Abortion Discussion, Part Trois

smacl

Dick Swiveller wrote: »

For example, can you imagine the Healy Raes losing many votes in Kerry because of their pro-life stance? Not a chance.

Funny enough, I can. Not specifically through the pro-life vote so much as the Healy Raes coming across a bit thick and the savvy people of the Kingdom not wanting to be tarred with that brush. Danny with the ceap on his head I'd imagine would struggle with a younger audience that might not feel represented by that image of a Kerryman in the Dail. I don't know how well legacy family politics will fare in this country going forward, been a some time now since Jackie was bringing the Dart to Dingle

Dick Swiveller

smacl wrote: »

Funny enough, I can. Not specifically through the pro-life vote so much as the Healy Raes coming across a bit thick and the savvy people of the Kingdom not wanting to be tarred with that brush. Danny with the ceap on his head I'd imagine would struggle with a younger audience that might not feel represented by that image of a Kerryman in the Dail. I don't know how well legacy family politics will fare in this country going forward, been a some time now since Jackie was bringing the Dart to Dingle

Well, we'll see. If I could, I would bet you 20 euro that they will romp home and get elected comfortably with a similar vote share as last time. It will be interesting to see what happens, though.

alaimacerc

Dick Swiveller wrote: »

You're proving my point, I think.

Depends what you think your precise point was (if "precise" is remotely the word).

smacl

oldrnwisr wrote: »

However, when you ask about the future of staunch political conservatism, we have to ask, which kind of conservatism. After all, fiscal conservatism may change in a manner completely unrelated to and uninfluenced by social conservatism.

I was thinking of traditionalism here. Conservative in the sense of doing what has been done previously, resisting rather than embracing change. That RTE exit poll was a really interesting read from my perspective, in that it captured a lot of ancillary information. If you look at the voting intentions on page 13 for example, the main preferences are 25.8% FG, 24.9% don't know, 16.5 FF, 11.0 SF, 7.9% independent. Trust levels in politicians by party is also fascinating, with Renua managing a staggering 100% of being absolutely untrustworthy, followed by SF with a still impressive 52% largely untrustworthy rating. What it suggests to me is that people are perhaps taking a more critical look at their public representatives than they have in times past. (Reading the tea-leaves a bit there to be fair though, as it is a single sample point). To my mind it would seem that our politicians are following rather than leading the people.

alaimacerc

Dick Swiveller wrote: »

Well, we'll see. If I could, I would bet you 20 euro that they will romp home and get elected comfortably with a similar vote share as last time. It will be interesting to see what happens, though.

Whachamean "if"? Aren't gentleman's wagers a thing any more? But I reckon Paddy Powers would give you better than evens on the above proposition. That is, if you're really predicting the clean sweep you appear to be, and not some yesbutnobut version.

Dick Swiveller

alaimacerc wrote: »

Depends what you think your precise point was (if "precise" is remotely the word).

All right, I'll explain it in simple terms for you: Twitter and boards.ie are not necessarily representative of the views of the wider public in Ireland.

smacl

Dick Swiveller wrote: »

Well, we'll see. If I could, I would bet you 20 euro that they will romp home and get elected comfortably with a similar vote share as last time. It will be interesting to see what happens, though.

Anybodies guess, and the family certainly has the form. I'm going out for a few pints with a friend from Kerry this evening and will see what he reckons. My gut feeling is that as ever more people from rural areas work abroad or in Dublin, the traditional parish pump politics will get superseded by larger national and European concerns.

Edit: My friend reckoned that the Healy Raes are pretty much like local mafia with extensive local business and property interests, loved by those that benefit from their activities, loathed by many others. He apparently fell into the latter category and described them as epitomizing the worst of Irish politics. That said. your €20 is probably a safe enough bet for now.

Dick Swiveller

smacl wrote: »

Anybodies guess, and the family certainly has the form. I'm going out for a few pints with a friend from Kerry this evening and will see what he reckons. My gut feeling is that as ever more people from rural areas work abroad or in Dublin, the traditional parish pump politics will get superseded by larger national and European concerns.

I don't necessarily disagree with you there. But I think it will take a good few years more before we see a drift away from parochial, parish pump politics.

alaimacerc

smacl wrote: »

Anybodies guess, and the family certainly has the form. I'm going out for a few pints with a friend from Kerry this evening and will see what he reckons. My gut feeling is that as ever more people from rural areas work abroad or in Dublin, the traditional parish pump politics will get superseded by larger national and European concerns.

Probably only in a few Healy-Raes' time, though, sad to say.

alaimacerc

Dick Swiveller wrote: »

All right, I'll explain it in simple terms for you: Twitter and boards.ie are not necessarily representative of the views of the wider public in Ireland.

It's not the supposed "complexity" of your hand-wavy proposition I was caveating. It's in what direction the supposed bias lies in.

Dick Swiveller

alaimacerc wrote: »

It's not the supposed "complexity" of your hand-wavy proposition I was caveating. It's in what direction the supposed bias lies in.

That's irrelevant. One of the posters above made the point that the fact that certain politicians voted against abortion will impact them in the next election. I said I doubted that - and pondered whether he/she was basing their opinion on what they had read online. Likewise, as you so eloquently said, reading boards a stranger would have thought that Casey romped home in the Presidential election. The bias can go either way.

aloyisious

Dick Swiveller wrote: »

If you think about it, there really wasn't much demand coming from the wider population for abortion legislation in the years leading up to the referendum. Sure there were groups campaigning for it, and a few politicians also, but it wasn't a huge issue during the last election. That's why I think it's unwise to think the comprehensive Yes vote will translate in to more votes for politicians that campaigned for the 8th and less votes for those who didn't. People are ultimately concerned with number one - themselves and their families. The middle class will continue to vote for FF and FG politicians - regardless of an individual politicians view on the abortion question.

For example, can you imagine the Healy Raes losing many votes in Kerry because of their pro-life stance? Not a chance.

That's what I think, anyway. We'll see if I'm right the next time an election comes 'round.

There's a chance that candidates re-election chances would be derailed if they were asked about their position on abortion again and were seen to be dissembling or wall-sitting on it. Any other candidate would be happy with the chance that opened up to gain votes at the expense of the O/P. The female vote is not to sneezed at, nor that of other sections of the public who have made their position plain.

I know that some TD's who opposed the delete the 8th referendum made it plain they were not for changing and they may well be safe. It's others who did the same but are in iffy seats where other parties will do whatever to take seats away from other parties.

Take the last TD to depart the fold within which he was elected as an example. Unless another issue at a more personal level to the voter arises [along the lines of severe dissatisfaction with the Govt] to take their attention away from the abortion issue, I see the issue still being to the fore in the mind of the voter. All it would take to stoke the fire would be some effort to stymie [or being seen to] the building of the new maternity hospital and I see there being no shortage of volunteers for that role, even if the NO campaign leaders don't want the YES-voter fired up again.

Loafing Oaf

aloyisious wrote: »

There's a chance that candidates re-election chances would be derailed if they were asked about their position on abortion again and were seen to be dissembling or wall-sitting on it.

But how could they do that in a meaningful way? Once they say they accept the decision of the people in the referendum, that's it, case closed. Once the legislation is passed, I don't see how abortion remains any more of a live issue than divorce, same-sex marriage etc.

and with probably a couple of years to go before the next election, the whole thing will feel like ancient history by then. It's only two and a half years since the SSM referendum, but how long ago does that feel?

Loafing Oaf

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Cora Sherlock is a complete fruit loop.

Are you mixing up Cora and ciara?

aloyisious

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

But how could they do that in a meaningful way? Once they say they accept the decision of the people in the referendum, that's it, case closed. Once the legislation is passed, I don't see how abortion remains any more of a live issue than divorce, same-sex marriage etc.

and with probably a couple of years to go before the next election, the whole thing will feel like ancient history by then. It's only two and a half years since the SSM referendum, but how long ago does that feel?

I'm thinking of quibbling over the passage of the legislation through the Oireachtas with some elected persons revealing their actual hands as being different from that publicly shown at time of election. I reckon despite the people YES vote being so definite, some of the elected will not cede to that vote. Some of the elected representatives are what I'd describe as 5th columnist in nature while running for election within parties.

Re the Sherlock sister in the video, it was Ciara, not Cora, and her speech [incl the shock-jockey parts of which she repeated 3 times over] in it put anything I heard from Cora in the shade. In it she described Éamon Ó Cuiv in terms akin to worship. Ciara has a fixation on the part that freedom of conscience was being denied to doctors, nurses and even porters when it came to the operation of the legislation.

gctest50

aloyisious wrote: »

.........

Ciara has a fixation on the part that freedom of conscience was being denied to doctors, nurses and even porters when it came to the operation of the legislation.

Well, some got so confused, they didn't know what they were, some weren't even there

PopePalpatine

Seriously EOTR, do you think none of us know what Google Image Reverse Search is?

gctest50

gctest50 wrote: »

Well, some got so confused, they didn't know what they were, some weren't even there

end of the road wrote: »

were you there to witness this to know that is the case?

A Pattern of lies :

gctest50

To save on Reverse Searches :


https://twitter.com/NursepollyRgn/status/971844913699663873/photo/1

Hotblack Desiato

oldrnwisr wrote: »

Actually it doesn't tell us that at all. You shouldn't let one or two high profile casualties like Lucinda Creighton or Fidelma Healy-Eames blind you to the reality of the full dataset.

Fidelma Healy Eames has never been a TD.

I was discussing FG TDs who opposed POLDPA and (with one exception I think) contested the next election under RENUA. Not a single one was elected, I think that's significant.

If there's any common thread in the winners and losers among those pro-life candidates it is that those who lost did so because they abandoned the political identity which got them elected in the first place.

FG did not portray themselves as a pro-choice party in 2011. The No campaign (who never ever lie) say that Enda Kenny and Simon Harris gave them a "pro-life promise".

robindch

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

That is not a substantiation of your claim. Either substantiate it or withdraw it. that is the forum rule.

The forum rule is that a poster who's been called to substantiate a fact claim must do so if the fact claim is not to lapse. While it would be good debating style to withdraw the claim, the OP is not obliged to do so.

I note that oldrnwisr has substantially corroborated some of what I believe was Dick Swiveller's original claim.

In the light of the above, the original claim that the "number of people under 25 who voted in the Presidential election was tiny" seems to me to be generally sustained by the available, though incomplete, evidence. Though to be fully sure, one would need to calculate the proportion of eligible voters under 25 as a proportion of the of the population as a whole, then compare that to the 5.9% who voted. For this, "below the average for other age groups" might be a better description than "tiny" as the age range is six years for the youngest group versus ten years for the older groups, so - assuming an even age distribution across the population (which isn't the case) - the figure should be around 60% of the expected ~16% for each age group, or ~10% and not ~6%.

Loafing Oaf

aloyisious wrote: »

I'm thinking of quibbling over the passage of the legislation through the Oireachtas with some elected persons revealing their actual hands as being different from that publicly shown at time of election. I reckon despite the people YES vote being so definite, some of the elected will not cede to that vote. Some of the elected representatives are what I'd describe as 5th columnist in nature while running for election within parties.

But there won't be anyone in FG opposing the legislation and at most one or two in FF. Virtually anyone in the main parties with a major issue with the legislation is already outside the party.

aloyisious

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

But there won't be anyone in FG opposing the legislation and at most one or two in FF. Virtually anyone in the main parties with a major issue with the legislation is already outside the party.

I regret to say that i believe there are elected members within both those parties who. at the drop of a hat, would renounce their apparent total togetherness with abortion rights for women and the majority public vote and say "I was always a believer in the Pro-life campaign" and those persons are toeing the party line as it's to their political advantage.

I won't believe in the actuality of the legislation until [a] its passed and signed into law and its successfully fulfilling its purpose and the new N.M.H is up and running fully for pregnant women in line with the legislation and womens rights to have an abortion.

Edit. I see on F/B an Ad for a demonstration on 08/12 at the Spire in relation to the new hospital, the cause being "Make Our National Maternity Hospital Public". It seems from that that again the status of the hospital ownership and operative-mode is still at/an issue.

Loafing Oaf

aloyisious wrote: »

I regret to say that i believe there are elected members within both those parties who. at the drop of a hat, would renounce their apparent total togetherness with abortion rights for women and the majority public vote and say "I was always a believer in the Pro-life campaign" and those persons are toeing the party line as it's to their political advantage. .

Well that's certainly plausible: IMO social issues were only ever a matter of political expediency for the vast majority in FF and FG. But what conceivable circumstances would prompt those TDs to reverse their position from now on? There is now an overwhelming pro-choice consensus in Irish society. I can't envisage how it would ever be politically advantageous for FF and FG Tds to revert to an anti-abortion position.

Hotblack Desiato

*rubs crystal ball*

All FG TDs will vote for the abortion bill. Anyone liable to jump ship would have either done so long ago, or seen the electoral disaster awaiting them (RENUA says hello) so they stay aboard.

FF TDs have already stated their position one way or the other. Most appear to be in favour.

Labour, Social Democrats, Greens, and the minor left parties are in favour provided the bill is not watered down.

Legislation in accordance with the heads of bill which Simon Harris published before the referendum will pass through the Oireachtas overwhelmingly.

aloyisious

No disbelief on my part on what others here in the YES side of the debate believe and state is intended. The way that the Pols have played us for decades now has changed me from an optimist to a pessimist where it comes to their statements of intent and I will be a Doubting Thomas til I see the new abortion legislation in actual practice in a medical hospital here. I think there is a strong chance that other matters of political import [incl basic patient medical care] will be higher on the political screen than the issue of abortion provision and unless the pressure is kept up on the Govt to prevent side-lining of the issue it may well end up on a trolley in a side-corridor.

Loafing Oaf

aloyisious wrote: »

I think there is a strong chance that other matters of political import [incl basic patient medical care] will be higher on the political screen than the issue of abortion provision and unless the pressure is kept up on the Govt to prevent side-lining of the issue it may well end up on a trolley in a side-corridor.

Well we're not talking about draining the Shannon here, in most cases all the 'service' will involve is a GP dispensing pills to a female patient. Once the legislation is passed there shouldn't be major logistical difficulties. And on cue, Peter Boylan "says he's confident that abortion services will be available in Ireland by the beginning of next year."

https://www.newstalk.com/Peter-Boylan-pretty-confident-abortion-services-will-be-available-by-beginning-of-2019

aloyisious

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Well we're not talking about draining the Shannon here, in most cases all the 'service' will involve is a GP dispensing pills to a female patient. Once the legislation is passed there shouldn't be major logistical difficulties. And on cue, Peter Boylan "says he's confident that abortion services will be available in Ireland by the beginning of next year."

https://www.newstalk.com/Peter-Boylan-pretty-confident-abortion-services-will-be-available-by-beginning-of-2019

Saturday's Indo comment column by Eilish O'Regan [page 12] has the GP's being paid €450 fee for an abortion but the training of the GP's in respect of the abortions hass apparently yet to be done with the start-update of the bill approaching fast.

ohnonotgmail

aloyisious wrote: »

Saturday's Indo comment column by Eilish O'Regan [page 12] has the GP's being paid €450 fee for an abortion but the training of the GP's in respect of the abortions hass apparently yet to be done with the start-update of the bill approaching fast.

€450 to dispense 2 pills?

Igotadose

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

€450 to dispense 2 pills?

It's 3 visits. I agree seems kind of high, and the bullsh1t 3 day 'waiting period', if removed, would reduce it to 2 visits. But, it's something I suppose and can always be changed now that the 8th is gone.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/health/gps-will-be-asked-to-opt-in-to-provide-abortions-at-450-each-37530347.html

The opt-in thing is crap. Dr's. should be required to dispense the pills. Lose there license if they won't.