Leo is the new king of Ireland.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You and Mary-Anne miss the point. Many politicians, groups and parties have been calling for this for decades. Credit goes to FG for sure, but it must be noted it took until 2018 because the can was kicked down the road for so long by FF/FG. It would be re-writing history to try sell it like Kenny came along and Leo got it over the line, like the whole movement started with Kenny. Of any prominent political party, I think Labour will be the ones to miss out on their dues in this regard.
Unlike the mess of the HSE, I can't see Leo claiming it was in motion when FG got here

Doesn't matter who was campaigning for it for so long. All that matters is who will get the credit - and that is Leo.

Wheeliebin30

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You and Mary-Anne miss the point. Many politicians, groups and parties have been calling for this for decades. Credit goes to FG for sure, but it must be noted it took until 2018 because the can was kicked down the road for so long by FF/FG. It would be re-writing history to try sell it like Kenny came along and Leo got it over the line, like the whole movement started with Kenny. Of any prominent political party, I think Labour will be the ones to miss out on their dues in this regard.
Unlike the mess of the HSE, I can't see Leo claiming it was in motion when FG got here

It was put to the people decades ago and rejected????

FrancieBrady

Far as I can see the activists are getting the credit. The political power swap in this country didn't want to touch it until they had to.

Leo and Simon will be back trying to downplay the mess of the health system soon enough.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Far as I can see the activists are getting the credit. The political power swap in this country didn't want to touch it until they had to.

Leo and Simon will be back trying to downplay the mess of the health system soon enough.

RC is a tad upset at Leo claiming the quiet revolution won the day. https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/coppinger-berates-varadkar-over-quiet-revolution-claim-36956260.html
She believes that people actually listen to her endless roaring. Does she not know that empty vessels make most noise.

Chips Lovell

Deleted User wrote: »

She believes that people actually listen to her endless roaring. Does she not know that empty vessels make most noise.

He thanked her explicity in the Dail last week. He seems to think people listen to her at least:

I want to add to what I said earlier by acknowledging the role of smaller parties and indeed Independents in this campaign, whether it is the Green Party, the Social Democrats or others, as well as parties of the left. As regards my constituency colleague, Deputy Coppinger, I want to particularly recognise her early role in putting this matter on the political agenda and raising it in this House, perhaps at a time when many of us would have preferred not to deal with it. It is only right, now that this question is being put to the people, to acknowledge the early role of Deputy Coppinger, Deputy Clare Daly and others in that regard.

blanch152

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

He thanked her explicity in the Dail last week. He seems to think people listen to her at least:

And very clever of him to do so as it makes her belligerent attempts to claim credit look selfish. A magnanimous leader handing out plaudits to those who assisted him still looks like the leader who brought the prize home. Quite a contrast to the "it was all me" response by Coppinger.

Then again, the 5% to whom she appeals will lap it up.

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

And very clever of him to do so as it makes her belligerent attempts to claim credit look selfish. A magnanimous leader handing out plaudits to those who assisted him still looks like the leader who brought the prize home. Quite a contrast to the "it was all me" response by Coppinger.

Then again, the 5% to whom she appeals will lap it up.

Poor auld Ruth and co, Irish Water and it's dismal failure gets blamed on them and their supporters.

Yet when they're shouting for the same thing as the govt, ie repeal the 8th, they and their 5% support base are irrelevant.


Some folk like their bread buttered on both sides it seems.

Colonel Claptrap

The last few weeks in politics have convinced me that FF now position themselves further right than FG.

A lot of voters are crying out for a fiscally conservative, socially liberal party. FG are slowly turning into that party.

As long as there is no giveaway budget this year, I think I have made up my mind who I will vote for.

McMurphy

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

The last few weeks in politics have convinced me that FF now position themselves further right than FG.

A lot of voters are crying out for a fiscally conservative, socially liberal party. FG are slowly turning into that party.

As long as there is no giveaway budget this year, I think I have made up my mind who I will vote for.

On what basis?

Genuine question. The Last few weeks politics wise has generally been all about the referendum and the McCabe affair.

Colonel Claptrap

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

On what basis?

Genuine question. The Last few weeks politics wise has generally been all about the referendum and the McCabe affair.

The huge number of No voters, both within the parliamentary party and the voter base.

FF can't shake off the Catholic conservatism from its past. It doesn't seem to want to either.

charlie14

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

The last few weeks in politics have convinced me that FF now position themselves further right than FG.

A lot of voters are crying out for a fiscally conservative, socially liberal party. FG are slowly turning into that party.

As long as there is no giveaway budget this year, I think I have made up my mind who I will vote for.

Is that not perhaps where FG may be caught between two or more stools ?


The overwhelming demands for social liberalism in the area of SSM and abortion are not going to have any affect on state expenditure, whereas any future social liberal issue would most likely come at a fiscal cost.


There is also the problem that if FG should aim for that younger social liberal vote, then they could alienate many of their own conservative supporters.
Especially those that actually run the party on the ground where the majority backed Coveney during the leadership contest.


Much of this young social liberal vote reminds me of snow on a ditch.
SF have been chasing it for years. Looking good in polls until election day when it fades away.
Same as it did for FG and Labour in the last GE after the SSM referendum.

charlie14

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

The huge number of No voters, both within the parliamentary party and the voter base.

FF can't shake off the Catholic conservatism from its past. It doesn't seem to want to either.

I would not be so sure that is just confined to FF.

There were quite a few FG TD`s who refused to give their views prior to the recent referendum.

McMurphy

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

The huge number of No voters, both within the parliamentary party and the voter base.

FF can't shake off the Catholic conservatism from its past. It doesn't seem to want to either.

I wouldn't be judging people's views on abortion as being right or left wing tbh, it's too personal and controversial to pigeon hole anyone with.

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

Is that not perhaps where FG may be caught between two or more stools ?


The overwhelming demands for social liberalism in the area of SSM and abortion are not going to have any affect on state expenditure, whereas any future social liberal issue would most likely come at a fiscal cost.


There is also the problem that if FG should aim for that younger social liberal vote, then they could alienate many of their own conservative supporters.
Especially those that actually run the party on the ground where the majority backed Coveney during the leadership contest.


Much of this young social liberal vote reminds me of snow on a ditch.
SF have been chasing it for years. Looking good in polls until election day when it fades away.
Same as it did for FG and Labour in the last GE after the SSM referendum.

In some ways you are falling into the trap of old politics, of looking at substance over style.

Leo is the poster boy of that new generation. As they move on from causes to voting in elections, they will remember that. Not all of it is just style though, there is a large element of spotting the issue, riding the wave and taking the plaudits. Martin also saw this but hadn't the ability to bring his party with him. His other problem is that he is still tainted by the problems of the past.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

In some ways you are falling into the trap of old politics, of looking at substance over style.

Leo is the poster boy of that new generation. As they move on from causes to voting in elections, they will remember that. Not all of it is just style though, there is a large element of spotting the issue, riding the wave and taking the plaudits. Martin also saw this but hadn't the ability to bring his party with him. His other problem is that he is still tainted by the problems of the past.

I may well be, but when I look at the recent Brexit referendum, the U.S. presidential election plus now the situation in Italy, I know which I would vote for.

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

I may well be, but when I look at the recent Brexit referendum, the U.S. presidential election plus now the situation in Italy, I know which I would vote for.

The thing is, Leo et al, whether by accident or design, are within reach of touching both, creating substance with style.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

The thing is, Leo et al, whether by accident or design, are within reach of touching both, creating substance with style.

That is your opinion and you are entitled to it.


As I have said already, in considering the Brexit referendum , the U.S. presidential election and the present Italian situation, three examples of where style won out over substance I have no difficulty in knowing which my vote would favour..

storker

blanch152 wrote: »

And very clever of him to do so as it makes her belligerent attempts to claim credit look selfish. A magnanimous leader handing out plaudits to those who assisted him still looks like the leader who brought the prize home. Quite a contrast to the "it was all me" response by Coppinger.

Then again, the 5% to whom she appeals will lap it up.

If she'd been willing to go into government she could have been up there with him.



_

James Brown

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

It was put to the people decades ago and rejected????

The point is many have been pushing for it for a long time. The lion's share of the credit will go to Harris/Leo for sure, but this particular can has been kicked down the road for decades by FF/FG and people remember. In fact only in 2015 Labour were campaigning that FG get a move on with it and stop stalling. I don't believe it will cadge them many votes. Leo's cachet peaked months ago.

blanch152 wrote: »

In some ways you are falling into the trap of old politics, of looking at substance over style.

Leo is the poster boy of that new generation. As they move on from causes to voting in elections, they will remember that. Not all of it is just style though, there is a large element of spotting the issue, riding the wave and taking the plaudits. Martin also saw this but hadn't the ability to bring his party with him. His other problem is that he is still tainted by the problems of the past.

How many women will die on hospital trolleys waiting on an abortion I wonder?
Leo is the epitome of style over substance. Are we talking about the same Leo? He's everything wrong with modern politics. The 'cool' uncle at a teenage disco.

Leonard Hofstadter

charlie14 wrote: »

Is that not perhaps where FG may be caught between two or more stools ?


The overwhelming demands for social liberalism in the area of SSM and abortion are not going to have any affect on state expenditure, whereas any future social liberal issue would most likely come at a fiscal cost.


There is also the problem that if FG should aim for that younger social liberal vote, then they could alienate many of their own conservative supporters.
Especially those that actually run the party on the ground where the majority backed Coveney during the leadership contest.


Much of this young social liberal vote reminds me of snow on a ditch.
SF have been chasing it for years. Looking good in polls until election day when it fades away.
Same as it did for FG and Labour in the last GE after the SSM referendum.

75% of FG voters voted to repeal the 8th amendment according to the RTÉ exit poll - an ever so slightly higher figure than SF for example. A clear majority of FG's voters are already socially liberal. Fortunately in this country we don't have 'culture wars', we have a very consensus based system.

Also, if you take out the undecideds, FG is on either 34.4% or 36% (the numbers for the party support do not add up - if you add them up you get to 96.5, so 25.8/(100-25.9 for the DKs)=34.4, and 25.8/(sum of all parties = 71.6)=36), so I don't think they need to worry about not catering for the socially conservative base - especially when even more voters backed this referendum than the marriage equality referendum (and I would have thought this was a much more divisive issue - the marriage one was just about giving LGBT+ the same opportunities to get married that everyone else had, it wasn't taking anything away from anyone like this is in a sense) - the country is clearly heading in a more liberal direction anyway.

Very few Irish people vote on social issues (e.g. abortion, equal marriage) anyway so FG won't lose any votes by remaining socially liberal, in fact they would lose votes if they did the opposite. What they are doing by positioning themselves in this way is ensuring the party keeps renewing its voter base and remaining relevant and thus appealing to the next and subsequent generations. Obviously the change of leadership has brought about huge electoral dividends, coupled with their strong stance on Brexit.

FF looks like a blast from the past - they're male, pale and stale and frankly I can't see what they have to offer a younger voter that FG or the other parties don't offer - FG will cater for those who want lower taxation and good economic management, SF and the others on the left will tick the boxes for voters who want more spending and more social services. Younger voters will blame them for the crash and the emigration anyway so they have a lot of trust to rebuild with the younger voters - and that was before the recent referendum where we found that a majority (albeit a very, very slim one) of their voters wanted to retain the 8th amendment.

Even for the minority of socially conservative younger voters, FF will start positioning themselves as more liberal in order to try and get rid of the male, stale and pale image - you can be sure that the likes of Lisa Chambers and some of the other younger TDs will be brought out to the fore more often from now on in order to try look more modern and in tune with modern Ireland.

Red_Wake

charlie14 wrote: »

blanch152 wrote: »

The thing is, Leo et al, whether by accident or design, are within reach of touching both, creating substance with style.

That is your opinion and you are entitled to it.


As I have said already, in considering the Brexit referendum , the U.S. presidential election and the present Italian situation, three examples of where style won out over substance I have no difficulty in knowing which my vote would favour..

I doubt people consciously choose style over substance. It's more likely they mistake one for the other.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The point is many have been pushing for it for a long time. The lion's share of the credit will go to Harris/Leo for sure, but this particular can has been kicked down the road for decades by FF/FG and people remember. In fact only in 2015 Labour were campaigning that FG get a move on with it and stop stalling. I don't believe it will cadge them many votes. Leo's cachet peaked months ago.



How many women will die on hospital trolleys waiting on an abortion I wonder?
Leo is the epitome of style over substance. Are we talking about the same Leo? He's everything wrong with modern politics. The 'cool' uncle at a teenage disco.

You sound like Ruth Coppinger.

History doesn't always remember those who caused a change. Was Claudette Colvin the real Rosa Parks?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudette_Colvin

Who knows? If they had used Claudette Colvin, they mightn't have changed anything and Martin Luther King may not have become the touchstone.

In the same way, at this point it looks like Leo and Simon will end up with a lot of the credit - when it perhaps should be Katherine Zappone, as the woman who swallowed some of her principles and went into power to achieve change, while the likes of Ruth sat on the ditch and complained.

The opinion polls after the summer will be interesting.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

You sound like Ruth Coppinger.

History doesn't always remember those who caused a change. Was Claudette Colvin the real Rosa Parks?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudette_Colvin

Who knows? If they had used Claudette Colvin, they mightn't have changed anything and Martin Luther King may not have become the touchstone.

In the same way, at this point it looks like Leo and Simon will end up with a lot of the credit - when it perhaps should be Katherine Zappone, as the woman who swallowed some of her principles and went into power to achieve change, while the likes of Ruth sat on the ditch and complained.

The opinion polls after the summer will be interesting.

Style over substance, pointing out him patting himself on the back while health is in crisis.
Seriously, how does a critique of Leo result in slagging off Ruth Coppinger? I hope you warmed up before partaking in that session of political gymnastics.
Going into power with a Tory party with little regard for the low paid tax payer worked out great for Labour, not surprising politicians looking at the bigger picture avoided them. It's gas, we're both lambasting supposed one issue politicians on the one hand and commending others for selling out any principles or decency to chase one issue, (if that's your inference re Zappone).
Leo is going to do well out of it re kudos. True, the like of Zappone, Labour and many others did more to make this happen and over a long long period of time, than the bould Varadkar or Harris. But as you say it's perception and Leo is all about creating a front. I'd say Harris is being told to calm himself.

A decade earlier.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viola_Desmond

Red_Wake

blanch152 wrote: »

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The point is many have been pushing for it for a long time. The lion's share of the credit will go to Harris/Leo for sure, but this particular can has been kicked down the road for decades by FF/FG and people remember. In fact only in 2015 Labour were campaigning that FG get a move on with it and stop stalling. I don't believe it will cadge them many votes. Leo's cachet peaked months ago.



How many women will die on hospital trolleys waiting on an abortion I wonder?
Leo is the epitome of style over substance. Are we talking about the same Leo? He's everything wrong with modern politics. The 'cool' uncle at a teenage disco.

You sound like Ruth Coppinger.

History doesn't always remember those who caused a change. Was Claudette Colvin the real Rosa Parks?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudette_Colvin

Who knows? If they had used Claudette Colvin, they mightn't have changed anything and Martin Luther King may not have become the touchstone.

In the same way, at this point it looks like Leo and Simon will end up with a lot of the credit - when it perhaps should be Katherine Zappone, as the woman who swallowed some of her principles and went into power to achieve change, while the likes of Ruth sat on the ditch and complained.

The opinion polls after the summer will be interesting.

Iirc, wasn't one of Zappone's conditions for supporting the government that this referendum be held?

I'm not sure I agree with her priorities, but in her short time as a TD, she's contributed more to the Repeal movement than any other politician. I notice Coppinger et al don't mention her at all - her success would really show how self aggrandizing all their efforts have been over the years.

charlie14

captainspeed wrote: »

75% of FG voters voted to repeal the 8th amendment according to the RTÉ exit poll - an ever so slightly higher figure than SF for example. A clear majority of FG's voters are already socially liberal. Fortunately in this country we don't have 'culture wars', we have a very consensus based system.

Also, if you take out the undecideds, FG is on either 34.4% or 36% (the numbers for the party support do not add up - if you add them up you get to 96.5, so 25.8/(100-25.9 for the DKs)=34.4, and 25.8/(sum of all parties = 71.6)=36), so I don't think they need to worry about not catering for the socially conservative base - especially when even more voters backed this referendum than the marriage equality referendum (and I would have thought this was a much more divisive issue - the marriage one was just about giving LGBT+ the same opportunities to get married that everyone else had, it wasn't taking anything away from anyone like this is in a sense) - the country is clearly heading in a more liberal direction anyway.

Very few Irish people vote on social issues (e.g. abortion, equal marriage) anyway so FG won't lose any votes by remaining socially liberal, in fact they would lose votes if they did the opposite. What they are doing by positioning themselves in this way is ensuring the party keeps renewing its voter base and remaining relevant and thus appealing to the next and subsequent generations. Obviously the change of leadership has brought about huge electoral dividends, coupled with their strong stance on Brexit.

FF looks like a blast from the past - they're male, pale and stale and frankly I can't see what they have to offer a younger voter that FG or the other parties don't offer - FG will cater for those who want lower taxation and good economic management, SF and the others on the left will tick the boxes for voters who want more spending and more social services. Younger voters will blame them for the crash and the emigration anyway so they have a lot of trust to rebuild with the younger voters - and that was before the recent referendum where we found that a majority (albeit a very, very slim one) of their voters wanted to retain the 8th amendment.

Even for the minority of socially conservative younger voters, FF will start positioning themselves as more liberal in order to try and get rid of the male, stale and pale image - you can be sure that the likes of Lisa Chambers and some of the other younger TDs will be brought out to the fore more often from now on in order to try look more modern and in tune with modern Ireland.

The general rule in politics is hold what you have first before you go chasing any other grouping.
I have no doubt that all and sundry will go chasing the younger liberal vote, but from the SSM referendum the subsequent GE Labour, plus the polling figures of SF showing support from this demographic that never materialised, it would appear to be a very fickle vote.


As i said earlier, this recent referendum and the previous SSM was achieved with not future financial cost to the state.
To cater to this demographic in the future to attract their vote would not be without a financial cost which could have a knock on effect on taxes.


FG did get a boost from the December Brexit meeting, but that looks to have a ways to run and could yet negate those gains if it all goes pear shaped



People keep talking about how liberal FG now on the strenght of this referendum result, but there are reports of up to 50% of its TD`s refusing to say how they were prepared to vote on the issue.
Which is safe I imagine to say wasn`t yes.



One thing people seem to overlook is that the people who actually run the organization on the ground are basically older and conservative.
The are the people who do the heavy carrying in getting T.D`s elected, and are also the group that backed Coveney by a 2 to 1 majority over Varadkar in the leadership contest.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Style over substance, pointing out him patting himself on the back while health is in crisis.
Seriously, how does a critique of Leo result in slagging off Ruth Coppinger? I hope you warmed up before partaking in that session of political gymnastics.
Going into power with a Tory party with little regard for the low paid tax payer worked out great for Labour, not surprising politicians looking at the bigger picture avoided them. It's gas, we're both lambasting supposed one issue politicians on the one hand and commending others for selling out any principles or decency to chase one issue, (if that's your inference re Zappone).
Leo is going to do well out of it. True, the like of Zappone, Labour and many others did more to make this happen and over a long long period of time, than the bould Varadkar or Harris. But as you say it's perception and Leo is all about creating a front. I'd say Harris is being told to calm himself.

I think the point I am trying to make is that whether you think it is fair or not, the politician or leader that takes a minority cause and makes it a majority cause usually ends up with a whole lot of credit. Yes, they are doing it on the back of others' hard work, but if it wasn't for them, it would still be a minority cause, and perhaps they do deserve the credit.

charlie14

Red_Wake wrote: »

I doubt people consciously choose style over substance. It's more likely they mistake one for the other.

Indeed it may be.

Which would appear to be the case in the Brexit referendum, the U.S presidential election and the recent Italian GE.


Best to forget style and rhetoric and concentrate on substance imho.

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

The general rule in politics is hold what you have first before you go chasing any other grouping.
I have no doubt that all and sundry will go chasing the younger liberal vote, but from the SSM referendum the subsequent GE Labour, plus the polling figures of SF showing support from this demographic that never materialised, it would appear to be a very fickle vote.


As i said earlier, this recent referendum and the previous SSM was achieved with not future financial cost to the state.
To cater to this demographic in the future to attract their vote would not be without a financial cost which could have a knock on effect on taxes.


FG did get a boost from the December Brexit meeting, but that looks to have a ways to run and could yet negate those gains if it all goes pear shaped



People keep talking about how liberal FG now on the strenght of this referendum result, but there are reports of up to 50% of its TD`s refusing to say how they were prepared to vote on the issue.
Which is safe I imagine to say wasn`t yes.



One thing people seem to overlook is that the people who actually run the organization on the ground are basically older and conservative.
The are the people who do the heavy carrying in getting T.D`s elected, and are also the group that backed Coveney by a 2 to 1 majority over Varadkar in the leadership contest.

You are forgetting the intangible effects. Our society has been through a terrible decade, caused by the incompetence of the FF leadership of Lenihan and Cowen. Things are getting better slowly, there are cranes all over Dublin again, wages are up, employment is up, and now on social issues like abortion and SSM, people are feeling that we are creating a better society. Those are ideal conditions for a ruling party to do well in an election. All it will take to be certain of that is some breakthrough or even some coherent plan on housing or health.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

I think the point I am trying to make is that whether you think it is fair or not, the politician or leader that takes a minority cause and makes it a majority cause usually ends up with a whole lot of credit. Yes, they are doing it on the back of others' hard work, but if it wasn't for them, it would still be a minority cause, and perhaps they do deserve the credit.

They do deserve credit. Simply pointing out it didn't begin with Kenny. At the end of the day once the right thing is achieved that's the most important thing. Leo does like the image of being a progressive liberal doer, be nice if he followed through to the substance side. Riding a wave as it crests is a skill martin lacks.

charlie14 wrote: »

The general rule in politics is hold what you have first before you go chasing any other grouping.
I have no doubt that all and sundry will go chasing the younger liberal vote, but from the SSM referendum the subsequent GE Labour, plus the polling figures of SF showing support from this demographic that never materialised, it would appear to be a very fickle vote.


As i said earlier, this recent referendum and the previous SSM was achieved with not future financial cost to the state.
To cater to this demographic in the future to attract their vote would not be without a financial cost which could have a knock on effect on taxes.


FG did get a boost from the December Brexit meeting, but that looks to have a ways to run and could yet negate those gains if it all goes pear shaped



People keep talking about how liberal FG now on the strenght of this referendum result, but there are reports of up to 50% of its TD`s refusing to say how they were prepared to vote on the issue.
Which is safe I imagine to say wasn`t yes.



One thing people seem to overlook is that the people who actually run the organization on the ground are basically older and conservative.
The are the people who do the heavy carrying in getting T.D`s elected, and are also the group that backed Coveney by a 2 to 1 majority over Varadkar in the leadership contest.

Yes. The 'home to vote' movement shows the youth can be used, but generally for a cause. It's FF/FG have them abroad in the first place. I can't see economic immigrants coming home in droves to vote for a civil war party gave them reason to leave in the first place. Fine Gael are like the company using a female CEO to show they've tackled their sexual harassment issues. Leo buying all the fun socks in the world won't disguise FG for what they are, their track record shows that.
The thing about chasing the young vote is, they don't vote consistently and in great numbers, also unlike the civil war stalwarts, they would tend to be a floating vote over time IMO.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

You are forgetting the intangible effects. Our society has been through a terrible decade, caused by the incompetence of the FF leadership of Lenihan and Cowen. Things are getting better slowly, there are cranes all over Dublin again, wages are up, employment is up, and now on social issues like abortion and SSM, people are feeling that we are creating a better society. Those are ideal conditions for a ruling party to do well in an election. All it will take to be certain of that is some breakthrough or even some coherent plan on housing or health.

I would not be getting carried away over the Dublin sky being lined with cranes and wages and employment up. We have been here before.
There is no sign or even suggestion that there is any coherent plan let alone any, "breakthrough" as you term it, on the disaster that is the HSE or on housing.
Come the next GE these will be the issues, with the recent referendum result similar to the SSM having little or no impact imo.


I find it rather confusing that you, a supposedly avowed Green Party supporter, having castigated all and sundry in the past over populist politics, is now under the guise of style lauding FG for the same.
Any reason for that ?