Claire Byrne Live (RTE1)

RabbleRouser2k

veetwin wrote: »

Is just my tv or bad make up or is the lighting really unflattering on set tonight?Even Claire doesn't look great and that's saying something.

Make up artist probably couldn't get in, and maybe Claire couldn't take a shower-water restrictions and all.

EPAndlee

When did taking your husbands name become such a problem. This cherokee looking goth talking pure sh!te

Pinch Flat

Had a Spanish work colleague explain their surname thing, which I never realised. Have to say I like it.

EPAndlee

It's just an argument that doesn't need to happen

Pinch Flat

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Had a Spanish work colleague explain their surname thing, which I never realised. Have to say I like it.

Ha I actually know this from watching cycling. It's given name then fathers first surname and mothers first surname if I recall? Though do the Colombians do it slightly different?

RabbleRouser2k

EPAndlee wrote: »

When did taking your husbands name become such a problem. This cherokee looking goth talking pure sh!te

They had this same debate on Brendan O'Connor a few weeks back-and even had Mairead Ronan/ Farrell/ Nahasapeemapetilan/ Sinatra on it too- also saying why she took her second husband's name.

They even peddled the age old 'gender pay gap'-they do know even Christina Hoff Summers calls crap on that.

Galwayguy35

That debate was all over the shop last night, both sides should have left the idiots at home, for the No side Mattie McGrath and for the Yes side Brid Smith.

I was very impressed with Peter Boylan though, this man knows what he is talking about.

EdEd

There was too much misinformation allowed to go unchallenged. It was a car crash.

pinkypinky

Very unbalanced audience participation. Multiple no comments in a row and then maybe one yes.

The attempts to discredit Peter Boylan were very nasty.

splinter65

I’m disappointed I didn’t get to hear the songs we were promised at the start.
I assume one was pro abortion and the other anti.
Only in Ireland....

Ash.J.Williams

It was trump / Clinton stuff... The no side hadn't a fact between them yet imposed their argument on a very weak yes side and won. The boxing analogy for Peter boylan was apt. He was wounded. As for the audience. You'd Hear a no argument then they'd move over to the other side for another nó argument... The no gang did their homework last night

gmisk

pinkypinky wrote: »

Very unbalanced audience participation. Multiple no comments in a row and then maybe one yes.

The attempts to discredit Peter Boylan were very nasty.

I totally agree
Send an email to
Complaints@rte.ie

gmisk

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

That debate was all over the shop last night, both sides should have left the idiots at home, for the No side Mattie McGrath and for the Yes side Brid Smith.

I was very impressed with Peter Boylan though, this man knows what he is talking about.

I think Peter Boylan was frustrated and I don't blame him he was barely let to finish a sentence, that show was more like a back alley brawl thankfully Mary Lou was well fit for it from a yes point of view

Galwayguy35

gmisk wrote: »

I think Peter Boylan was frustrated and I don't blame him he was barely let to finish a sentence, that show was more like a back alley brawl thankfully Mary Lou was well fit for it from a yes point of view

Every time he tried to say something Maria Steen started screeching that she was a lawyer at him and wouldn't let him finish his point.

Mr E

Peter Boylan had a rough night. His frustration was written all over his face and it was obvious from his body language.

Muahahaha

Claire Bytne totally out of her depth last night. Plus using the much larger Late Late Show studio meant the audience could behave like animals whooping and hollering. Also they should have separated the Yes and No sides in the audience altogether.

retro:electro

Peter was totally deflated by the end of it. There’s no way that audience was a fair split. Absolutely shocking behaviour out of them. However I fear the Yes side didn’t manage to do enough to sway the undecided as they spent most of their time cleaning up the last sentence of absolute muck that came from the No side. Very disheartening debate. There shouldn’t have been an audience in the first place and Claire was shocking.

pinkypinky

I have complained to RTÉ, but the damage is done.

johnpatrick81

Disgusting stuff all round. Claire Byrne and RTE should be deeply ashamed and issue a full apology. It was a disgrace. They should have to re-run it without the circus audience. You'd swear you were watching Jerry Springer and not such a serious issue being "debated".

Ash.J.Williams

Mr E wrote: »

Peter Boylan had a rough night. His frustration was written all over his face and it was obvious from his body language.

Which in my opinion made him very unsuitable to be there. The no side were there to fight.

alan partridge aha

Didn't see last night, heard Maria played a blinder, must watch it on the player.

drunkmonkey

Yes side coming across a bit childish listening to the radio. Mary Lou was making up stuff, she can't guarantee anything after the vote. They failed to answer basic questions.
Nobody can say what way the law will be drafted, they shouldn't be speaking as if it's a sure thing.
Both sides got their points across, yes side just not happy they handn't more cheers but they had enough both sides were at it, I thought it was 50/50 from the audience I couldn't really tell at the start

Maria Steen is a very intelligent lady, I'm not sure who the yes side could put up against her. The Yes lady insulting her probably cost a lot of votes.

BarryD2

It was poorly managed but what do you expect? The No side of this 'debate' have been preparing for years and know well how to manipulate & twist even the simplest arguments. What was very striking at one stage was how the GPs were brought in and it was said that the vast majority of GPs were in favour of repeal. But Claire going to the audience managed to pick out 4 No GPs and they squatted on that slot.

But as far as I've seen or heard this imbalance in RTE coverage has run all through this campaign. No one wants to see timers used but if they're not, then it's the responsibility of the broadcaster to balance coverage. And IMHO RTE have failed in this regard. But maybe I've missed some coverage where the topic has been slanted towards repeal. I don't think so though and suspect that RTE are running scared of the legal boyos on the No side and therefore over compensating.

Sesame

As a Yes voter, I thought was a terrible performance from the Yes side.
I know the Savita issue is hugely relevant and a terrible tragic consequence of the amendment but there are other cases, and other examples of why keeping the 8th is such a bad idea and to hear Savita's name repeatedly mentioned is diminishing the Yes argument down to one woman when it is far more wdespread than that. I wish they could have used more hard examples and evidence in their short soundbites.

Other than Mary Lou who was excellent and Peter who provided the coal face facts but not great at responses when put on the spot, the Yes side were weak. Who was that other Yes woman on the panel? Could they not have got someone better? She didn't add anything.

The No doctors were much better at explaining why they didn't want to support the repeal than the Yes doctor was talking about why he wanted it gone. Was it bad coaching to the Yes side?

I know crisis pregnancies don't get the same sympathy as rape, FFA, etc, but they got barely any mention from the Yes side. Why did no one mention that Ireland has one of the world's strictest abortion regimes outside muslin countries? Or offer information on the dangers of travel after surgical abortion or taking internet medication?
I was frustrated watching it. There were so many Yes reasons that didn't get touched on at all.

drunkmonkey

A lot of those things were brought up, The Savita issue even Boylin didn't answer that straight up when Mattie threw it up to him, he was cleaver in his words. As someone who's seen first hand how the Hospitals handle sepsis, she died due to a shocking lack of care with a deadly condition not because of the 8th. It's one of the biggest killers in the country. I think the Yes side should drop using her it's not a good example.

BarryD2

Sesame wrote: »

The No doctors were much better at explaining why they didn't want to support the repeal than the Yes doctor was talking about why he wanted it gone. Was it bad coaching to the Yes side?

I think Claire only managed to get one other GP in favour of repeal. She was badly organised and picked out mainly anti repeal GPS, so of course they dominated that part. The fact that some of these didn't have badges meant she didn't know until they spoke but that's just very poor management.

BarryD2

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Maria Steen is a very intelligent lady, I'm not sure who the yes side could put up against her.

She came across as somewhat patronising and overbearing, kept interrupting and speaking on issues certainly not in her 'lawyer' domain.

drunkmonkey

BarryD2 wrote: »

She came across as somewhat patronising and overbearing, kept interrupting and speaking on issues certainly not in her 'lawyer' domain.

Maria won last night hands down. I didn't think she kept interrupting people, she was very composed.

NIMAN

I always thought CB was a lightweight host/anchor to a show, and she proved me 100% right last night.

ednwireland

NIMAN wrote: »

I always thought CB was a lightweight host/anchor to a show, and she proved me 100% right last night.

don't watch it very often but she's never been able to control an interview less still an audience, typical rte lightweight.