So Michael D IS running again!

TheRiverman · 25-08-2018 11:16pm

I posted about this previously and I am open to correction,but I think Micheal D said before the last election that it would depend on his health and he would be seventy seven years old when he would have to consider going for a second term.He is still in good health.

Alf Veedersane · 25-08-2018 11:17pm

Bradlin wrote: »

Every time I look at Michael D and every time he opens his mouth, I say to myself: 'Is that really the best we, as a country, can elect as President of the country?'

I'm embarrassed to have him as a President.

It's quite likely many of the Irish electorate will choose to ignore his campaign pledge 7 years ago that he would only stay for one term and upon which he has no reneged. Politicians renege on promises all the time, but it should be held against them. Unfortunately, not in Ireland.

Come on, people - we're better than this slop.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you but who, of the candidates, are the candidates we'd be proud of?

jmcc · 25-08-2018 11:22pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

You've repeated this accusation several times now, but I've yet to see you offer any evidence that he knew it to be untrue when he said it (the definition of a lie).

One term only.

Regards...jmcc

TheRiverman · 25-08-2018 11:26pm

"As now".Two important words there that left it open to change his mind.

Loafing Oaf · 25-08-2018 11:27pm

Bradlin wrote: »

Every time I look at Michael D and every time he opens his mouth, I say to myself: 'Is that really the best we, as a country, can elect as President of the country?'

I'm embarrassed to have him as a President.

What specifically is so terrible about him in your eyes? What would your preferred type of president be saying/doing differently?

jmcc · 25-08-2018 11:28pm

TheRiverman wrote: »

"As now".Two important words there that left it open to change his mind.

One term only.

Regards...jmcc

AGC · 26-08-2018 11:00am

jmcc wrote: »

Statistically, he may die in office. He is going to be on TV alongside younger candidates. Any question about his health, even that shaking hand that his people and RTE worked so hard to hide in the last election, is going to be a problem if it is covered. The cameras will highlight any flaws and even if people consciously ignore these flaws (Higgins/Labour supporters), ordinary people may not. This is why RTE worked so hard to avoid covering Higgins hobbling around in the last election and relied mainly on static shots of Higgins sitting or standing.

Regards...jmcc

Christ, so another argument against him is a shaky hand.

Think I’ll bow out of this thread....

jmcc · 26-08-2018 12:23pm

AGC wrote: »

Christ, so another argument against him is a shaky hand.

No. It is the perception of a flaw in a candidate and what people will think. Higgins' hand was shaking badly in the 2011 coverage. For someone of his age, people might think that it was an indication of Parkinson's disease even if there was some other cause. The media presentation of a candidate, especially when most voters will never physically meet the candidates is extremely important and it is why candidates and their teams will always try to present their candidates as being in the best of health. There's a lot more to elections than simple happy clappy slogans and policies. The electorate has to be convinced to vote for a candidate.

Regards...jmcc

batgoat · 26-08-2018 12:37pm

Anyway, Gemma O'Doherty was even doing legal threats during her Sunday Business Post interview. Almost as if she's doing all the damage to her campaign on her own.

[url]

http://twitter.com/drg1985/status/1033663474847674368[/url]

oscarBravo · 26-08-2018 12:54pm

jmcc wrote: »

One term only.

You're deliberately evading a very specific question, so I'll ask it again.

What evidence do you have that, at the time he said it, he knew it to be untrue?

dulpit · 26-08-2018 1:26pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

You're deliberately evading a very specific question, so I'll ask it again.

What evidence do you have that, at the time he said it, he knew it to be untrue?

Also, thing is - whether or not he lied last time around should not have had any real affect on that election, as people were still voting on his first term. For this time around we have a very direct opportunity to take him to task on his "lie" if we want to - vote for someone else. I have a feeling that the results will be obvious that lie or change of mind or whatever you want to view it will not affect results in any major way, Miggeldy will be easily re-elected.

jmcc · 26-08-2018 4:33pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

You're deliberately evading a very specific question, so I'll ask it again.

What evidence do you have that, at the time he said it, he knew it to be untrue?

Higgins pledged to be a one term president and made it part of his campaign to get elected president. Perhaps you and Higgins supporters don't consider it an issue but there are others who consider a man's word to be worth something. It is a question of honour. To those with low expectations of politicians, Higgins breaking a pledge to the electorate may not matter.

Regards...jmcc

oscarBravo · 26-08-2018 4:46pm

jmcc wrote: »

Higgins pledged to be a one term president and made it part of his campaign to get elected president. Perhaps you and Higgins supporters don't consider it an issue but there are others who consider a man's word to be worth something. It is a question of honour. To those with low expectations of politicians, Higgins breaking a pledge to the electorate may not matter.

That's nice, but you evaded the question again, so I'll ask it again: what evidence do you have that, at the time he said it, he knew it to be untrue?

I'm focused specifically on your repeated accusation of lying, here. If you had accused him of flip-flopping, or of reneging on a campaign promise, we wouldn't be having this discussion, because those are entirely fair accusations.

But you've repeatedly accused him of lying, so I think it's only fair to ask you to either back up that specific accusation, or withdraw it.

alaimacerc · 26-08-2018 4:48pm

jmcc wrote: »

Haven't been paying attention to the smear campaign running against Gemma O'Doherty on Twitter?

"Smear campaign", says the individual spamming with the thread incessantly that our present president is a mendacious Marxist with one foot in the grave.

jmcc · 26-08-2018 4:50pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

That's nice, but you evaded the question again, so I'll ask it again: what evidence do you have that, at the time he said it, he knew it to be untrue?

Higgins pledged to do only one term. He is now breaking that pledge to the electorate to do only one term. Work it out.

Regards...jmcc

batgoat · 26-08-2018 4:53pm

jmcc wrote: »

Higgins pledged to do only one term. He is now breaking that pledge to the electorate to do only one term. Work it out.

Regards...jmcc

That is not evidence of lying, could equally be a sign of change of mind. Also, notably there's actually very few people in this thread that are angry about Michael D doing a second term... It's basically people who wouldn't have voted for him last time either...

jmcc · 26-08-2018 4:59pm

batgoat wrote: »

That is not evidence of lying, could equally be a sign of change of mind.

And you and OscarBravo will continue to make excuses for him. Higgins made it a central element of his campaign in 2011. Some people voted for him on that basis. And now he has broken his pledge to do only one term. But to those who support him, that doesn't matter. It does to others.

Regards...jmcc

batgoat · 26-08-2018 5:03pm

jmcc wrote: »

And you and OscarBravo will continue to make excuses for him. Higgins made it a central element of his campaign in 2011. Some people voted for him on that basis. And now he has broken his pledge to do only one term. But to those who support him, that doesn't matter. It does to others.

Regards...jmcc

There's no indication that the public are actually upset that he wants a second term and that's perfectly within his right to do so and you've failed to illustrate that he was lying. This is a bit like when politicians changed their views on abortion or same sex marriage, they were also accused of lying and most simply changed their minds. Neither will have any particular influence on them being elected though!

Alf Veedersane · 26-08-2018 5:07pm

jmcc wrote: »

And you and OscarBravo will continue to make excuses for him. Higgins made it a central element of his campaign in 2011. Some people voted for him on that basis. And now he has broken his pledge to do only one term. But to those who support him, that doesn't matter. It does to others.

Regards...jmcc

Why would a pledge to do only one term be a deciding factor in voting as opposed to him being the better person for the job, in the eyes of those who voted for him.

Besides, he still might only do one term. If enough people are offended that he changed his mind, then they will vote accordingly.

batgoat · 26-08-2018 5:13pm

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Why would a pledge to do only one term be a deciding factor in voting as opposed to him being the better person for the job, in the eyes of those who voted for him.

Besides, he still might only do one term. If enough people are offended that he changed his mind, then they will vote accordingly.

Jmcc seems intent on believing everything will change people's minds. Also implying that he might have Parkinsons.... It's all a bit petty.

jmcc · 26-08-2018 5:15pm

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Why would a pledge to do only one term be a deciding factor in voting as opposed to him being the better person for the job, in the eyes of those who voted for him.

Because Higgins was continually losing support on the run up to the election and this was a bargain with the electorate. If it wasn't for RTE's use of that fake tweet to nobble Gallagher, Higgins would most likely have lost as all the polls up to that point had Gallagher at around 40% to Higgins 25%.

Besides, he still might only do one term. If enough people are offended that he changed his mind, then they will vote accordingly.

It is one of the things that will be brought up during the campaign. Some will vote for Higgins anyway but this is a very different election to that of 2011. A lot of the dynamics that got Higgins elected (RTE's rigged audience and lack of questions for Higgins, the hatred of FF, the high opinion poll ratings of Labour, the fourth place position of SF) are not present in this election.

Regards...jmcc

batgoat · 26-08-2018 5:18pm

jmcc wrote: »

Because Higgins was continually losing support on the run up to the election and this was a bargain with the electorate. If it wasn't for RTE's use of that fake tweet to nobble Gallagher, Higgins would most likely have lost as all the polls up to that point had Gallagher at around 40% to Higgins 25%.

It is one of the things that will be brought up during the campaign. Some will vote for Higgins anyway but this is a very different election to that of 2011. A lot of the dynamics that got Higgins elected (RTE's rigged audience and lack of questions for Higgins, the hatred of FF, the high opinion poll ratings of Labour, the fourth place position of SF) are not present in this election.

Regards...jmcc

A poll from May indicated that 50% of the public weren't even aware of the one term... So clearly most didn't let it impact their decision at time...

Robert McGrath · 26-08-2018 5:23pm

alaimacerc wrote: »

mendacious Marxist with one foot in the grave.

Whether I agree with you or not, that’s a lovely turn of phrase. Nicely done, sir

Yer Da sells Avon · 26-08-2018 5:23pm

jmcc wrote: »

Higgins made it a central element of his campaign in 2011. Some people voted for him on that basis.

(a) No, he didn't.

and

(b) No, they didn't.

alan partridge aha · 26-08-2018 5:27pm

Not a Michael D fan but he did really well with the Pope's visit.

oscarBravo · 26-08-2018 5:33pm

jmcc wrote: »

And you and OscarBravo will continue to make excuses for him.

I'm not making excuses for him. I'm pointing out that you have repeatedly criticised him for something for which you've been completely unable to offer any evidence.

I might have let it go, if it weren't for the juxtaposition of your unfounded accusations of lying with your claim that reporting O'Doherty's own words is a "smear campaign".

At least you appear to have stopped repeating the accusation, which is something, I guess.

Alf Veedersane · 26-08-2018 5:41pm

jmcc wrote: »

Because Higgins was continually losing support on the run up to the election and this was a bargain with the electorate. If it wasn't for RTE's use of that fake tweet to nobble Gallagher, Higgins would most likely have lost as all the polls up to that point had Gallagher at around 40% to Higgins 25%

So it was the tweet that decided it, is what you're saying there.

I'd question the logic of someone who was swayed to vote for MDH on the basis that he'd be a one-term President.

And again, if enough people are bothered by him changing his mind, then they can just vote for someone else.

jmcc · 26-08-2018 6:52pm

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

(a) No, he didn't.

Yes he did. (See the video clip above.)

(b) No, they didn't.

Yes, some did.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc · 26-08-2018 6:55pm

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

So it was the tweet that decided it, is what you're saying there.

The use of the fake tweet by RTE effectively got Gallagher to use the word "envelope". Once that happened, his campaign was over. More people were watching that Frontline show than were listening to the Pat Kenny show. That changed minds immediately because the term "Brown Envelope" is so strongly identified with corruption. Anyone who may have been considering voting for Gallagher prior to that would have been given something to think about.

I'd question the logic of someone who was swayed to vote for MDH on the basis that he'd be a one-term President.

The "only one term" thing was a political excuse to deal with the question of Higgins' age. By using the "one term" excuse, it effectively nullified any further questioning along the lines of the candidate's age.

And again, if enough people are bothered by him changing his mind, then they can just vote for someone else.

This is something that will be exploited by other candidates.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc · 26-08-2018 7:02pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm not making excuses for him.

You are. It is that simple.

I'm pointing out that you have repeatedly criticised him for something for which you've been completely unable to offer any evidence.

Higgins pledged to do only one term. It was in all the newspapers and media coverage of the 2011 election. There are even a few video clips around of him making the pledge. You were around at the time and could not have failed to notice.

I might have let it go, if it weren't for the juxtaposition of your unfounded accusations of lying with your claim that reporting O'Doherty's own words is a "smear campaign".

Evidently in seven years time you will figure out what happened with the little Twitter war between a bunch of media hacks and O'Doherty the other day that resulted in threats of legal action and an Irish Times journalist pulling a tweet about O'Doherty.

At least you appear to have stopped repeating the accusation, which is something, I guess.

Higgins pledged to do only one term only. He broke that pledge and is now running for election for a second term.

Regards...jmcc

So Michael D IS running again!

Comments