The Frances Fitzgerald controversy. Are we heading for an election?

Loafing Oaf

tayto lover wrote: »

The trouble with that is that every Minister would be expected to do likewise for the slightest mistake or omission.

Presumably there would be a quid pro quo with FF that they wouldn't be calling for a minister's head every other week as part of the deal...

tayto lover

charlie14 wrote: »

It could end up a lot worse for Varadkar if she ends up taking him with her due to a bad GE election result that costs FG a place in government

An election at short notice will be a gamble for all parties and individuals.
People might get angry with FG or they might take it out on those who called for it. It's not a gamble that many will want to take imo. It could backfire badly.

charlie14

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The problem I have with that is that it's only scapegoating on the basis of partial information and a whiff of political smell of blood.

I've no problem with her being sacked once the full facts are established in the tribunal. But ultimately the blame for this less in the DOJ and the Gardai who will get away with it if her head rolls.

There are more than enough facts now to see her sacked.

She sat on her hands knowing what she did from that email, kept stumm about it while backing O`Sullivan to the hilt and then again sat on her hands keeping stumm while Varadkar got to his feet in the Dail making a fool of himself as to when she had received the email.

This disclosure tribunal has already shown itself as a farce not having a clue about the email and is nothing other than a FG can kicking exercise attempting to keep Fitzgerald who should have been given the ultimatum of resign or be sacked the day it became clear to Varadkar that she had sat back letting him mislead the Dail.

charlie14

tayto lover wrote: »

An election at short notice will be a gamble for all parties and individuals.
People might get angry with FG or they might take it out on those who called for it. It's not a gamble that many will want to take imo. It could backfire badly.

Agreed, but it has the very dangerous possibility of resulting in FG moving to the opposition benches which would also carry the potential for major bloodletting within FG and Varadkar gone as leader.

FG are the party with most to loose here in the event of a GE imo.

charlie14

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Presumably there would be a quid pro quo with FF that they wouldn't be calling for a minister's head every other week as part of the deal...

From FF`s O`Callaghan`s remarks on radio yesterday as regards Flanagan, that appears to be on offer.

Loafing Oaf

charlie14 wrote: »

Agreed, but it has the very dangerous possibility of resulting in FG moving to the opposition benches which would also carry the potential for major bloodletting within FG and Varadkar gone as leader.

Can't see that happening unless they take a right hammering. I doubt many in FG are delusional enough to see where they were in 2011 as their 'natural level.' I actually think most in FG would be happy enough to support a minority FG government if they come in second, seeing it as 'returning a favour' etc. Plus of course anything to keep SF out...

charlie14

Water John wrote: »

In that case, there goes Flanagan, as well.

That would be a call for Varadkar to make, and one he probably should imo.

According to FF`s O`Callaghan on radio yesterday, they are not concerned over Flanagan`s involvement, in that unlike Fitzgerald, he knew nothing about this email alerting her to the Garda Siochana strategy until he saw it less than two weeks ago.

charlie14

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Can't see that happening unless they take a right hammering. I doubt many in FG are delusional enough to see where they were in 2011 as their 'natural level.' I actually think most in FG would be happy enough to support a minority FG government if they come in second, seeing it as 'returning a favour' etc. Plus of course anything to keep SF out...

I wouldn`t be too sure that a bad result would not lead to a lot of bloodletting within FG if they lost their position in government with Varadkar under pressure when you add in the fact that he wasn`t the favourite of the ordinary party members in the vote to get the gig in the first place.

Even best case scenario with a GE. it looks a very high stakes game for very little return.

blanch152

My money is still on FF backing down, despite the hysterics on here about Fitzgerald. There is an awful lot of supposition on here masquerading as fact, when there is no evidence for example that she could or should have done anything as a result of the email.

It is easy for Sinn Fein to forget that everyone, including the Gardai as an organisation or the Garda Commissioner, is entitled to due process given their support for kangaroo courts in the past, but I thought FF would understand it better.

tomwaterford

blanch152 wrote: »

My money is still on FF backing down, despite the hysterics on here about Fitzgerald. There is an awful lot of supposition on here masquerading as fact, when there is no evidence for example that she could or should have done anything as a result of the email.

It is easy for Sinn Fein to forget that everyone, including the Gardai as an organisation or the Garda Commissioner, is entitled to due process given their support for kangaroo courts in the past, but I thought FF would understand it better.

So ff are going to say they were wrong in saying they had no confidence in the minister??


Everyone except McCabe is entitled to due process in the fg world....Unless smearing someone's name is part of due process?

blanch152

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Can't see that happening unless they take a right hammering. I doubt many in FG are delusional enough to see where they were in 2011 as their 'natural level.' I actually think most in FG would be happy enough to support a minority FG government if they come in second, seeing it as 'returning a favour' etc. Plus of course anything to keep SF out...

Actually, I think Leo would have a cleverer play in mind. If FG lose seats in this election and come in second, they will have lost seats in two successive elections. Leo will say that the people have spoken and that FG have been told to go into opposition and that they should have no hand, act or part in government and that it should be left to the others - FF, SF, PBP, Labour, Greens, - who have been shouting from the ditches for the last eighteen months to step up to the plate.

He knows, as do we all, that such an alliance would be doomed to failure.

blanch152

tomwaterford wrote: »

So ff are going to say they were wrong in saying they had no confidence in the minister??


Everyone except McCabe is entitled to due process in the fg world....Unless smearing someone's name is part of due process?

Who are those in the FG world who believe McCabe isn't entitled to due process, you are making things up again. I haven't seen anything from any Minister saying that.

charlie14

[QUOTE=blanch152;105385339]My money is still on FF backing down, despite the hysterics on here about Fitzgerald. There is an awful lot of supposition on here masquerading as fact, when there is no evidence for example that she could or should have done anything as a result of the email.
.[/QUOTE]

You had a similar bet on them backing down over water charges did you not?
Maybe best so to keep in mind that old idiom of throwing good money after bad.

Mrsmum

I'm beginning to worry that Leo does not have good judgement. Apart from the fact she let him make a fool of himself in the Dail, she did not do the right thing at the time or afterwards. When she was exposed, her first defense was forgetfulness, then that she just did what she was told by the DOJ ie do nothing concerning the shocking treatment of a man that even those living under a rock know about. My advice - Sack her and get on with things, Leo or she'll take you down with her and you'll deserve it. Are you a new broom or just same old, same old ****e.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

Actually, I think Leo would have a cleverer play in mind. If FG lose seats in this election and come in second, they will have lost seats in two successive elections. Leo will say that the people have spoken and that FG have been told to go into opposition and that they should have no hand, act or part in government and that it should be left to the others - FF, SF, PBP, Labour, Greens, - who have been shouting from the ditches for the last eighteen months to step up to the plate.

He knows, as do we all, that such an alliance would be doomed to failure.

Considering the blood sweat and tears FG put into getting their bums on the comfy seats after the last GE, that gave me a good laugh.:D

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

You had a similar bet on them backing down over water charges did you not?
Maybe best so to keep in mind that old idiom of throwing good money after bad.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

FrancieBrady

charlie14 wrote: »

Considering the blood sweat and tears FG put into getting their bums on the comfy seats after the last GE, that gave me a good laugh.:D

The descriptive term at the moment is that FG are 'clinging' to power.

tayto lover

charlie14 wrote: »

Agreed, but it has the very dangerous possibility of resulting in FG moving to the opposition benches which would also carry the potential for major bloodletting within FG and Varadkar gone as leader.

FG are the party with most to loose here in the event of a GE imo.

They are BUT I can't see them losing.
FG are the party that people want to see at the Brexit talks. I base that opinion on conversations I have had with many people in the last few weeks.
They don't trust any of the others to handle such an important occasion.
For that reason I could see the election strengthening FG's hand rather than weakening it. I could be entirely wrong on that but it's unlikely.

Water John

blanch, your theory is very far from political reality. Remember Mary Harney's saying, the worst day in Ministerial office is better than, the best day in opposition.
No politician wants to engage in the risk of an election, esp those in Govn't.

Tayto, don't actually believe you. Why would you have been discussing this over a few weeks, when there was no indication that their was a possibility of an election. Calling it a porkie.

FrancieBrady

tayto lover wrote: »

They are BUT I can't see them losing.
FG are the party that people want to see at the Brexit talks. I base that opinion on conversations I have had with many people in the last few weeks.
They don't trust any of the others to handle such an important occasion.
For that reason I could see the election strengthening FG's hand rather than weakening it. I could be entirely wrong on that but it's unlikely.

Campaigns are dangerous things. Anything can come out and the numbers are very close.

Odhinn

blanch152 wrote: »

Who are those in the FG world who believe McCabe isn't entitled to due process, you are making things up again. I haven't seen anything from any Minister saying that.

There's what they are saying and what some of them are doing. The latter is more important.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Sorry so. I could have sworn it was you.

Perhaps that is because a poster who disappeared when his ramblings and predictions on water charges fell apart had a very similar posting style, and whose political musings were virtually identical to your good self.

tomwaterford

blanch152 wrote: »

Who are those in the FG world who believe McCabe isn't entitled to due process, you are making things up again. I haven't seen anything from any Minister saying that.

Since when did smearing someone's reputation become a valid part of due process??


Where have I made up anything??


Looks to me like fg,the gaurds and DOJ set out to destroy this man for actually using due process.....and minute they've been found out and caught want to hide behind it themselves


They are no different to those who hide behind free speech to gain platform so as to propose restricting the rights of others




They can't have it both ways,either they support the whistle-blowers like they said they would

or they can as it appears as always back the gaurds to the hilt....remember this is the same gaurda commissioner who afterwards the governmemt came out and gave their full backing too



Alan Kelly of the labour party deserves a massive credit and mention for the work he's done to expose this

tayto lover

Water John wrote: »

blanch, your theory is very far from political reality. Remember Mary Harney's saying, the worst day in Ministerial office is better than, the best day in opposition.
No politician wants to engage in the risk of an election, esp those in Govn't.

Tayto, don't actually believe you. Why would you have been discussing this over a few weeks, when there was no indication that their was a possibility of an election. Calling it a porkie.

It was to do with the Brexit talks. People were saying that FG were the best party to have at them. I live in N. Louth. It's a big issue and talking point around here especially with farmers and business people.
It had nothing to do with the issue being discussed here but i doubt it would make any difference to those groups i've named.

blanch152

Water John wrote: »

blanch, your theory is very far from political reality. Remember Mary Harney's saying, the worst day in Ministerial office is better than, the best day in opposition.
No politician wants to engage in the risk of an election, esp those in Govn't.

Tayto, don't actually believe you. Why would you have been discussing this over a few weeks, when there was no indication that their was a possibility of an election. Calling it a porkie.

I am actually with Tayto on this one, I would see FG strengthening in a pre-Christmas election. The reality is that most of the issues being rasied by FF in particular (SF are just populist opportunists) are before the Charleton Tribunal and will only last a day of two in the election campaign.

Inevitably, when it comes down to it, people will vote at this point in time based on who they believe will look after the country's interests, and everyone knows that neither FF (because of the bank guarantee) and SF (because of their terrorist past and involvement in another jurisdiction) can be trusted to do that.

Fann Linn

tomwaterford wrote: »

Since when did smearing someone's reputation become a valid part of due process??


Where have I made up anything??


Looks to me like fg,the gaurds and DOJ set out to destroy this man for actually using due process.....and minute they've been found out and caught want to hide behind it themselves


They are no different to those who hide behind free speech to gain platform so as to propose restricting the rights of others




They can't have it both ways,either they support the whistle-blowers like they said they would

or they can as it appears as always back the gaurds to the hilt....remember this is the same gaurda commissioner who afterwards the governmemt came out and gave their full backing too



Alan Kelly of the labour party deserves a massive credit and mention for the work he's done to expose this

Alan Kelly's MOLE deserves a massive credit and mention for the work he's done to expose this. FYP

flaneur

So is this election happening or false alarm?

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

My money is still on FF backing down, despite the hysterics on here about Fitzgerald. There is an awful lot of supposition on here masquerading as fact, when there is no evidence for example that she could or should have done anything as a result of the email.

It is easy for Sinn Fein to forget that everyone, including the Gardai as an organisation or the Garda Commissioner, is entitled to due process given their support for kangaroo courts in the past, but I thought FF would understand it better.

Aren't you on record of being upset about being expected to ask for sources, or proof of convictions on a very recent Gerry Adams thread, yet here you're preaching about due process and right to the presumption of innocence?

Definite bang of FG double standards of that one.

Btw. No one is claiming the minister was involved in the smear campaign. Only that she's 100% guilty of being incompetent (best case scenario)

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

I am actually with Tayto on this one, I would see FG strengthening in a pre-Christmas election. The reality is that most of the issues being rasied by FF in particular (SF are just populist opportunists) are before the Charleton Tribunal and will only last a day of two in the election campaign.

Inevitably, when it comes down to it, people will vote at this point in time based on who they believe will look after the country's interests, and everyone knows that neither FF (because of the bank guarantee) and SF (because of their terrorist past and involvement in another jurisdiction) can be trusted to do that.

FG, thanks be to God voted against that bank guarantee right?

The Rape of Lucretia

Leo is playing this like a chess grandmaster. Machiavelli would be proud.
True, the opportunity came up by chance, but he is superbly manipulating it to provoke an election and have it look like FF is to blame, and that they cannot be trusted in a confidence and supply agreement.

In addition, with independent support going through the floor, the moment is ripe to wipe out the bulk of them, as people flock back to organised parties, realising they are the only option for a stable government - the most terrified people in Ireland are the independents this weekend.

Like the crab being boiled from cold water, I dont think FF have yet realised what is being done to them, and how their weakness for party politicking, both internal and with FG, is being played like a puppet. The Dail bar cheering the other night must almost have prompted Leo to have pity on how easily manipulated they are.

Quite the master political manipulator already.

charlie14

tayto lover wrote: »

They are BUT I can't see them losing.
FG are the party that people want to see at the Brexit talks. I base that opinion on conversations I have had with many people in the last few weeks.
They don't trust any of the others to handle such an important occasion.
For that reason I could see the election strengthening FG's hand rather than weakening it. I could be entirely wrong on that but it's unlikely.

I don`t know about that one Tayto.
Most people I have talked too are off the opinion that regardless of what anybody says, if the divorce money is sorted the EU would happily move on to the next stage leaving us with a veto being our only option where it would not matter who is leading the government.

Even regardless of that it will take a lot of luck on FG`s part to turn the narrative in a GE campaign away from this to focus on Brexit.
Plus the fact that there is a lot of dis-quite and anger around on the housing, homelessness and health crisis.

charlie14

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Leo is playing this like a chess grandmaster. Machiavelli would be proud.
True, the opportunity came up by chance, but he is superbly manipulating it to provoke an election and have it look like FF is to blame, and that they cannot be trusted in a confidence and supply agreement.

In addition, with independent support going through the floor, the moment is ripe to wipe out the bulk of them, as people flock back to organised parties, realising they are the only option for a stable government - the most terrified people in Ireland are the independents this weekend.

Like the crab being boiled from cold water, I dont think FF have yet realised what is being done to them, and how their weakness for party politicking, both internal and with FG, is being played like a puppet. The Dail bar cheering the other night must almost have prompted Leo to have pity on how easily manipulated they are.

Quite the master political manipulator despite already.

Cheers

I wasn`t expecting two such great laughs on here tonight.

blanch152

tomwaterford wrote: »

Since when did smearing someone's reputation become a valid part of due process??

And when did Frances Fitzgerald smear anyone's reputation? Not a single piece of evidence that she did.

tomwaterford wrote: »

Where have I made up anything??

See above, and repeated throughout your posts where you decide, based on not a single shred of evidence that FG were involved in a conspiracy.

tomwaterford wrote: »

Looks to me like fg,the gaurds and DOJ set out to destroy this man for actually using due process.....and minute they've been found out and caught want to hide behind it themselves

There is not a single piece of evidence that FG set out to destroy Sgt. McCabe. That is another example of you making things up.

tomwaterford wrote: »

They are no different to those who hide behind free speech to gain platform so as to propose restricting the rights of others

You wouldn't be referring to those who go on social media and argue that a Minister should have restricted the rights of the Gardai and the Garda Commissioner to defend themselves? I agree that there are plenty of people on here, including yourself, hiding behind free speech in order to restrict the rights of O'Sullivan, the Gardai and Frances Fitzgerald to defend themselves before a Tribunal, by having them convicted before the evidence is heard.

You were one of those who defended the likes of Shlab Murphy right up to and after he was convicted.

tomwaterford wrote: »

They can't have it both ways,either they support the whistle-blowers like they said they would

or they can as it appears as always back the gaurds to the hilt....remember this is the same gaurda commissioner who afterwards the governmemt came out and gave their full backing too

The government aren't the judge and jury on this, they don't decide who is right or wrong, that is for the courts and the tribunals. So when they support the rights of the whistleblowers to be heard but also defending the rights of those accused, they are acting completely appropriately. It seems though that some people only support the rights of one side.

It reminds me of those who supported the right to violence in the North but disregarded the right to life of those who were coldly murdered by IRA criminal terrorists.

tomwaterford wrote: »

Alan Kelly of the labour party deserves a massive credit and mention for the work he's done to expose this

Kelly is one of the few Labour politicians I dislike. He reminds me of other North Tipp politicians like Lowry. I would guess that he has been sitting on some of this information since he was in government and far from exposing anything, he was only intent on making the most of it for political reasons.

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

I don`t know about that one Tayto.
Most people I have talked too are off the opinion that regardless of what anybody says, if the divorce money is sorted the EU would happily move on to the next stage leaving us with a veto being our only option where it would not matter who is leading the government.

Even regardless of that it will take a lot of luck on FG`s part to turn the narrative in a GE campaign away from this to focus on Brexit.
Plus the fact that there is a lot of dis-quite and anger around on the housing, homelessness and health crisis.

You could be right on the EU, but if that happens, it happens right bang in the middle of the election campaign and FG can say to the people, thank FF for causing this unnecessary election and leaving us as lame ducks at the EU summit.

Can only rebound in FG favour, and if the EU summit goes well, FG can claim credit. It is not often that a political party is in a position to claim credit if something goes right, but also assign blame to someone else if it goes wrong. This election campaign would give FG that opportunity.

FrancieBrady

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Leo is playing this like a chess grandmaster. Machiavelli would be proud.
True, the opportunity came up by chance, but he is superbly manipulating it to provoke an election and have it look like FF is to blame, and that they cannot be trusted in a confidence and supply agreement.

In addition, with independent support going through the floor, the moment is ripe to wipe out the bulk of them, as people flock back to organised parties, realising they are the only option for a stable government - the most terrified people in Ireland are the independents this weekend.

Like the crab being boiled from cold water, I dont think FF have yet realised what is being done to them, and how their weakness for party politicking, both internal and with FG, is being played like a puppet. The Dail bar cheering the other night must almost have prompted Leo to have pity on how easily manipulated they are.

Quite the master political manipulator already.

That would be why FG dropped in the RedC poll and FF and SF rose?

blanch152

Rick Shaw wrote: »

FG, thanks be to God voted against that bank guarantee right?

Only Labour opposed it actually.

FG, FF, SF, Greens all supported it. To be fair, other than FF, the rest can claim to have been misled.

Edward M

blanch152 wrote: »

And when did Frances Fitzgerald smear anyone's reputation? Not a single piece of evidence that she did.




See above, and repeated throughout your posts where you decide, based on not a single shred of evidence that FG were involved in a conspiracy.




There is not a single piece of evidence that FG set out to destroy Sgt. McCabe. That is another example of you making things up.




You wouldn't be referring to those who go on social media and argue that a Minister should have restricted the rights of the Gardai and the Garda Commissioner to defend themselves? I agree that there are plenty of people on here, including yourself, hiding behind free speech in order to restrict the rights of O'Sullivan, the Gardai and Frances Fitzgerald to defend themselves before a Tribunal, by having them convicted before the evidence is heard.

You were one of those who defended the likes of Shlab Murphy right up to and after he was convicted.




The government aren't the judge and jury on this, they don't decide who is right or wrong, that is for the courts and the tribunals. So when they support the rights of the whistleblowers to be heard but also defending the rights of those accused, they are acting completely appropriately. It seems though that some people only support the rights of one side.

It reminds me of those who supported the right to violence in the North but disregarded the right to life of those who were coldly murdered by IRA criminal terrorists.



Kelly is one of the few Labour politicians I dislike. He reminds me of other North Tipp politicians like Lowry. I would guess that he has been sitting on some of this information since he was in government and far from exposing anything, he was only intent on making the most of it for political reasons.

That's a long post, lecturing someone on producing evidence to back things up.
AND then finish it off with pure conjecture, hypocritical IMO.

Water John

Some, should be posting on the Conspiract Theories Forum.
Leo nor Michael wants an election.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That would be why FG dropped in the RedC poll and FF and SF rose?

The one poll to rule them all, that could be the start of a trend, but could also be an outlier, and that was conducted before we had the threat of an election, making it meaningless.

tayto lover

charlie14 wrote: »

I don`t know about that one Tayto.
Most people I have talked too are off the opinion that regardless of what anybody says, if the divorce money is sorted the EU would happily move on to the next stage leaving us with a veto being our only option where it would not matter who is leading the government.

Even regardless of that it will take a lot of luck on FG`s part to turn the narrative in a GE campaign away from this to focus on Brexit.
Plus the fact that there is a lot of dis-quite and anger around on the housing, homelessness and health crisis.

Again you could be right but if I was a betting man i'd go against you. Having said that and i'm not a political animal at all, it's my view that the people will vote for stability.

Tony EH

Fann Linn wrote: »

Alan Kelly's MOLE deserves a massive credit and mention for the work he's done to expose this. FYP

After Kelly's shilling for Fg on behalf of Irish Water, it's dificult to give him credit for anything to be honest.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

The one poll to rule them all, that could be the start of a trend, but could also be an outlier, and that was conducted before we had the threat of an election, making it meaningless.

It's an indication of who the public were believing. And what the public wanted.

If we get an election it only stands to reason who will ship the blame for it.

The Rape of Lucretia

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That would be why FG dropped in the RedC poll and FF and SF rose?

Rather, its a master stroke to turn defense into attack. They will claim a very high ground now in an election and can sling a lot of mud at FF, SF, and independents, that will resonate positively in their favour with the electorate.

tayto lover

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That would be why FG dropped in the RedC poll and FF and SF rose?

I never put much heed in those polls myself. There are many instances of them saying one thing before an election and the opposite happens when the votes are cast. We only have to look back to the best example of opinion polls i.e. the 1977? GE when FF romped home against all the odds and the Trump win in the US.

FrancieBrady

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Rather, its a master stroke to turn defense into attack. They will claim a very high ground now in an election and can sling a lot of mud at FF, SF, and independents, that will resonate positively in their favour with the electorate.

And throw a few more juicy revelations about this affair and anything could happen. The numbers are too close and the trend of the overall share for FF FG is downward as well. More and more are finding alternatives votes.

blanch152

Edward M wrote: »

That's a long post, lecturing someone on producing evidence to back things up.
AND then finish it off with pure conjecture, hypocritical IMO.

Not a bit, only joining in the silliness around here.

Remember the same people on here pontificating about how Fitzgerald definitely conspired to smear McCabe (I know, when you write it down, you realise who little evidence there is of this) are the same people who said she would resign before the Dail sat on Thursday. They have been wrong time and again about this crisis, and nothing to suggest that they will be right this time.

FrancieBrady

tayto lover wrote: »

I never put much heed in those polls myself. There are many instances of them saying one thing before an election and the opposite happens when the votes are cast. We only have to look back to the best example of opinion polls i.e. the 1977? GE when FF romped home against all the odds and the Trump win in the US.

Yes, I agree. But it is better indication than a guess or a feeling in one's water.

Loafing Oaf

charlie14 wrote: »

I wouldn`t be too sure that a bad result would not lead to a lot of bloodletting within FG if they lost their position in government with Varadkar under pressure when you add in the fact that he wasn`t the favourite of the ordinary party members in the vote to get the gig in the first place.

Even best case scenario with a GE. it looks a very high stakes game for very little return.

As I say I think the average FG grassroots is fairly realistic and would see finishing a close second to FF as a decent performance by historical standards. Their medium-term plan is to polarise politics between themselves and SF, in the process marginalizing FF, but they know it will take a few election cycles to realise that..

tayto lover

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes, I agree. But it is better indication than a guess or a feeling in one's water.

That's why I rarely bet.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's an indication of who the public were believing. And what the public wanted.

If we get an election it only stands to reason who will ship the blame for it.

And even if the public blame Leo for the election, that won't matter three weeks later when they decide to vote for who will lead the country forward.

That is especially true when they reflect fully on how we are having an election because FF and SF got excited about an email.