So Michael D IS running again!

Loafing Oaf

martingriff wrote: »

So have them picked by the Seanad which is government majority or by the go government panel so again by the go government. Which will be fine unless is the government you do not like. Again how is it democratic

Well I suppose the underlying argument is that since the office is ceremonial it doesn't really amount to a hill of beans how it's chosen. The advantage of these other systems I'm half-heartedly suggesting is that they would spare us from enduring the current farce every seven years.

expectationlost

RobertKK wrote: »

Plus Higgins 5 years ago said he wants to visit President Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, so far he has failed to distance himself from his friend who runs death squads.
Right up until the race for the presidency started, and while Ortega was murdering his own people, our president had a picture of himself and ortega on president.ie as if it was something to be proud of, rather than Ortega being someone he should have been condemning.

on what page exactly? https://president.ie/en/the-president/michael-d-higgins this one? the image gallery higgins through the years? or here yep its gone https://www.president.ie/en/media-library/photos/michael-d.-higgins-through-the-years https://twitter.com/declanganley/status/1022493167755689985

https://goo.gl/images/zJWpi8

martingriff

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Well I suppose the underlying argument is that since the office is ceremonial it doesn't really amount to a hill of beans how it's chosen. The advantage of these other systems I'm half-heartedly suggesting is that they would spare us from enduring the current farce every seven years.

The president does have the power to send legislation to the supreme court before signing it or convening the council of president so a bit more then ceremonial. You be fine with them putting Aherne in

Zubeneschamali

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

spare us from enduring the current farce every seven years.

The system of voting for a president is not foisting this farce on us. Everyone knew MichaelD was going to win this regardless, and normally he would just be nodded through by the other parties without a contest, the way McAleese and Hillery were.

The difference is that this time, for the first time, SF have enough people in the Oireachteas to nominate a candidate and force an election on their own. So they are doing it just to show what a big feckin deal they are now.

The other clowns are just chasing the SF clown car, I don't blame them.

Loafing Oaf

martingriff wrote: »

The president does have the power to send legislation to the supreme court before signing it or convening the council of president so a bit more then ceremonial. You be fine with them putting Aherne in

My understanding is that these powers are very much exercised "on the advice of the government." But anyway if you were changing the system for selecting the president you could eliminate them in the process.

James Brown

Casey is doubling down. Making reference to Varadkar's Indian heritage like it's relevant to his own bigotry. The ignorant right wing MAGA style 'entitlement culture'. What an ass. He should apologise to the Irish people and drop out.

Sycamore Tree

RobertKK wrote: »

A lot of the country are indeed stupid, and will be afraid of change so will vote for Higgins again.

Ah will you stop, I reckon we are the thickest electorate in Europe. Voting in the same local issue crony gombeen TDs and then expecting a change or less government waste. Dreamers.

Still, great fun though.

Tell me how

RobertKK wrote:

A lot of the country are indeed stupid, and will be afraid of change so will vote for Higgins again.

Let me guess, everyone is stupid except those who will think and vote as you are going to.

Zubeneschamali

Sycamore Tree wrote: »

I reckon we are the thickest electorate in Europe.

Ah, you haven't heard about Brexit yet.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Casey is doubling down. Making reference to Varadkar's Indian heritage like it's relevant to his own bigotry. The ignorant right wing MAGA style 'entitlement culture'. What an ass. He should apologise to the Irish people and drop out.

Tell us what he should apologise for.

Explain clearly, using his words, and not an interpretation of his words.

Initially, I was very dubious about his remarks on the basis of the newspaper reports, but when I saw the actual remarks, while they may have been impolite or radical, I struggled to see what was discriminatory, criminal, unfair or untrue about them.

Could you analyse exactly what you see wrong with them, and why the Irish people deserve an apology?

Sycamore Tree

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Ah, you haven't heard about Brexit yet.

That will never happen!

Wait and see. The electorate got it wrong and it will be reversed or dumbed down.

No harm giving the EU a rebuff. They screwed us for billions on the private banking debt that is now on our national debt for the stupid Irish electorate to pay back.

Again only the Irish thickos would accept that one...not another Red cent anyone?

.

Tell me how

Matt Barrett wrote:

Casey is doubling down. Making reference to Varadkar's Indian heritage like it's relevant to his own bigotry. The ignorant right wing MAGA style 'entitlement culture'. What an ass. He should apologise to the Irish people and drop out.

blanch152 wrote:

Could you analyse exactly what you see wrong with them, and why the Irish people deserve an apology?

Think the suggestion that he should drop out is as ludicrous as those suggesting he should be voted for solely because of the same comments.

Both are ridiculous.

Rhineshark

blanch152 wrote: »

Tell us what he should apologise for.

Explain clearly, using his words, and not an interpretation of his words.

Initially, I was very dubious about his remarks on the basis of the newspaper reports, but when I saw the actual remarks, while they may have been impolite or radical, I struggled to see what was discriminatory, criminal, unfair or untrue about them.

Could you analyse exactly what you see wrong with them, and why the Irish people deserve an apology?

If you have found the full remarks in context, could you please post the link?

It is very difficult to find a direct quote that doesn't skip the middle and exactly how he got from telling the Taoiseach to "shut [his] trap" to "being a member of an ethnic community himself" and "being Indian".

James Brown

Tell me how wrote: »

Think the suggestion that he should drop out is as ludicrous as those suggesting he should be voted for solely because of the same comments.

Both are ridiculous.

Divisive right wing blather to garner votes.
I want him to drop out. For decency he should drop out. That's my opinion. I do not want him representing Ireland. That cool?

What's ridiculous? Having an opinion you choose to pooh pooh?
Do you like him as President or not? Who do you like?

An Ciarraioch

blanch152 wrote: »

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Casey is doubling down. Making reference to Varadkar's Indian heritage like it's relevant to his own bigotry. The ignorant right wing MAGA style 'entitlement culture'. What an ass. He should apologise to the Irish people and drop out.

Tell us what he should apologise for.

Explain clearly, using his words, and not an interpretation of his words.

Initially, I was very dubious about his remarks on the basis of the newspaper reports, but when I saw the actual remarks, while they may have been impolite or radical, I struggled to see what was discriminatory, criminal, unfair or untrue about them.

Could you analyse exactly what you see wrong with them, and why the Irish people deserve an apology?

For one thing, they directly contradict the genuine (if slightly hamfisted) point he was making in relation to Travellers - as we've learnt across Europe, the best way to accommodate different communities is to fully integrate them into society, so Varadkar symbolises an expansion of how Irishness is defined, rather than pigeonholing him into an "ethnic" bracket.

MrMusician18

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The system of voting for a president is not foisting this farce on us. Everyone knew MichaelDwas going to win this regardless, and normally he would just be nodded through by the other parties without a contest, the way McAleese and Hillery were.

The difference is that this time, for the first time, SF have enough people in the Oireachteas to nominate a candidate and force an election on their own. So they are doing it just to show what a big feckin deal they are now.

The other clowns are just chasing the SF clown car, I don't blame them.

Didn't know the election had happened.

Zubeneschamali

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Didn't know the election had happened.

I mean everyone knew MichaelD would win any election at a walk before SF announced they would force an election.

Tell me how

Matt Barrett wrote:

Divisive right wing blather to garner votes. I want him to drop out. For decency he should drop out. That's my opinion. I do not want him representing Ireland. That cool?

You need to listen to the voices that are saying he makes sense.
Whether you agree with his comments or not, if x% of the people relate to those comments, you need to recognize it as at least a partial societal view.

Can't just ignore and keep your head in an echo chamber of views you agree with.

James Brown

Tell me how wrote: »

You need to listen to the voices that are saying he makes sense.
Whether you agree with his comments or not, if x% of the people relate to those comments, you need to recognize it as at least a partial societal view.

Can't just ignore and keep your head in an echo chamber of views you agree with.

I deem him unfit for office. I don't like his style. I do not like his comments.
That's how people come to a conclusion and post their opinion in a forum discussing such things.
What are you on about with your 'echo chamber' remark? To be fair I can't tell what your opinion is on the man, but their are plenty on here who disagree. What 'echo chamber' are you on about exactly? Who do you like for President, what do you think of Casey? I hear people who agree with him and like his lie. I disagree, go figure right?

Zubeneschamali

Tell me how wrote: »

You need to listen to the voices that are saying he makes sense.

We understand why people agree with Casey - they are bad people.

It is bad to try to garner popularity with bad people by normalizing their bad views. Casey is doing a bad thing, whether he himself believes what he says or is just cynically using it.

Eric Cartman

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

We understand why people agree with Casey - they are bad people.

It is bad to try to garner popularity with bad people by normalizing their bad views. Casey is doing a bad thing, whether he himself believes what he says or is just cynically using it.

But Casey is against the travellers, not for them ?

martingriff

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Divisive right wing blather to garner votes.
I want him to drop out. For decency he should drop out. That's my opinion. I do not want him representing Ireland. That cool?

What's ridiculous? Having an opinion you choose to pooh pooh?
Do you like him as President or not? Who do you like?

I was not voting for Casey before or after his comments. I agree with his comments and there needs to be a full debate.

I have lived for 4 years with parking illegal beside my estate. They tore down wire fencing to get into our area dedicated in our bin area. If you tried to go anywhere near the area you were threatened they had dogs and horses around racing cars up and down the area. They have now left and hopefully now in piece. Are there good travellers of course but they are not the people traveller groups are fighting for.

Before you say only 1 area I have seen the same in other areas

James Brown

martingriff wrote: »

I was not voting for Casey before or after his comments. I agree with his comments and there needs to be a full debate.

I have lived for 4 years with parking illegal beside my estate. They tore down wire fencing to get into our area dedicated in our bin area. If you tried to go anywhere near the area you were threatened they had dogs and horses around racing cars up and down the area. They have now left and hopefully now in piece. Are there good travellers of course but they are not the people traveller groups are fighting for.

Before you say only 1 area I have seen the same in other areas

So have I. I'm not getting into a 'you should hate travelers because' debate. The President represents Travelers too.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

But Casey is against the travellers, not for them ?

I thought he wanted them to receive equal treatment? I know FG/FF are bad, but that's not being 'against them' is it?

He lied about the travelers in Tipp. He used it in association with the housing crisis.
It basically says to the ill informed, that if they are struggling with rents or unable to buy a home, look at these travelers who are 'blackmailing the council' leaving homes idle.

It's turning one section of society against another to try cadge a few votes, exactly like what Varadkar did regarding welfare and 'getting up early'. Casey picked on a minority with ethic status so of course Leo is seen to condemn it. Neither are right. It's sub-par behaviour.

The President is everybodys President. Travelers, the poor, Michael Noonan and Michael Lowry equally.

MrMusician18

Matt Barrett wrote: »

So have I. I'm not getting into a 'you should hate travelers because' debate. The President represents Travelers too.



I thought he wanted them to receive equal treatment? I know FG/FF are bad, but that's not being 'against them' is it?

He lied about the travelers in Tipp. He used it in association with the housing crisis.
It basically says to the ill informed, that if they are struggling with rents or unable to buy a home, look at these travelers who are 'blackmailing the council' leaving homes idle.

It's turning one section of society against another to try cadge a few votes, exactly like what Varadkar did regarding welfare and 'getting up early'. Casey picked on a minority with ethic status so of course Leo is seen to condemn it. Neither are right. It's sub-par behaviour.

Did he lie? I thought it was acknowledged by all that they want the council to provide them with horse accommodation? Otherwise they won't move in.

blanch152

Rhineshark wrote: »

If you have found the full remarks in context, could you please post the link?

It is very difficult to find a direct quote that doesn't skip the middle and exactly how he got from telling the Taoiseach to "shut [his] trap" to "being a member of an ethnic community himself" and "being Indian".

Here is his article from the Sunday Indpendent:

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/presidential-election-2018/dont-quit-amazing-support-has-helped-me-to-stay-in-race-37441896.html


I don't expect everyone to agree with his views, but I struggle to find anything in his words that he needs to apologise for. Fair enough that you don't want to vote for him, but why are some posters going off on some stupid notion that he should apologise for what he said?

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/presidential-election-2018/casey-sparks-outrage-with-his-racist-remarks-on-travellers-37429086.html

Again, his views in this second article could be considered extreme, rude or even a little crude, but where in anything he has said, was it criminal, discriminatory, unfair or untrue?

I am struggling to find it.

I don't fully agree with him, I think his way of approaching issues is too outspoken and controversial, but he is entitled to his views and entitled to put them forward. Those on here who are calling for him to apologise to the Irish people are full of bluster and hyperbole and nonsense.

Tell me how

Matt Barrett wrote:

I deem him unfit for office. I don't like his style. I do not like his comments. That's how people come to a conclusion and post their opinion in a forum discussing such things. What are you on about with your 'echo chamber' remark? To be fair I can't tell what your opinion is on the man, but their are plenty on here who disagree. What 'echo chamber' are you on about exactly? Who do you like for President, what do you think of Casey? I hear people who agree with him and like his lie. I disagree, go figure right?

I'll be voting for the incumbent. He is the best, by a long way of all candidates.

There's nothing about Casey that is presidential. His comments are of the dog whistle variety in my view given the race he is in.

But, he's entitled to a view, and others are entitled to challenge and defend it.

I mention echo chamber because you seem very cut and dried in any discussion relating to him and uninterested in hearing alternative views.

James Brown

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Did he lie? I thought it was acknowledged by all that they want the council to provide them with horse accommodation? Otherwise they won't move in.

He said they were blackmailing the council demanding stables be built. They were actually seeking permission to graze their horses.
That aside more importantly he brought that into a discussion on the housing crisis. Like Travelers set policy or have a big bearing on the problem of the housing crisis. A typical FG tact, except he happened to pick on a minority group.
I still believe he couldn't care less about travelers. I'd say it was a story he had in his head and he twisted it and used it on the fly.

seamus

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Did he lie? I thought it was acknowledged by all that they want the council to provide them with horse accommodation? Otherwise they won't move in.

It's more complicated that than, there were agreements previously made about having grazing land and such made available for horses. Whereas Casey repeated the tabloid claims that they were making new demands for stables.

Whatever your feelings about it - personally I think they should have the horses seized and be told to go f*ck themselves - Casey badly misrepresented the situation for his own gain.

James Brown

Tell me how wrote: »

I'll be voting for the incumbent. He is the best, by a long way of all candidates.

There's nothing about Casey that is presidential. His comments are of the dog whistle variety in my view given the race he is in.

But, he's entitled to a view, and others are entitled to challenge and defend it.

I mention echo chamber because you seem very cut and dried in any discussion relating to him and uninterested in hearing alternative views.

He's entitled to a view and I don't like it and am of the opinion he should drop out.
Well that would be wrong. Disagreeing requires a degree of interest.
I disagree and do not like him for the office. Any problem you have with my having an opinion and you calling it into question seems like odd behaviour to me.

Rhineshark

seamus wrote: »

It's more complicated that than, there were agreements previously made about having grazing land and such made available for horses. Whereas Casey repeated the tabloid claims that they were making new demands for stables.

Whatever your feelings about it - personally I think they should have the horses seized and be told to go f*ck themselves - Casey badly misrepresented the situation for his own gain.

So...despite that you know Casey misrepresented it, that there was an agreement understood (or misunderstood), that horses blatantly need grazing land and tat the stables thig was a red herring (they built their own stables on the land they were living on for the past 40 years) you want their horses seized and them to be told to go f*ck themselves...just on general principles?

Why?