The Official After Hours Election Day Thread *Mod Note in OP*

mikemac

I predict a close result, sheningans when ballot boxes from Mayo goes missing, multiple recounts and a dirty high court case :eek:

Anything else would be too easy

K-9

Local-womanizer wrote: »

HEY!

You can't vote twice!! Or 3 times as it is now!

A Shinners get 2 votes, it's why they love on line polls, change id's and vote again.

1. Dana
2. Norris
3. Higgins
4. Davis
5. Gallagher
6. Mitchell
7. McGuinness

Dana for the LOLZ and to ensure my transfer matters, same with Norris.

After 3, doesn't really matter.

Local-womanizer

heyjude wrote: »

So your argument is, if judges pay is reduced, even if all other public service wages are being reduced at the same time, then judicial independence would be endangered and they would be more prone to corruption.

I would ask, is it not true that judges are appointed according to to their political affiliations ? Would you see a diehard Fine Gael supporter appointed to the judiciary by a Fianna Fail government or vice versa ? No, you wouldn't, so does this not endanger judicial independence too and is this method of judicial selection, not also open to corruption ?

Judges also have to be part of the society they serve and if we're cutting the pay of low paid public servants, how just would it be for high earners such as judges to be exempt from the same pain ?

I accept that pay cuts for judges alone shouldn't be allowed for the reasons you give, but as part of a universal public service pay cut, I see a valid argument for them.

And just to point out:

"The present Constitutional prohibition on reducing the pay of judges applies only to judges who have already been appointed. There is nothing in the Constitution to prevent new judges being appointed at lower pay levels than apply to sitting judges. The government has announced its intention to reduce the pay of newly appointed judges."

As for the anti-corruption argument, I would argue that its the caliber of the people involved that prevents corruption and not the amount,within reason, that they are paid. Picking judges according to their party political preferences is a bad starting point. Our politicians are among the best paid in Europe, yet allegations of corruption have remained. Some people will be corrupt no matter what they earn.

They are appointed by the President on behalf of advice of the government. A person with the correct criteria may also be recommended for appointment by the JAAB. A stupid system in my view yes but not every judge at the moment is a die-hard Fine Gael supporter and vice versa when FF where in power.

I don't think judges should be exempt from cuts, I feel the way it should be done be looked at. My main gripe is with the current referendum, as I have pointed out.

The fact they don't pay the Public Service Pension Levy is stupid. And I see that's what the referendum is putting forward.

I just don't see this referendum being passed as a healthy method on controlling the pay of the judiciary.
It, I feels, leaves the judiciary open to the threat of interference by the ministers.

Again, I agree Judges should have pay cut, just not in the manner proposed by the referendum.

And just a note:

The present Constitutional prohibition on reducing the pay of judges applies only to judges who have already been appointed. There is nothing in the Constitution to prevent new judges being appointed at lower pay levels than apply to sitting judges. The government has announced its intention to reduce the pay of newly appointed judges.

And currently of the 147 judges in Ireland, 72 made voluntary payments and standing order commitments in relation to the whole not being affected by the Levy.

They also can be taxed the same way as anyone else.

Sparks43

mikemac wrote: »

I predict a close result, sheningans when ballot boxes from Mayo goes missing, multiple recounts and a dirty high court case :eek:

Anything else would be too easy

And that all happens when the judges pay cuts get passed

Dartz

Yawn

>..>

<..<

http://i.imgur.com/cplFz.jpg

ShooterSF

Higgins purely on the grounds that his pension will probably be less than a younger president. More concerned with the referendums, definite no in the second and still unsure about the first, leaning for a no.

cardwizzard

Martin Mc Guinness Number 1. Believe it or not still undecided on my preferences at this late stage.

The wife also going to vote MMG, she has never voted SF in the past.

The Davestator

I've found it very interesting how different the AH poll has been to the official ones. I don't think (and I hope I'm right) that MMG has a hope even though he's been doing well in AH polls. We'll see Friday I suppose.

Morlar

We have had approx 130 voters so far. Gay Mitchell has 2 votes. I'd love to see that trend repeated around the country. Maybe next time he will run an actual campaign.

Mary Davis 1 0.79%
Seán Gallagher 9 7.09%
Michael D. Higgins 54 42.52%
Martin McGuinness 29 22.83%
Gay Mitchell 2 1.57%
David Norris 19 14.96%
Dana Rosemary Scallon 1 0.79%
I cannot/will not vote. 12 9.45%

sdanseo

strobe wrote: »

Ah, any chance of making it public Keith?

Any particular reason why?

sdanseo

I think this was meant to be an exit poll, but nevertheless my vote is for Michael D and unless he eats an orphan between now and the morning I won't be changing my mind for anyone's money.

charlemont

1 MMG
2 MDH
3 DN

NO

NO

Jimoslimos

Local-womanizer wrote: »

One of the reasons is that they cannot be influenced by government over certain cases, ie be threatened or rewarded with regards their pay by the government for a favourable outcome for the government.

That's akin to saying nurses' treatment of a sick TD or minister might be influenced by public sector cuts/rises. Should they be exempt too?

cardwizzard

sdeire wrote: »

I think this was meant to be an exit poll, but nevertheless my vote is for Michael D and unless he eats an orphan between now and the morning I won't be changing my mind for anyone's money.

Very funny.:D

Jesus Wept

sdeire wrote: »

I think this was meant to be an exit poll, but nevertheless my vote is for Michael D and unless he eats an orphan between now and the morning I won't be changing my mind for anyone's money.

Due to the moratorium he is entitled to eat as many orphans as he pleases since 2pm today, and good luck to him.

nice_very

I will be voting as follows:

1 Martin McGuinness
2
3
4
5
6
7

NO NO (on the 2 referenda)

Notorious97

Voting for Martin McGuinness

Im actually very proud today that I can go in and put number 1 against his name.

Im not sure what way to go on the other two votes though!

--Kaiser--

I was going to vote when McGuinness and Norris were polling well. Now it looks like neither are going to win (Mitchell, Dana and Davis haven't a chance either) I am going to spoil my vote as IMO the office of the President should be done away with as it is a waste of the Irish people's money and time (and distracting us from the other two important referenda to be voted upon)

The Davestator

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

I was going to vote when McGuinness and Norris were polling well. Now it looks like neither are going to win (Mitchell, Dana and Davis haven't a chance either) I am going to spoil my vote as IMO the office of the President should be done away with as it is a waste of the Irish people's money and time (and distracting us from the other two important referenda to be voted upon)

You're a great supporter, Norris and MMG are lucky to have ya! If my guys look like they won't win, I'm not playing.

Penn

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

I was going to vote when McGuinness and Norris were polling well. Now it looks like neither are going to win (Mitchell, Dana and Davis haven't a chance either) I am going to spoil my vote as IMO the office of the President should be done away with as it is a waste of the Irish people's money and time (and distracting us from the other two important referenda to be voted upon)

Sorry, but that's ridiculous.

You're not going to vote for McGuinness or Norris because they aren't polling well? Well why not give them your vote then anyway?

The position of the President should be done away with? Come on, it's a hugely important role for foreign relations, tourism and the President still has many duties which, I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want those duties to be assigned to the Taoiseach. I think that's far too much power for any Taoiseach to have.

And as for distracting us from the other two referenda, that's not the President's fault, and has nothing to do with who should be President or if we have a President. It's the government's fault for having these referenda on the same day meaning it's been pushed into the background.

Spoiling your vote is pointless. There is going to be a new President whether you spoil your vote or not. You have the chance to try and make sure the person you would most like to be President has a chance. Even if you only put a 1 beside one name and don't mark the rest, vote for somebody.

seamus

Delighted that I could go in and leave a blank box beside McGuinness and Dana. Pity you can't do more, like write a personal letter to them telling them to FOAD.

Felt a bit dirty sticking a 5 beside Mitchell though.

Badgermonkey

Notorious97 wrote: »

Im actually very proud today that I can go in and put number 1 against his name.

'Poster puffed with pride as pariah pushes for presidency'.

Give the Star a call, they might run with that.

Lollipops23

I ticked the box beside Higgins and voted yes, yes on the referendum. Have no problems with judges' pay being decreased, and despite having some reservations about the Oireachtas one I decided it was in the interest of the greater good to go for it.

--Kaiser--

The Davestator wrote: »

You're a great supporter, Norris and MMG are lucky to have ya! If my guys look like they won't win, I'm not playing.

Just to clarify, I was going to vote to keep McGiunness and Norris out of the office

PeterIanStaker

How about a poll on the Referendums? Or is that too serious for AH:P

Fairly obvious from my sig who I voted for.

Lord TSC

1. MDH
2. SG
3. Norris
4. Davis
5. Mitchell.
6. Dana

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

How about a poll on the Referendums? Or is that too serious for AH:P

It wouldn't matter. They'll pass without any hassle since they've been snuck in and people tend to vote yes for things they've no clue about and hope for the best.

Badgermonkey

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

people tend to vote yes for things they've no clue about and hope for the best.

Like Nice? Or Lisbon?

The Volt

1. Higgins
2. Norris

Voted yes on judge's pay, no on Oireachtas enquiries.

Lord TSC

Badgermonkey wrote: »

Like Nice? Or Lisbon?

Those had strong campaigns both for and against, with people at least asking others to consider the No option if they don't know what its about. There was attempts to debate that. I've seen no such discussion on this one on a large scale (no posters, no literature through the letter box, etc).

charlemont

Just back from voting now, Voted for those on my last post in this thread...