So Michael D IS running again!

alaimacerc

Pussyhands wrote: »

Just wondering why are party politics prevalent in presidential elections. Gallagher is clearly getting the Fianna Fail vote for the most part. But it's not like he can dictate policy or change anything so why is it political at all?

Often FF and FG are barely different in party-policy terms anyway, so you can see why the "vote for someone from our Gene Pool" instinct is strong. You could accuse Gallagher of many things -- like "is a terrible candidate and would be an shocking embarrassment as a president" -- but he's not doing anything overtly partisan, or really saying anything policy-ish. Duffy might have similarly been the Blueshirt than Dares not Speak That Name, but it's not working out very well for him that way.

Obviously Higgins is a retread politician, and he's been a little bit plausibly-deniably political in office, so we assume we'd be getting more of the same with him, whether or not he says anything on that in the campaign. Ni Riada's been the only one to do this overly. Understandably, as she's the only party nominee, and given her poll numbers would be doing well just to get the SF core vote to turn out for her. If she was swanning along serenely in 1st or 2nd place in the polls, somewhere north of 15-20%, I imagine she'd be less assertive on that, and more ostentatiously above such things.

alaimacerc

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Even though they specifically say that they were against the idea of a 'coronation'?

Haven't they all said that at this stage? It was Craughwell's whole shtick. TBF, it's almost the only thing you can say, given the nature of the role.

Incumbent: "Don't I seem very presidential? What with me being the actual president, and all?"
Challengers: "Stop a coronation! Time for a change!"

Anything else you say, it risks sounding even more vacuous on the one hand, or "wait a sec, that's not the president's role!" on the other.

alaimacerc

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Duffy getting huffy on Morning Ireland when he interpreted a question as implying he was a philistine. Absolutely no need for the petulant answer. Comes across as completely self absorbed and ego driven.

Huffy Duffy. That one might has a ring to it, and might stick.

Though actually he seems mostly fairly affable. He's had some very poor interviews of late, mind.

Sam Russell

alaimacerc wrote: »

Huffy Duffy. That one might has a ring to it, and might stick.

Though actually he seems mostly fairly affable. He's had some very poor interviews of late, mind.

A few car crashes, I think.

alaimacerc

blanch152 wrote: »

The general public don't see it that way. They see one popular incumbent, one party candidate, and four council candidates.

You didn't go quite so far as to say they regarded the "independent" candidates as "independent", I notice!

I think it's possible there are some people out there that are thinking "Micky D is an evil little Leninist collectivist, I'll vote for the FF-proxy candidate/the obligatory social conservative candidate/etc." The "general" public doesn't necessarily have a single "general" view.

alaimacerc

marieholmfan wrote: »

How is Freeman not even superficially appealing? Surely she is very superficially appealing.

OK, there's "does a lot of work for charidee", and (with the exception of when she's asked anything meaningful about the role she's running for), can manage to get from one end of a sentence to the other. Her support level seems more explicable than Gallagher's. (Even were there not much less to explain.)

Cork Boy 53

Apparently Gallagher delivered a letter to the Aras last night, the content of which criticized Michael D for not agreeing to show up for the Claire Byrne Show TV debate tonight. I wonder was this letter in an envelope, brown or otherwise?

alaimacerc

Sam Russell wrote: »

A few car crashes, I think.

Get him into a neck brace and the head injury protocol for say a week, perhaps?

blanch152

alaimacerc wrote: »

You didn't go quite so far as to say they regarded the "independent" candidates as "independent", I notice!

I think it's possible there are some people out there that are thinking "Micky D is an evil little Leninist collectivist, I'll vote for the FF-proxy candidate/the obligatory social conservative candidate/etc." The "general" public doesn't necessarily have a single "general" view.

What I mean by that is that the view on here of Gallagher as a FF bagman or Duffy as a FG-lite candidate isn't universally known or accepted. Even Higgins' Labour history is forgotten by many in the general public.

alaimacerc

blanch152 wrote: »

What I mean by that is that the view on here of Gallagher as a FF bagman or Duffy as a FG-lite candidate isn't universally known or accepted. Even Higgins' Labour history is forgotten by many in the general public.

Sure, there will be many people who'll think "Micky D, good enough, why're we even having an election?" Come to that, there will be plenty in the headspace of "we're having an election? I might have other things on." The latter might indeed be somewhat inflating MDH's poll numbers.

Cork Boy 53

blanch152 wrote: »

What I mean by that is that the view on here of Gallagher as a FF bagman or Duffy as a FG-lite candidate isn't universally known or accepted. Even Higgins' Labour history is forgotten by many in the general public.

You think people are not aware of Michael D`s Labour background? I very much doubt people are that naive/forgetful.

alaimacerc

Cork Boy 53 wrote: »

Apparently Gallagher delivered a letter to the Aras last night, the content of which criticized Michael D for not agreeing to show up for the Claire Byrne Show TV debate tonight. I wonder was this letter in an envelope, brown or otherwise?

Some of the text of the letter on the News at One now. Sounds like very overwrought and "notions of himself" stuff.

marieholmfan

alaimacerc wrote: »

OK, there's "does a lot of work for charidee", and (with the exception of when she's asked anything meaningful about the role she's running for), can manage to get from one end of a sentence to the other. Her support level seems more explicable than Gallagher's. (Even were there not much less to explain.)

Imagine an tUachatarán Ó Dubhthaigh or an tUachatarán Ó Gallchobhoir being called in front of a Tribunal of Inquiry.

seamus

alaimacerc wrote: »

Some of the text of the letter on the News at One now. Sounds like very overwrought and "notions of himself" stuff.

This is pathetic stuff. He's attempting to drag the discussion down to mudslinging. And having painted himself into a corner with his "If Michael D isn't there, I won't be" assertion, now he's trying to goad Michael D into a public war of words.

The media love it of course. They're doing their level best to stir a pot here. The lack of scandal and mis-steps from Michael D is driving them crazy.

alaimacerc

seamus wrote: »

This is pathetic stuff. He's attempting to drag the discussion down to mudslinging. And having painted himself into a corner with his "If Michael D isn't there, I won't be" assertion, now he's trying to goad Michael D into a public war of words.

The media love it of course. They're doing their level best to stir a pot here. The lack of scandal and mis-steps from Michael D is driving them crazy.

"Oh, I'm sorry. I was terribly busy. Y'know, being president." *drops mic*

eastwest

Cork Boy 53 wrote: »

Apparently Gallagher delivered a letter to the Aras last night, the content of which criticized Michael D for not agreeing to show up for the Claire Byrne Show TV debate tonight. I wonder was this letter in an envelope, brown or otherwise?

'Drama queen wants to be president'?
What did he hope to achieve by a stunt like that?
Is this the same Sean Gallagher who wanted to turn the Aras into a coffee shop last time around? Bit of an eejit, I'd say.

Adamcp898

........I believe it is incumbent on every candidate to engage in all debates.

- Sean Gallagher on why Sean Gallagher doesn't take part in debates that Sean Gallagher doesn't want to :pac:

link

alaimacerc

On reflection, odd there's no TG4 debate this time. We've double the number of fluent speakers in this election as the last one!

FrancieBrady

Seanie Gallagher, straight into No. 1 as embarrassment of the non race.

marieholmfan

If Gallagher isn't there who cares. If Michael D isn't there people say 'he's busy'.

chrisk123

I read up on the power of the position, more than I previously thought.

I always thought it was ceremonial thing, greeting foreign dignitaries etc.

What has MDH done in his time? … I am genuinely asking, not lived in in Ireland for many year… curious.

James Brown

Water John wrote: »

SF would have seen it as an open space to slot into, without FG and FF canvassing. Politically made good sense. They should be disappointed if they weren't able to capture some of that space.

I don't know how many people truly put that kind of political worth into the Presidency. It would be a PR coup if SF did well as regards profile but it's not an election proper. There will be them trying to make something out of nothing so when she loses it'll be a dig at SF, sure why not.

On a lighter note I see Gallagher kicking up because Higgins won't attend a debate he said two weeks ago he wasn't attending. Another example why Gallagher is not fit for the office. Higgins' team say he's spliting his time between the election and his job. Which seems fair enough to me.
Nice article in the Irish Times today about spoofers and how poor the quality of candidate is.

Loafing Oaf

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Nice article in the Irish Times today about spoofers and how poor the quality of candidate is.

Thought the headline "Presidential election a new low for politics" was a bit OTT...

alaimacerc

chrisk123 wrote: »

I read up on the power of the position, more than I previously thought.

I always thought it was ceremonial thing, greeting foreign dignitaries etc.

It is. There's basically four powers, but they're generally very routine in their exercise, or aren't normally exercised at all.

Whether they're used depends less on the president, and more on the circumstances. Like if the Dáil passes a bill of highly questionable constitutionality (and even there it's just to pass it to the supreme court, which anyone could do, albeit by more laborious and expensive means). Or if there's a contested dissolution of the Dáil, which again only happens if the elected reps cause it to.

What has MDH done in his time? … I am genuinely asking, not lived in in Ireland for many year… curious.

The usual stuff. Glad-handing, eloquence, being ever-so-slightly political on occasion but getting away with it. No dissolutions refused -- as no irregular ones requested -- and no bills referred to the SC. The only one that was even mooted that I recall was the POLDPA (the X-Case/Halappanavar abortion legislation).

alaimacerc

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Seanie Gallagher, straight into No. 1 as embarrassment of the non race.

Holding at #1, in my view. Which is saying something, with Casey to compete with.

Beechwoodspark

alaimacerc wrote: »

Some of the text of the letter on the News at One now. Sounds like very overwrought and "notions of himself" stuff.

Like his rubbishy RTÉ pitch so?

alaimacerc

Sean meats Sean -- Gallagher is doing the "silly questions" segment on the Moncrieff show, up after the ads. Might be more his speed than these Hard Sums about the constitution, debates, fitness for office, etc.

alaimacerc

"Pass. Ask me an easier one."

"I don't do regrets."

Half a dozen second-favourite counties of Ireland.

Non-commital, much?

Had a very thought-through answer on horse-sized ducks vs duck-sized horses, though. Wrong, but definitely thought-through!

Loafing Oaf

alaimacerc wrote: »

Had a very thought-through answer on horse-sized ducks vs duck-sized horses, though. Wrong, but definitely thought-through!

So the mystery of what he's been up to for the last seven years is a mystery no longer.

Zubeneschamali

I got a Joan Freeman flyer in the door, and her slogan is, wait for it...

Better Together.

Yes, the very name used by the No side in the Scottish Indyref.