European Parliament Elections 2019

Blueshoe

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

It is both a complex (if you don't understand it fully), and relatively simple (if you are used to it) system.

It's a bit late to explain in full here, and most people are just following and commenting on the exit polls right now etc.

Why don't you open a separate thread asking for STV/PR system to be explained. I am sure many will help, and believe me you are not alone in not following it fully. There should be a lot more information given to prospective voters about this system I feel.

When you get a handle on it you will not stop at just a number 1 vote. It is great to be able to spread your vote. It also gives a much more accurate and fair result, resulting in the will of the voters being translated into votes for minority candidates in some instances.

This is the opposite of the FPTP system in places like UK. Don't give up!

Il stop derailing and look into it myself . Thanks

road_high

grbear wrote: »

3% still represents a failure on her part which pleases me. I'm in Galway East so the bar for TDs hasn't been set particularly high lately but she is by some distance the worst of the current shower. Hate the sight of her.

She across like a bit of a dope on the abortion referendum. Clueless as to what the person on the street was actually thinking

Zubeneschamali

Blueshoe wrote: »

Money and power runs the world. Not voters
Yet I always vote at every opportunity

You are an inspiration! You should simply pick the jackass least likely to win, mark #1 and then stop. Or just go to the pub instead!


Either way, you make my vote count more than yours, because you don't understand it and I do.


Power to the people (who understand the system) !

MacDanger

seligehgit wrote: »

Glad we've the single transferable vote (proportional representation) system which is far fairer and more representative of voters intentions than the UK's first past the post system

In the euro elections the UK (and most European countries, it's an EU requirement I think) have a "list" system where you vote for a party and then the seats are divided up amongst the parties based on vote share (not 100% sure how that works) So FG in Dublin would have had FF as 1st on the list and MD as 2nd. Apparently it's fairer on the smaller parties than FPTP

Colonel Claptrap

road_high wrote: »

So how many of these middle class hypocrites that vote “Green” will be ditching the 4 foreign holidays and three cars? I always find the biggest hypocrites going vote green as they’re comfortably well off enough to afford to be preachy- minor inconveniences like carbon taxes will effect them the least, it’s always the poorest in society that will suffer

I'm not going to personally hand over an extra 5k of my money to the state.

But I will happily vote for a party which taxes me and other middle income earners 5k - if it means implementing policies to curb OUR carbon footprint.

That's the difference.

charlie14

Just Saying wrote: »

I would have thought Casey voters were highly unlikely to transfer to Flanagan in any great numbers.The FF vote might but will Walsh and Mc Hugh be far enough in front?
Also the sequence of events will be vital as it is very likely that Carthy will still not have reached the quota and many of these FF votes could be absorbed by him and leave Flanagan too far behind.

May be wrong but from his presidential vote I have a feeling that Casey`s vote is FF gene pool. IF I am right then little of his or the two FF will go to Walsh. Carthy would not be high on their list either, although moreso than Walsh so on that I would not be surprised if Flannagan got the bulk.

Spanish Eyes

Blueshoe wrote: »

Il stop derailing and look into it myself . Thanks

No worries, and by the way I wasn't accusing you of derailing anything. It is a system that is not fully understood by many, not just you.

road_high

Sawduck wrote: »

If you are referring to everyone who drives a car then well pretty much everyone, so you think we should all be punished

No please don’t put words in my mouth, I said no such thing. Just pointing out the rank hypocrisy of the vast majority that vote green- very few are willing to make any huge personal sacrifices- it’s always someone else’s fault/problem be it large corporations or farmers etc

WrigleysExtra

It seems there's a lot of tree huggers voting in the greens, enjoy adding more taxes on top of the ridiculous amount we pay already!

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

Smith/Casey/Rabbitte have 16% between them. If Walsh gets 60% of McGuinnesss surplus that will leave her on 13% but I cannot see her getting much from the other three. Mc Hugh will get some, but it would not surprise me to see Flanagan pick up the main bulk.

Walsh will have an all-round appeal in a way that for example Carthy won't have.

On the other hand, conservative FF voters won't like her and are more likely to transfer to Carthy.

It will be an interesting count.

Blueshoe

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

You are an inspiration! You should simply pick the jackass least likely to win, mark #1 and then stop. Or just go to the pub instead!


Either way, you make my vote count more than yours, because you don't understand it and I do.


Power to the people (who understand the system) !

Why the attitude. Don't be that guy

road_high

WrigleysExtra wrote: »

It seems there's a lot of tree huggers voting in the greens, enjoy adding more taxes on top of the ridiculous amount we pay already!

Taxes on other people...they’ll be up in arms if the flights to Malaga or NYC are taxed out of their reach !

Plumbthedepths

L1011 wrote:

By election, but if certain people do get elected it could precipitate a general election. Fitzgerald for instance as it will further cut the tiny majority

Bit irresponsible of Leo?

AugustusMinimus

It’s alarming that at a time when we need to reduce our carbon footprint that we vote in the Green Party who are opposed to nuclear power.

Basically all of the developed European countries with the lowest carbon emissions have a significant nuclear baseload for generation. Those that don’t have some of the highest and that includes the likes of Norway who have a significant renewables infrastructure.

drkpower

Isn’t there a rule/law prohibiting publication if exit polls before all countries have voted (ie. Sunday night)?

For Forks Sake

WrigleysExtra wrote: »

It seems there's a lot of tree huggers voting in the greens, enjoy adding more taxes on top of the ridiculous amount we pay already!

You do know the role of an MEP, right?

Plumbthedepths

Spanish Eyes wrote:

Why don't you open a separate thread asking for STV/PR system to be explained. I am sure many will help, and believe me you are not alone in not following it fully. There should be a lot more information given to prospective voters about this system I feel.

It should occupy a few hours on the secondary school syllabus, nothing like informed voters to put a check on politicians.

road_high

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

I'm not going to personally hand over an extra 5k of my money to the state.

But I will happily vote for a party which taxes me and other middle income earners 5k - if it means implementing policies to curb OUR carbon footprint.

That's the difference.

And you think that will actually happen? Bless your naivety and idealism.

gmisk

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

It’s alarming that at a time when we need to reduce our carbon footprint that we vote in the Green Party who are opposed to nuclear power.

Basically all of the developed European countries with the lowest carbon emissions have a significant nuclear baseload for generation. Those that don’t have some of the highest and that includes the likes of Norway who have a significant renewables infrastructure.

I'm happy with no nuclear power here thanks.
Maybe watch the show about Chernobyl and see if you still think nuclear would be great for Ireland.

Zubeneschamali

charlie14 wrote: »

May be wrong but from his presidential vote I have a feeling that Casey`s vote is FF gene pool.

Casey's vote is from the FF pool, but it's the gunk you find when you clean the FF pool filters.

Blueshoe

gmisk wrote: »

I'm happy with no nuclear power here thanks.
Maybe watch the show about Chernobyl and see if you still think nuclear would be great for Ireland.

Odd way to look at things. How many countries have power stations which haven't melted down.

Chernobyl happened due to a flawed reactor design and a poorly trained staff. They have worked out the flaws since I'd imagine

Loafing Oaf

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

It’s alarming that at a time when we need to reduce our carbon footprint that we vote in the Green Party who are opposed to nuclear power.

Basically all of the developed European countries with the lowest carbon emissions have a significant nuclear baseload for generation. Those that don’t have some of the highest and that includes the likes of Norway who have a significant renewables infrastructure.

Unlike all the other Irish parties who are gung ho for nuclear?

road_high

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

It’s alarming that at a time when we need to reduce our carbon footprint that we vote in the Green Party who are opposed to nuclear power.

Basically all of the developed European countries with the lowest carbon emissions have a significant nuclear baseload for generation. Those that don’t have some of the highest and that includes the likes of Norway who have a significant renewables infrastructure.

You can forget anything pragmatic with that lot. The Green Party in Ireland are all middle class nimbys that believe the pain is for other people, as they’re already virtuous

igCorcaigh

drkpower wrote: »

Isn’t there a rule/law prohibiting publication if exit polls before all countries have voted (ie. Sunday night)?

I'm confused about this too!

AugustusMinimus

gmisk wrote: »

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

It’s alarming that at a time when we need to reduce our carbon footprint that we vote in the Green Party who are opposed to nuclear power.

Basically all of the developed European countries with the lowest carbon emissions have a significant nuclear baseload for generation. Those that don’t have some of the highest and that includes the likes of Norway who have a significant renewables infrastructure.

I'm happy with no nuclear power here thanks.
Maybe watch the show about Chernobyl and see if you still think nuclear would be great for Ireland.

Your thinking is irrational. Coal fired stations have released many times the amount of radioactivity into the atmosphere compared to nuclear power per unit generated. Coal has probably caused millions of deaths through radioactivity and lung disease.

This compares to less than 5,000 deaths for all of the worlds meltdowns combined.

Sawduck

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

If only there was some alternative to using cars for <2km journeys, like perhaps walking for 20 minutes or cycling for 10 minutes?


https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/more-than-half-of-travellers-use-cars-for-journeys-under-2km-1.2303451

So everyone should be punished because of lazy feckers???

gmisk

Blueshoe wrote: »

Odd way to look at things. How many countries have power stations which haven't melted down

Not at all plenty of countries have had serious issues the two big ones are Japan and Ukraine but lots of others. Would you be happy to have one near you?

AugustusMinimus

gmisk wrote: »

Blueshoe wrote: »

Odd way to look at things. How many countries have power stations which haven't melted down

Not at all plenty of countries have had serious issues the two big ones are Japan and Ukraine but lots of others. Would you be happy to have one near you?

There are plenty within a few hundred miles of us.

gmisk

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

Your thinking is irrational. Coal fired stations have released many times the amount of radioactivity into the atmosphere compared to nuclear power per unit generated. Coal has probably caused millions of deaths through radioactivity and lung disease.

This compares to less than 5,000 deaths for all of the worlds meltdowns combined.

I'd dispute those figures.
Other studies have estimated 90k killed as result of Chernobyl alone.
Would you want one round the corner from you?

Blueshoe

gmisk wrote: »

Not at all plenty of countries have had serious issues the two big ones are Japan and Ukraine but lots of others. Would you be happy to have one near you?

The Japanese disaster was caused by a tsunami. Ireland hasn't experienced a tsunami since 1755 apparently. Sonny answer is yes I would be happy