Two new polls show collapse in Labour support

Wider Road

LordSutch wrote: »

Hmm, I presume that would be the all new shiny Sinn Fein (without any connections to their alter ego)? because nothing disgusts me more that a SF coulcillor who justfies the actions of the PIRA and what they did in the name of Ireland & the Irish people. On the other hand, many of the new breed of S'effers try to distance themselves from the armed campaign, Mary Lou being a prime example. Wouldn't vote for FF either.

I'd say that you'll have to rule out Labour as well, if you want to be seen to be consistent.

hatrickpatrick

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

Hatrickpatrick, I don't think anyone here, be they FG, Lab, SF, NULA (Not United Left Alliance) or Independent are going to argue with the idea that people like Bertie & co get so much state money is a good thing.

But if you are trying to argue the socialists would be better and would get "justice" for Irish people, well that's debatable. Firstly, I think they would get "justice" on those they do not like, not those they do like, so look at their vitriol against the FF developers, but then compare that to their love of Mick Wallace.

When it comes to other comparable payments such as expenses:
http://www.oireachtas.ie/ViewDoc.asp?DocId=-1&CatID=169&m=m
Gives the latest figures from Nov & Dec 2012, and again, it shows the socialists right up there at the top of the crowd. Given that so many of the left are based in Dublin and yet still claim so much, it does not give much hope that their actions speak louder then their words.

So taking one consistency, Dublin West.

We have four TDs
1) Joe Higgins (SP) Nov 2,250 Dec 2,250
2) Joan Burton (LAB) Nov 1,000 Dec 1,000
3) Leo Varadkar (FG) Nov 1,666 Dec 1,666
4) Patrick Nulty (LAB/"Rebel") Nov 3,141 Dec 3,141

I never said they were perfect and they'd probably become as corrupt as other politicians in time. Firstly on Mick Wallace, wasn't it Boyd Barrett & co who adamantly insisted that he never again be allowed near the technical group?

Secondly, I would bet anything that they'd make a start by turning to Europe and telling them to stick their promissory notes up their collective asses, no more diplomatic grovelling and no more flowery language. The way our bank debt is being treated is a disgrace, and while some will probably defend subservience as a necessary evil, I honestly believe the time has come to say "Look, we're not paying it, so you can either help us sort this out or we WILL allow the entire house of cards to come down on top of it, come what may".

I still say allowing the house of cards to come down would be a good thing anyway as it would lead to a bottom up redesign of the monetary system, but I can understand that most people wouldn't want to take such a huge risk and that's fair enough. The EU definitely wouldn't, and if any politicians had the balls to play hardball (no pun intended) I would imagine they'd fold fairly quickly, or at least concede that making taxpayers bail out private companies and get nothing in return is not remotely viable either socially or politically.

You can call me naive, and maybe I am, but I would very much like to see an Irish government with more "attitude". No more sugar coating. Look the banking elite in the eye and tell them it's game over.

LordSutch

Wider Road wrote: »

I'd say that you'll have to rule out Labour as well, if you want to be seen to be consistent.

I did say PIRA, whose campaign was particularly nasty & very recent.

Wider Road

LordSutch wrote: »

I did say PIRA, whose campaign was particularly nasty & very recent.

Ok, substitute Mary Lou for let's say Alan Kelly.
Do you or anyone else on this site think that Alan or anyone else belonging to his family did anything to cause grief to other families, regardless of their political persuasion?
Yes or No, anyone?

dvpower

Wider Road wrote: »

Ok, substitute Mary Lou for let's say Alan Kelly.
Do you or anyone else on this site think that Alan or anyone else belonging to his family did anything to cause grief to other families, regardless of their political persuasion?
Yes or No, anyone?

The Labour guy? What did he do?

The Waltzing Consumer

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I never said they were perfect and they'd probably become as corrupt as other politicians in time. Firstly on Mick Wallace, wasn't it Boyd Barrett & co who adamantly insisted that he never again be allowed near the technical group?

Secondly, I would bet anything that they'd make a start by turning to Europe and telling them to stick their promissory notes up their collective asses, no more diplomatic grovelling and no more flowery language. The way our bank debt is being treated is a disgrace, and while some will probably defend subservience as a necessary evil, I honestly believe the time has come to say "Look, we're not paying it, so you can either help us sort this out or we WILL allow the entire house of cards to come down on top of it, come what may".

I still say allowing the house of cards to come down would be a good thing anyway as it would lead to a bottom up redesign of the monetary system, but I can understand that most people wouldn't want to take such a huge risk and that's fair enough. The EU definitely wouldn't, and if any politicians had the balls to play hardball (no pun intended) I would imagine they'd fold fairly quickly, or at least concede that making taxpayers bail out private companies and get nothing in return is not remotely viable either socially or politically.

You can call me naive, and maybe I am, but I would very much like to see an Irish government with more "attitude". No more sugar coating. Look the banking elite in the eye and tell them it's game over.

I would call it naive unfortunately and akin to Nero playing the fiddle.

Look at one small sample of what would happen if the socialists got their way with the "get lost Europe" approach. It was unrelated but a nice view of the possibility. The RBS/Ulster Bank IT problem last year, it caused absolute chaos. Now imagine that happening for all banks and not for a small period of time.

You don't seem to even think about the idea of raising day-to-day funding, the paper market, and what chaos it would cause to businesses, or even long term funding issues for the state.

Anyway, to bring that around to the topic at hand, opinion polls may show a consistent drop for Labour, but it is millions of miles better then the would be masochist approach of the socialist politicians.

laoch na mona

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

their love of Mick Wallace.

did'nt the sp and Healy pull out of the ULA over them not condeming mick wallace

LordSutch

Wider Road wrote: »

Ok, substitute Mary Lou for let's say Alan Kelly.
Do you or anyone else on this site think that Alan or anyone else belonging to his family did anything to cause grief to other families, regardless of their political persuasion?
Yes or No, anyone?

The only Alan Kelly I can think of is the Labour guy, and he seems clean enough: Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Kelly_%28politician%29

Dob74

dvpower wrote: »

The Labour guy? What did he do?

Brother is a major defence contractor in US?
Not quite sure what he sells. But considering the internet grew out of Us defence budget he could be selling anything.

The Waltzing Consumer

laoch na mona wrote: »

did'nt the sp and Healy pull out of the ULA over them not condeming mick wallace

True, Healy seemed to the sane voice in the group. The SP, well, sure there was two of them, and both had different opinions of the matter. Clare Daly obviously resigned from the SP later in the summer after this story broke. When it came to Higgins, well he flip flopped to be honest.

My main point regarding the Mick Wallace and the FF builders/developers was not that one is better then the other, but the very obvious difference in treatment from members of the ULA.

Lockstep

Not so much a collapse as a return to their core vote. They saw increased support when in opposition but have now returned to the support they had in 2007.

Lockstep

Dob74 wrote: »

Brother is a major defence contractor in US?
Not quite sure what he sells. But considering the internet grew out of Us defence budget he could be selling anything.

First I've heard of this, link?
Even if it's true, what relevence does this have to Alan Kelly himself?

golfball37

Alan Kelly's brother Declan was on Hillary Clinton's staff in 2008 such is his influence in America. He is very well respected and successful.

thecommietommy

The strange thing for Labour is -

If they stay in Govt they are going to be hammered in an election

Or

If they pull out of Govt they are going to be hammered in an election

nuac

I think they will save some seats if they pull out of govt early

Dob74

Lockstep wrote: »

First I've heard of this, link?
Even if it's true, what relevence does this have to Alan Kelly himself?

Sorry can't find link but I dont think its a big deal.
I don't like the way it's thrown in Ganley's face as it's something to be ashamed of.
Would vote number one for kelly he hasn't let power get to his head. Unlike Gilmore, Howlin and Rabbitte. Whose bootlicking of the blueshirts makes me sick.

Sierra Oscar

Lockstep wrote: »

Even if it's true, what relevence does this have to Alan Kelly himself?

Probably referring to the rumours that the brother not only bankrolled Alan's campaign, but also the Labour party as whole. Some even go as far as suggesting that it is one of the main reason as to why Kelly is a junior minister today.

bmaxi

nuac wrote: »

I think they will save some seats if they pull out of govt early

Doubt it, anyway it's not going to happen. I can't see Gilmore or Rabbitte surviving a GE , Quinn is doubtful , Howlin will probably survive. I can see a complete clear out of the Labour front bench, with the possible exception of Joan Burton, before the next GE. If not the party will go into meltdown.