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

myironlung

No matter what Martin McGuinness says he's still got blood on his hands. Murder is never acceptable. Do we want a criminal like that representing us to the world?
I find it disgusting that he is running. It's a total insult to Ireland.
Would you want a drug baron or someone like that who claimed he'd given up years ago as President?
He claims to be a peacemaker. Yet he was one of those fanning the flames of conflict for so long. I'm 26, I can just about remember the pain and suffering men like him caused. I'm afraid a lot of people my age and younger don't remember, and I think that's why polls seem to show him doing well (not to mention the shinnerbots who seem to be everywhere online lately).
I've no reason to be biased or have any party allegiances, this is totally my own educated and well thought out opinion.
To be honest, if he got elected I would be very disappointed in the people of Ireland. I wouldn't want to be a citizen of a country that thinks it's OK for such scum to represent them.

cue shinnerbots' predictable and repetitive responses

privateBeavis

thee glitz wrote: »

What's the dana scandal?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgfU2tC-Z2s

General General

myironlung wrote: »

No matter what Martin McGuinness says he's still got blood on his hands. Murder is never acceptable. Do we want a criminal like that representing us to the world?
I find it disgusting that he is running. It's a total insult to Ireland.
Would you want a drug baron or someone like that who claimed he'd given up years ago as President?
He claims to be a peacemaker. Yet he was one of those fanning the flames of conflict for so long. I'm 26, I can just about remember the pain and suffering men like him caused. I'm afraid a lot of people my age and younger don't remember, and I think that's why polls seem to show him doing well (not to mention the shinnerbots who seem to be everywhere online lately).
I've no reason to be biased or have any party allegiances, this is totally my own educated and well thought out opinion.
To be honest, if he got elected I would be very disappointed in the people of Ireland. I wouldn't want to be a citizen of a country that thinks it's OK for such scum to represent them.

cue shinnerbots' predictable and repetitive responses

Is the educated-ness & well-thought-out-ness of your opinion backed up by empirical evidence, or is it just your educated & well thought out opinion that what you've stated is, indeed, an educated & well thought out opinion, specifically your own?

Pompey Magnus

myironlung wrote: »

No matter what Martin McGuinness says he's still got blood on his hands. Murder is never acceptable. Do we want a criminal like that representing us to the world?

Sean Lemass took part in the cold blooded murder of an unarmed, physically disabled barrister who was lying in his own bed at the time, he did a pretty good job representing Ireland as Taoiseach abroad though.

Bergkamp 10

myironlung wrote: »

No matter what Martin McGuinness says he's still got blood on his hands. Murder is never acceptable. Do we want a criminal like that representing us to the world?
I find it disgusting that he is running. It's a total insult to Ireland.
Would you want a drug baron or someone like that who claimed he'd given up years ago as President?
He claims to be a peacemaker. Yet he was one of those fanning the flames of conflict for so long. I'm 26, I can just about remember the pain and suffering men like him caused. I'm afraid a lot of people my age and younger don't remember, and I think that's why polls seem to show him doing well (not to mention the shinnerbots who seem to be everywhere online lately).
I've no reason to be biased or have any party allegiances, this is totally my own educated and well thought out opinion.
To be honest, if he got elected I would be very disappointed in the people of Ireland. I wouldn't want to be a citizen of a country that thinks it's OK for such scum to represent them.

cue shinnerbots' predictable and repetitive responses

educated opinion, I'd say thats up for debate.

myironlung

Like I said, it's my opinion. And I'm sure a lot of others share that opinion.
Its the same old argument again, "where's your evidence?", if I had evidence, so would everybody else. And then he would be in jail for it if he was found to have done wrong.
The fact of the matter is even if you don't believe he personally did anything, you can't deny he did support a group which did kill innocent people. In my opinion killing people, for whatever reason, is never right.
And yes, it is a well educated opinion. History has shown again and again that violence only breeds more violence. He says he is a catholic and was fighting for catholics but a true catholic would not support murder. The only thing that works at the end of the day are peaceful methods. I'm glad he has been working towards peace in recent years. That's great. But that's after he realised the futility of a violent conflict. Other;s had been working towards peace for decades and deserve a lot more credit than him.
He is tainted by his past and is certainly not someone who should represent the people of this country.

So get off my back Sinn Feiners. I'm entitled to have an opinion as much as the rest. I was only stating it as I'm worried at the way this country might turn out.

Bergkamp 10

myironlung wrote: »

Like I said, it's my opinion. And I'm sure a lot of others share that opinion.
Its the same old argument again, "where's your evidence?", if I had evidence, so would everybody else. And he would be in jail for it.
The fact of the matter is even if you don't believe he personally did anything, you can't deny he did support a group which did kill innocent people. In my opinion killing people, for whatever reason, is never right.
And yes, it is a well educated opinion. History has shown again and again that violence only breeds more violence. He says he is a catholic and was fighting for catholics but a true catholic would not support murder. The only thing that works at the end of the day are peaceful methods. I'm glad he has been working towards peace in recent years. That's great. But that's after he realised the futility of a violent conflict. Other;s had been working towards peace for decades and deserve a lot more credit than him.
He is tainted by his past and is certainly not someone who should represent the people of this country.

So get off my back Sinn Feiners. I'm entitled to have an opinion as much as the rest. I was only stating it as I'm worried at the way this country might turn out.

So you support the idea of arresting and imprisoning the hundreds of British soldiers who killed innocent men women and children in Northern Ireland.

After all you claim there was no "war" so it is murder so why arent you lobbying for them to be arrested?

Another hypocrite just out for himself. Usual rubbish spouted by the well paid establishment.

Pompey Magnus

myironlung wrote: »

And yes, it is a well educated opinion. History has shown again and again that violence only breeds more violence. He says he is a catholic and was fighting for catholics but a true catholic would not support murder.

Perhaps not quite sufficiently well educated, going back to the time of St Augustine the Catholic Church has found ways of defending war and killing.

The only thing that works at the end of the day are peaceful methods.

How quickly history is forgotten. Did peaceful methods achieve the Irish Republic or was it violence or warfare?

So get off my back Sinn Feiners. I'm entitled to have an opinion as much as the rest. I was only stating it as I'm worried at the way this country might turn out.

Could you clarify how you feel at being a citizen of a country that elected and was represented by Sean Lemass? As I already pointed out he helped kill a man yet when he left office he left the country a better place than how he found it.

Richard

Bergkamp 10 wrote: »

So you support the idea of arresting and imprisoning the hundreds of British soldiers who killed innocent men women and children in Northern Ireland..

Hundreds?

ColeTrain

I thought the "debate" last night was embarrassing. Miriam O'Callaghan is completely out of her depth hosting something as serious as last night.

Her treatment of McGuinness was disgraceful.

RTE have really hit a new low. Their job last night should have been to provide a well structured debate giving us all an insight into how each candidate would act in office. Instead we got some overpaid bint trying her best to throw mud at the candidates while all the time saying "lioke". They even had a bit that resembled an episode of '24', where at the start of each episode they tell you what happend in the previous show, with all the candidates controversies and a few soundbites thrown together. Where is the impartial editing there?

O'Callaghan said she read the IRA's green book that day, maybe she would have been better off googling the word 'debate'. All she did was ask stupid questions and then had the cheek to not let any candidate answer them. Maybe she thought it was 'Tonight with Miriam' - which she gets due to nepotism, typical RTE eh?

What annoyed me the most though was when she asked every candidate "did they want Martin McGuiness running in this election"? Even asking Michael O'd would he vote for him if he wasn't running.

Then to top it off we had the Dana show. What a circus..

Oranage2

A revote - it's like Lisbon all over again.

ColeTrain

myironlung wrote: »

No matter what Martin McGuinness says he's still got blood on his hands. Murder is never acceptable. Do we want a criminal like that representing us to the world?
I find it disgusting that he is running. It's a total insult to Ireland.
Would you want a drug baron or someone like that who claimed he'd given up years ago as President?
He claims to be a peacemaker. Yet he was one of those fanning the flames of conflict for so long. I'm 26, I can just about remember the pain and suffering men like him caused. I'm afraid a lot of people my age and younger don't remember, and I think that's why polls seem to show him doing well (not to mention the shinnerbots who seem to be everywhere online lately).
I've no reason to be biased or have any party allegiances, this is totally my own educated and well thought out opinion.
To be honest, if he got elected I would be very disappointed in the people of Ireland. I wouldn't want to be a citizen of a country that thinks it's OK for such scum to represent them.

cue shinnerbots' predictable and repetitive responses

So Collins, deValera, Lemass, Pearse and Connolly were all criminals going by that logic, would they disgust you today?

I suppose you'd consider George Bush and Cromwell good honest men because they had blood on their hands while under a legitimate flag?

Plazaman

Surrreeee Dana, you have a "big" story about allegations against your family..... sure....... :rolleyes:

NASGOFSBG

Lord TSC

Bergkamp 10 wrote: »

So you support the idea of arresting and imprisoning the hundreds of British soldiers who killed innocent men women and children in Northern Ireland.

If it led to arrests of people involved in IRA as well, fair enough. Since thats not going to happen, I'll settle for not voting for any of them in the presidency either.

This "But they did stuff as well" arguement which constantly is thrown back is childish. Forgive the cliche but two wrongs does not make a right....

Biggins

Plazaman wrote: »

Surrreeee Dana, you have a "big" story about allegations against your family..... sure....... :rolleyes:

I just want this race to be over now if only to get her and her whining off our screens.

Lollipops23

myironlung wrote: »

No matter what Martin McGuinness says he's still got blood on his hands. Murder is never acceptable. Do we want a criminal like that representing us to the world?

Nelson Mandella was a terrorist with blood on his hands. Desperate times, desperate measures and all that.

Having said that, I genuinely don't want him as President-not because of his past but because I don't think he's the man for the job. Also the barefaced lies he's been telling at every opportunity.

KeithAFC

ColeTrain wrote: »

I thought the "debate" last night was embarrassing. Miriam O'Callaghan is completely out of her depth hosting something as serious as last night.

Her treatment of McGuinness was disgraceful.

RTE have really hit a new low. Their job last night should have been to provide a well structured debate giving us all an insight into how each candidate would act in office. Instead we got some overpaid bint trying her best to throw mud at the candidates while all the time saying "lioke". They even had a bit that resembled an episode of '24', where at the start of each episode they tell you what happend in the previous show, with all the candidates controversies and a few soundbites thrown together. Where is the impartial editing there?

O'Callaghan said she read the IRA's green book that day, maybe she would have been better off googling the word 'debate'. All she did was ask stupid questions and then had the cheek to not let any candidate answer them. Maybe she thought it was 'Tonight with Miriam' - which she gets due to nepotism, typical RTE eh?

What annoyed me the most though was when she asked every candidate "did they want Martin McGuiness running in this election"? Even asking Michael O'd would he vote for him if he wasn't running.

Then to top it off we had the Dana show. What a circus..

I don’t see what she did that was so wrong in terms of the questions to Martin Mcguinness. If you have a past like him, then you are going to get questions asked of you. It isn’t just Miriam who has been asking questions of him recently.

I know it is a debate on national TV but you must expect those questions to be asked to Martin Mcguinness.

Sunnyisland

The Fine Gael environment minister,Phil Hogan, said recently that putting McGuinness in charge of the state "would leave us looking like a banana republic". Ireland, he continued ominously, would be "denuded of serious levels of corporate investment within 24 months". His panicky warning coincided with the return of McGuinness and Robinson from the US with further promises of investment for the North. Far from having investors running for cover, McGuinness is well regarded in New York and Washington.
What galls McGuinness's detractors is that Sinn Féin has been so staggeringly successful Unable to score points against his record in office or to find evidence of personal lapses, his opponents have fallen back on his membership of the IRA. Before the Saville inquiry into the Bloody Sunday killings, McGuinness admitted that he was the Provisional IRA second-in-command in Derry on that fateful day, and said he left the IRA in 1974. No one believes he left in 1974. Indeed, his stature as an IRA leader was crucial in selling the peace deal to the organisation. His supporters treat his denials philosophically and even some of his critics understand the legal need to finesse the dates of his IRA membership, which is still a prosecutable offence. Does this mean he should not be president?
The violence in Ireland was appalling. McGuinness has already said that much of it was unjustifiable. But it was not the work of killers addicted to killing. What happened in McGuinness's home town of Derry in the summer of 1969 was an Irish spring, a spontaneous rebellion against a regime that discriminated and excluded from power a majority of its own citizens. Many reached for the gun in those strange, paranoid, idealistic and angry days. Martin McGuinness was one of them. But he put the gun down and he persuaded the British government to address the issues that sparked the conflict. The North is a better place because of him. The republic can be too.

(taken from the guardian uk newspaper)

maebee

Mammy O'Rourke was on the John Murray show on Radio 1 this morning and she said she got a txt from a reliable sourse last night stating that the latest Dana scandal concerns an allegation against her brother in the U.S. More to follow later today, no doubt.

Fishooks12

Does anyone really give a **** what Dana does? She's 250/1 and hasn't a hope

It's been one of the dirtiest election campaigns, given the lack of policy candidates have the only means of real debate is by dragging up and analysing the past.

_feedback_

maebee wrote: »

Mammy O'Rourke was on the John Murray show on Radio 1 this morning and she said she got a txt from a reliable sourse last night stating that the latest Dana scandal concerns an allegation against her brother in the U.S. More to follow later today, no doubt.

Apparently it is common knowledge in "media circles", but nobody is reporting it, for obvious reasons.

Fishooks12

ColeTrain wrote: »

I thought the "debate" last night was embarrassing. Miriam O'Callaghan is completely out of her depth hosting something as serious as last night.

Her treatment of McGuinness was disgraceful.

RTE have really hit a new low. Their job last night should have been to provide a well structured debate giving us all an insight into how each candidate would act in office. Instead we got some overpaid bint trying her best to throw mud at the candidates while all the time saying "lioke". They even had a bit that resembled an episode of '24', where at the start of each episode they tell you what happend in the previous show, with all the candidates controversies and a few soundbites thrown together. Where is the impartial editing there?

O'Callaghan said she read the IRA's green book that day, maybe she would have been better off googling the word 'debate'. All she did was ask stupid questions and then had the cheek to not let any candidate answer them. Maybe she thought it was 'Tonight with Miriam' - which she gets due to nepotism, typical RTE eh?

What annoyed me the most though was when she asked every candidate "did they want Martin McGuiness running in this election"? Even asking Michael O'd would he vote for him if he wasn't running.

Then to top it off we had the Dana show. What a circus..

You do know you can turn it off if you want?

Otacon

Fishooks12 wrote: »

It's been one of the dirtiest election campaigns, given the lack of policy candidates have the only means of real debate is by dragging up and analysing the past.

I think the fact that some candidates have such checkered pasts to talk about has helped this campaign become dirty.

fishy fishy

i wonder what mo callaghan, joe duffers and all the other "haters" would do if they had to live up north, and be treated like refugees in their own country. Its all very well to be an armchair judge and jury when the treatement never affected you personally. A different matter altogether watching your family and friends being treated like pieces of dirt. These crowd then have the audactiy to try and win public opinion by their dirt mongering and attacks. Have you noticed that they are vilifying all but one - michael d higgins. This is who rte want in. and the sheeple are going along with it. this is the reason why I am voting for Martin mc guinness, the underdog

Warper

realies wrote: »

The Fine Gael environment minister,Phil Hogan, said recently that putting McGuinness in charge of the state "would leave us looking like a banana republic". Ireland, he continued ominously, would be "denuded of serious levels of corporate investment within 24 months". His panicky warning coincided with the return of McGuinness and Robinson from the US with further promises of investment for the North. Far from having investors running for cover, McGuinness is well regarded in New York and Washington.
What galls McGuinness's detractors is that Sinn Féin has been so staggeringly successful Unable to score points against his record in office or to find evidence of personal lapses, his opponents have fallen back on his membership of the IRA. Before the Saville inquiry into the Bloody Sunday killings, McGuinness admitted that he was the Provisional IRA second-in-command in Derry on that fateful day, and said he left the IRA in 1974. No one believes he left in 1974. Indeed, his stature as an IRA leader was crucial in selling the peace deal to the organisation. His supporters treat his denials philosophically and even some of his critics understand the legal need to finesse the dates of his IRA membership, which is still a prosecutable offence. Does this mean he should not be president?
The violence in Ireland was appalling. McGuinness has already said that much of it was unjustifiable. But it was not the work of killers addicted to killing. What happened in McGuinness's home town of Derry in the summer of 1969 was an Irish spring, a spontaneous rebellion against a regime that discriminated and excluded from power a majority of its own citizens. Many reached for the gun in those strange, paranoid, idealistic and angry days. Martin McGuinness was one of them. But he put the gun down and he persuaded the British government to address the issues that sparked the conflict. The North is a better place because of him. The republic can be too.

(taken from the guardian uk newspaper)

Strange the way the English media is much more understanding of the Republican Movement than the constant slating he is getting in every media outlet in the Republic.
This line sums it up for me:
The North is a better place because of him. The republic can be too.

ColeTrain

KeithAFC wrote: »

I don’t see what she did that was so wrong in terms of the questions to Martin Mcguinness. If you have a past like him, then you are going to get questions asked of you. It isn’t just Miriam who has been asking questions of him recently.

I know it is a debate on national TV but you must expect those questions to be asked to Martin Mcguinness.

I understand that he is always going to be asked questions about his past but I would expect better from RTE.

We shouldn't be paying our TV licence to be told who to vote for.

Why not let the candidates debate valid arguments for and against instead of having a poor presenter like O'Callaghan control the whole show and resort to slinging dirt at them - it was trash TV dressed up.

RTE were telling us not to vote for Martin McGuinness. It doesn't matter if you like him or hate him, that farce last night was complete slanted bullsh*t.

Fishooks12 wrote: »

You do know you can turn it off if you want?

Thanks for that.

Fishooks12

fishy fishy wrote: »

i wonder what mo callaghan, joe duffers and all the other "haters" would do if they had to live up north, and be treated like refugees in their own country. Its all very well to be an armchair judge and jury when the treatement never affected you personally. A different matter altogether watching your family and friends being treated like pieces of dirt. These crowd then have the audactiy to try and win public opinion by their dirt mongering and attacks. Have you noticed that they are vilifying all but one - michael d higgins. This is who rte want in. and the sheeple are going along with it. this is the reason why I am voting for Martin mc guinness, the underdog

Maybe it's because he actually has nothing to hide........that wouldn't fit in with your conspiracy theory though

Pompey Magnus

Warper wrote: »

Strange the way the English media is much more understanding of the Republican Movement than the constant slating he is getting in every media outlet in the Republic.
This line sums it up for me:
The North is a better place because of him. The republic can be too.

The problem is that there are plenty in the Republic living what can only be some kind of black and white Universe who think that if McGuinness and other Republican leaders had taken the Ghandi approach then all would have been fine and both communities would have gotten along the grandest.

They haven't got a clue of the reality of the situation and what is worse is that they don't want to know either.

Lord TSC

KeithAFC wrote: »

I don’t see what she did that was so wrong in terms of the questions to Martin Mcguinness. If you have a past like him, then you are going to get questions asked of you. It isn’t just Miriam who has been asking questions of him recently.

I know it is a debate on national TV but you must expect those questions to be asked to Martin Mcguinness.

Its something thats annoying me about all the candidates tbh. They all are acting as if their past should be ignored but at the end of the day, we have to pick a person to represent us and thus every candidate is going to be open to inspection. How you got to where you are is just as important as where you're going to go, and that goes for MMG, Norris, Dana and all of them.

If you want to run for the highest office in Irish politics and ask people to trust you to run the country, its only fair the people know who it is they are voting for.

Happyman42

realies wrote: »

The Fine Gael environment minister,Phil Hogan, said recently that putting McGuinness in charge of the state "would leave us looking like a banana republic". Ireland, he continued ominously, would be "denuded of serious levels of corporate investment within 24 months". His panicky warning coincided with the return of McGuinness and Robinson from the US with further promises of investment for the North. Far from having investors running for cover, McGuinness is well regarded in New York and Washington.
What galls McGuinness's detractors is that Sinn Féin has been so staggeringly successful Unable to score points against his record in office or to find evidence of personal lapses, his opponents have fallen back on his membership of the IRA. Before the Saville inquiry into the Bloody Sunday killings, McGuinness admitted that he was the Provisional IRA second-in-command in Derry on that fateful day, and said he left the IRA in 1974. No one believes he left in 1974. Indeed, his stature as an IRA leader was crucial in selling the peace deal to the organisation. His supporters treat his denials philosophically and even some of his critics understand the legal need to finesse the dates of his IRA membership, which is still a prosecutable offence. Does this mean he should not be president?
The violence in Ireland was appalling. McGuinness has already said that much of it was unjustifiable. But it was not the work of killers addicted to killing. What happened in McGuinness's home town of Derry in the summer of 1969 was an Irish spring, a spontaneous rebellion against a regime that discriminated and excluded from power a majority of its own citizens. Many reached for the gun in those strange, paranoid, idealistic and angry days. Martin McGuinness was one of them. But he put the gun down and he persuaded the British government to address the issues that sparked the conflict. The North is a better place because of him. The republic can be too.

(taken from the guardian uk newspaper)

There is a sea change happening in international opinion. Of course, as always, our conservative, surrender monkey deniers will be leagues behind.