Peter Casey believes Travellers should not be recognised as an ethnic minority

JMNolan

Atlantis50 wrote: »

Got in for 2nd when it was 16/1.

All of the online polls I've seen show him doing very well and the bookies odds have shifted from expecting him to come last to 4th.

I still think he'll come second.

Paddy Power has him in third place ahead of Liadh Ni Riada

vonlars

dav3 wrote: »

This idea trying to be pushed by some of Casey being a kind of 'plucky underdog' doesn't really cut it on here does it? With the poll saying he'll receive more votes than all of the other candidates combined, and 90% of the posts on here desperately shilling for him and outraged when there are any negative stories about him, it's a bit of a stretch.

Nobody has to attack Peter Casey, he's doing a grand job at taking himself down. People simply have to quote the man and point out the ridiculous uneducated nature of his statements.

A lot of these statements have been spammed across Irish forums in the past few months. Usually by anti-Irish posters, clueless about Irish culture, Irish people, Irish history and Irish politics.

We've never had a candidate attack so many Irish people before. The end result, is that Peter Casey is the most anti-Irish presidential candidate we've had in the history of the state. Whoever is currently whispering in his hear, is slowly pushing him to the edge of the cliff at the same time.

Go on dav3, give us a few of this uneducated statements. Quiet day in work so should be able to refute them fairly quickly for you.

maxwell smart

dav3 wrote: »

This idea trying to be pushed by some of Casey being a kind of 'plucky underdog' doesn't really cut it on here does it? With the poll saying he'll receive more votes than all of the other candidates combined, and 90% of the posts on here desperately shilling for him and outraged when there are any negative stories about him, it's a bit of a stretch.

Nobody has to attack Peter Casey, he's doing a grand job at taking himself down. People simply have to quote the man and point out the ridiculous uneducated nature of his statements.

A lot of these statements have been spammed across Irish forums in the past few months. Usually by anti-Irish posters, clueless about Irish culture, Irish people, Irish history and Irish politics.

We've never had a candidate attack so many Irish people before. The end result, is that Peter Casey is the most anti-Irish presidential candidate we've had in the history of the state. Whoever is currently whispering in his hear, is slowly pushing him to the edge of the cliff at the same time.

I'm sorry but I don't agree with you. While some of his words can be seen as perhaps a little inflammatory I don't see where his statements can be seen as ridiculously uneducated.
I'm paraphrasing the below but:
He said that he doesn't believe travellers should be treated differently than the rest of the population. Seems reasonable.
He said that there is a housing crisis and that people who turn down perfectly good houses should go to the end of the line for the next house. Seems reasonable.
He said that there is too big a reliance on social welfare by some sections of Irish society. Seems reasonable.
What did he say that is so uneducated and anti-Irish as perhaps I've missed something?

Cina

dav3 wrote: »

This idea trying to be pushed by some of Casey being a kind of 'plucky underdog' doesn't really cut it on here does it? With the poll saying he'll receive more votes than all of the other candidates combined, and 90% of the posts on here desperately shilling for him and outraged when there are any negative stories about him, it's a bit of a stretch.

Nobody has to attack Peter Casey, he's doing a grand job at taking himself down. People simply have to quote the man and point out the ridiculous uneducated nature of his statements.

A lot of these statements have been spammed across Irish forums in the past few months. Usually by anti-Irish posters, clueless about Irish culture, Irish people, Irish history and Irish politics.

We've never had a candidate attack so many Irish people before. The end result, is that Peter Casey is the most anti-Irish presidential candidate we've had in the history of the state. Whoever is currently whispering in his hear, is slowly pushing him to the edge of the cliff at the same time.

Who exactly has he attacked? Where are your quotes?

He has said traveler's should not be an ethnic minority, but that's not an attack, that's an opinion on their status on society. So what Irish people has he attacked exactly?

Time and time again in this thread people like you come rolling in claiming that anyone voting for him is stupid/misinformed/uneducated/whatever but you don't seem to cop the fact that it's educated people who are voting for him, because he's targeting educated, middle-class people in his campaign, unlike every other politician and media member out there.

It's also incredibly insulting and frankly idiotic to try and claim that anyone supporting Casey hasn't a clue about Irish culture or is anti-Irish. I'd argue that anyone supporting Casey is moreso dismayed about the current situation here and simply wants things to improve in their home country.

Get off your high horse, eh?

Omackeral

dav3 wrote: »

This idea trying to be pushed by some of Casey being a kind of 'plucky underdog' doesn't really cut it on here does it? With the poll saying he'll receive more votes than all of the other candidates combined, and 90% of the posts on here desperately shilling for him and outraged when there are any negative stories about him, it's a bit of a stretch.

Nobody has to attack Peter Casey, he's doing a grand job at taking himself down. People simply have to quote the man and point out the ridiculous uneducated nature of his statements.

A lot of these statements have been spammed across Irish forums in the past few months. Usually by anti-Irish posters, clueless about Irish culture, Irish people, Irish history and Irish politics.

We've never had a candidate attack so many Irish people before. The end result, is that Peter Casey is the most anti-Irish presidential candidate we've had in the history of the state. Whoever is currently whispering in his hear, is slowly pushing him to the edge of the cliff at the same time.

dav3

vonlars wrote: »

Go on dav3, give us a few of this uneducated statements. Quiet day in work so should be able to refute them fairly quickly for you.

The thread title. The actual title of this thread that you're posting in that started it all off.

ohnonotgmail

maxwell smart wrote: »

I'm sorry but I don't agree with you. While some of his words can be seen as perhaps a little inflammatory I don't see where his statements can be seen as ridiculously uneducated.
I'm paraphrasing the below but:
He said that he doesn't believe travellers should be treated differently than the rest of the population. Seems reasonable.
He said that there is a housing crisis and that people who turn down perfectly good houses should go to the end of the line for the next house. Seems reasonable.
He said that there is too big a reliance on social welfare by some sections of Irish society. Seems reasonable.
What did he say that is so uneducated and anti-Irish as perhaps I've missed something?

He said he wasn't aware of the ethnic status of travellers. This is a man running for president who will have responsibility for ensuring that laws enacted by the oireachtas are constitutional. Should he not have a little bit of a clue what he is talking about?

Cina

dav3 wrote: »

The thread title. The actual title of this thread that you're posting in that started it all off.

That is not an attack. That is an opinion. There's a difference. Try figure it out.

Omackeral

dav3 wrote: »

The thread title. The actual title of this thread that you're posting in that started it all off.

Here's the thread title in full;

''Presidential candidate Peter Casey believes Travellers should not be recognised as an''

More lies from dav3.

super_furry

Think the clue is in the hashtag on his the video where his American narrator goes on the attack against non-Irish dogs.

#APresidentForUsAll

Now on the surface that looks like "A President For Us All" but look deeper and you'll see it's actually "A President For UsA ll" It's right in front of your faces people! Peter Casey is an asset working for Donald Trump's Government and is going to be laying the groundwork for a surreptitious American invasion through deploying their agents at the highest level of Irish political society.

And who in turn is Donald Trump working for? The Russians! Now lets look at the has tag again #APresidentForUsAll - RSUS or, more simply USSR.

It's all there sheeple! Just follow the money! The reason that Casey is now going after Bród and Shadow - Michael D's dogs - is because they're Bernese Mountain Dogs or the Greater Swiss Mountain Dog. Now what do we know about the Greater Swiss Mountain Dog? Well only that "During World War II the breed was used by the Swiss Army as a draft dog.[1] In 1945 over 100 puppies were registered, indicating the existence of about 350–400 dogs of the breed at that time." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Swiss_Mountain_Dog

The Russians, AKA Peter Casey's campaign organisers are aware of the particularly strong sense of smell that Bród and Shadow would have and that they're particularly adept at sniffing out Russians. I therefor expect to see them implicated in a false-flag attack, possibly on Margaret Cash, within the next two days.

Follow the money people.

maxwell smart

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

maxwell smart wrote: »

I'm sorry but I don't agree with you. While some of his words can be seen as perhaps a little inflammatory I don't see where his statements can be seen as ridiculously uneducated.
I'm paraphrasing the below but:
He said that he doesn't believe travellers should be treated differently than the rest of the population. Seems reasonable.
He said that there is a housing crisis and that people who turn down perfectly good houses should go to the end of the line for the next house. Seems reasonable.
He said that there is too big a reliance on social welfare by some sections of Irish society. Seems reasonable.
What did he say that is so uneducated and anti-Irish as perhaps I've missed something?

He said he wasn't aware of the ethnic status of travellers. This is a man running for president who will have responsibility for ensuring that laws enacted by the oireachtas are constitutional. Should he not have a little bit of a clue what he is talking about?

You think Mickey D doesn't get legal advice on signing / Not signing constitutional documents?
Do they have to be sent to him in the form of a Sonnet so he understands them?

Atlantis50

JMNolan wrote: »

Paddy Power has him in third place ahead of Liadh Ni Riada

You're right. If they think he can leapfrog her, then I see no issue with him leapfrogging Gallagher who has led a lethargic campaign so far.

ohnonotgmail

maxwell smart wrote: »

You think Mickey D doesn't get legal advice on signing / Not signing constitutional documents?
Do they have to be sent to him in the form of a Sonnet so he understands them?

I'm sure he does get advice but he wouldn't need to be told about something as straightforward as the ethnic status of travellers when asked about them.

gmisk

super_furry wrote: »

Think the clue is in the hashtag on his the video where his American narrator goes on the attack against non-Irish dogs.

#APresidentForUsAll

Now on the surface that looks like "A President For Us All" but look deeper and you'll see it's actually "A President For UsA ll" It's right in front of your faces people! Peter Casey is an asset working for Donald Trump's Government and is going to be laying the groundwork for a surreptitious American invasion through deploying their agents at the highest level of Irish political society.

And who in turn is Donald Trump working for? The Russians! Now lets look at the has tag again #APresidentForUsAll - RSUS or, more simply USSR.

It's all there sheeple! Just follow the money! The reason that Casey is now going after Bród and Shadow - Michael D's dogs - is because they're Bernese Mountain Dogs or the Greater Swiss Mountain Dog. Now what do we know about the Greater Swiss Mountain Dog? Well only that "During World War II the breed was used by the Swiss Army as a draft dog.[1] In 1945 over 100 puppies were registered, indicating the existence of about 350–400 dogs of the breed at that time." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Swiss_Mountain_Dog

The Russians, AKA Peter Casey's campaign organisers are aware of the particularly strong sense of smell that Bród and Shadow would have and that they're particularly adept at sniffing out Russians. I therefor expect to see them implicated in a false-flag attack, possibly on Margaret Cash, within the next two days.

Follow the money people.

U ok hun?

EdgeCase

The president does not really have any scope to simply refuse to sign legislation on a whim. It's only possible where it's unconstitutional and they have to refer it, after discussion with the Council of State, to the Supreme Court.

They can't use the power to block legislation they don't like, only have it constitutionally tested.

However, that's also a right that *all* people in Ireland have to some extent through the courts. If you identify that a piece of legislation is possibly unconstitutional, particularly during a court case where it's being used, you can pursue that and we have had quite a few cases where pieces of legislation were 'struck down' as unconstitutional by the courts. This is also one of the weird scenarios where the law can act somewhat retrospectively too.

So, basically the president's power is only a fairly limited check and balance in the system. It's nothing at all like the US president.

I would assume if a president were to deliberately block legislation by flatly refusing to sign it, that it could easily end up in a constitutional crisis and their impeachment. They were never intended to have that kind of total veto. To date, that has never arisen as a problem.

I mean, as a hypothetical example, if a president were to take issue with say the abortion legislation, they can only refer it to the Supreme Court. If it's deemed to be constitutional legislation, then they must sign it. If they refused point blank, then it would be a case of them acting ultra vires (beyond their legal powers) and they would be open to impeachment or their resignation on a matter of personal beliefs.

This is why I don't really see the point in the debates discussing things like "would you sign x, y or z.." If it's constitutional, they have to sign it.

The debates need to be focused on what these candidates are actually proposing to do in the office. It's a non-political, ceremonial role and it should really be about representing, interpreting and uniting the country and providing a very different type of leadership to the Taoiseach or any other political figure.

robindch

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

I'm voting for Casey not solely on his special status views, I'm going to vote for him because of the aforementioned demonisation the man has been subjected to, both on the media, by our politicians and on here. But I'm especially giving him my no1 because the Taoiseach of the country thought he has the right to subtly ask me not to.

So you're going to vote for a guy not because of anything he might bring to the table - like honesty or ability - but instead because you feel sorry for him and want to spite somebody else?

That is a misuse of your vote and represents a fairly massive misunderstanding of democracy on your part.

maxwell smart

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

maxwell smart wrote: »

You think Mickey D doesn't get legal advice on signing / Not signing constitutional documents?
Do they have to be sent to him in the form of a Sonnet so he understands them?

I'm sure he does get advice but he wouldn't need to be told about something as straightforward as the ethnic status of travellers when asked about them.

Probably not, but equally I'm sure there are areas where Casey (and indeed the other candidates) would be more knowledgeable than him. Mental health for example. I'd imagine Joan Freeman is more knowledgeable than Mickey

Homer

robindch wrote: »

So you're going to vote for a guy not because of anything he might bring to the table - like honesty or ability - but instead because you feel sorry for him and want to spite somebody else?

That is a misuse of your vote and represents a fairly massive misunderstanding of democracy on your part.

NO, if you bothered to actually read their post, especially the word "solely" and "especially"

also its none of your bloody business how they use their vote :rolleyes:

McMurphy

dav3 wrote: »

This idea trying to be pushed by some of Casey being a kind of 'plucky underdog' doesn't really cut it on here does it? With the poll saying he'll receive more votes than all of the other candidates combined, and 90% of the posts on here desperately shilling for him and outraged when there are any negative stories about him, it's a bit of a stretch.

Nobody has to attack Peter Casey, he's doing a grand job at taking himself down. People simply have to quote the man and point out the ridiculous uneducated nature of his statements.

A lot of these statements have been spammed across Irish forums in the past few months. Usually by anti-Irish posters, clueless about Irish culture, Irish people, Irish history and Irish politics.

We've never had a candidate attack so many Irish people before. The end result, is that Peter Casey is the most anti-Irish presidential candidate we've had in the history of the state. Whoever is currently whispering in his hear, is slowly pushing him to the edge of the cliff at the same time.

dav3, after the countless times you've disappeared after being asked to give examples of Casey being a racist or bigot, you should become a subscriber to the site and request a new username.

May I suggest BoardsHideAndSeekChamp2018.

ohnonotgmail

maxwell smart wrote: »

Probably not, but equally I'm sure there are areas where Casey (and indeed the other candidates) would be more knowledgeable than him. Mental health for example. I'd imagine Joan Freeman is more knowledgeable than Mickey

Well if you are going to discuss something is it best not to try and educate yourself a little first?

vonlars

dav3 wrote: »

The thread title. The actual title of this thread that you're posting in that started it all off.

"Peter Casey believes travellers should not be recognised as an ethnic minority".

Firstly, it's an opinion, so all I can give you is arguments that support his opinion.

Let's start with genes - travellers genes are Irish. Not Irish traveller. The difference in their genes comes from consanguinity, aka inbreeding. Source: https://www.ed.ac.uk/usher/news-events/news-2017/gene-study-reveals-irish-travellers-ancestry. So there we have it, they are not what you could class as scientifically an ethnic minority.

Further argument is that by being classed an 'ethnic minority' they are further segregating themselves from the general population. We are all Irish, we all live here and so our goal should be to all be an equal, inclusive society. Giving a certain section of society special rights above everyone else is not conducive to that goal.

Proof of that segregation can be seen in the fact that education levels are low, as are their employment levels. Of 30,000 travellers, 2,000 of them are employed. If they were to be their own society it would fail, as that is a completely unworkable rate of employment. The rest of them presumably live off welfare, paid by the Irish taxpayer. I think it is therefore fair to say that those who class themselves as Irish Travellers do not make a fair contribution to society. Source: https://www.cso.ie/en/csolatestnews/presspages/2017/census2016profile8-irishtravellersethnicityandreligion/

In case that wasn't enough for you, while making up 0.6% of the population, they make up 15% and 20% of the male and female prison populations respectively. Source: https://www.ssgt.ie/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/TPI-Ethnic-Identifiers-in-Irish-Prisons-Book.pdf That is extremely disproportionate.

On top of all of that, their culture has died. They are no longer hard working people who go around looking for work or mending pots and pans. That's just indisputable.

So, let's turn the question to you, dav3. Why should they be classed as an ethnic minority?

dav3

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

dav3, after the countless times you've disappeared after being asked to give examples of Casey being a racist or bigot, you should become a subscriber to the site and request a new username.

May I suggest BoardsHideAndSeekChamp2018.

All I can suggest to you is to go back through the posts.

Let me guess, we'll have a bit of a back and forth before you flounce out of the thread, tomorrow someone will ask the exact same question and we'll have to put up with another Peter Casey anti-Irish rant.

robindch

Homer wrote: »

NO, if you bothered to actually read their post, especially the word "solely" and "especially"

I read both words - both carefully - and that's why I replied why I did. Have a read of my post again

Homer wrote: »

also its none of your bloody business how they use their vote :rolleyes:

It's not a well-functioning democracy if people choose to vote on proxy issues - as above, it represents a fairly massive misunderstanding of the system, not to mention personal responsibility too.

Seriously, I asked before, but no one could give a proper answer.
What difference does it make if travellers are an ethnic minority?
It does not effect anyone else, in fact, I don't see how it effects them.
So, what difference does it make & why are so many people dead against it?

McMurphy

robindch wrote: »

So you're going to vote for a guy not because of anything he might bring to the table - like honesty or ability - but instead because you feel sorry for him and want to spite somebody else?

That is a misuse of your vote and represents a fairly massive misunderstanding of democracy on your part.

Find it odd that you missed this bit tbh.

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Well then maybe I didn't add, I found Casey's truthfulness refreshing, (especially when he called the others out on their " disingenuous-ness" ref a halting site on their doorsteps.

And I firmly believe that MDH is a shyster, who is merely milking the system, only in multiples of what the aforementioned average traveller would.

Casey and LNR were the only two candidates in the race imo.

But Casey just pipped her.

So it's a yes from me for Casey. Louie?

EdgeCase

robindch wrote: »

I read both words - both carefully - and that's why I replied why I did. Have a read of my post again :)It's not a well-functioning democracy if people choose to vote on proxy issues - as above, it represents a fairly massive misunderstanding of the system, not to mention personal responsibility too.

And this is also why there's a huge oneness on the media, particularly the likes of RTE, to ensure that the candidates are not debating things that are totally irrelevant to the presidential office.

When someone goes off on a soapbox about rural broadband, the health service, social services provision or creating jobs in the west or any other legislative issue like that, they need to be immediately pulled up on it by the moderator. It's resulting in debates that are totally irrelevant to the presidency and it's misleading the electorate too, if people genuinely think the Irish president can do something to push any policy issues at all.

It's like half the population and a good % of the candidates, don't even understand the job description.

dubdaymo

There was a time when the President was just someone sitting up in the Park minding his own business. Nobody had ever given a toss about who was up there because the position is totally irrelevant in either an Irish or World context.

Then your wan Robinson came along full of her own importance (and sh1t) followed by your other wan who was almost as bad.

I wasn't bothered much about his upcoming election as all the candidates appeared to be the usual mixture of PC-loving nobodys terrified of expressing or being associated with any views that might differ from the Facebook/TwitterWarriors/Hashtag brigade and all the other pathetic groups that have taken over the country.

Then Peter Casey spoke out. It doesn't matter whether or not he spoke out in order to get more votes. The fact is he did have the courage to speak out and call things like they are. Anybody who has not had to live with the absolute Hell of an illegal traveller encampment on their doorstep is not qualified to comment on the subject. Where I used to live we had 5 long years of filth, thuggery, robberies and other law-breaking (20 yards from our doorsteps) that nobody else would have been allowed to get away with. The Laws of the country were suspended just for them. I have no hesitation in calling those people who inflicted this torture as the scum of the Earth. Plenty of other areas suffered the same fate with even football grounds and parks being invaded and destroyed on a regular basis. It cost millions to clear up and disinfect the areas when they were gone.

Peter Casey gets my No.1 by a country mile. The others, who claimed on Live TV they would have no problem with such an encampment moving in beside them, can (insert any expletive you like) off.

McMurphy

dav3 wrote: »

All I can suggest to you is to go back through the posts.

Let me guess, we'll have a bit of a back and forth before you flounce out of the thread, tomorrow someone will ask the exact same question and we'll have to put up with another Peter Casey anti-Irish rant.

I'm not asking you to show your posts, I'm asking you to point out what Casey said that you felt was racist or bigoted., he's had non - stop media attention for a week or so, so it shouldn't prove too much to ask.

Simple copy and paste should suffice with a link to the article.

EdgeCase

Again though, what has any of this got to do with the presidency. If he wants to campaign about ethnic minority recognition or removal of that recognition, the president has absolutely no role whatsoever in any of that.

If a president decided to behave like a US executive president and started to try and challenge the government and the Houses of the Oireachtas, then they'd simply be acting unconstitutionally and you'd be straight into a crisis and probably impeachment if they didn't cop onto themselves.

It's a very restricted and restrictive kind of role that is nothing like being a TD or a Senator.

Campaigning on issues that have nothing to do with the role of the presidency is very misleading and is confusing some of the electorate. At best, someone gets elected and is then unable to deliver any of the things they said they would do as they find out the role is not what they thought it was, or at worst they cause a constitutional crisis.

ThunbergsAreGo

robindch wrote: »

So you're going to vote for a guy not because of anything he might bring to the table - like honesty or ability - but instead because you feel sorry for him and want to spite somebody else?

That is a misuse of your vote and represents a fairly massive misunderstanding of democracy on your part.

There is precious little to vote for anyone in this election

Reasons I have heard are
"he seems a nice man"
"he is already president"
"he is old"
"I cant vote for him, he looks like a leprechaun and other nations make fun of him"
"he looks like an egg and I like eggs"
"he was my favourite dragon"
"I feel sorry for her spending her own money"