What Type Of New Political Parties Would You Consider Voting For ?

gaffer91

A party that is properly socially liberal i.e is in favour of gay marriage and adoption rights, holding a referendum on abortion and campaigning for abortion rights, liberalising drug laws, and legislating on father's rights etc.

Economically, they are pragmatic, are at times in favour of cutting and at times in favour of stimulating. This party would be generally hold keynesian views but would adapt to situations as they see fit. In favour of a strong but affordable welfare state and is not afraid to raise taxes.

Monty Burnz

gaffer91 wrote: »

A party that is properly socially liberal i.e is in favour of gay marriage and adoption rights, holding a referendum on abortion and campaigning for abortion rights, liberalising drug laws, and legislating on father's rights etc.

Economically, they are pragmatic, are at times in favour of cutting and at times in favour of stimulating. This party would be generally hold keynesian views but would adapt to situations as they see fit. In favour of a strong but affordable welfare state and is not afraid to raise taxes.

Sounds like Labour.

gaffer91

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Sounds like Labour.

I would probably be closest to Labour but they don't really seem to care about social liberalism at all for some reason. No talk about any of the things mentioned in my post since they came to office.

Monty Burnz

gaffer91 wrote: »

I would probably be closest to Labour but they don't really seem to care about social liberalism at all for some reason. No talk about any of the things mentioned in my post since they came to office.

Yeah, that's odd - the only thing I can think of is that they don't think the public would take too well to them driving some of these changes when the country is on life support. I think it would be a nice change of pace, personally.

gaffer91

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Yeah, that's odd - the only thing I can think of is that they don't think the public would take too well to them driving some of these changes when the country is on life support. I think it would be a nice change of pace, personally.

I would say the same, but I wouldn't think the country being on life support matters (with regards making these changes) to a lot of people. Most people are by their nature conservative and oppose social change. It is only after the change has been enacted that they realise what a positive thing it has been.

MetalDog

Irish pirate party. Yarrrrrghh!! (waves cutlass)

http://pirateparty.ie/

Chucky the tree

mikemac1 wrote: »

There was a party for this, the PDs
But not enough voted for them and now they are gone

You could have even put yourself forward as a candidate, it's too late now

The PDs were hardly fiscally conservative. Not sure how socially liberal they were either considering they brought in laws to narrow pub and club opening hours.

Sleepy

I'd be another seeking a centre-right party to vote for. The PD's would have been closest to my views originally but they just became Fianna Fail lite. At present, I'm having to vote Fianna Gael despite being heavily against their socially conservative stance. Ironically, it'd be the Labour party who would appeal to me most on this front but of the main parties theirs are the economic policies I find most ludicrous (I exclude SF from the main parties not on the basis of numbers but on the belief that I can't see FF/FG or Labour ever going into coallition with them to form a govt).

Monty Burnz

Sleepy wrote: »

At present, I'm having to vote Fianna Gael despite being heavily against their socially conservative stance.

There's certainly a rural, more conservative wing in FG but there's also a progressive wing - far more progressive than FFailure. They were the guys who flew in the face of a powerful Catholic Church back in the 80s to introduce divorce.

It's probably too obvious to point it out, but if you want to strengthen the liberal wing you can do so by joining or supporting it.

Flex

hooradiation wrote: »

The "intelligence test" bollox for a start.



In your dreams, kid.
The presence of "Healy-Raes and Lowrys" is the fault of electorate and nothing else, placing the blame at the feet of PR-STV is nonsense.
If we switched to, say, First past the post (which is so fucking terrible in it's own right, but that's neither here nor there) do you imagine that the situation would be magically fixed?
You can't stop people electing people you don't like and they will.
Blaming the election system is pointless.



The fuck it was.

Another system could be implemented to prevent the national parliament being unduly influenced by constituency issues and parish politics. PR-STV was originally (correct me if Im wrong) implemented as part of the Home Rule act to give Protestants in the south and Catholics in the north as much of a voice as possible in the new provinces they were each a minority in. That problem doesnt really exist anymore.

I wouldnt recommend first past the post either; it results in fewer coalitions which would be a good thing, but would magnify the constituency problem we have. A list system would be better. Ideally moving to a system whereby the electorate dont vote for candidates at all, but for parties. That way no one TD is under pressure about voting against a bill to close an unnecessary school/hospital/quango in the middle of nowhere because it will hurt their chances of being re-elected by those constituents. Obviously provisions would have to be made for independents and so on.

Regards the intelligence test, iits my opinion that if people had to answer some basic questions regards the economy then support for economically far-left parties would collapse. It would also allow parties to campaign with sensible proposals without fear of being "outbid" with the electorate by (economically) far-left parties who appeal to people who genuinely think that all of our economic problems are caused by the banks and everything would be grand if we just implemented a wealth tax and burned bondholders, etc.

mikemac1

Flex wrote: »

A list system would be better. Ideally moving to a system whereby the electorate dont vote for candidates at all, but for parties.

So instead of voting for someone I know I now vote for party hack 27, party lackey 35 or leaders connected friend 13

No thanks

I'll be voting for anonymous administrators who are just connected to party leadership.

They've never achieved anything on their own or taken a risk and put themselves forward

Sleepy

What's the difference?

Your great local politician votes exactly how party lacky no. 345 would vote but distracts from the running of our national government by trying to extort his fellow party members into prioritising local issues that a TD has no business being involved in.

ToddyDoody

The one that makes me its leader for life (is that too much to ask??)

DEFTLEFTHAND

A party which would incorporate my plan to reform voting rights in this country.

One's right to vote would not be guaranteed at 18. A person applying to the register must first complete and pass a State IQ test which will determine whether or not they receive voting rights.

paddyandy

Remove two thirds of the Electorate from polling leaving the wise noble and intelligent .It won't be perfect but much better .

token101

Fenian Army wrote: »

And what exactly, is wrong with them?

TBF I think when people bash them they are really thinking of violence supporting parties like the 32CSM, RSF, RNU etc when in fact eirigi are affiliated with no armed group and dont support any either, as has always been the case.

They are about building a popular public movement and are open, democratic and transparent, certainly not the bogeymen some would have you believe (rooted in the confusion I alluded to).

Dont support them personally at all(to say the least) but they certainly are no where near the worst but I'd suggest reading their constitution etc before utterly demonising them. They do some very good community work in Dublin were they have some elected reps.

Read it. They're saps.

wendell borton

An Anarcho-syndicalist party.

MT HEAD

I as a County Councilor and Town Mayor for Fine Gael would just like to fúcking say that the only reason we are the bad guys is because some ****érs called Fianna Fail fúcked up the country and we have to clean their shít up soo you lot can just go away and fúck off while we rebuild the economy, you wànkers, eat shít and die

Mod note: User banned

Jimoslimos

MT HEAD wrote: »

I as a County Councilor and Town Mayor for Fine Gael would just like to fúcking say that the only reason we are the bad guys is because some ****érs called Fianna Fail fúcked up the country and we have to clean their shít up soo you lot can just go away and fúck off while we rebuild the economy, you wànkers, eat shít and die

Oh hi there! Just thought I'd say hello since I'm sure we'll be hearing a lot more of your meaningful contributions in the future.

And I'm having fun reading your colourful language aloud, with emphasis on the added accents.:)

Gadfly Girl

Personally while I think there's always room for more parties to give people more choice, I think as a society we need to be better educated about politics.

While I'm not particularly against the P STV system, 'we' do tend to vote for personalities over policies. In other European countries political philosophy is part of primary school education. I think a great many people in our society don't even know what it means to be Left or Right Wing, and so on. People are excluded from politics by lack of adequate education unless they choose to find out more, and even then it can be difficult to find factual information that is not tainted by a media agenda of some sort.

As politcs affects everyone, everyone should have the chance to participate fully, I would even go so far as to say that voting should be mandatory as in some states. That's just my opinion though.