So Michael D IS running again!

seamus

eastwest wrote: »

That's not an issue, believe me. It was reasonable for him not to commit to one term at the time and to change his mind when he was comfortable with giving all.his time to the job.
This issue was raised early on in the campaign by a few anti-higgins people but it never got traction, and it won't. Most of them realise that now and have given up this line of argument.

Although he hasn't come out and explicitly said it, he was in poorer health at the start of his first term than he is now. He was visibly much slower on his feet.

He had a knee operation at the very start of that term, and since then he's been in much finer fettle. So it's likely at that time that he didn't feel he had two terms in him, whereas now he does.

Hurrache

So Casey has withdrawn his conspiracy theory remarks. I said weeks ago, 1, if not 2, of these 'dragons' are there more or less as agitators.

FrancieBrady

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The Dragons are not politicians at all, they are rank amateurs at this stuff. They haven't a snowball's chance in hell unless Higgins self destructs somehow.

I will vote:

1. Higgins
2. Freeman (despite her possible ultracatholic links)
3. Ni Riada (despite her thinking SF is a good idea)
4. Casey (marketing droid)
5. Duffy (Hunting? Seriously?)
6. Gallagher (back under your rock, bagman).

I'm not one to quote Miriam Lord too often but she is right when she says that 'Michael D strong on vision guff - but it is of the highest quality'.

All presidents have done this 'vision' speak and it is part of the job description and nobody matches Higgins at it in my opinion, such is his intelligence and scholarly understanding of our culture and society.

As you say, it is his to lose.

Hotblack Desiato

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

2. Freeman (despite her possible ultracatholic links)
3. Ni Riada (despite her thinking SF is a good idea)
4. Casey (marketing droid)
5. Duffy (Hunting? Seriously?)
6. Gallagher (back under your rock, bagman).

You forgot about Ni Riada trying to make political capital out of anti-vaccine hysteria.

None of the above is worthy of a preference, IMHO and ideally none of them would get their expenses back.

Zubeneschamali

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

None of the above is worthy of a preference, IMHO and ideally none of them would get their expenses back.

I always vote all the way down to 2nd last place. If some insane scandal takes Higgins out, I definitely prefer Freeman to Ni Riada to the others, and Gallagher belongs at or off the bottom of every ballot as punishment for nearly stealing it last time.

An Ciarraioch

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The Dragons are not politicians at all, they are rank amateurs at this stuff. They haven't a snowball's chance in hell unless Higgins self destructs somehow.

I will vote:

1. Higgins
2. Freeman (despite her possible ultracatholic links)
3. Ni Riada (despite her thinking SF is a good idea)
4. Casey (marketing droid)
5. Duffy (Hunting? Seriously?)
6. Gallagher (back under your rock, bagman).

I'm not one to quote Miriam Lord too often but she is right when she says that 'Michael D strong on vision guff - but it is of the highest quality'.

All presidents have done this 'vision' speak and it is part of the job description and nobody matches Higgins at it in my opinion, such is his intelligence and scholarly understanding of our culture and society.

As you say, it is his to lose.

The fact that he's best described as an "all-rounder" undoubtedly helps with his popularity - not too many people who would be as comfortable at a League of Ireland game as delivering an historical address, or pressing the flesh at an artistic event.

Hurrache

The 'debate' is on RTE Radio 1 news at the moment.

Gallagher still sticking with being petulant sending in a statement that he'll only do debates in which all candidates are present and having a dig at RTE.

BarryD2

Higgins looks like the best overall, but I wouldn't be adverse to a new face and someone from a different background. Just not that gone on the alternatives: Gavin Duffy's probably the best of the rest IMHO but the Ward Hunt aspect is not appealing. Will listen and see, who knows but couldn't see any of the others getting my vote.

An Ciarraioch

The Peace Corps idea, in fairness, has its merits, but would be up to Foreign Affairs to establish.

FreudianSlippers

Hurrache wrote: »

The 'debate' is on RTE Radio 1 news at the moment.

Gallagher still sticking with being petulant sending in a statement that he'll only do debates in which all candidates are present and having a dig at RTE.

I'm not sure who his voter base is on his platform of being anti-RTÉ; this seems to be his only issue in his Presidential bid.

BarryD2

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I'm not sure who his voter base is on his platform of being anti-RTÉ; this seems to be his only issue in his Presidential bid.

It's a big axe that needs to be ground. Heard him being interviewed yesterday and he was asked several times where he'd been in the last seven years and what he was up to. He couldn't answer it coherently except to say that he was involved in family matters. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's a bit much to just roll up after 7 years and put the name down again, with little or nothing of public substance in between.

Hurrache

Well watch Higgins's odds drop through the floor after this spectacle.

marieholmfan

Freeman is a perfectly reasonable candidate. There is a certain appeal there in terms of her very ordinariness. It feels a bit like sortition.

Of the others Duffy would be fine (not actually good but fine), Ni Riada is a bit off and anyway if there might be a united Ireland referendum I want Sinn Fein as marginalised as possible down here so as not to spook the horses (raises the question of how patriotic SF actually are) , Casey is not an overly scrupulous businessman in the ordinary sense of the word (he is a northerner which would be a plus for me especially with an united ireland on the horizon) and Gallagher is a Fianna Fail bagman and grantrapreneur who has consistently lied about his connections to FF.

VinLieger

BarryD2 wrote: »

It's a big axe that needs to be ground. Heard him being interviewed yesterday and he was asked several times where he'd been in the last seven years and what he was up to. He couldn't answer it coherently except to say that he was involved in family matters. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's a bit much to just roll up after 7 years and put the name down again, with little or nothing of public substance in between.

Especially considering the monumental issues that the country has passed by referendum in those 7 years and the big social issues still ongoing like housing.


He didnt need to be active everyday, but his complete and utter absence from any political discourse on these huge issues is pretty damning

An Ciarraioch

Of the four debating today, Duffy came across the best - not setting the world alight, but generally seemed the steadiest in terms of his pitch.

James Brown

Hurrache wrote: »

Well watch Higgins's odds drop through the floor after this spectacle.

He was amazing the other day.

“I have no difficulty in constructing a formal statement that can live within the Constitution and at the same time accept the independence of the president whoever he or she is,” he said of the allowance which has been available since 1938, and at is present level of €317,000 since 1998....

Asked about comments by Senator Gerard Craughwell that he stayed in suite at a luxury hotel in Switzerland this year , costing more than €3,000 per night, the President maintained he had never asked to stay in a particular hotel.

“The arrangement for the President and where he stays are made by the Department of Foreign Affairs without consultation.

“I have never asked to stay in a particular hotel. I have stayed in hostels and stayed in tents and with Concern in Somalia.

“It is a question I never ask. I don’t really think… about all of that when I do go abroad.

“The ambassador and the host country are involved and then there are those who have security concerns,” he said....


“We had a conversation. There were a few things we discussed. When that was finished I left the room under my own volition.

“She was then interviewed by a senior garda. She was an unemployed person. I wished her well. That’s how it should be.”

Asking himself about Mr Casey’s charge it was a stunt, he said: “Maybe that candidate is not too long back from America.”
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/higgins-defends-%C3%A1ras-allowances-as-he-launches-re-election-bid-1.3642332

Put all the faux expenses outrage to bed. Really showed how he's streets above the reality TV folk.

SimonTemplar

That joke about Trump's hair was very cringy. Humour in political debates is rarely a good idea and almost never works.

marieholmfan

VinLieger wrote: »

Especially considering the monumental issues that the country has passed by referendum in those 7 years and the big social issues still ongoing like housing.


He didnt need to be active everyday, but his complete and utter absence from any political discourse on these huge issues is pretty damning

He is a terrible candidate. Like terrible, he is a bagman.

SimonTemplar

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Of the four debating today, Duffy came across the best - not setting the world alight, but generally seemed the steadiest in terms of his pitch.

I agree, after all he is very media savvy and has coached people on media appearances himself, but I can't help but shake the opinion that he is doing this just for self promotion and increase his brand awareness. I may being unfair to him but that's the feeling I get from him.

jm08

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Of the four debating today, Duffy came across the best - not setting the world alight, but generally seemed the steadiest in terms of his pitch.

I watched it on News Now. The only one I'd eliminate at this stage is Casey. He seems to be very out of touch with Ireland. He is very fidgety. He thinks Ireland should join NATO. I think he has been living too long in the US. He is an example that if Irish people living abroad are given a vote, it should be limited to those who have lived in Ireland in the last 5 years.

I thought Duffy, Ni Riada and Freeman did fairly well, but none close to Michael D. as a representative of the Irish nation.

Hotblack Desiato

marieholmfan wrote: »

Freeman is a perfectly reasonable candidate.

'Knock cured my eczema,' says presidential hopeful Joan Freeman

The senator and Pieta House founder spoke at the National Novena in Knock in 2015 and recounted a visit to the shrine as a teenager.

"One of the first times I came here was when I was 16 and I had eczema on my hands. They were very, very bad. They were so bad that if I flexed them at all my skin would burst open and I placed my hands on the wall here in Knock on the shrine and I've never had eczema again," she said, to applause.

"I'm telling you that was because behind that cure was faith. It was the foundation of belief of divine intervention and it became the cornerstone of the next 40 years of my life."

Zubeneschamali

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

'Knock cured my eczema,' says presidential hopeful Joan Freeman

Yikes!

OK, she goes below the antivaxxing SFer.

pixelburp

It's a sorry bunch of candidates, and reflects poorly on the engagement of Irish politics that someone of substance or decency can't give Higgins a fair run for his money. Maybe Higgins' stature and popularity scared away the serious candidates, who knows.

It's funny how there was a much animated debate over the continued existence of the Seanad (followed by a empty promise for reform), yet the subject of the President hasn't really gained as much traction. I am suddenly wondering if we should do away with the role completely, move the small amount of legislative power over to some existing branch of government.

I genuinely like Higgins, and think he has performed his duties well and with the kind of decorum a ceremonial role demands. But that's kinda it: the role is ceremonial, doesn't seem to hold any great appeal in the hearts of politicians of any stripe, and feels increasingly redundant.

James Brown

pixelburp wrote: »

It's a sorry bunch of candidates, and reflects poorly on the engagement of Irish politics that someone of substance or decency can't give Higgins a fair run for his money. Maybe Higgins' stature and popularity scared away the serious candidates, who knows.

It's funny how there was a much animated debate over the continued existence of the Seanad (followed by a empty promise for reform), yet the subject of the President hasn't really gained as much traction. I am suddenly wondering if we should do away with the role completely, move the small amount of legislative power over to some existing branch of government.

I genuinely like Higgins, and think he has performed his duties well and with the kind of decorum a ceremonial role demands. But that's kinda it: the role is ceremonial, doesn't seem to hold any great appeal in the hearts of politicians of any stripe, and feels increasingly redundant.

I think we need a national representative removed from day to day politics. It's an ambassadorial role.
The Seanad is a rewards club for luvies concerned with ice cream trucks being too loud and seagulls losing the run of themselves. I wouldn't compare the two TBH.

Zubeneschamali

pixelburp wrote: »

the role is ceremonial, doesn't seem to hold any great appeal in the hearts of politicians of any stripe, and feels increasingly redundant.

Eh, no.

It never was an appealing role for ambitious politicians, instead it was a retirement home for has-been politicians.

Only with the election of Mary Robinson did it come to life.

Hotblack Desiato

pixelburp wrote: »

I am suddenly wondering if we should do away with the role completely, move the small amount of legislative power over to some existing branch of government.

Then Leo would be head of state, is that what you want?

Capt'n Midnight

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The Peace Corps idea, in fairness, has its merits, but would be up to Foreign Affairs to establish.

Pretty much.
https://www.irishaid.ie/

But unless we are transferring useful skills to the locals it might as well be "jobbridge in the sun" for all the good it would do.

Pussyhands

So Duffy hasn't drawn down the loan on his house yet? Where's he getting the money? Also i think he said it wasn't a loan. Anyone know exactly what it is?

And does anyone think some of these are using this election as a profile raiser for 7 years time?

Casey is the worst candidate ever. He was on Ivan after he revealed he was joining the race and was asked when he decided...claimed he decided ages ago. I don't believe him for a second. Last minute job I think. And he keeps going on about his mother. "My mother always says etc." When asked if he could speak irish he said no but his mother speaks fluently. So what? Says he told his mother in 82 when he went to australia he'd come back and be president. Such nonsense. He probably said it but probably happened in a way like I'd say to my dad I'll be ceo of my company in 10 years.

I found Duffys answer to the irish question cringe aswell. Anyone who went to school in Ireland would have a grasp of the few words he spoke....It was so amateur! It's like asking 4 people could they juggle and 3 said no and then the 4th grabbed two oranges and started juggling them and they start thinking they're great.

Cork Boy 53

And does anyone think some of these are using this election as a profile raiser for 7 years time?

Gavin Duffy possibly is. Michael D. definitely is not.The rest of them doubtful IMO.

Sam Russell

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I think we need a national representative removed from day to day politics. It's an ambassadorial role.

One possible current role that could be used to provide a President would be a retired supreme court judge, preferably the Chief Justice.

As for salary, if Michael D were to not run or was defeated he would be in line for a pension as ex-Pres, a pension as ex-Minister, and a pension as retired Senetor, and a Pension as retired TD. ll in all, he would get a rise in pay. Currently he returns his pensions.

How much say does the President get a say in how the expense account is spent, or in how his itinerary is planned? Not a lot, I would think.

He turns up early, and well scrubbed with speech in his pocket. What more could a President do?