Fianna fail/Fianna Geal Confidence and supply deal

James Brown

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

And yet a big chunk of that majority will still go out and vote for FF and/or FG at the next election? That doesn't make sense...

I explained above. Nobody is disputing FG are the most popular party. They cannot hold a government by themselves, so a lot more than a few voters have a distrust of them. Both FF and FG have their die hards who only vote FG/FF. And FG have told the floating voters that FF are A O K now.

Loafing Oaf

Matt Barrett wrote: »

In FG's desperation to maintain power they brought FF back from the near dead. That's one of the legacies of Kenny and Varadkar.

Easy to make this kind of sweeping judgement from the ditch of boards.ie. Reality after the last election was that a government could only be formed by two out of three of FG, FF and SF. With both FG and FF ruling out any deal with SF, and FF ruling out full coalition with FG, something like the current arrangement was pretty much the only game in town as far as I can see. Either that or go back to the people, and would said people have thanked FG for that?

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I explained above. Nobody is disputing FG are the most popular party. They cannot hold a government by themselves, so a lot more than a few voters have a distrust of them. Both FF and FG have their die hards who only vote FG/FF. And FG have told the floating voters that FF are A O K now.

I think you are stretching the analogy too far in suggesting that FG have told the floating voter that FF are AOK.

In reality, the choice facing FG following the last election was FF or SF. What FG have told the floating voter is that however bad FF are, and they are too bad to actually share power with in a proper coalition, they are not as bad as SF.

People also forget that SF had the power to stop FG by going into coalition with FF, but SF ruled it out.

Wanderer78

.... so the dance continues.....

FreudianSlippers

L1011 wrote: »

Renua are dead. You are also the only person who still seems to think Renua would return to their old tax policies - they won't, they are a Christian-right social policy party and nothing else.

Even in the off chance that they did return to their economic policies and had an opportunity to implement them (somehow), I wouldn't vote for them due to their stance on social issues.

FreudianSlippers

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I explained above. Nobody is disputing FG are the most popular party. They cannot hold a government by themselves, so a lot more than a few voters have a distrust of them. Both FF and FG have their die hards who only vote FG/FF. And FG have told the floating voters that FF are A O K now.

Does that really even make sense in our form of democracy? Ok, in the US when you have one choice - red vs blue - your comment might hold weight; however, in the last election I definitely voted for both FF and FG, as well as a green. It's much more nuanced and has nothing to do with the weight of the "die hard" party voters.

Wanderer78

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Does that really even make sense in our form of democracy? Ok, in the US when you have one choice - red vs blue - your comment might hold weight; however, in the last election I definitely voted for both FF and FG, as well as a green. It's much more nuanced and has nothing to do with the weight of the "die hard" party voters.

or is it really red v's redder?

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

I think you are stretching the analogy too far in suggesting that FG have told the floating voter that FF are AOK.

In reality, the choice facing FG following the last election was FF or SF. What FG have told the floating voter is that however bad FF are, and they are too bad to actually share power with in a proper coalition, they are not as bad as SF.

People also forget that SF had the power to stop FG by going into coalition with FF, but SF ruled it out.

Is 32 months not a very short time span in which to attempt re-writing history.
April 2016 FG offered FF a coalition government.

James Brown

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Easy to make this kind of sweeping judgement from the ditch of boards.ie. Reality after the last election was that a government could only be formed by two out of three of FG, FF and SF. With both FG and FF ruling out any deal with SF, and FF ruling out full coalition with FG, something like the current arrangement was pretty much the only game in town as far as I can see. Either that or go back to the people, and would said people have thanked FG for that?

What nonsense. Are you a sitting TD? Should I be ignoring you if you're not?
What do you mean exactly? Is this like the old standard of 'what would you do?' well you can point out incompetence when you see it and you have a civic duty IMO to point out, IMV, intentional exacerbation of crises for private profits.
The only game in town doesn't mean you need applaud bad playing or dismiss fouls.

Yes, they nearly had us 'eating out of bins'. They destroyed the economy. They required the IMF coming over and lied about it....and Fine Gael think they are fine partners in government if it means they can hang on in. No ethics. We'd have been better off if Fine Gael did nothing regards housing. That's a fact. They have made the housing crises worse and the rental sector dependent on hand outs from the state. That's some legacy. At Least Leo can hide behind Brexit when the scandal of the hospital trolleys hits the headlines. Probably blame the brickies for building small wards.

Good loser

I'm amazed at the crowds P Tobin seems to be getting at his rallies and the enthusiasm for his 'economic' ideas. That's just from reports in the papers.
Are they for real?

Imo he might have some chance as an Ind.
But to think a new party would go anywhere with his tired/trite windbaggery is laughable. He has nothing to offer.


(Unless J McGuinness would be interested in jumping ship)

Infini

Wanderer78 wrote: »

.... so the dance continues.....

In fairness an election would be better timed next year rather than next month only because of Brexit and the Brits seeming desire to implode in a pit of their own ignorance and stupidity.

markodaly

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Demand for housing isn't a side effect of a growing economy.

I am sorry but it is.

We have the fastest growing population in Europe, apart from Turkey (if you can call them European), and the fastest growing economy in the EU.
These obviously have an effect on housing and the demand for it.

During the crash, the population of the country fell slightly, with both Irish and non-nationals leaving the country to find work elsewhere. This made rents plummet and housing builds evaporated.

For the first time since the Famine, our population on our Island is set to reach 8 million within the next 30 years. This means we need to house an extra 1.5 million people, and they all cant be housed in a 3-bed semi-d. This means we need to readjust our views on housing, planning and building heights. This also means that we as Irish people need to adopt a more European view on housing and pay more property tax to boot.

No opposition party is going to propose to the electorate that we do these things because it is popular to ignore the real issues behind the housing crisis.

markodaly

Matt Barrett wrote: »

With all due respect, it's looking like a matter of 'so what?'.
We've more children homeless than ever in our history.
Many working people need assistance from the state to pay rent.
Also, again, it must never be forgot, that the actual party that required us to pull of this 'economic miracle' have a very big say in policy currently, because that's stability or something. The supply and confidence deal is no more than two selfish groups holding on to power at any cost.

You are looking at things purely in a negative fashion.
Is it 'so what' that we have near 5% unemployment .i.e full employment?
I think not.

The housing issue is one that is more of a cultural and systemic issue imo. Look at Dublin City Council and their view on 'high rise'. They reduce property taxes and claim they have no money to pay for social housing?

We have an overly democratic system where consensus is needed for everything and anything before we do or build anything. This means that we are really really slow to execute good plans. See Bus Connects, or Dublin Metro or housing for an example. Sure we need more apartments in the city, but don't build them in 'my' suburb etc.etc...

Central government while slow off the mark and now trying to do something about this.
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/building-height-restrictions-in-towns-and-cities-lifted-37604346.html


Stability is something people value, just look across at both side of the water and see where rocking the boat gets you. Trump is a loose cannon on one side, while Brexit is tearing the UK apart. Do you think Irish want to replicate this with a SF led government with a bunch of loony lefties and Indos? If not SF led government, then who?

The only two parties willing to go into government at the last GE were FG and FF (at a push). The rest literally ran away as they used to just being on the bully pulpit, without any responsibility to govern.

If there was an election tomorrow, it would be FG lead government, with some others to make up the numbers. Or FF with SF and others to make up the numbers.

Eric Cartman

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Even in the off chance that they did return to their economic policies and had an opportunity to implement them (somehow), I wouldn't vote for them due to their stance on social issues.

yeah. If they just kept out of the abortion debate I think they would have been a lot more viable, the idea appealed to me but they sank their own ship.

Realistically Every irish election until people wake up again is going to be about doing the least cringeworthy deal to keep the shinners out.

Zubeneschamali

Eric Cartman wrote: »

yeah. If they just kept out of the abortion debate I think they would have been a lot more viable.

Being anti abortion is literally the reason they exist, it's why Lucinda left a promising career in FG.

Eric Cartman

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Being anti abortion is literally the reason they exist, it's why Lucinda left a promising career in FG.

That was the sad part, they made a lot of sense to me with flat taxation, restructuring welfare etc... but the party forming with people who were all publically pro-life and becoming known as the 'pro-life' party just made the noise louder than the signal and sank the ship before it began. There was a lot of promise that was clouded by 'the new staunch catholic party' or 'the iona party' rhetoric.

L1011

You don't find many people with those fiscal viewpoints who are not also on Lucinda's social views part of the spectrum - or further.

blanch152

markodaly wrote: »

If there was an election tomorrow, it would be FG lead government, with some others to make up the numbers. Or FF with SF and others to make up the numbers.

Figures from the poll today point to a FF/SF coalition, with them having 48% of the vote.

Eric Cartman

blanch152 wrote: »

Figures from the poll today point to a FF/SF coalition, with them having 48% of the vote.

Id like to say it would never happen, but MM might be spineless enough to do it , against the members wishes.

Loafing Oaf

blanch152 wrote: »

Figures from the poll today point to a FF/SF coalition, with them having 48% of the vote.

Why not another 'arrangement' of some form between FF and FG, given Martin has ruled out any deal with SF?

charlie14

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Why not another 'arrangement' of some form between FF and FG, given Martin has ruled out any deal with SF?

The reason that neither FF or FG were that keen on a GE I imagine.Polls just indicate it would only be the same again.
A FG minority government with FF support. FG may have missed the bus though by not calling a GE this Autumn. Come Spring 2020 Brexit will be a memory, (if a hard one, a bad memory), and FF will be raising the pressure on health and housing in the meantime. Neither of which will show any if much improvement by then. This children hospital fiasco certainly will not help, and now it looks as if it may also have consequences for the planned maternity hospital.

L1011

The poll this weekend is useless; its from an organisation who are never right. There hasn't been much to change figures since the last RedC poll - the childrens hospital overrun hasn't got the attention it would have a few years ago or without Brexit.

The last RedC would suggest another FG/FF deal but with FF having even less say. Its very unlikely that any potential non-SF option exists, as the only other non-SF options are FG-Lab-SD-GP-Oth or FF-Lab-SD-GP-Oth anyway.

If May gets her deal through somehow, FG will call an election deal be damned. I also suspect that if the UK govt collapses over no-deal and they go for their usual long election cycle, FG will call an ultra-short campaign election at the same time; knowing it'll be settled - and with them in charge still - before the UK figures itself out.

blanch152

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Why not another 'arrangement' of some form between FF and FG, given Martin has ruled out any deal with SF?

Martin won't survive the next election, unless FF is bigger than FG. He is the only obstacle to a FF/SF deal.

markodaly

blanch152 wrote: »

Figures from the poll today point to a FF/SF coalition, with them having 48% of the vote.

They would still need another smaller party or Indos to make up the numbers.
Not only that, I think both SF and FF grassroots would hate it, having to share power with 'the other'.

How stable would that government really be?

It would be disastrous for SF. They have grown their vote by taking over traditional labour heartland. In government they will have to make and back hard decisions, decisions the working class will hate and where SF populist messages will hit the hard brick wall of reality.

charlie14

L1011 wrote: »

The poll this weekend is useless; its from an organisation who are never right. There hasn't been much to change figures since the last RedC poll - the childrens hospital overrun hasn't got the attention it would have a few years ago or without Brexit.

The last RedC would suggest another FG/FF deal but with FF having even less say. Its very unlikely that any potential non-SF option exists, as the only other non-SF options are FG-Lab-SD-GP-Oth or FF-Lab-SD-GP-Oth anyway.

If May gets her deal through somehow, FG will call an election deal be damned. I also suspect that if the UK govt collapses over no-deal and they go for their usual long election cycle, FG will call an ultra-short campaign election at the same time; knowing it'll be settled - and with them in charge still - before the UK figures itself out.

It could be early days over the childrens hospital, especially if it has a knock-on effect on the maternity hospital and we have another Winter crisis in health.

I think FG would be playing a very dangerous game calling an election short of the time agreed with FF. Especially if Brexit is not sorted out. If we end up with a hard border, that also could have an effect on the FG vote in snap election imho.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

Figures from the poll today point to a FF/SF coalition, with them having 48% of the vote.

It would also point to a FG/SF coalition with over 50% of the vote.

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

It would also point to a FG/SF coalition with over 50% of the vote.

Possibly, but SF will be campaigning on the basis that Varadkar has to go, as will FF, making them a more likely coalition.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

Possibly, but SF will be campaigning on the basis that Varadkar has to go, as will FF, making them a more likely coalition.

When coalitions are required it is amazing how quickly the animosity of a campaign can become like dew on a Summer morning.
Drifts away very fast.

When it comes to getting their hands on the reins of power, politicians become very pragmatic.

FreudianSlippers

L1011 wrote: »

You don't find many people with those fiscal viewpoints who are not also on Lucinda's social views part of the spectrum - or further.

Really? :rolleyes:

FreudianSlippers

blanch152 wrote: »

Martin won't survive the next election, unless FF is bigger than FG. He is the only obstacle to a FF/SF deal.

I'm not sure I'd give a preference to FF if I knew that they would potentially attempt to form a government with SF tbh.