyway-they met many of these people throughout the good friday agreement as they needed to get the IRA to support and take part in the peace process.

At the time when they where trying to get the IRA to go this route they where endangering there own lifes and where very brave for following through with it.

Morlar

cowzerp wrote: »

I'm a MMG voter-the point i'm saying is we're expected to give answers for things that are out of our knowlege, I'm pretty sure it will come out that all is ok anyway.

Unlike the unreleased Norris letters of clemency for the statutory rapist of a minor, the Norris refusal to clarify his views on age of consent between older males and younger males, & the Norris refusal to even disclose the amount of disability money he recieved while simultaneously working fulltime in the senate etc. etc.

cowzerp

Morlar wrote: »

Unlike the unreleased Norris letters of clemency for the statutory rapist of a minor, the Norris refusal to clarify his views on age of consent between older males and younger males, & the Norris refusal to even disclose the amount of disability money he recieved while simultaneously working fulltime in the senate etc. etc.

I said he will be asked, I have yet to see him asked it

Norris is hiding the letters as he has something to hide, on your post anyway-MMG can have as much money as he's earned in there anyway and whats the problem, thats if it even turns out to be the case.

General General

Given all this dual nationality talk & spake about reinstating the Queen or creating a monarchy, what about (our fellow Gaelic man) Ian McDiarmid as Emperor? Think of the publicity & he seems to have a lot of experience, after all, his last job was Emperor of the Universe (I am aware that this was a long, long time ago...).

Bannasidhe

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

And now the "Ye have no proof" line gets trotted out :rolleyes: Its like arguing with a broken record. Shall we use the Mandela comparison from the big book of SF cliches next?

Here's what gets me. A journalist made some observations about MMG's supposed transparity, pointing out some holes in what was released. Rather than actually debate this point, the subject is immediatly shifted to the other candidates, in a bid to block actual discussion of MMG's political moves. When someone points this out, we fall back onto the "There's no proof" safety blanket...

But the problem is that while there's no definite proof, it's obvious to a blind man that MMG was involved in the IRA, and that the IRA did commit some terrible actions. Worse, you have a contingency of people who say "you can't prove anything, but we're proud of what he did", competly contradicting ther own point. People claim he's a hero in one breath who fought against the English, but then in the next, they turn round and defend him by trying to claim nothing happened! Which is it? Is MMG a hero or did he do nothing? The entire hero complex people have, and which he pushes himself, is based on the actions that no one wants to admit he actually did. It's a stupid nudge and wink scenario where everyone knows he did it, but by trotting out the "You can't prove it" line, he can't be held accountable by those who disagree with what he did.

The question asked never mentioned the PIRA or McGuinness' past. It dealt with the now.


It was a simple question about the bank statements McG issued to the press which he said was his income/expenditure for the last 6 months -


Yet - it would appear that, if I understand how it works correctly, his earnings from Stormont are paid in full to McGuinness who then transfers the funds to Sinn Féin. He then draws down his salary from SF. The bank statements he supplied show the draw down from SF i.e. his salary. But not the original payments from Stormont. The question was therefore asked - in to what bank account is the Stormont monies paid?

The original poser of the question - via a letter to today's IT - also noted that there was no expenditure for utility bills on the statements and queried whether these were paid out of another, undeclared account.

Both of these are valid questions.

They have whatsoever nothing to do with McG's past, the Troubles or the finances of any other candidate so there is no need for pro/anti republican rhetoric/ polemic or references to other candidates when responding to these questions.

Lord TSC

They have whatsoever nothing to do with McG's past, the Troubles or the finances of any other candidate so there is no need for pro/anti republican rhetoric/ polemic or references to other candidates when responding to these questions.

Fair enough But it's the same rhetoric used in both cases. SF trot out the "There's no proof" line too regularly. I'll apologise if I misunderstood the question but it's a case of I needed to vent on this "There's no proof" BS that comes out constantly....

Bannasidhe

mike kelly wrote: »

I was going to vote for Norris until I found out that he is gay

You do know that even when you are covered in that white sheet you can be identified by your shoes...

mike kelly

even if MMG has 100 million in his bank account, it will not put off any of his voters.

General General

Bannasidhe wrote: »

The question asked never mentioned the PIRA or McGuinness' past. It dealt with the now.


It was a simple question about the bank statements McG issued to the press which he said was his income/expenditure for the last 6 months -


Yet - it would appear that, if I understand how it works correctly, his earnings from Stormont are paid in full to McGuinness who then transfers the funds to Sinn Féin. He then draws down his salary from SF. The bank statements he supplied show the draw down from SF i.e. his salary. But not the original payments from Stormont. The question was therefore asked - in to what bank account is the Stormont monies paid?

The original poser of the question - via a letter to today's IT - also noted that there was no expenditure for utility bills on the statements and queried whether these were paid out of another, undeclared account.

Both of these are valid questions.

They have whatsoever nothing to do with McG's past, the Troubles or the finances of any other candidate so there is no need for pro/anti republican rhetoric/ polemic or references to other candidates when responding to these questions.

Maybe the utility companies think better of sending him a bill.

Maybe he's like Bertie & likes to pay in cash that he wins on the horses.

Bannasidhe

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Fair enough But it's the same rhetoric used in both cases. SF trot out the "There's no proof" line too regularly. I'll apologise if I misunderstood the question but it's a case of I needed to vent on this "There's no proof" BS that comes out constantly....

I understand perfectly.

Just trying to forestall as much as possible the use of any mud - either slung or in the waters.

Bannasidhe

General General wrote: »

what about (our fellow Gaelic man) Ian McDiarmid as Emperor? Think of the publicity & he seems to have a lot of experience, after all, his last job was Emperor of the Universe (I am aware that this was a long, long time ago...).

Can he provide copies of all of his correspondence, bank statements, speeches, P60 and board memberships?

cowzerp

mike kelly wrote: »

even if MMG has 100 million in his bank account, it will not put off any of his voters.

Yes it will, if i find out Mcguinness has sent letters defending a statatory rape offender i will withdraw my support-it's very simple

Anything that can be dug up on MmG has been dragged up over the years, including his republican past-you don't think loyalist just did not bother trying to dig the dirt on MMG.

K-9

Morlar wrote: »

What's strange about this is the way the people who support and defend Norris, who has NOT been forthcoming about his finances, (nor has he released the letters etc) are now attempting to target the ONLY candidate in the race (McGuinness) who has opened his bank account to the public.

LOL, Just presenting his bank accounts does not end the matter, hence the questions.

He says he only takes the average industrial wage so people are just wondering how exactly that works, does the NI Govt. pay him directly or do they pay SF direct, which would be odd to me who has experience of how PAYE works.

General General

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Can he provide copies of all of his correspondence, bank statements, speeches, P60 and board memberships?

Sadly, much of this material was destroyed along with the second Death Star.

squod

K-9 wrote: »

LOL, Just presenting his bank accounts does not end the matter, hence the questions.

He says he only takes the average industrial wage so people are just wondering how exactly that works, does the NI Govt. pay him directly or do they pay SF direct, which would be odd to me who has experience of how PAYE works.

His salary is paid to SF (by him or directly to SF I dunno). He says he then gets his wage form SF. I presume SF have paid staff and also know how the PAYE system works.

EDit: He's taking on a couple of extra hands when he gets into the Aras which will be covered by the enormous presidential salary.