So Michael D IS running again!

makeorbrake

batgoat wrote: »

There we go, justifying anything she says..

Eh, no. I've asked you to justify what YOU'VE said.

blackwhite

makeorbrake wrote: »

Twist words much? I said that anyone who doesn't want to tackle corruption, coverup, lack of accountability and transparency in Ireland is part of the problem.



What are these 'conspiracies' and what has she 'dreamed up'?

Her twitter is a stream of conspiracy theory nonsense. It’s been posted reappeared on this, and on the GOD thread in AH - but her disciples just ignore it each time.
The McCann stuff and the anti-vaxx rubbish being prime examples of her wandering off down the crazy path - and that’s before you get to her trying to equate trans-people with paedophiles

gandalf

At this stage I am looking at the so called prospective candidates for President and none of them are fit for purpose. We have Ganley who is tainted in the extreme, Duffy who is a self promotion whore, Sharkey who is "out there" to say the least and O'Doherty who on many levels is not fit to be president.

I don't particularly like Michael D, I didn't vote for him last time but I concede that he has executed his tenure as President well and has represented us on the international stage with exemplary grace. If that crowd above are the ones we have to run against him then the contest shouldn't be run and the cost should be saved. All I see are with those four prospects is ego and madness!

blanch152

makeorbrake wrote: »

Well, what's the worst that can happen? ....which is that it is another 'lovely girls' competition.

It could set the stage as a statement by the people of Ireland that they won't put up with the cronyism, corruption, lack of accountability and transparency that we've currently got. These things have to start somewhere. Furthermore, that conversation is being stymied by a DOB/RTE media. So lets start here.

This sort of lazy analysis really bugs me. Wherever you have people, you have cronyism and corruption. How bad is Ireland?

https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2017

According to this international organisation, we are the 19th least corrupt country in the world, which means there are 161 countries worse than Ireland. Obviously, any corruption is bad, but any criminality is bad, and in the same way that you cannot eliminate crime, you cannot eliminate cronyism or corruption.

We have systems that deal with ethics, have a read of the SIPO website:

https://www.sipo.ie/en/


Rather than ranting and raving about particular perceived problems, it would be much more productive if people would look at other countries and their systems and explain what changes they would like to see.

Oh, and introducing DOB into every second sentence is just pure laziness.

blanch152

gandalf wrote: »

At this stage I am looking at the so called prospective candidates for President and none of them are fit for purpose. We have Ganley who is tainted in the extreme, Duffy who is a self promotion whore, Sharkey who is "out there" to say the least and O'Doherty who on many levels is not fit to be president.

I don't particularly like Michael D, I didn't vote for him last time but I concede that he has executed his tenure as President well and has represented us on the international stage with exemplary grace. If that crowd above are the ones we have to run against him then the contest shouldn't be run and the cost should be saved. All I see are with those four prospects is ego and madness!

Don't forget the SF anti-vaxxer, you could always give her a vote.

Loafing Oaf

blackwhite wrote: »

Her twitter is a stream of conspiracy theory nonsense. It’s been posted reappeared on this, and on the GOD thread in AH - but her disciples just ignore it each time.
The McCann stuff and the anti-vaxx rubbish being prime examples of her wandering off down the crazy path - and that’s before you get to her trying to equate trans-people with paedophiles

If we want to elect a tinfoil hat president, let's go full retard and enlist Jim Corr...

makeorbrake

@blanch152 : I simply don't agree. Have you any experience of your judicial system and the legal professions in Ireland. What of AGS? We'll take that as a starting point.

makeorbrake

blanch152 wrote: »

Don't forget the SF anti-vaxxer, you could always give her a vote.

Now this isn't lazy - it's just nasty misinformation. Showing your true colours. There is no truth to the 'anti-vax assertion. It's called not simply accepting the HSE - but challenging them...and their record is far from a good one.

makeorbrake

gandalf wrote: »

At this stage I am looking at the so called prospective candidates for President and none of them are fit for purpose. We have Ganley who is tainted in the extreme, Duffy who is a self promotion whore, Sharkey who is "out there" to say the least and O'Doherty who on many levels is not fit to be president.

I don't particularly like Michael D, I didn't vote for him last time but I concede that he has executed his tenure as President well and has represented us on the international stage with exemplary grace. If that crowd above are the ones we have to run against him then the contest shouldn't be run and the cost should be saved. All I see are with those four prospects is ego and madness!

You want a puppet for president as you have this notion that this is what they do in the role? If that's all the job is going to be, in no way should the country suffer the expense of an election. You might as well have a competition on the back of a corn flakes box...or one of these reality TV deals..

blackwhite

gandalf wrote: »

At this stage I am looking at the so called prospective candidates for President and none of them are fit for purpose. We have Ganley who is tainted in the extreme, Duffy who is a self promotion whore, Sharkey who is "out there" to say the least and O'Doherty who on many levels is not fit to be president.

I don't particularly like Michael D, I didn't vote for him last time but I concede that he has executed his tenure as President well and has represented us on the international stage with exemplary grace. If that crowd above are the ones we have to run against him then the contest shouldn't be run and the cost should be saved. All I see are with those four prospects is ego and madness!

Agreed. Michael D looks like the best of a bad bunch at the minute. It's a pity that none of FG, FF, Greens or SDs had anyone to put forward, as at the very least it would have likely spared us from a good few of the "independent" candidates that have appears to take advantage of the extra publicity that the sparse field offers.

Whilst SF have committed to running a candidate, the delays in actually putting someone forward suggest that they aren't really that serious about trying to win and just want the opportunity to have some SF posters on lamp-posts for a few weeks when no other party will be campaigning

AGC

gandalf wrote: »

At this stage I am looking at the so called prospective candidates for President and none of them are fit for purpose. We have Ganley who is tainted in the extreme, Duffy who is a self promotion whore, Sharkey who is "out there" to say the least and O'Doherty who on many levels is not fit to be president.

I don't particularly like Michael D, I didn't vote for him last time but I concede that he has executed his tenure as President well and has represented us on the international stage with exemplary grace. If that crowd above are the ones we have to run against him then the contest shouldn't be run and the cost should be saved. All I see are with those four prospects is ego and madness!

100%

batgoat

makeorbrake wrote: »

Now this isn't lazy - it's just nasty misinformation. Showing your true colours. There is no truth to the 'anti-vax assertion. It's called not simply accepting the HSE - but challenging them...and their record is far from a good one.

There is plenty of proof, she's been pushing against the vaccine for the last year... We have plenty of proof of the efficacy of the hpv vaccine. Meanwhile those opposed have been relying on conspiracies..

gandalf

makeorbrake wrote: »

You want a puppet for president as you have this notion that this is what they do in the role? If that's all the job is going to be, in no way should the country suffer the expense of an election. You might as well have a competition on the back of a corn flakes box...or one of these reality TV deals..

FFS the President here is effectively a ceremonial position, they are nearly a puppet. Think of them as a Diplomatic Bord Failte.

If any of the nutters or egomaniacs want to "fix" Ireland they need to run for the Dail!!!!

blackwhite

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

If we want to elect a tinfoil hat president, let's go full retard and enlist Jim Corr...

Has Jim not been out to endorse Gemma O'D already? He's been a fully-fledged member of the fanclub in the past

https://twitter.com/Jimcorrsays/status/955063158506512385

gandalf

blanch152 wrote: »

Don't forget the SF anti-vaxxer, you could always give her a vote.

SF haven't named a candidate yet. I think you're referring to Gemmo O'Doherty who isn't affiliated AFAIK (well maybe to the Iona Institute via family connections!).

Loafing Oaf

gandalf wrote: »

SF haven't named a candidate yet. I think you're referring to Gemmo O'Doherty who isn't affiliated AFAIK (well maybe to the Iona Institute via family connections!).

Potential SF candidate Liadh Ni Riada apparently has 'issues' with the MMR vaccine...

gandalf

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Potential SF candidate Liadh Ni Riada apparently has 'issues' with the MMR vaccine...

Great another bloody quack supporter! Where are all these loons coming from?

Hotblack Desiato

blackwhite wrote: »

I prefer to judge people on their own actions (like for example, co-sponsoring legislation that flies in the face of what Iona are trying to promote) - and not on the actions of their brothers or sisters, or nieces or nephews.

Well (if she gets nominated -and I don't think starting a charity is a basis for political office) we'll have plenty of opportunity to find out exactly what her opinions are. I'm not expecting too many surprises, though.

It's a worrying trend how certain posters on here, and elements of Irish political discourse in general, seems to see character assassination by proxy as a legitimate way of trying to silence anyone who doesn't 100% agree with them.

She's playing dumb so far on the catholic conservative angle, which is (imho) disingenuous.

I'd expect any fair-minded person to judge Freeman (and all of the other candidates) on her own actions - not on the actions of other people.

If she wants to denounce the Iona "instutute", who are a pretty nasty bunch let's not forget, she can come right out and say so anytime she wants.

If I was running for office and had two close family members in say the National Front or Communist Party, I could expect to be asked about that...

To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, to have one close relative as a top level member of a far-right wingnut group is unfortunate, to have two looks like carelessness

I can only the imagine the hysteria of you and some others on here if a post such as this was made with crass generalisations about any other religious grouping (or ethnic grouping).

No need whatsoever for you to bring ethnicity into it.

It's not the religion which is the problem, it's the political movement associated with the extremist elements of that religion.

Water John

As a Munster resident, haven't never heard a whisper on anything from Liadh. Saw her once, in the local shop. Talk about riding a well known surname.

VinLieger

Water John wrote: »

As a Munster resident, haven't never heard a whisper on anything from Liadh. Saw her once, in the local shop. Talk about riding a well known surname.

There was a bit of a media frenzy about her when SF announced they were putting forward a candidate. Most are guessing its between her and O Cuiv

James Brown

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

He’s been pretty average/poor and loads of ppl can’t stand him.

But thankfully he’s being forced to campaign against his will and the people can hold him to account.

Fair enough. I honestly don't get it. I've seen less interest in a general election off some.

L1011

VinLieger wrote: »

There was a bit of a media frenzy about her when SF announced they were putting forward a candidate. Most are guessing its between her and O Cuiv

SF won't put forward O'Cuiv even if he swapped parties. 8th ref has ensured that.

He'd have to leave FF to run anyway though

VinLieger

L1011 wrote: »

SF won't put forward O'Cuiv even if he swapped parties. 8th ref has ensured that.

He'd have to leave FF to run anyway though

Doh got confused, i cant remember but there was someone else along with Liadh that was being touted for SF as a front runner

Loafing Oaf

VinLieger wrote: »

Doh got confused, i cant remember but there was someone else along with Liadh that was being touted for SF as a front runner

John Finucane, son of murdered solicitor Pat. Bit odd as his brother Michael would seem to have a higher profile...

Water John

SF see a political space, with FF and FG not actively campaigning and postering. We''ll have Mary Lou's mug up on every lamppost.

gandalf

Water John wrote: »

SF see a political space, with FF and FG not actively campaigning and postering. We''ll have Mary Lou's mug up on every lamppost.

Yes but they also see an imminent general election. I mean we really are only 30 days away from one at any time if Leo and Micky have a falling out.

If SF spend a rake on the Presidential Election then they may compromise the funds for their GE campaign.

Water John

I don't think, funds were ever a SF problem.

blackwhite

gandalf wrote: »

Yes but they also see an imminent general election. I mean we really are only 30 days away from one at any time if Leo and Micky have a falling out.

If SF spend a rake on the Presidential Election then they may compromise the funds for their GE campaign.

They’ll do it like the Referendum posters. Lots space for Mary Lou and the SF logo, not as much for the issue on hand. Let’s them re-use again, but get posters out there when other parties don’t.

Cynical tactic, but quite smart all the same

James Brown

blackwhite wrote: »

They’ll do it like the Referendum posters. Lots space for Mary Lou and the SF logo, not as much for the issue on hand. Let’s them re-use again, but get posters out there when other parties don’t.

Cynical tactic, but quite smart all the same

Cynical? How so?

blackwhite

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Cynical? How so?

The appearance is that they're not so much interested in winning the Presidential election - just in taking advantage of an opportunity to promote the party at a time when the other parties aren't taking part.


In the 8th Referendum campaign they were the only large party to have their party leader plastered across their campaign posters - which gave more than a slight suggestion that promoting the party for a future GE was their actual focus.

It's not much of a leap to think that the same might be going on this time around (and plenty of commentators suggested as much at the time SF announced they'd contest the election).

The relative silence since about who the actual candidate will be doesn't do anything to dispel the theory