Dublin West General Election - SEE MOD NOTE POST 19.

chucknorris

The Sinn Fein surge is an interesting one in Dublin west.

They have historically polled around 7% since 2009. 2014 LEA and by-election was almost 20%. Unprecedented. SF have always done worse off in Dublin west, compared to the rest of Dublin due to the socialists.

There are a few factors to that:

• Higgins was not running for the socialists.
• The Labour vote collapsed and their candidates were average.
• FF support fell back
• The water issue was massive in 2014 and the economy was fragile.
• The SF machine is better than most and they ramp it up well in fairness

This time around, with nothing to back it up, i think their support might pull back for the following reasons. Keeping in mind the socialists did not see the previous SF surge coming in 2014 to the extent it did.


I think SF support will be very good, but if they don't get near the number 1s they got last time, their lack of transfer friendliness could hurt them. Polls out tomorrow say they are on 17% now, so add in the Socialists and their position weakens considerably.

• They lose 1000 votes from 2014 received from Swords.
• Labour have a stronger candidate this time around compared to 2014.
• There is an Independent operating in their patch for the first time (with name recognition).
• FF still have a candidate so no loose FF votes
• The socialists will work extra hard now that the threat is there.
• Finally, I canvassed the Navan road today. SF support is not exactly strong.

I'm not saying they won't get a seat in the GE, but what I am saying is, it is not a sure thing as people say and I would go as far as saying that the predictions favoring them is based on a 2014 by-election anomaly where the conditions are now completely changed.

Canadel

Zaph wrote: »

As I said above, a lot of it is down to the posters themselves "coming clean", I'm not about to dig into the profile of every poster on the forum to try to catch them out. But if you tell us that you have no connection to X and then somewhere along the line let it slip that you're actually their father, then you can't say you weren't warned of the consequences. It's about trying to keep a little bit of dignity and integrity in what is often an unseemly business, and also having some respect for the other posters in the forum and not trying to take them for fools.

Posters shouldn't have to come clean considering they haven't done anything dirty in the context of boards as a discussion site. You mention dignity and integrity, but where is boards' dignity and integrity when it offers people usernames and the option to attempt to post anonymously, but then punishes people for doing exactly that when it doesn't suit a certain discussion like the election here. You can't have it both ways.

Murt10

chucknorris wrote: »

This is not a vote for Jack Chambers, this is a vote for the chairman of Fianna Fail in Dublin west, Frank Chambers.
!

Well that explains a lot.

I couldn't for the life of me understand why Mc Guinness was dropped by FF after he came 2nd in two by elections. He would have been a shoo (?) in, in a 4 seater General Election after that.

Think I'll give Mc Guinness one of my lower preference votes just to spite FF.

Toto Wolfcastle

To be honest, I think most (regular) posters here can spot when someone clearly has a connection with a candidate or a party. It generally just looks terrible for the candidate when someone denies that they have a connection despite it being obvious that they do. It doesn't happen often, to be fair. If someone doesn't want to disclose their affiliation, that's fair enough, but they should know that if people think they're affiliated it will just damage the candidate's reputation. Although that can still happen even if the affiliation is declared. Chuck put me right off David McGuinness a few years ago. :pac: I'm back on board with him now though!

Canadel

Zaph wrote: »

As I said above, a lot of it is down to the posters themselves "coming clean", I'm not about to dig into the profile of every poster on the forum to try to catch them out. But if you tell us that you have no connection to X and then somewhere along the line let it slip that you're actually their father, then you can't say you weren't warned of the consequences. It's about trying to keep a little bit of dignity and integrity in what is often an unseemly business, and also having some respect for the other posters in the forum and not trying to take them for fools.

So if I sing Jack Chambers' praises on this thread throughout the entire campaign, and then a few weeks later I let slip I'm his father, I'll be banned. But how do you prove that I am actually his father beyond what a username called Canadel claims to be on this thread? Do you just go ahead with the ban regardless? You are essentially banning a poster based purely on your own suspicions surrounding their anonymity. Why bother with attempting to afford posters anonymity at all? And if I really am his father, then you're banning a poster because of their real name. So again, why bother with usernames?

chucknorris

Murt10 wrote: »

Well that explains a lot.

I couldn't for the life of me understand why Mc Guinness was dropped by FF after he came 2nd in two by elections. He would have been a shoo (?) in, in a 4 seater General Election after that.

Think I'll give Mc Guinness one of my lower preference votes just to spite FF.

Only 1s and 2s will count this time, compared to the by-election.

There won't be enough eliminations for transfers to have a massive impact.

Who goes out first between, and in my honest opinion, will be Chambers, Burton or McGuinness is the only significant elimination that will push one of the remaining two over the line. They key i to get enough 1s to stay ahead.

An awful lot depends on Burton. If she gets 7% to 9% as polls suggest she might, then she could go out first from those three.

Zaph

Canadel wrote: »

So if I sing Jack Chambers' praises on this thread throughout the entire campaign, and then a few weeks later I let slip I'm his father, I'll be banned. But how do you prove that I am actually his father beyond what a username called Canadel claims to be on this thread? Do you just go ahead with the ban regardless? You are essentially banning a poster based purely on your own suspicions surrounding their anonymity. Why bother with attempting to afford posters anonymity at all? And if I really am his father, then you're banning a poster because of their real name. So again, why bother with usernames?

As I said, I'm not asking for people to specify exactly who they are, but I am asking that they be honest about their political affiliations, so you're completely missing the point, deliberately imo.

It makes for more open and honest discussion in the forum if people are upfront about why they've been extolling the virtues of a candidate. If people don't want to do that, well as I said there's little I can do about it and I'm not getting into an endless debate with you about it. If you have an affiliation and you're not disclosing it, well then good for you, but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

chucknorris

Zaph wrote: »

As I said, I'm not asking for people to specify exactly who they are, but I am asking that they be honest about their political affiliations, so you're completely missing the point, deliberately imo.

It makes for more open and honest discussion in the forum if people are upfront about why they've been extolling the virtues of a candidate. If people don't want to do that, well as I said there's little I can do about it and I'm not getting into an endless debate with you about it. If you have an affiliation and you're not disclosing it, well then good for you, but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

I agree, when it comes to politics, too many people try to influence others and get a point out and pretend not to have an affiliation. I do and i don't hide it so anything i say can be taken with a pinch of salt.

I know who ASC is and he knows I know who he is. He's a FF hack trying to soften the facts shared on this forum about their candidate.

I've made no bones about it and I'll make no bones about it - young chambers wanted to run and his daddy made sure it happened as chairman of the Dublin west branch of the organisation. hey wheeled old foggies out of nursing homes to vote for him at convention. His candidacy is in serious question and people who have been around this town for longer than most of us are well aware of what candidates did or did not do and what their track record is. They don't take young chambers at face value. He is running a P.R campaign and not an election campaign. His position on everything is generic FF waffle. He keeps saying he is "passionate about palatics (as opposed to politics)". That generic waffle turns people off.

He has no position on ANYTHING. He is avoiding EVERY debate. He has no track record at all.

Canadel

Zaph wrote: »

As I said, I'm not asking for people to specify exactly who they are, but I am asking that they be honest about their political affiliations, so you're completely missing the point, deliberately imo.

Your point IS that the basis for a potential ban is the requirement for people to specify exactly who they are. You're treating boards like a courtroom where you swear an oath to tell the truth, and if it's later found out you lied you're guilty, banned, whatever. It doesn't work like that. The first thing you do when you join boards, before a post is made, is that you are given the option to create a username. You can't go from that point to the point you're trying to make here about banning people for real life affiliations based on their real names.

It makes for more open and honest discussion in the forum if people are upfront about why they've been extolling the virtues of a candidate. If people don't want to do that, well as I said there's little I can do about it and I'm not getting into an endless debate with you about it. If you have an affiliation and you're not disclosing it, well then good for you, but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

That laissez faire, little I can do about it, attitude contradicts your earlier post.

Zaph wrote: »

OK folks, play nicely please. And as pointed out above, anyone who has a connection to a candidate that isn't disclosed can expect to be banned from the forum should it subsequently emerge that they haven't been honest here.

You are either banning posters because of their real names or you're not. Which is it? I think posters deserve to know.

Canadel

chucknorris wrote: »

I agree, when it comes to politics, too many people try to influence others and get a point out and pretend not to have an affiliation. I do and i don't hide it so anything i say can be taken with a pinch of salt.

That's fair enough, and you obviously hold yourself to a higher standard. Perhaps you should run for election? However, the point still remains, there should be no obligation on boards for posters to behave like and be as honest as you are concerning this topic. At the end of the day, who knows if you are really telling the truth either?

Zaph

Canadel wrote: »

You are either banning posters because of their real names or you're not. Which is it? I think posters deserve to know.

I fail to see how you can come to that conclusion. If someone says they're a relative of a candidate how will I know what their real name is? Or how close a relative they are? I don't even know if some of the posters in this forum are male or female, so I'm hardly going to be able to ascribe real names to them. Similarly if someone says they canvass for someone, well it hardly narrows things down there does it, considering how many people will be canvassing for each candidate and the fact that I personally don't know a single person canvassing for any candidate in any constituency.

So if you want to shill for a candidate then be my guest, but I'm not discussing this any further with you.

Kiwi_knock

I see Chambers had Mary O'Rourke and Conor Lenihan out with him today, the obsession FF in Dublin West continue to have with the Lenihan name is comical. Referring to FF candidates as close personal friends of Lenihan and campaigning on reclaiming Lenihan's seat is ridiculous.

chucknorris

Kiwi_knock wrote: »

I see Chambers had Mary O'Rourke and Conor Lenihan out with him today, the obsession FF in Dublin West continue to have with the Lenihan name is comical. Referring to FF candidates as close personal friends of Lenihan and campaigning on reclaiming Lenihan's seat is ridiculous.

Brian Lenihan built up a working class personal vote from 1996 that did not and was not ever a FF vote. It was there when he died and pulled him across the line in 2011 with 16.5% of the vote. David McGuinness benefited from it and increased it in the by-election of that year reaching 21.5% of the vote.

It was so popular that in the 2007 general election, of the greater corduff area (edgewood, brookhaven, sheephill), 50% of all voters voted for Brian Lenihan.

That working class personal vote is gone from FF. It was evident in the by-election of 2014 when David McGuinness received 18% of the vote, down from 21.5% in 2011.

Jack Chambers has no association with Brian in any way. They never met. The photo with Mammy and Conor is not really something that would inspire confidence.

The point being - FF split when David McGuinness was shafted. Ed McManus, BL's campaign manager in 2007 and 2011 was treated poorly by Chambers cronies in Myos, so he left the party and took his people to Sinn Fein. David resigned a few months after being shafted and BL's private secretary in the laurel lodge office of 15 years followed David McGuinness by resigning totally from the party.

The people who remain, and there's about 10 of them, have destroyed the organisation from what it was when it was a centre left party that pulled votes all over Dublin west and earned.

Brian Lenihan would be rolling in his grave to see what they did to his organisation locally. FF have gone from centre left locally, to extreme right wing upper class, relying totally on the ultra castleknock vote.

Larbre34

chucknorris wrote: »

Brian Lenihan would be rolling in his grave to see what they did to his organisation locally. FF have gone from centre left locally, to extreme right wing upper class, relying totally on the ultra castleknock vote.

This.

And to put all their eggs in one basket with such a poor candidate is just bonkers. It wont work for them. If they had parachuted Conor Lenihan himself, it still wouldnt work for them.

Bringing Conor and Mary around with them is pure stupid. Younger voters who might identify with Chambers youth, wont know who they are. And people who do know who they are, and had no particular link or loyalty to Brian, will just be reminded of FFs role in the collapse!

BohsCeltic

Swan Curry wrote: »

It seems a bit silly to single out one party for using made up numbers in an election campaign

True but most on here are anti SF

ArmaniJeanss

2011 I voted O'Gorman, Varadkar, Burton, Dennison, Lenihan.
With Varadkar and Burton already elected by the time O'Gorman was eliminated my transfer ended up on Lenihan helping him to be elected wrq.

Just so you know FF, I won't be voting for your little poppet at all, so your obnoxious and expensive campaign has you down 1 vote here.

ThisRegard

Kiwi_knock wrote: »

I see Chambers had Mary O'Rourke and Conor Lenihan out with him today, the obsession FF in Dublin West continue to have with the Lenihan name is comical. Referring to FF candidates as close personal friends of Lenihan and campaigning on reclaiming Lenihan's seat is ridiculous.

Hilarious. Like I said, the oul lad who knocked at my door last week tried to claim they need new blood as there's people in there for too long, I mentioned the FF dynasty they're trying to plant him into and they pull this bloody stunt.

ASC why on earth do the clowns think that was a good idea? Don't they realise that Mammy O'Rourke is a laughing stock?

chucknorris

The remaining FF crew aren't very clever. They give FG an open goal.

https://twitter.com/campaignforleo/status/696368338717581312

athtrasna

Chambers low posters on Hartstown Road all suitably graffitied (not by me obviously!). That's what happens when people with no cop on (or interest in anything other than financial gain) erect your posters. Would back up other posters suspicions.

Larbre34

I wont be voting for Varadkar, but my sentiments exactly

handlemaster

I think it will be FG in the next government . Hopefully with a majority . The coalition government makes the decision making process into a farse alot of the time.

chucknorris

handlemaster wrote: »

I think it will be FG in the next government . Hopefully with a majority . The coalition government makes the decision making process into a farse alot of the time.

It absolutely will be a FG government, but I cannot see it being anywhere near a majority.

Labour won't be in a position to prop it up either.

handlemaster

chucknorris wrote: »

It absolutely will be a FG government, but I cannot see it being anywhere near a majority.

Labour won't be in a position to prop it up either.

Labour will be wiped out. But in saying that I think Joan has come out fighing

chucknorris

handlemaster wrote: »

Labour will be wiped out. But in saying that I think Joan has come out fighing

As I've said here, if she gets in, Chambers and McGuinness lose out.

A left leaning constituency almost has to put two left candidates in.

I've been to Blanch village and Castleknock and there is hostility to her that I never seen before.

Anything she comes out fighting for is killed by Alan kelly's the loose canon and on the Navan road, Pascal Donohoe has done her no favors. He seems to have cut off early from the navan road once it became part of Dublin west and i heard that from many old fogies on both sides of the Navan road.

AGC

chucknorris wrote: »

I agree, when it comes to politics, too many people try to influence others and get a point out and pretend not to have an affiliation. I do and i don't hide it so anything i say can be taken with a pinch of salt.

I know who ASC is and he knows I know who he is. He's a FF hack trying to soften the facts shared on this forum about their candidate.

I've made no bones about it and I'll make no bones about it - young chambers wanted to run and his daddy made sure it happened as chairman of the Dublin west branch of the organisation. hey wheeled old foggies out of nursing homes to vote for him at convention. His candidacy is in serious question and people who have been around this town for longer than most of us are well aware of what candidates did or did not do and what their track record is. They don't take young chambers at face value. He is running a P.R campaign and not an election campaign. His position on everything is generic FF waffle. He keeps saying he is "passionate about palatics (as opposed to politics)". That generic waffle turns people off.

He has no position on ANYTHING. He is avoiding EVERY debate. He has no track record at all.

Brilliant:D

As I have said all along I am not a FF member, never have been, I have voted FF in the past, as said McGuinness in the last election and bye-election.

As I have said I do not know Jack, his family or so far I don't know anyone out canvassing for the bloke! I do know who put up his posters, that is the only connection I have made to knowing him - the person who was doing that does not go out canvassing for him.

When David comes around my area canvassing I will happily meet you so you do know who I am and you might be surprised to know that even the person you are canvassing for will be happy to let you know I am and explain to you how I am not a 'FF hack'

I originally showed support for FF running a young candidate and gave an opinion when people gave theirs on why he should not run and beyond he has never had a real job, he still lives at home with his parents and he is running for his father I have seen nothing to say he would not do a good job.

My McGuinness vote is certainly gone.

Godge

chucknorris wrote: »

The Sinn Fein surge is an interesting one in Dublin west.

They have historically polled around 7% since 2009. 2014 LEA and by-election was almost 20%. Unprecedented. SF have always done worse off in Dublin west, compared to the rest of Dublin due to the socialists.

There are a few factors to that:

• Higgins was not running for the socialists.
• The Labour vote collapsed and their candidates were average.
• FF support fell back
• The water issue was massive in 2014 and the economy was fragile.
• The SF machine is better than most and they ramp it up well in fairness

This time around, with nothing to back it up, i think their support might pull back for the following reasons. Keeping in mind the socialists did not see the previous SF surge coming in 2014 to the extent it did.


I think SF support will be very good, but if they don't get near the number 1s they got last time, their lack of transfer friendliness could hurt them. Polls out tomorrow say they are on 17% now, so add in the Socialists and their position weakens considerably.

• They lose 1000 votes from 2014 received from Swords.
• Labour have a stronger candidate this time around compared to 2014.
• There is an Independent operating in their patch for the first time (with name recognition).
• FF still have a candidate so no loose FF votes
• The socialists will work extra hard now that the threat is there.
• Finally, I canvassed the Navan road today. SF support is not exactly strong.

I'm not saying they won't get a seat in the GE, but what I am saying is, it is not a sure thing as people say and I would go as far as saying that the predictions favoring them is based on a 2014 by-election anomaly where the conditions are now completely changed.

I tend to agree with you.

How far down the Navan Road does the constituency now go?

Going down Blackhorse Ave this morning there was clear overlap with Burton and Costello posters on the same lampposts.

A year ago I was pretty certain Burton was gone and that SF were taking a seat. Now I reckon that between the votes for McGuinness, O'Gorman, Burton, Noone and Chambers, there is at least one seat and that given the constituency changes there could be a second because the balance has shifted towards the Castleknock end of the constituency. That would leave Coppinger and Donnelly with one seat between them.

McGuinnes could be the beneficiary because he could get transfers from everywhere.

January

AGC wrote: »

Brilliant:D

As I have said all along I am not a FF member, never have been, I have voted FF in the past, as said McGuinness in the last election and bye-election.

As I have said I do not know Jack, his family or so far I don't know anyone out canvassing for the bloke! I do know who put up his posters, that is the only connection I have made to knowing him - the person who was doing that does not go out canvassing for him.

When David comes around my area canvassing I will happily meet you so you do know who I am and you might be surprised to know that even the person you are canvassing for will be happy to let you know I am and explain to you how I am not a 'FF hack'

I originally showed support for FF running a young candidate and gave an opinion when people gave theirs on why he should not run and beyond he has never had a real job, he still lives at home with his parents and he is running for his father I have seen nothing to say he would not do a good job.

My McGuinness vote is certainly gone.

To flip the coin, there is nothhing to say he will do a good job either.

ThisRegard

AGC wrote: »

I originally showed support for FF running a young candidate and gave an opinion when people gave theirs on why he should not run and beyond he has never had a real job, he still lives at home with his parents and he is running for his father I have seen nothing to say he would not do a good job.

An yet you haven't given any reason as to why you think people should vote for him, other than he's young.

You can't have it both ways.

AGC

January wrote: »

To flip the coin, there is nothhing to say he will do a good job either.

Agreed, same with all of them.

January

AGC wrote: »

Agreed, same with all of them.

Well no, not really. The ones who already had seats and are running again have a proven track record. There's also a record of other candidates doing work in the community. Chambers has neither.