General Election - Feb 26th Megathread

mathie

Nice back -handed apology from Kenny over his "whingers" remark ...

Taoiseach Enda Kenny has said he regrets "if offence was taken"

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/election-2016/taoiseach-says-castlebar-whingers-remark-was-referring-to-fianna-fil-members-in-his-hometown-34473364.html

KomradeBishop

JustTheOne wrote: »

You do know 1 in 7 people who emigrated in the last 5 years were unemployed when leaving?

Over the last 5 years, a consistent number of around 40-50% were unemployed or students - a significant chunk of the latter which would have been adding to our unemployment figures had they stayed.

Baggy Trousers

Interesting

KomradeBishop

Lets also remember the current housing/rental crisis having developed on their watch as well - a massive economic failure from Fine Gael (or perhaps 'success', for certain sections of society) - which they seem to have no real plans for fixing properly; not a surprise, given that landlord and property developer lobby groups, are likely well connected with Fine Gael, and are happy enough with the status quo.

So yea, want a high chance of a continued housing crisis during the next governments term, along with an excessive cost of living? Vote Fine Gael.

JustTheOne

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Lets also remember the current housing/rental crisis having developed on their watch as well - a massive economic failure from Fine Gael (or perhaps 'success', for certain sections of society) - which they seem to have no real plans for fixing properly; not a surprise, given that landlord and property developer lobby groups, are likely well connected with Fine Gael, and are happy enough with the status quo.

So yea, want a high chance of a continued housing crisis during the next governments term, along with an excessive cost of living? Vote Fine Gael.

So who should we vote for a wise one?

keeponhurling

Sorry if this has been asked before on the thread - but is there anywhere that we could find a good summary of what each party's main policies are?

I know they all have manifestos but these can be hundreds of pages.
A summary of where they differ would be great.

Thanks!

KomradeBishop

JustTheOne wrote: »

So who should we vote for a wise one?

Literally anyone other than FF/FG/Lab? None of the alternatives - except for Renua perhaps - could hope to be worse.

Satriale

keeponhurling wrote: »

Sorry if this has been asked before on the thread - but is there anywhere that we could find a good summary of what each party's main policies are?

I know they all have manifestos but these can be hundreds of pages.
A summary of where they differ would be great.

Thanks!

Not party manifestos but, http://smartvote.ie/ , will tell you who who are most compatible in your constituency. I think you can look at a breakdown of your differences after you do the questionnaire.

Baggy Trousers

LostinKildare wrote: »

Posts like this annoy me. With all the really serious s**t going on in the country, you get exercised about a cheeky 15-year-old. Get some perspective. Aim your wrath higher.

And Alicia Mysterious Beeswax, we don't kick, we use our words. Any 15-year-old knows that.

:D:D

Burn!

Baggy Trousers

keeponhurling wrote: »

Sorry if this has been asked before on the thread - but is there anywhere that we could find a good summary of what each party's main policies are?

I know they all have manifestos but these can be hundreds of pages.
A summary of where they differ would be great.

Thanks!

Here you go.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057559208

storker

mathie wrote: »

Nice back -handed apology from Kenny over his "whingers" remark ...

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/election-2016/taoiseach-says-castlebar-whingers-remark-was-referring-to-fianna-fil-members-in-his-hometown-34473364.html

I bet he's really sorry that it's turned into what people imagine it to be...or something.

Galwayguy35

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Literally anyone other than FF/FG/Lab? None of the alternatives - except for Renua perhaps - could hope to be worse.

So a Government of SF, a mix of independents many of whom don't even agree with anything SF says, the SD and comrades Murphy and Boyd Barrett.

Oh yeah Daly and Wallace as well, but sure Mick will probably give us all a tax break anyway seeing as he doesn't like paying it himself.

Billy86

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Which you posted as a sign of 'success'/'recovery' in the current economy - that Fine Gael tries to take credit for, despite it being largely down to worldwide economic conditions - and ignoring the massive negatives which show the damage during their term - showing Fine Gael want to take credit for all of the 'good', and none of the bad, and many posters are trying to assist with this spin.

The last 5 years have been abysmal economically - this is an insanely long time to recover from an economic crisis, the main problems with the crisis (the massive private debt levels, reforming the regulatory system, reform at an EU level, reform of the Euro) have not been dealt with and will come home to roost later, and what little 'recovery' there has been is disproportionately felt by the better-off/well-connected parts of society - a 'recovery' likely to be derailed/reversed as worldwide economic conditions worsen.

On the one hand, people say there is 'little that could be done' economically by Fine Gael - well then that goes as much for the 'good' that happens in our economy, as well as the bad - so stop trying to give them credit for the 'good' (which they are trying to steal credit for anyway, since it's largely down to worldwide economic conditions), while ignoring the bad.

And the reverse is also true - people wanting to blame FG for all of the bad, and desperately making further and further reaches to ignore and of the good. Personally I think they have been far, far from perfect but blaming them for all the people leaving and a long recovery while simultaneously trying to say that none of the policies are their own and all recovery was down to the EU/IMF//global markets/FF strikes as having an agenda.

CFlat

Billy86 wrote: »

And the reverse is also true - people wanting to blame FG for all of the bad, and desperately making further and further reaches to ignore and of the good. Personally I think they have been far, far from perfect but blaming them for all the people leaving and a long recovery while simultaneously trying to say that none of the policies are their own and all recovery was down to the EU/IMF//global markets/FF strikes as having an agenda.

I always have a laugh at the usual suspects here who say that FF implemented the policies and not FG. They are actually admitting that there is a recovery happening, but won't credit FG for it!! They'll give the most reviled party in the country back in 2011 the credit before FG. SF supporters are probably the reason why FF are doing well in the polls because of the praise they are giving them for the recovery.

They're probably all on the soccer forum saying what a great job Jose Mourinho did with Chelsea yesterday when they beat Man City 5-1 in that FA cup match.

Billy86

Well to be fair, the credit should go to Hiddink more than Mourinho.

beach_walker

In fairness I don't think the current government have done that bad considering. Sure there's been some right feck-ups but I don't think any other option/coalition that was on offer in the 2011 election would have done any better over the last five years.

That said I'm not a FGer and have always stayed a mile clear of Labour (and will be laughing heartily at their dismal returns).

I don't think FG will do as badly as people and polls are predicting. I have no doubt that Enda will still be leader of the country, just a case of who they need to back them up.

KomradeBishop

Billy86 wrote: »

And the reverse is also true - people wanting to blame FG for all of the bad, and desperately making further and further reaches to ignore and of the good. Personally I think they have been far, far from perfect but blaming them for all the people leaving and a long recovery while simultaneously trying to say that none of the policies are their own and all recovery was down to the EU/IMF//global markets/FF strikes as having an agenda.

Uh, who else are you going to blame for all of the people emigrating, and for a 'recovery' that seems to be anemic and mostly benefiting better off sections of the economy? For the housing/rental crisis and the massive cost of living?

It's quite simple - if Fine Gael want to take the credit for the economy (the anemic 'recovery'), they get to take the blame for the economy too.

Billy86

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Uh, who else are you going to blame for all of the people emigrating, and for a 'recovery' that seems to be anemic and mostly benefiting better off sections of the economy? For the housing/rental crisis and the massive cost of living?

It's quite simple - if Fine Gael want to take the credit for the economy (the anemic 'recovery'), they get to take the blame for the economy too.

But you seem extremely interested in downplaying the recovery as not being a recovery, and some kind of fluke that they had nothing to do and made no decisions toward, while criticising them for the decisions they made toward it.

It's as if you expected them to just click their fingers and fix everything in no time at all, the moment they came into government. The fact that you claim Jeff Rudd/United People and Paul Murphy/AAA would be better options says a lot.

CFlat

beach_walker wrote: »

In fairness I don't think the current government have done that bad considering. Sure there's been some right feck-ups but I don't think any other option/coalition that was on offer in the 2011 election would have done any better over the last five years.

That said I'm not a FGer and have always stayed a mile clear of Labour (and will be laughing heartily at their dismal returns).

I don't think FG will do as badly as people and polls are predicting. I have no doubt that Enda will still be leader of the country, just a case of who they need to back them up.

I agree with that. I think the death of FG is being greatly exaggerated. I'm expecting good support on Friday for them and vastly ahead of the polls a la the Conservative Party in the UK last year. What happens there tends to mimic it self over here.

Can't see any other option but a FG/FF coalition especially for the year that's in it. Wouldn't be overly thrilled about that, but anything's better than SF.

KomradeBishop

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Uh, who else are you going to blame for all of the people emigrating, and for a 'recovery' that seems to be anemic and mostly benefiting better off sections of the economy? For the housing/rental crisis and the massive cost of living?

The people who have emigrated have done so (or claim to have done so anyway) due to the recession and FF were running the country into the ground back then as you well know so I have no idea how you are blaming FG for emigration. If there is a political party to blame it is without doubt FF. On the other hand FG have come in and steered the country back on track, got us through a terrible recession and have us back in a time of high growth, thousands getting back into employment etc.

You must be totally blind if you can't see how much the country has recovered, things are very much back on track. Thousands are back in work across all sections of society, people have more money in their pockets which is easily shown by VAT returns being way ahead of predictions. You really would try to claim black was white before admitting your views are not fitting with reality.

Also there has been an exodus of LLs from the rental market due to the fact they are so heavily taxed that its barely a viable business to be in nowadays. You of course are very quick to forget these "better off sections of society" are the ones who's taxes are propping up the rest of society so they should be equally if not more entitled to benefit from any recovery. In reality they are not benefiting any more than anyone else.

In fact while I am a fan of USC being abolished (as it puts more money in my pocket) the only problem I have is it disproportionally benefits low earners who pay almost no tax and at least were having to contribute something with USC.

Jack Killian

Jaylah Important Trailblazer wrote: »

You of course are very quick to forget these "better off sections of society" are the ones who's taxes are propping up the rest of society

You mean like bankers and politicians and developers, who got of almost scot-free ?

In fact while I am a fan of USC being abolished (as it puts more money in my pocket) the only problem I have is it disproportionally benefits low earners.

That is the most ridiculous thing I have read this week on here, and that's saying something.

ToddyDoody

So it should be a FG - SF coalition, going by the numbers?

What exactly is the deal with who'll work with who?

DEFTLEFTHAND

ToddyDoody wrote: »

So it should be a FG - SF coalition, going by the numbers?

What exactly is the deal with who'll work with who?

FG won't deal with SF. FF have said the same but I wouldn't be so sure.

Canadel

tomwaterford wrote: »

Life starts at conception IMO

But no one should be forced to put there body through the ringer if they don't want to/not up to it IMO

**it should at this point be pointed out that I don't believe people should be allowed abort for disabilities/gender of the child.....

only if they don't wish to put their body through a pregnancy...,as some people are not able/want to do it....and others are just not cut out to be parents

Why not? On the one hand you say you favour abortion on demand and that a woman shouldn't have to give birth if she doesn't want to. However, a woman can just use the excuse that she's not up to giving birth but the real reason is that she doesn't want a son or she doesn't want a daughter or she doesn't want a disabled child.

Saying you're in favour of abortion on demand but don't believe people should be allowed to abort for disabilities/gender of the child is the definition of thought crime.

You believe in abortion on demand. Or you don't. Emotion has to be taken out of this argument. And your gender/disability reason for disallowing abortion is based on emotion, and contradicts your argument for abortion on demand.

Saying you're opposed to a woman being allowed to have an abortion because of gender/disability is exactly the same as a pro lifer saying they're opposed to a woman being allowed to have an abortion at all. The rationale for both beliefs is based on your own moral reasoning rather than on the right of a woman to control her own reproductive system.

Coles

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

FG won't deal with SF. FF have said the same but I wouldn't be so sure.

Why wouldn't FG form a coalition with SF?

Are you not aware that in 2007 Enda Kenny approached SF about forming a coalition? I can't imagine that SF are more toxic now than they were then, right?

KomradeBishop

Billy86 wrote: »

But you seem extremely interested in downplaying the recovery as not being a recovery, and some kind of fluke that they had nothing to do and made no decisions toward, while criticising them for the decisions they made toward it.

It's as if you expected them to just click their fingers and fix everything in no time at all, the moment they came into government. The fact that you claim Jeff Rudd/United People and Paul Murphy/AAA would be better options says a lot.

Uh, no none of their policy failures that I mentioned were moving toward recovery...

Don't put words in my mouth, thanks - I never referenced any of those other people.

LordSutch

Coles wrote: »

Are you not aware that in 2007 Enda Kenny approached SF about forming a coalition?

Let's see proof of that please. Got a link?

Billy86

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Uh, no none of their policy failures that I mentioned were moving toward recovery...

I don't even recall you mentioning their policies toward me actually, but tens of thousands more in employment is moving toward recovery.

Don't put words in my mouth, thanks - I never referenced any of those other people.[/QUOTE]Someone asked who should be voted for, you replied "Literally anyone other than FF/FG/Lab? None of the alternatives - except for Renua perhaps - could hope to be worse." So yeah, you kind of did.

KomradeBishop

Jaylah Important Trailblazer wrote: »

The people who have emigrated have done so (or claim to have done so anyway) due to the recession and FF were running the country into the ground back then as you well know so I have no idea how you are blaming FG for emigration. If there is a political party to blame it is without doubt FF. On the other hand FG have come in and steered the country back on track, got us through a terrible recession and have us back in a time of high growth, thousands getting back into employment etc.

You must be totally blind if you can't see how much the country has recovered, things are very much back on track. Thousands are back in work across all sections of society, people have more money in their pockets which is easily shown by VAT returns being way ahead of predictions. You really would try to claim black was white before admitting your views are not fitting with reality.

Also there has been an exodus of LLs from the rental market due to the fact they are so heavily taxed that its barely a viable business to be in nowadays. You of course are very quick to forget these "better off sections of society" are the ones who's taxes are propping up the rest of society so they should be equally if not more entitled to benefit from any recovery. In reality they are not benefiting any more than anyone else.

In fact while I am a fan of USC being abolished (as it puts more money in my pocket) the only problem I have is it disproportionally benefits low earners who pay almost no tax and at least were having to contribute something with USC.

Uh, the vast majority of emigration happened on Fine Gael's watch - if Fine Gael want to take 'credit' for the countries economic conditions, then they own the massive emigration stats too.

What's your explanation for the housing/rental crisis? Fine Gael let that build up and develop on their watch too - and they seem quite happy to do bugger all about it, as it benefits the well connected landlord and financial class in this country - which likely have very heavy lobbying power with Fine Gael.

Being a landlord barely viable? With the massive rents there are now? That's utter bollocks. The number of tenants, and thus landlords, has skyrocketed...

More than 700,000 people now live in rented accomodation.

The latest figures from the Private Residential Tenancies Board show that 10,000 people a month are moving into rental properties.

According to the Irish Independent, the total is just under 700,000 - compared to 455,000 in December 2013.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/number-of-tenants-in-rented-accommodation-increasing-by-10000-a-month-681999.html

LordSutch

LordSutch wrote: »

Let's see proof of that please. Got a link?

It was the Greens who said that they were approached by Kenny and Hogan who spoke of bringing in SF but wanted the Greens to act as go betweens. FG rejected the claim...

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/sargent-stands-over-kenny-claim-1.841425

KomradeBishop

Billy86 wrote: »

Someone asked who should be voted for, you replied "Literally anyone other than FF/FG/Lab? None of the alternatives - except for Renua perhaps - could hope to be worse." So yeah, you kind of did.

No actually, saying to vote for anyone other than those parties, is not an endorsement of all of the rest of the parties/groups/individuals - it is pointing out, that it would be hard for any of them (except perhaps Renua) to be worse than FF/FG/Labour.

Billy86

KomradeBishop wrote: »

No actually, saying to vote for anyone other than those parties, is not an endorsement of all of the rest of the parties/groups/individuals - it is pointing out, that it would be hard for any of them (except perhaps Renua) to be worse than FF/FG/Labour.

So exactly like I said...

Billy86 wrote: »

The fact that you claim Jeff Rudd/United People and Paul Murphy/AAA would be better options says a lot.

If I didn't know any better, I would think you reckon taking the Greek approach would have been better for us.

KomradeBishop

Billy86 wrote: »

So exactly like I said...



If I didn't know any better, I would think you reckon taking the Greek approach would have been better for us.

No that's you deliberately misrepresenting what I said - as anyone reading the thread can see - I never endorsed any of those people, that's you cherry picking from what I have said.

Do not put words in my mouth. The way you are misrepresenting me, is as good as lying there, as I did not endorse those people.

Unless I say "I directly support 'x' person or 'y' group", do not misrepresent me as supporting them.

Baggy Trousers

Don't let the vested interests convince you that a vote for an Independent candidate is a wasted vote.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. The civil war parties let this country down time and time again. Pigs in the trough.

The Independents were the hardest working group in the last Dail by a long shot. They told it as it is and helped root out corruption and wrongdoing. You hardly heard a peep out of the whipped FG/Lab back benchers while their leaders refuse to answer simple questions.

A Dail full of Independents would slowly but surely find common ground and allegiances - they already have started doing this e.g. Social Democrats. The SDs already have more honour/courage and less baggage than all the civil war parties put together.

The loyalty of the Irish electorate is akin to Stockholm Syndrome but finally they are waking up.

Coles

Anyone but FF/FG/Labour.

Baggy Trousers

Coles wrote: »

Anyone but FF/FG/Labour.

And Sinn Fein

Too much baggage and a very dodgy leader.

The_Kew_Tour

You want be off your Rocket to vote Sinn Fein.

Billy86

KomradeBishop wrote: »

No that's you deliberately misrepresenting what I said - as anyone reading the thread can see - I never endorsed any of those people, that's you cherry picking from what I have said.

Do not put words in my mouth. The way you are mispresenting me, is as good as lying there, as I did not endorse those people.

When you say LITERALLY ANYONE would be a better option than FG/FF/Labour, you absolutely are saying LITERALLY ANYONE as a better option than FG/FF/Labour.

I said: The fact that you claim Jeff Rudd/United People and Paul Murphy/AAA would be better options [than FG/FF/Labour] says a lot.
You said: Literally anyone other than FF/FG/Lab? None of the alternatives - except for Renua perhaps - could hope to be worse.

You literally said NONE of the alternatives could hope to be worse than FG/FF/Labour, and you literally said LITERALLY ANYONE other than FG/FF/Labour would be better. So you absolutely said Jeff Rudd/United People and Paul Murphy/AAA are better options. There's no discussion to be had there.

There is no word twisting here, there is only you trying to claim there is because you know you made a silly comment.

Baggy Trousers

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

You want be off your Rocket to vote Sinn Fein.

...and Labour, Fianna Fail, Fine Gael

We need a real revolution at the polls this Friday.

Will Ireland deliver? Doubtful/Somewhat.

Baggy Trousers

Baggy Trousers wrote: »

...and Labour, Fianna Fail, Fine Gael

We need a real revolution at the polls this Friday.

Will Ireland deliver? Doubtful/Somewhat.

We need stability and to stay keep the economy growing as it is which makes FG the obvious choice for 1st preference. I will also give some of my higher preferences to an independant or two who are good for getting stuff done in the area.

Undecided on the rest of my preferences but no SF, AAA, people before profit, etc will be getting any preference though I don't even know if any of them chasers are running in my area bar SF rural people have no interest in them.

sid waddell

"All brought on by your own actions", said Fine Gael TD Regina Doherty to Gerry Adams on LMFM's "Michael Reade Show" this morning, in reference to an unprovoked, sectarian massacre by a drunk, off-duty RUC man at Adams' West Belfast Sinn Fein constituency office on February 4th, 1992, in which three civilians were murdered.

Just let that sink in.

Could one imagine what the reaction from both Fine Gael and the media would be if Gerry Adams had, hypothetically, said: "The Kingsmills massacre was brought on by the RUC's actions". or even "Michael Collins' death was brought on by his own actions"?

Because it would amount to effectively the same thing as what Doherty said.

Will our media scrutinise Doherty's comments in the same way it does to almost every comment a Sinn Fein member makes?

This was an entirely unprovoked, sectarian massacre of civilians she was referring to here. And it wasn't the only such incident she was referring to which was supposedly "brought on by Adams' own actions".

She was also referring to the murder of two members of Gerry Adams' family by Loyalist paramilitaries and the British Army respectively, the shooting of his brother, his own shooting by Loyalist paramilitaries in 1984, and the bombing of his office.

These incidents were mentioned immediately before the reference to the 1992 massacre.

"All brought on by his own actions", according to Regina Doherty.

I think any decent citizen, regardless of their political affiliation, would feel disturbed and affronted at a Fine Gael politician effectively saying that "you brought it on yourself" (and I refer to Gerry Adams as "yourself" here, for clarity and accuracy) about an unprovoked sectarian massacre of civilians at Adams' constituency office, as if there is any valid reason for an unprovoked sectarian massacre of civilians.

I would encourage everybody to listen to the relevant part of the debate "in the round" (from 1 hour and 5 minutes on here: http://www.lmfm.ie/Podcasts/Podcasts/Show?showalias=the-michael-reade-show-1#7431 so as to gauge the full context in which the remarks were made. That context is clear and unambiguous, and for Regina Doherty and Fine Gael, is nothing short of an appalling reflection on them.

KomradeBishop

Billy86 wrote: »

When you say LITERALLY ANYONE would be a better option than FG/FF/Labour, you absolutely are saying LITERALLY ANYONE as a better option than FG/FF/Labour.

I said: The fact that you claim Jeff Rudd/United People and Paul Murphy/AAA would be better options [than FG/FF/Labour] says a lot.
You said: Literally anyone other than FF/FG/Lab? None of the alternatives - except for Renua perhaps - could hope to be worse.

You literally said NONE of the alternatives could hope to be worse than FG/FF/Labour, and you literally said LITERALLY ANYONE other than FG/FF/Labour would be better. So you absolutely said Jeff Rudd/United People and Paul Murphy/AAA are better options. There's no discussion to be had there.

There is no word twisting here, there is only you trying to claim there is because you know you made a silly comment.

Fine - pedantically, with the strict interpretation of words, you are right - I don't believe anybody can 'miss' that the intention of my post, is to express that removal of support from FF/FG/Lab is the primary desire mind, unless they were deliberately trying to spin it.

To restate my post:
FF/FG/Lab should be considered excluded from peoples consideration for voting, given the abysmal job they have done in government - out of the remaining candidates, you'd be hard pressed to find worse (though there are some, like Renua - I'm not going to iterate every potential 'worse' candidate though).

Billy86

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Fine - pedantically, with the strict interpretation of words, you are right - I don't believe anybody can 'miss' that the intention of my post, is to express that removal of support from FF/FG/Lab is the primary desire mind, unless they were deliberately trying to spin it.

To restate my post:
FF/FG/Lab should be considered excluded from peoples consideration for voting, given the abysmal job they have done in government - out of the remaining candidates, you'd be hard pressed to find worse (though there are some, like Renua - I'm not going to iterate every potential 'worse' candidate though).

It's not pedantic that words have definitions, and when you use terms like 'literally anyone' you mean, well, literally anyone.

And then we've got the question of what would the others have done so differently over the last 5 years, if the path was already laid for them by world markets/the EU/IMF/FF etc as so many like to claim?

Sh1tbag OToole

John_Rambo wrote: »

And Mullingar, and Castlebar, and Cavan, and Donegal, and Kilkenny, and Limerick, and Mallow. Just setting you straight there.

Tis worse than I thought so. Twould be a great job to have though, you'd get a serious amount of thumb-twiddling done

Jack Killian

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It was the Greens who said that they were approached by Kenny and Hogan who spoke of bringing in SF but wanted the Greens to act as go betweens. FG rejected the claim...

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/sargent-stands-over-kenny-claim-1.841425

Godge is your man there - he's familiar with both and defends both; this should be interesting to witness as to which is the lying party.

Baggy Trousers

Jaylah Important Trailblazer wrote: »

We need stability and to stay keep the economy growing as it is which makes FG the obvious choice for 1st preference.

Can you prove this?

What specific Fine Gael policy created the so called "recovery"? As far I could see, it was all external factors that started our recovery (from a very low base).

What Fine Gael promise will specifically keep the economy growing?

Given the slowdown in the global economy, they could well be eating their words in the next GE.

http://www.financedublin.com/debtclock.php

Quest

Interesting that FF are so low in this poll compared to the national polls MRBI, Red C etc. Does that say something about the kind of people who vote in online polls? (There's a thesis in that!)

I predict FF will do about 5 points better than their average poll result.

Jack Killian

Jaylah Important Trailblazer wrote: »

We need stability and to stay keep the economy growing as it is which makes FG the obvious choice for 1st preference. I will also give some of my higher preferences to an independant or two who are good for getting stuff done in the area.

Undecided on the rest of my preferences but no SF, AAA, people before profit, etc will be getting any preference though I don't even know if any of them chasers are running in my area bar SF rural people have no interest in them.

Stability is no use if it's not working for the good of the country. Look at what FG have done with their massive majority, arrogantly railroading through legislation while drunk and dismissing the promised accountability and transparency, safe in the knowledge that their majority of whipped lapdogs will say nothing and vote with them.

Phoebas

Jack Killian wrote: »

Stability is no use if it's not working for the good of the country.

Its working.
http://www.cso.ie/indicators/Maintable.aspx

thattequilagirl

I canvassed for the Social Democrats this evening. Got a good reaction on the doors. Unfortunately there's a bit of a Catch22, where people want something new but they don't want to vote for someone they've never seen before. I'm not sure my candidate will make it across the line; he's very transfer-friendly but I don't know if he will get those all important number ones.