So Michael D IS running again!

Loafing Oaf

blanch152 wrote: »

Ahern, Cowen, Haughey, their faults, as bad as they were, really don't compare to the damage caused by Castro and Chavez.

Some of the lads up North, though, they would compare.

All highly subjective. If the president had to restrict himself to saying things that could not cause any conceivable offence to anyone, he'd probably be better taking a vow of silence for seven years...

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Ahern, Cowen, Haughey, their faults, as bad as they were, really don't compare to the damage caused by Castro and Chavez.

Some of the lads up North, though, they would compare.

That as they say is 'your opinion'.

Higgins was assessing their life achievements at the time of their deaths. He put emphasis on what they tried to achieve and the odds against them succeeding.

It's for another thread to discuss all that.

It was his 'opinion' though which Kenny and Varadkar said he was entitled to and didn't create any difficulty for the government.
So the fact that you are offended is frankly, tough. You are more than entitled to not vote for him though and chose a Dragon from the telly.

batgoat

Edgware wrote: »

Panic is settling into the Pro Higginscamp now that we have a few to put it up to him. The left luvvies in the media don't like the idea their little man will be asked a few awkward questions

What are the awkward questions? Running a second term is a one liner to explain. I hope Gallagher and Co all get nominations,they'll split the handful of votes they'll get...

Turnipman

Edgware wrote: »

Panic is settling into the Pro Higginscamp now that we have a few to put it up to him. The left luvvies in the media don't like the idea their little man will be asked a few awkward questions

I commiserate with them. It must be genuinely upsetting for them to realise that so many voters are unable to see the humanitarian halo that shines so brightly around his erudite head.

Hurrache

blanch152 wrote: »

Higgins has arguably worsened the state of humanity.

Go on so, argue that statement.

ligerdub

seamus wrote:

Now Trump has gotten in. And the attitude has shifted. People feel now that a businessman is clearly in over his head politically, and there is a fundamental conflict between the inherent selfishness required to be a businessman and the social conscience required to be a politician.

Says who? Twitter, boards.ie, Ryan Tubridy? The media narrative about Trump has been massively negative for about 3 years now, well before he won the 2016 election. If you'd followed the sentiment told TO us he'd wouldn't have stood a chance at all.

Since he has gotten in, almost every faux pas, lazy poorly based accusation has been taken as gospel or out of context and almost every positive has been downplayed.

His popularity or otherwise has less to do with the fact that he's an entrepreneur than other factors. Certainly in this country, where many media outlets are owned by a fellow billionaire who doesn't particularly get on with Donald, he's not exactly flavour of the month. Also this country is fairly shamelessly major lickarses of the democrats, partially because they are softer on illegal immigrants, and there's still plenty Irish that fall into that bracket in the States. As you say yourself, it doesn't matter here, and you're right.....therefore your Trump reference is needless and irrelevant.

Social conscience isn't all about being progressive or following what you (as in you) personally consider to be correct. Some people think social conscience is about opening up borders to one and all whereas others consider that to be harmful to society as it creates a state where people have no allegiance to where they are and cultures fighting for dominance etc. Neither has the monopoly on social conscience but they act in good faith. There's no reason why an entrepreneur can't have a social conscience either.

Also, I don't think anybody is arguing that even a hugely successful entrepreneur would financially benefit the country should he or she be elected to the Presidency here. The Taoiseach on the other hand is a different matter, and with a more hands on approach required there's no reason to think that business savvy people couldn't succeed in the role more than say a teacher on an extended leave of absence.

I just don't buy this belief that people see one person from a certain background have a certain amount of success or failure, and then infer that this view is shared by the masses and also that this would be repeatable in a different country by a person of that ilk. Let's say Feargal Quinn goes for the role? Are we honestly to expect people would be put off that because "muh Trump"? I think that's rubbish.

pgj2015

8j1w94vbmnlt05 wrote: »

Why do people think he's a great president?

Because they heard it on the news, people are stupid.

I wont be voting for him. did he address the fact 3000 euro was wasted on that hotel room?

Cork Boy 53

I believe that Michael D. will easily be re-elected to the Aras. The real question is whether Gallagher will finish in second place again.

Aska

pgj2015 wrote:

did he address the fact 3000 euro was wasted on that hotel room?

Nope. Most others did though saying it was the going rate there for a room.

What am I doing tonight? Sleeping in a truck in dublin port for .95c a km. And payong €3 for a shower in Circle K here in the port. Tis a great life

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That as they say is 'your opinion'.

Higgins was assessing their life achievements at the time of their deaths. He put emphasis on what they tried to achieve and the odds against them succeeding.

It's for another thread to discuss all that.

It was his 'opinion' though which Kenny and Varadkar said he was entitled to and didn't create any difficulty for the government.
So the fact that you are offended is frankly, tough. You are more than entitled to not vote for him though and chose a Dragon from the telly.

It is Hobson's choice really.

Higgins has done nothing to deserve a second term. The two anti-vaxxers are toxic if they are nominated. The Dragons are Tweedledum and Tweedledee, while the rest are completely nuts.

By a process of elimination, I may end up voting for Gallagher or Duffy, which might be enough to make me stay at home for the first time ever.

Aska

Personally I'd always try and vote, however the governments in general have form in days they pick for votes.

I don't believe the younger voters wouldn't be keen on Micky D so what do you do to solve this issue? Have the vote on a thursday (instead of a friday) when they aint going to bother coming home to vote.

batgoat

ligerdub wrote: »

seamus wrote:

Now Trump has gotten in. And the attitude has shifted. People feel now that a businessman is clearly in over his head politically, and there is a fundamental conflict between the inherent selfishness required to be a businessman and the social conscience required to be a politician.

Says who? Twitter, boards.ie, Ryan Tubridy? The media narrative about Trump has been massively negative for about 3 years now, well before he won the 2016 election. If you'd followed the sentiment told TO us he'd wouldn't have stood a chance at all.

Since he has gotten in, almost every faux pas, lazy poorly based accusation has been taken as gospel or out of context and almost every positive has been downplayed.

His popularity or otherwise has less to do with the fact that he's an entrepreneur than other factors. Certainly in this country, where many media outlets are owned by a fellow billionaire who doesn't particularly get on with Donald, he's not exactly flavour of the month. Also this country is fairly shamelessly major lickarses of the democrats, partially because they are softer on illegal immigrants, and there's still plenty Irish that fall into that bracket in the States. As you say yourself, it doesn't matter here, and you're right.....therefore your Trump reference is needless and irrelevant.

Social conscience isn't all about being progressive or following what you (as in you) personally consider to be correct. Some people think social conscience is about opening up borders to one and all whereas others consider that to be harmful to society as it creates a state where people have no allegiance to where they are and cultures fighting for dominance etc. Neither has the monopoly on social conscience but they act in good faith. There's no reason why an entrepreneur can't have a social conscience either.

Also, I don't think anybody is arguing that even a hugely successful entrepreneur would financially benefit the country should he or she be elected to the Presidency here. The Taoiseach on the other hand is a different matter, and with a more hands on approach required there's no reason to think that business savvy people couldn't succeed in the role more than say a teacher on an extended leave of absence.

I just don't buy this belief that people see one person from a certain background have a certain amount of success or failure, and then infer that this view is shared by the masses and also that this would be repeatable in a different country by a person of that ilk. Let's say Feargal Quinn goes for the role? Are we honestly to expect people would be put off that because "muh Trump"? I think that's rubbish.

Well for example, Michael D possibly getting a 3000 euro room is a scandal. For Trump, every day is a scandal. There's a Russia collusion investigation ongoing, he's started a trade war. He's slept with a pornstar and paid her off plus others. He's had children taken off their parents. And that's just a sampler. Plus he's been banned from 2 funerals in the past year....

He's also universally disliked with some exceptions that tend to be dictators...

Cork Boy 53

Aska wrote: »

Personally I'd always try and vote, however the governments in general have form in days they pick for votes.

I don't believe the younger voters wouldn't be keen on Micky D so what do you do to solve this issue? Have the vote on a thursday (instead of a friday) when they aint going to bother coming home to vote.

Double negative there so not sure what your point is. Anyway the election will be on Friday 26th October, the first time ever for a presidential election in this country to take place on that day of the week.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

It is Hobson's choice really.

Higgins has done nothing to deserve a second term. .

What metric are you using to judge him?

McAleese didn't do much either, she talked on issues as much as Higgins has and managed to insult living people here on this island a number of times.

Robinson, the same, addressed a lot of issues, like Higgins, that concerned her.

All of them fulfilled their statutory duties adequately as far as I know.

Aska

Yea i made a mess of that. After posting it and reading it I edited "wouldn't".

Apologies I for some reason best only known to me I believed it was on a thursday. Thanks for the clear up. Shoots my conspiracy clear out of the water

gandalf

blanch152 wrote: »

They are both running for election for the second time.

Higgins has arguably worsened the state of humanity.

Gallagher has done nothing good or bad for humanity.

That puts Gallagher ahead.

Wtf are waffling about. This race is for the President of Ireland, a ceremonial position with little or no power that's at the behest of the Government not protector of the human race :rolleyes:

James Brown

gandalf wrote: »

Wtf are waffling about. This race is for the President of Ireland, a ceremonial position with little or no power that's at the behest of the Government not protector of the human race :rolleyes:

The man has been a champion for equal rights for same sex couples and recognition of gender issues. The monster!

Loafing Oaf

Hurrache wrote: »

Go on so, argue that statement.

He said a few nice things about Castro after he died, clearly up there with African slavery and the conquest of the Americas in terms of great historical crimes...

Beechwoodspark

Aska wrote: »

Personally I'd always try and vote, however the governments in general have form in days they pick for votes.

I don't believe the younger voters wouldn't be keen on Micky D so what do you do to solve this issue? Have the vote on a thursday (instead of a friday) when they aint going to bother coming home to vote.

The media would have you believe that the youth love Mickey d

Beechwoodspark

I think Higgins has had his innings. He had the full term. He did some good things, some not so good things. He has a good legacy.

He’s an elderly man. Prefer someone younger to take over now.

Water John

If Freeman's election brought mental health to the fore, considering its almost epidemic proportions, that would be a good thing. Think she would do a good job.

Capt'n Midnight

Is there a new seris of Dragon's Den needing advertising or something ?

https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2018/0830/988454-presidential-election/

Mr Casey, the founder of recruitment firm Claddagh Resources, is the third Dragons' Den entrepreneur to seek a nomination after Seán Gallagher and Gavin Duffy.

Oh and wouldn't this split the entrepreneur vote ?


TBH at this stage some of the cast of Dempsey's Den might as well run.

Hurrache

I'm half convinced it's some ridiculous elaborate plot between the 3 with the Casey fella brought in to sling the dirt as it won't make a difference to how people would see him negatively as a result as nobody knows who the **** he is anyway.

Cork Boy 53

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

The media would have you believe that the youth love Mickey d

Actually a lot of them do.

mickdw

Hurrache wrote: »

I'm half convinced it's some ridiculous elaborate plot between the 3 with the Casey fella brought in to sling the dirt as it won't make a difference to how people would see him negatively as a result as nobody knows who the **** he is anyway.

It has to be a plot to down Michael D.
One dragon will be filthy. Dragging up anything he can to show Michael D in a bad light and dropping out of the race late on. Second dragon likely there to backup opinion of prime dragon who will be the only serious contender.
Imagine at any given debate, you will have one guy continually targeting Michael D with every response not bothered if it drives his own vote through the floor as long as it puts Michael D under pressure or makes him look bad.
Prime Dragon will be able to stand there looking presidential and will have number 2 to either strengthen his argument or further dump on Michael D.
Might be a better plan if they were not 3 dragons though.

gandalf

Well just watched the start of the Casey interview on the Tonight show and it was a train wreak. This guy is certainly not the Prime Dragon anyway. Based on what I saw he will not get nominated (unless there are "incentives" involved).

Yer Da sells Avon

gandalf wrote: »

Well just watched the start of the Casey interview on the Tonight show and it was a train wreak. This guy is certainly not the Prime Dragon anyway. Based on what I saw he will not get nominated (unless there are "incentives" involved).

He couldn't even keep a straight face. Absolute chancer.

Muahahaha

^ I reckon that Peter Casey is the attack dog on Higgins. However as he has virtually no chance of securing 4 county councils he wont be involved in any TV debates. His role is to take advantage of the current media blackout from Higgins until the campaign actually gets underway on Sept 26th. Higgins cannot open his mouth until then whereas all other runners can say what they like about him. So if Casey goes on the attack against Higgins now (and his RTE interview today suggested just that) then he has till the 26th September to spread a negative narrative into the media about him. After that the media continue on the questions about him and it takes on a life of its own. Duffy and Gallagher gain from this without having to directly spread the narrative about Higgins themselves, thus keeping their noses relatively clean. Then if they both make the ballot what they would be hoping for is no.2 transfers off each other in the hope their combined vote would get one of them over then line.

Which then brings us to the debates. Will Higgins take part in them or will he stand back and try to look presidential? I think his decision here will come down to the polls about 10 days before polling day. If they are tight then he has to go on and debate, if theyre not then he sits back and lets them talk over each other.

mickdw

gandalf wrote: »

Well just watched the start of the Casey interview on the Tonight show and it was a train wreak. This guy is certainly not the Prime Dragon anyway. Based on what I saw he will not get nominated (unless there are "incentives" involved).

Very strange. This guy came across more presidential on dragons den than tonight. Continually caught with a stupid grin, not able to speak clearly. Absolute chancer. It would appear as said above that he will be sent out to blacken Higgins. The comments tonight re presidents pay is the start of it.... lots of room to develop that when you have an old man who promised one term only now attempting to get a second.

gandalf

I really don't think Duffy will get on the ticket. Interesting theory but I think you are forgetting we're dealing with three massive egos here. I'd be surprised if they could work together over a campaign to elevate just one of them.