2016 General Election Waterford

Max Powers

cul beag wrote: »

A cop out by Halligan. Yes the hospital is of huge importance but there's more needed in the region than just health. Whatever chance he/we had of getting something positive done down here with him working with whatever minority government, he/we have certainly no hope of moving forward with no voice at the top table. Certainly won't be voting for him again. The easy option is to sit outside and complain,he had the chance to roll up his sleeves and get stuck in there and really try to work for the betterment of Waterford but how is he going to do that now? What little hope we would have got by him being inside,we will get sweet f**k all by him copping out and sitting on the back benches. Disgusted with him as my vote has been completely wasted. This bulls**t that he has to represent his constituents and the mandate he represents for them well I am one of them and I certainly don't want him voicing his opinion for a few minutes through Dail time questions when he should have taken this marvellous opportunity to show us what he can really do for this region. He has spat the dummy out of the pram because he didn't get his way(officially anyway) but to be honest it looks like it is a smokescreen as he saw what happened to Coffee and decided he better look after his own seat and the easiest way of doing that is by being vocal in opposition with never getting anything of importance done.

There is a slight hope for hospital as fitzmaurice from the independents said it would form part of their group wants...how committed they are another thing. Halligan looks like a child now who had a tantrum and walked, more than likely resulting in him achieving sod all.you see all the other independents Keeping quiet and possibly doing the deal on the quiet.you can see the media thinking that halligan chap wanted to go back to old school sweetheart constituency deals and they will think rightly the govt left him walk, where in reality the govt will do deals with tipp,roscommon,galway , Kerry independents.

Max Powers

AdMMM wrote: »

It's very difficult to make sense of your stance. You seem to believe that the biggest mistake Waterford ever did was vote out Paudie Coffey despite the fact that he had five years to try and influence those within his own party. Do you think that Halligan should have agreed to blindly support a government, despite being told there's no chance for 24 hour cardiac care in Waterford on the off-chance that he might be rewarded for being a yes man and get a small concession for Waterford near the end of the lifetime of the Government?

What do you make of the actions of the other TDs over the past few weeks? Who has impressed you the most?

Quick answers is not much and no one.my stance is incredibly simple, vote for the person with the best opportunity to get investment and jobs here. The best opportunity is the person who is likely to be a govt party, higher up in that govt better, reasonably competent , not have a record and doesn't smell of cordite.I don't put much weight in grand standing speeches, table banging or stunts.

AdMMM

Max Powers wrote: »

There is a slight hope for hospital as fitzmaurice from the independents said it would form part of their group wants...how committed they are another thing. Halligan looks like a child now who had a tantrum and walked, more than likely resulting in him achieving sod all.you see all the other independents Keeping quiet and possibly doing the deal on the quiet.you can see the media thinking that halligan chap wanted to go back to old school sweetheart constituency deals and they will think rightly the govt left him walk, where in reality the govt will do deals with tipp,roscommon,galway , Kerry independents.

This post just confirmed that you don't really know what's going on at the moment.

Junior

So if I can understand this from a few people...

Politician stands on the principles/items A,B,C
Politician enters talks to go into power
Large Party won't concede anything on A,B,C
Politician decides he's wasting his time
Everyone is up in arms at Politician not abandoning his election promises and principles ...

It's no wonder the country is f*cked if that's people's attitudes.

Max Powers

AdMMM wrote: »

This post just confirmed that you don't really know what's going on at the moment.

What's incorrect

Max Powers

Junior wrote: »

So if I can understand this from a few people...

Politician stands on the principles/items A,B,C
Politician enters talks to go into power
Large Party won't concede anything on A,B,C
Politician decides he's wasting his time
Everyone is up in arms at Politician not abandoning his election promises and principles ...

It's no wonder the country is f*cked if that's people's attitudes.

It's not do much about abandoning principles for me but its at this moment a clear indication of the ineffectiveness halligan is for Waterford.
He's effectively out of the game now, we are hoping his mates can salvage something for us.
Added to that, throwing the toys out of the pram plays well with some voters, not me,I would have preferred even a compromise over nothing.

BBM77

Max Powers wrote: »

It's not do much about abandoning principles for me but its at this moment a clear indication of the ineffectiveness halligan is for Waterford.
He's effectively out of the game now, we are hoping his mates can salvage something for us.
Added to that, throwing the toys out of the pram plays well with some voters, not me,I would have preferred even a compromise over nothing.

So come on side without getting a commitment on cardiac care. That’s logical to you is it?

How can he comprise on 24 hour cardiac care? It is either 24 hour care or it is not.

If there are issues in this constituency that need addressing. And a government that needs support but will not address these issues. Why in the name of god would he tie himself down to that government? Being on the government side will make no difference to what he can achieve. He is better off on the outside where he is free to represent these issues in the Dail which is what he is paid to do.

cul beag

BBM77 wrote: »

So come on side without getting a commitment on cardiac care. That’s logical to you is it?

How can he comprise on 24 hour cardiac care? It is either 24 hour care or it is not.

If there are issues in this constituency that need addressing. And a government that needs support but will not address these issues. Why in the name of god would he tie himself down to that government? Being on the government side will make no difference to what he can achieve. He is better off on the outside where he is free to represent these issues in the Dail which is what he is paid to do.

And exactly whom will listen to him? He jumped ship so whatever hope he had of being influential inside the ring he is worthless outside it. A vote for change and when the opportunity arose for him to make a difference he looked at the bigger picture,saw what happened to Coffee and thought, I'll leave well enough alone and use the cardiac issue in the hospital as his get out of jail card. Disgusted with him. Principles my arse!.

Max Powers

BBM77 wrote: »

So come on side without getting a commitment on cardiac care. That’s logical to you is it?

How can he comprise on 24 hour cardiac care? It is either 24 hour care or it is not.

If there are issues in this constituency that need addressing. And a government that needs support but will not address these issues. Why in the name of god would he tie himself down to that government? Being on the government side will make no difference to what he can achieve. He is better off on the outside where he is free to represent these issues in the Dail which is what he is paid to do.

Logical is maybe if can't get 24 hours, maybe 20 hour cover,18 hour cover.that's a compromise, its not rocket science.
He's better off on the outside how...that is very rarely true if you trying to achieve something beyond sound bites.you and others might be happy with bluster and sound bites,I would prefer jobs, investment of any kind or in this particular case an improvement on cardiac care.

Johnboy1951

He can hardly do any worse than those who went before ...

fuzzy dunlop

Max Powers wrote: »

Most politicians do have to wait to serve their time in back bench, that's just a fact, few exceptions don't prove rule.

Its only a fact if we're dumb enough to vote for them. If we don't then they will learn. Its not a fact for the likes of Leo Varadker. Its not a fact for Dublin SE and never was. So it is not a fact. Exceptions prove that there is no rule. What you are defending is a style of archaic politics that is in terminal decline.

Max Powers

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

Its only a fact if we're dumb enough to vote for them. If we don't then they will learn. Its not a fact for the likes of Leo Varadker. Its not a fact for Dublin SE and never was. So it is not a fact. Exceptions prove that there is no rule. What you are defending is a style of archaic politics that is in terminal decline.

Naming a few who were fast tracked and bucked the trend I will repeat is not the normal way business is done up there or indeed many places.I hope you are right and it is in decline and people are promoted on merit rather than longevity, maybe it's changing more rapidly like that on some sectors like tech etc but I seriously doubt it is from what we hear in sectors like education, law, local government and national government. If we keep going in merit based trend you say there is, govt will be the last sector to catch on so IMO longevity of service is and keeping your nose clean is the main game in dail eireann for some time to come.
Having said that,I will contradict myself by repeating what we are hearing in media now that some fairly new independents could see themselves at cabinet meetings soon.not our independent though.we had a junior minister and if it ends up like they say....fg minority with some independents..it's reasonable to assume he would have maintained at least that level.

Max Powers

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

He can hardly do any worse than those who went before ...

There have been some good developments in Waterford the last few years,I went thru them in previous posts, investments in tourism, quays, court house, fire station,ida etc but some here dismiss all that as having nothing to do with our most senior td.so IMO he has, can and will likely do worse than previous.

fuzzy dunlop

Max Powers wrote: »

Naming a few who were fast tracked and bucked the trend I will repeat is not the normal way business is done up there or indeed many places.I hope you are right and it is in decline and people are promoted on merit rather than longevity, maybe it's changing more rapidly like that on some sectors like tech etc but I seriously doubt it is from what we hear in sectors like education, law, local government and national government. If we keep going in merit based trend you say there is, govt will be the last sector to catch on so IMO longevity of service is and keeping your nose clean is the main game in dail eireann for some time to come.
Having said that,I will contradict myself by repeating what we are hearing in media now that some fairly new independents could see themselves at cabinet meetings soon.not our independent though.we had a junior minister and if it ends up like they say....fg minority with some independents..it's reasonable to assume he would have maintained at least that level.

First of all you seem to be assuming the rules of the private sector and the rules of the public sector were/are the same.They are not And its obvious the political trends have changed radically. FG and FG combined are less than 50% of the vote. The only reason the scenario you painted ever existed was that people voted FG and FF like sheep. But that is changing. With respect what you are saying is pure peasant thinking. Just because FG expects Paudie Coffey to serve his time doesn't mean we have to agree to it. They tried and they got punished for it. And btw the only cabinet minister we ever had we got by voting strategically in the 80's. Cullen got the call after a period where we were voting more radically. FF realized if they made a deal with Cullen then he could jump ship and boost their numbers. Paudie Coffey might not be in that position for decades. I would suggest he was given the junior position because they knew he was a gonner if they did not do something. But if we acted like sheep and did not register any discontent then he would have stayed where he was on the back benches.

Max Powers

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

First of all you seem to be assuming the rules of the private sector and the rules of the public sector were/are the same.They are not And its obvious the political trends have changed radically. FG and FG combined are less than 50% of the vote. The only reason the scenario you painted ever existed was that people voted FG and FF like sheep. But that is changing. With respect what you are saying is pure peasant thinking. Just because FG expects Paudie Coffey to serve his time doesn't mean we have to agree to it. They tried and they got punished for it. And btw the only cabinet minister we ever had we got by voting strategically in the 80's. Cullen got the call after a period where we were voting more radically. FF realized if they made a deal with Cullen then he could jump ship and boost their numbers. Paudie Coffey might not be in that position for decades. I would suggest he was given the junior position because they knew he was a gonner if they did not do something. But if we acted like sheep and did not register any discontent then he would have stayed where he was on the back benches.

Did you read what I wrote,I specifically said public and private are different, generally lag behind when it comes to changes etcso your first bit is plain incorrect.please stop pointing out individual and rare examples which I point out are not the norm.totally agree, voting patterns are changing but you can't argue, Coffey would probably be at least junior minister in fg minority govt..if it happens.Having a junior minister is better than none, that in my mind would be voting strategically for Waterford betterment.we don't have to agree with the current way business happens up there of course but not playing the current game strategically is bad for us.

fuzzy dunlop

Max Powers wrote: »

Did you read what I wrote,I specifically said public and private are different, generally lag behind when it comes to changes etcso your first bit is plain incorrect.please stop pointing out individual and rare examples which I point out are not the norm

For them to lag indicates they had some similarity in the first place and this is not the case. And as for "rare examples" there is plenty of examples so to say they are rare just isn't true. Brian Cowen, Noel Dempsey, Ivan Yates, John Bruton, Brendan Howlin, Ruari Quinn are all household names who made it to senior cabinet within 10 years of being elected. So this idea that you have to "serve your time" is in your head. Then there's the lifelong back benchers which is pretty much what Enda Kenny was.

Max Powers wrote: »

.totally agree, voting patterns are changing but you can't argue, Coffey would probably be at least junior minister in fg minority govt..if it happens.Having a junior minister is better than none, that in my mind would be voting strategically for Waterford betterment.we don't have to agree with the current way business happens up there of course but not playing the current game strategically is bad for us.

If you think Paudie Coffey was on some sort of upward trajectory then you are sadly mistaken. Your analysis is over simplistic and does not follow historical example. Where was Brian O'Shea's senior position? Or his junior position for that matter after his brief foray on the 90's. If the seat is safe which it would have been if we followed your example then he would have never been a junior minister in the first place.

Max Powers

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

For them to lag indicates they had some similarity in the first place and this is not the case. And as for "rare examples" there is plenty of examples so to say they are rare just isn't true. Brian Cowen, Noel Dempsey, Ivan Yates, John Bruton, Brendan Howlin, Ruari Quinn are all household names who made it to senior cabinet within 10 years of being elected. So this idea that you have to "serve your time" is in your head. Then there's the lifelong back benchers which is pretty much what Enda Kenny was.




If you think Paudie Coffey was on some sort of upward trajectory then you are sadly mistaken. Your analysis is over simplistic and does not follow historical example. Where was Brian O'Shea's senior position? Or his junior position for that matter after his brief foray on the 90's. If the seat is safe which it would have been if we followed your example then he would have never been a junior minister in the first place.

Jeez fuzzy, ten years,the way I was reading your posts,it read like you thought you expected newly elected td's to go straight into minister roles within a few years, yeah so I think we can agree that they should be making decent progress in the ten years.There is though for most td's that 4-6 years where they do generally have to serve their time before they get promotion.
I can't say Coffey was on some some sort of highway to star dom ,i never did say that,but he was making progress,would have been our highest ranking td the way things are looking...fg minority.that would have been good for Waterford .
Don't know what that bit about Brian o Shea is about so going to leave that alone.

On a final note, why the F wouldwe elect deasy when he is on a path to nowhere with no political friends over his running mate in a better/more powerful position.especially as you point out he's been there for I'm guessing twice as long to no avail.pure crazy stuff.

fuzzy dunlop

Max Powers wrote: »

Jeez fuzzy, ten years,the way I was reading your posts,it read like you thought you expected newly elected td's to go straight into minister roles within a few years, yeah so I think we can agree that they should be making decent progress in the ten years.There is though for most td's that 4-6 years where they do generally have to serve their time before they get promotion.

10 years minus the time spent in opposition. This means that there are TD's who have virtually made it on their first term. This is not serving time

Max Powers wrote: »

I can't say Coffey was on some some sort of highway to star dom ,i never did say that,but he was making progress,would have been our highest ranking td the way things are looking...fg minority.that would have been good for Waterford .
Don't know what that bit about Brian o Shea is about so going to leave that alone.

He was only making progress because 25000 people marched on the streets over the treatment of WRH by Fine Gael. If this had not happened its doubtful Coffey would have been given the shout at all.I seem to recall when there was crisis meetings being held over this none of our TD's including Coffey turned up. Shameful Stuff!

Its obvious "What that bit about Brian O'Shea" is about. It disproves your theorey that time "has to be served" He served enough time and then some and went virtually nowhere. Ditto Keneally and many others

Max Powers wrote: »

On a final note, why the F wouldwe elect deasy when he is on a path to nowhere with no political friends over his running mate in a better/more powerful position.especially as you point out he's been there for I'm guessing twice as long to no avail.pure crazy stuff.

Why are you asking me? I didn't vote for him. But the fact is somebody in FG had to go as punishment for their ineptitude.Since they vote for Deasy in the West no matter what he does then Coffey was the one who had to take the hit. Otherwise we would have sent two FG TD's back to DE and they would think they could f*ck us whenever they wanted to.

Max Powers

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

10 years minus the time spent in opposition. This means that there are TD's who have virtually made it on their first term. This is not serving time



He was only making progress because 25000 people marched on the streets over the treatment of WRH by Fine Gael. If this had not happened its doubtful Coffey would have been given the shout at all.I seem to recall when there was crisis meetings being held over this none of our TD's including Coffey turned up. Shameful Stuff!

Its obvious "What that bit about Brian O'Shea" is about. It disproves your theorey that time "has to be served" He served enough time and then some and went virtually nowhere. Ditto Keneally and many others



Why are you asking me? I didn't vote for him. But the fact is somebody in FG had to go as punishment for their ineptitude.Since they vote for Deasy in the West no matter what he does then Coffey was the one who had to take the hit. Otherwise we would have sent two FG TD's back to DE and they would think they could f*ck us whenever they wanted to.

Plenty of tds who served their time and went nowhere substantial true opposite true too, as you said enda Kenny got where he is today virtually by default of being the longest there.
As for Coffey,I don't think you can say with confidence that he got junior minister because of that March.however he was there (junior min) and would have been our only td of any influence, that's the bottom line really if we want investment from govt etc

fuzzy dunlop

Max Powers wrote: »

Plenty of tds who served their time and went nowhere substantial true opposite true too, as you said enda Kenny got where he is today virtually by default of being the longest there.
As for Coffey,I don't think you can say with confidence that he got junior minister because of that March.however he was there (junior min) and would have been our only td of any influence, that's the bottom line really if we want investment from govt etc

You have this irrational fixation with "time served". I never said Enda got there because of longevity. Its a known fact that Enda was pulled from obscurity because he was seen as an equivalent to Bertie Ahern i.e.some everyman that could down a few scoops etc etc. and resonate with the ordinary man and woman. Coffey certainly didn't get a ministry for towing the party line and waiting patiently for "the nod". You assume he would have been a junior again. Maybe. But the march certainly sent a message to FG and also the need to shaft Deasy were probably more important factors when it came to where Coffey was going. Either way it means it had nothing to do with "time served" and more to do with strategy. And the fact is if we had elected two FG TD's it would have said that "we don't do strategy".

Max Powers

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

You have this irrational fixation with "time served". I never said Enda got there because of longevity. Its a known fact that Enda was pulled from obscurity because he was seen as an equivalent to Bertie Ahern i.e.some everyman that could down a few scoops etc etc. and resonate with the ordinary man and woman. Coffey certainly didn't get a ministry for towing the party line and waiting patiently for "the nod". You assume he would have been a junior again. Maybe. But the march certainly sent a message to FG and also the need to shaft Deasy were probably more important factors when it came to where Coffey was going. Either way it means it had nothing to do with "time served" and more to do with strategy. And the fact is if we had elected two FG TD's it would have said that "we don't do strategy".

No just puzzled with people who claim to be voting strategically would vote for others who are less likely to do anything constructive for Waterford or be in a position to do.your March theory is pure speculation, Coffey was in a position to have some weight, people knew he can be expected to hold that position yet voted for people who will not be heard, that's the illogical thing.my only conclusion is people don't vote strategically as you say and just vote for the loudest table banger whom they naively think will do a good job for Waterford.

Max Powers

My summary is...Waterford had a choice...do you want a junior minister or someone else who lets face it will have zero influence.

fuzzy dunlop

Max Powers wrote: »

No just puzzled with people who claim to be voting strategically would vote for others who are less likely to do anything constructive for Waterford or be in a position to do.your March theory is pure speculation, Coffey was in a position to have some weight, people knew he can be expected to hold that position yet voted for people who will not be heard, that's the illogical thing.my only conclusion is people don't vote strategically as you say and just vote for the loudest table banger whom they naively think will do a good job for Waterford.

FG lost 35% of their seats.If you think Paudie Coffey was not going to be on the back benches had he retained his seat then you are bad at maths as well as clueless. The likelihood being most of the existing cabinet who were re-elected would have to be placated. Coffey had no chance. Now practically the whole Waterford electorate marched in protest against what the government did to the hospital. If you think this has nothing to do with why Paudie Coffey lost his seat then once again you are sadly deluded.In 40 years nothing has motivated so many people on to the streets in the city like that. Waterford benefited from this government to the extent of zero when everything is settled. The IDA offices that reopened were closed by them in the first place so why should we be thankful.They were preparing WIT for the same treatment as WRH with the institute probably broken up to set up campus in Kilkenny and Wexford. So it was a case of once bitten twice shy for Waterford. Nothing illogical at all. Punish the government or accept the same treatment from them.

fuzzy dunlop

Max Powers wrote: »

My summary is...Waterford had a choice...do you want a junior minister or someone else who lets face it will have zero influence.

No the choice was punish the government or behave like a co-dependent battered spouse. People chose the one with more dignity.

Max Powers

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

No the choice was punish the government or behave like a co-dependent battered spouse. People chose the one with more dignity.

I can understand people feeling like that 100% and wishing to punish the govt, but we all knew fg would be biggest party and more than likely lead govt, wouldn't we be better off then with our own junior minister in there.as it stands we are totally at their mercy now

fuzzy dunlop

Max Powers wrote: »

I can understand people feeling like that 100% and wishing to punish the govt, but we all knew fg would be biggest party and more than likely lead govt, wouldn't we be better off then with our own junior minister in there.as it stands we are totally at their mercy now

That is what they get for cronyism, extreme parochialism and corruption!They are only the largest party by the skin of their teeth.They were 2% away from their 2002 disaster. And we still wouldn't have had a Junior minister. There is too many senior faces that retained their seats that would have to be looked after. They can't even make a government after nearly two months never mind divvy up cabinet seats.

Max Powers

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

That is what they get for cronyism, extreme parochialism and corruption!They are only the largest party by the skin of their teeth.They were 2% away from their 2002 disaster. And we still wouldn't have had a Junior minister. There is too many senior faces that retained their seats that would have to be looked after. They can't even make a government after nearly two months never mind divvy up cabinet seats.

You have gone from maybe he would still be junior minister to last post saying we wouldn't.I don't see any good reason why he wouldn't have kept that position, and be demoted especially since possibly no Labour means more seats even taking into account a few going to independents who played the game better than ours.

fuzzy dunlop

Max Powers wrote: »

You have gone from maybe he would still be junior minister to last post saying we wouldn't.I don't see any good reason why he wouldn't have kept that position, and demoted especially since possibly no Labour means more seats even taking into account a few going to independents who played the game better than ours.

Maybe if all FG had 70 seats but they didn't. He wouldn't for the simple reason that there would not have been the number available.There is nearly 30 more seats required for FG to form a government. The speculation was that a merger would be made of some description with FF.That essentially is the only coalition option. FF are in denial about it but that is the state of play. This would have made it virtually impossible for Coffey to hold his ministry. We had nothing to gain for voting for him because he was guaranteed to be on the back benches. FG were depending on people like you to be lured in by a tiny chance that he would get a position.Like I said no matter what Deasy does he gets in because of some almost feudal mentality. Therefore the only options we had was to vote Coffey out. It would have been unthinkable not to punish FG and Labour for what they did here. And the electorate pretty much agrees....

Max Powers

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

Maybe if all FG had 70 seats but they didn't. He wouldn't for the simple reason that there would not have been the number available.There is nearly 30 more seats required for FG to form a government. The speculation was that a merger would be made of some description with FF.That essentially is the only coalition option. FF are in denial about it but that is the state of play. This would have made it virtually impossible for Coffey to hold his ministry. We had nothing to gain for voting for him because he was guaranteed to be on the back benches. FG were depending on people like you to be lured in by a tiny chance that he would get a position.Like I said no matter what Deasy does he gets in because of some almost feudal mentality. Therefore the only options we had was to vote Coffey out. It would have been unthinkable not to punish FG and Labour for what they did here. And the electorate pretty much agrees....

Yeah look what you say there about fifty fifty fg ff hypothetical situation is true but that was never gonna happen, situation we are in now would have seen him back as junior.

fuzzy dunlop

Max Powers wrote: »

Yeah look what you say there about fifty fifty fg ff hypothetical situation is true but that was never gonna happen, situation we are in now would have seen him back as junior.

No it wouldn't. There are too many there with seniority on him and not enough posts for FG to give him a post.That is even before they do a deal with Independents. This is the reality. This woulda, coulda, shoulda, nonsense you are coming out with is pure magic beans and nobody bought it thankfully. People are too clever for that. Its why they voted for Cullen consistently and why they didn't give FG a second chance. They know what a safe bet is when they see one and what is not.