So Michael D IS running again!

Hurrache

marieholmfan wrote: »

My niece is a researcher for a pharmaceutical company but I know nothing about them.

The attempt to blacken the name of someone who has achieved so much in Irish life and society by associating her with the most backward elements in Irish life because of her niece is ridiculous. Is it even her blood niece or is it marital?

Oh, her pharmaceutical company was playing a large part in a recent referendum for a change to our constitution, of which you were supplied documents which you were required to read?

I'm not trying to blacken her, I'm saying she has no credibility.

marieholmfan wrote: »

If everything else (i.e. nothing) still stands presumably you will either be giving Joan your number 2 or else publicly condemning suicidal people as weaklings who need to buck up.

Your assumption is as stupid as your comparison of Dublin during the Queen's visit to Krakow and Palestine.

Zubeneschamali

marieholmfan wrote: »

Is it even her blood niece or is it marital?

Her maiden name is Maria Davin, her mother was a born a Lowe like Freeman (Theresa Lowe is also one of the sisters, another pro-lifer). Her father Sean Davin is a businessman/auctioneer.

marieholmfan

Hurrache wrote: »

I'm not trying to blacken her, I'm saying she has no credibility.

But what about Pieta house? Surely that provides credibility? Enough for a second preference?

Hurrache

marieholmfan wrote: »

But what about Pieta house? Surely that provides credibility? Enough for a second preference?

What about it?

Your leap of logic in implying that because I don't give her any preference, therefore I'm all for people killing themselves, is beyond idiocy.

VinLieger

marieholmfan wrote: »

But what about Pieta house?

She accepted a loan from the president of an american MLM that has undoubtedly caused people to commit suicide.


Her credibility is gone if she is that naive and clueless.

marieholmfan

Hurrache wrote: »

What about it?

Your leap of logic in implying that because I don't give her any preference, therefore I'm all for people killing themselves, is beyond idiocy.

I apologise if I gave you that impression. I am sure that you regards suicide as regrettable in most cases.

Loafing Oaf

jm08 wrote: »

I connected suicide and her catholic faith: This is what I said:

you also said:

jm08 wrote: »

In fairness, it would be rather odd for someone with her track record in mental health, suicide awareness etc. to publicly support abortion, particularly as she is a practising catholic.

If you're using English correctly, the main clause of such statements is supposed to stand independent of the 'particularly' bit. So we get:

jm08 wrote: »

In fairness, it would be rather odd for someone with her track record in mental health, suicide awareness etc. to publicly support abortion

jm08

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

you also said:

If you're using English correctly, the main clause of such statements is supposed to stand independent of the 'particularly' bit. So we get:

Apologies for the poor grammar. My meaning was that as a practicising catholic and a promotor of mental health (especially in suicide prevention) it is highly unlikely that she would have voted 'yes' in the Repeal the 8th referendum


And I don't think anyone should have an issue with that, particularly as she didn't campaign one way or the other.

jm08

VinLieger wrote: »

She accepted a loan from the president of an american MLM that has undoubtedly caused people to commit suicide.

Her credibility is gone if she is that naive and clueless.

I hope you don't have any loans from companies (such as banks/building societies who refused her a loan) as they have undoubtedly caused a lot of people to commit suicide.

VinLieger

jm08 wrote: »

I hope you don't have any loans from companies (such as banks/building societies who refused her a loan) as they have undoubtedly caused a lot of people to commit suicide.

Im not the head of a charity specifically dedicated to helping people with suicidal tendencies like joan.

If i was you can bet id be checking the background of someone who popped up out of nowhere after 40 years to offer a loan to support my presidential campaign.

Of course banks and building societies refused her a loan, they do risk assessments before lending money and shes polling well below the threshold to get any money back. Why would they agree to back her in that case?

Also poor false equivalence of banks and mlms, banks are nowhere near as predatory and manipulative no matter how evil you might believe them to be.

Rhineshark

jm08 wrote: »

I hope you don't have any loans from companies (such as banks/building societies who refused her a loan) as they have undoubtedly caused a lot of people to commit suicide.

Eh, there really is no comparison between socially acceptable loans from banks vs loan from the head of an I-can't-believe-it's-not-a-pyramid-scheme like Herbalife. Sure, banks have a deeply morally dubious past (and probably present) but taking a loan from a bank is one of those things unless the loan itself is done dubiously. Connecting your political name to a private company is a political statement. When the company has the a bad reputation, it becomes notable.

Hurrache

Liam Duffy is seriously blessed his car crash (in more ways than one) interview happened on budget day.

Cork Boy 53

Hurrache wrote: »

Liam Duffy is seriously blessed his car crash (in more ways than one) interview happened on budget day.

You mean Gavin Duffy. I missed it. Any link to what was said?

Hurrache

Cork Boy 53 wrote: »

You mean Gavin Duffy. I missed it. Any link to what was said?

No, Liam Duffy, that's his real name! Worth a listen for the cringe and awe that this guy gives others media training
This guy has a SoundCloud link https://twitter.com/CormacDonoghue/status/1049704997821263872?s=09

FrancieBrady

Unless one of them is waiting for a televised debate to unleash on Michael D then this looks done and dusted already. Minor skirmishes with the others but as predicted Michael D to romp back home in triumph.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Unless one of them is waiting for a televised debate to unleash on Michael D then this looks done and dusted already. Minor skirmishes with the others but as predicted Michael D to romp back home in triumph.

I don't think there is a single person who has predicted anything other than a win for Michael D.

But there are a significant number of posters who think this is a bad thing. If winning an election was the barometer for deciding the validity of a political opinion, there are a number of parties who have never been in government who should be defunct.

Capt'n Midnight

richiepurgas wrote: »

In fairness, and I won't be voting for her, she was quite open about the source and conditions of the loan. Also, you'd struggle to see how a businessman could use undue influence on an Irish president. Things are different in the states.

And yet there are three other dodgy* businessmen in the race

*IMHO.
**Would you buy a used car off any of them ?

jm08

VinLieger wrote: »

Im not the head of a charity specifically dedicated to helping people with suicidal tendencies like joan.

If i was you can bet id be checking the background of someone who popped up out of nowhere after 40 years to offer a loan to support my presidential campaign.

Of course banks and building societies refused her a loan, they do risk assessments before lending money and shes polling well below the threshold to get any money back. Why would they agree to back her in that case?

Also poor false equivalence of banks and mlms, banks are nowhere near as predatory and manipulative no matter how evil you might believe them to be.

You made the point that the person who was giving her a loan may have caused people to commit suicide.


I'm just making the point that if you are going down that line of thinking, the banks caused many people in this country to commit suicide, so Joan Feeman should not have anything to do with them because of her position in Pieta House (which she has now left).

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't think there is a single person who has predicted anything other than a win for Michael D.

But there are a significant number of posters who think this is a bad thing. If winning an election was the barometer for deciding the validity of a political opinion, there are a number of parties who have never been in government who should be defunct.

Blanch, who do you want to win?

bilbot79

I'm voting Michael d and won't listen to a word the other slimeballs say

jm08

Rhineshark wrote: »

Eh, there really is no comparison between socially acceptable loans from banks vs loan from the head of an I-can't-believe-it's-not-a-pyramid-scheme like Herbalife. Sure, banks have a deeply morally dubious past (and probably present) but taking a loan from a bank is one of those things unless the loan itself is done dubiously. Connecting your political name to a private company is a political statement. When the company has the a bad reputation, it becomes notable.

The point was made that Herbalife caused people to commit suicide. So have the banks in this country.


Both caused people to commit suicide so Joan Freeman should ignore both as a suicide awareness campaigner seems to be what you are saying!

VinLieger

jm08 wrote: »

You made the point that the person who was giving her a loan may have caused people to commit suicide.


I'm just making the point that if you are going down that line of thinking, the banks caused many people in this country to commit suicide, so Joan Feeman should not have anything to do with them because of her position in Pieta House (which she has now left).

Its a complete false equivalence but you dont seem to want to accept that, im guessing you dont have much knowledge of the predatory and aggressive tactics used by mlms going off your ignorant attitude

Rhineshark

jm08 wrote: »

The point was made that Herbalife caused people to commit suicide. So have the banks in this country.


Both caused people to commit suicide so Joan Freeman should ignore both as a suicide awareness campaigner seems to be what you are saying!

No, that is not even the point I *seem* to be making. I am pointing out that your comment equating a bank loan and the loan from the head of Herbalife aren't the same thing regardless of whether her last job was in suicide prevention or beekeeping.

marieholmfan

bilbot79 wrote: »

I'm voting Michael d and won't listen to a word the other slimeballs say

Joan Freeman isn't a slimeball.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't think there is a single person who has predicted anything other than a win for Michael D. But there are a significant number of posters who think this is a bad thing.

The best person for the job in the opinion of a significant enough number of voters is never a 'bad thing', if you are a democrat. It may be something that annoys you or you are bitter because your man/woman didn't win but it isn't a bad thing.

If winning an election was the barometer for deciding the validity of a political opinion, there are a number of parties who have never been in government who should be defunct.

What relevance the rest of what you said escapes me.

VinLieger

marieholmfan wrote: »

Joan Freeman isn't a slimeball.

Maybe not but shes childishly naive

sliabh 1956

just heard that Emma Mhic Mhathúna's cortège will also pass Áras an Uachtaráin as a mark of personal appreciation for President Michael D Higgins, who had visited her in Kerry during the summer. The Dragons will be furious at the publicity this will bring MIchael D I wonder will it be shown on TV given that all canditates must be given fair treatment. I heard Duffy talking to Sean O'R yesterday saying that he would be playing a vital role if elected if there was a Hard Brexit he also implied that he is much more energetic than MD I pressume he believes all this nonsese that he utters. Is it any wonder that MD doesn't want to debate with these awful people.

marieholmfan

sliabh 1956 wrote: »

just heard that Emma Mhic Mhathúna's cortège will also pass Áras an Uachtaráin as a mark of personal appreciation for President Michael D Higgins, who had visited her in Kerry during the summer. The Dragons will be furious at the publicity this will bring MIchael D I wonder will it be shown on TV given that all canditates must be given fair treatment. I heard Duffy talking to Sean O'R yesterday saying that he would be playing a vital role if elected if there was a Hard Brexit he also implied that he is much more energetic than MD I pressume he believes all this nonsese that he utters. Is it any wonder that MD doesn't want to debate with these awful people.

Joan Freeman is not an awful person. She really should have stayed out of this because she is damaged by association with the Dragons (which mean by association with Sean Gallagher).

Zubeneschamali

marieholmfan wrote: »

Joan Freeman is not an awful person. She really should have stayed out of this because she is damaged by association with the Dragons (which mean by association with Sean Gallagher).

She is also damaged by the spotlight thrown on her beliefs, and by her poor judgement taking a loan from a dodgy businessman, neither of which are Dragon related, they are self inflicted.

Zubeneschamali

Freeman strikes me as a bit like Mary Davis last time out. The only thing I knew about Davis before the 2011 campaign was that she was associated with the Special Olympics, and that made me think well of her.

But the campaign put a spotlight on her, and I learned that her association with the Special Olympics was not as a charity volunteer activist, it was a very well paid position, and she was also a serial member of the boards of state and semi-state bodies, earning over €200,000 in 2010. Earning a lot of money is not a moral failing, but it is a very different image than a charitable woman who helps the kids in the Special Olympics.

Likewise all I knew of Freeman was her association with Pieta House and suicide prevention. The campaign spotlight has not improved her image.