Northern Ireland Westminster General Election

FrancieBrady

Alex Kane - normally pro Unionist is wittering on Arlene. Can she last for much longer?

The DUP has another problem, of course. Arlene Foster. Under her watch unionism lost its majority in Stormont, was ‘betrayed’ by two prime ministers in whom the party put so much trust, saw unionist MPs outnumbered by non-unionists for the first time ever in Westminster and now facing the prospect of serious concessions in return for a rebooted Assembly.

I know exactly what Arlene would have said had it been David Trimble responsible for all of this. She knows it, too.

https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/opinion/alex-kane-arlene-foster-is-just-one-of-many-problems-for-the-dup-1-9175288

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Alex Kane - normally pro Unionist is wittering on Arlene. Can she last for much longer?


https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/opinion/alex-kane-arlene-foster-is-just-one-of-many-problems-for-the-dup-1-9175288

It is amazing that neither leader of the two main parties in the North has faced a heave since the election. One lost 5%, the other 7%, yet their members just seem to suck it up. Makes them look like cults, more than political parties.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

It is amazing that neither leader of the two main parties in the North has faced a heave since the election. One lost 5%, the other 7%, yet their members just seem to suck it up. Makes them look like cults, more than political parties.

Well one of them led a party that took a seat never before held by a nationalist and decided to step aside in another constituency to allow another Unionist to be toppled.

Every cloud and all that...meanwhile, did you digest what Arlene has presided over (doesn't even get into RHI, which wiped out the veneer of probity and fiscal rectitude they liked to take out and polish too on the high moral ground)

blanch152

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

26% of 2019 Alliance supporters voting Leave in 2016 is intriguing - suggests many unionists having second thoughts about Brexit?

https://twitter.com/LucidTalk/status/1206699197740781576

Possibly, but also 46% of UUP support voted Leave in 2016.

Of more interest was the gender breakdown, the three most extreme parties - DUP, SF and UUP, in that order - had the highest number of male votes.

circadian

Just curious, will there be a breakdown by polling station/area or lower level than constituency available for this?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So you disagree with Kane and almost every other pundit that the 2019 General Election was a disaster for the DUP?

Ha ha ha, blanch, criticises the Green/Orange centric politics of NI but happily indulges in it when it suits him. 'As long as the DUP beat SF, it's a win for the DUP....'

Brilliant really!

https://sluggerotoole.com/2019/12/17/after-ge2019-sinn-fein-is-faced-with-strategic-reversals-it-will-struggle-to-understand/

Pretty much in line with my views is this Slugger article. Stunning loss of vote for Sinn Fein.

An Ciarraioch

More Lucid Talk poll data - Alliance supporters are 25% unionist, 50% neutral and 25% nationalist, but most surprisingly, 32% of SDLP voters are neutral:

https://twitter.com/LucidTalk/status/1207016459127443456

FrancieBrady

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

More Lucid Talk poll data - Alliance supporters are 25% unionist, 50% neutral and 25% nationalist, but most surprisingly, 32% of SDLP voters are neutral:

https://twitter.com/LucidTalk/status/1207016459127443456

Yes...neutral and that means their votes will float around.

No doubt about it on the current main issues Brexit and Stormont that the votes have floated away from the 2 main parties. Are they long term votes secured by the Alliance and the SDLP, that is very much up in the air.
Both have to stand by what they campaigned on, which might present challenges.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes...neutral and that means their votes will float around.

No doubt about it on the current main issues Brexit and Stormont that the votes have floated away from the 2 main parties. Are they long term votes secured by the Alliance and the SDLP, that is very much up in the air.
Both have to stand by what they campaigned on, which might present challenges.

The general election confirmed a trend that started in the local and European elections. You were dismissing those results on the same based that the votes were only lent.

At what stage will you accept that there has been a shift?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

The general election confirmed a trend that started in the local and European elections. You were dismissing those results on the same based that the votes were only lent.

At what stage will you accept that there has been a shift?

Brexit and Stormont were issues at those elections too.

Settle blanch, if there has been a shift, that is fine by me, because the shift is towards were I, for one, want it to go - i.e parties favouring a UI in the majority. That is the important 'trend' if we are looking at trends.

You seem fixated with the idea that ONE party losing vote share is some sort of victory for you while ignoring the long list of losses now for Arlene and her party, in standing and elections and power. Why is that, I wonder?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Brexit and Stormont were issues at those elections too.

Settle blanch, if there has been a shift, that is fine by me, because the shift is towards were I, for one, want it to go - i.e parties favouring a UI in the majority. That is the important 'trend' if we are looking at trends.

You seem fixated with the idea that ONE party losing vote share is some sort of victory for you while ignoring the long list of losses now for Arlene and her party, in standing and elections and power. Why is that, I wonder?

TWO particular parties losing vote share is a victory for Northern Ireland in my opinion.

Both sectarian parties are extremist and an impediment to the normalisation of Northern Ireland.

Your mistake, once again, is to count votes on the basis of whether or not parties favour a united Ireland. The reality is that the likes of the Alliance and the SDLP are not going to support a call for a border poll, until there is a working democracy in Northern Ireland that isn't interrupted by hissy fits from one side or the other every six months. As one comment on that article put it in respect of the ILA: "turning the issue into a 4 year identity politics bun fight is a waste of time." That is what the electorate have woken up to.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

TWO particular parties losing vote share is a victory for Northern Ireland in my opinion.

Both sectarian parties are extremist and an impediment to the normalisation of Northern Ireland.

Your mistake, once again, is to count votes on the basis of whether or not parties favour a united Ireland. The reality is that the likes of the Alliance and the SDLP are not going to support a call for a border poll, until there is a working democracy in Northern Ireland that isn't interrupted by hissy fits from one side or the other every six months. As one comment on that article put it in respect of the ILA: "turning the issue into a 4 year identity politics bun fight is a waste of time." That is what the electorate have woken up to.

I and the majority of the media (as linked to before) see the significance of this election.

Your head in the sand search for anything at all to run down ONE party is also significant. When challenged you try your best to make it about two parties but you are not fooling anyone.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I and the majority of the media (as linked to before) see the significance of this election.

Your head in the sand search for anything at all to run down ONE party is also significant. When challenged you try your best to make it about two parties but you are not fooling anyone.

I detest the DUP almost as much as SF, the only difference being that SF supported a terrorist organisation that claimed to be acting on behalf of me and every other Irish person and had no democratic legitimacy which makes them slightly worse.

I know it makes your head spin to think that somebody isn't enraptured by the Green/Orange binary dispute, but hey, that's my opinion.

Edit: The other thing, there is rarely if ever anyone on here mindlessly defending the DUP in the same way that SF are defended 24/7/365 so don't need to debate how bad they are.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I detest the DUP almost as much as SF, the only difference being that SF supported a terrorist organisation that claimed to be acting on behalf of me and every other Irish person and had no democratic legitimacy which makes them slightly worse.

I know it makes your head spin to think that somebody isn't enraptured by the Green/Orange binary dispute, but hey, that's my opinion.

Edit: The other thing, there is rarely if ever anyone on here mindlessly defending the DUP in the same way that SF are defended 24/7/365 so don't need to debate how bad they are.

I only defend SF from mindless anti republican rants by people who are partitionist.

I do not defend their various policy decisions.

And like it or not, a still significant proportion of people on this island see the DUP as people who defended the actions of Britain (and the indigenous Loyalism they also supported) and their terrorising of Irish people. I.E. There was a 30 year conflict/war over it which you might have noticed.

Mr.Nice Guy

It would be interesting to see a percentage breakdown on the attitude towards the EU amongst Alliance voters. My impression without seeing data would be that they would generally be strong supporters.

In a post-Brexit world that is significant. Prior to 2016, such voters would have had no incentive to think about reunification. But given that Brexit takes NI out of the EU, albeit in a less painful way than across the water, that does offer an incentive that did not exist before - vote for it and see NI return to the EU.

4068ac1elhodqr

Very unlikely but maybe there is a route for SF to take seats across the water, if ever some very close vote is required:
Do what this SNP chap did (cross the fingers) when swearing in, seems he was taken in anyway regardless:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1218852/SNP-MP-Steven-Bonnar-House-of-Commons-swearing-in-video-Queen-Elizabeth-latest
Could also do what TBP did in Brussels, turn the otherway and face the wall during any pomp and ceremony.

FrancieBrady

Oakley Short Lung wrote: »

Very unlikely but maybe there is a route for SF to take seats across the water, if ever some very close vote is required:
Do what this SNP chap did (cross the fingers) when swearing in, seems he was taken in anyway regardless:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1218852/SNP-MP-Steven-Bonnar-House-of-Commons-swearing-in-video-Queen-Elizabeth-latest
Could also do what TBP did in Brussels, turn the otherway and face the wall during any pomp and ceremony.

I see Claire Hanna wrote a very 'polite, defferential, glad to be of use' letter objecting to having to take the oath of allegiance, but took it anyway. The SDLP have fallen foul of this before, it remains to be seen if she will once again be 'almost ridiculous, almost the fool'.

4068ac1elhodqr

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I see Claire Hanna wrote a very 'polite, defferential, glad to be of use' letter objecting to having to take the oath of allegiance, but took it anyway. The SDLP have fallen foul of this before, it remains to be seen if she will once again be 'almost ridiculous, almost the fool'.

Think she lodged a respectful 'protest' of sorts, better than nothing anyway.
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/general-election-2019/sdlps-claire-hanna-lodges-respectful-protest-over-pledge-to-queen-in-commons-38796681.html

Any change will likely be spearheaded by the SNP who have the numbers to raise the topic, crossing fingers might only be the start.

circadian

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I see Claire Hanna wrote a very 'polite, deferential, glad to be of use' letter objecting to having to take the oath of allegiance, but took it anyway. The SDLP have fallen foul of this before, it remains to be seen if she will once again be 'almost ridiculous, almost the fool'.

I don't see the problem to be fair. She's agreed to play the game on behalf of her constituents, as she was elected to do. I see no problem with Claires statement of not agreeing with it and objections.

4068ac1elhodqr

Interesting that the MPs over there just gave themselves a double inflation pay rise of 3.1%, to £82k just before bumper holidays.
Whislt the Nurses of the North had to stand out in the stormy freezing weather today just to ask for basic pay parity with Scot/Wales/Eng.

FrancieBrady

circadian wrote: »

I don't see the problem to be fair. She's agreed to play the game on behalf of her constituents, as she was elected to do. I see no problem with Claires statement of not agreeing with it and objections.

The SDLP made the case that WM was the place to be to achieve for NI. They have to prove that now. They fell from grace for doing the exact same thing and not only taking the oath but the 'honours' as well. We shall see how they get on.

FrancieBrady

Let's see what the 'MP for Foyle' can do about this.
Sickening for the people of Derry if this happens.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/boris-johnson-to-end-prosecutions-of-troubles-veterans-through-queens-speech-report-38797907.html?fbclid=IwAR2s8MXO_M1rdZfiG4YyaKcdT6rZ2diR6H6U2rfEv3ccq1j8W7nn_vSIXhQ

joe40

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Let's see what the 'MP for Foyle' can do about this.
Sickening for the people of Derry if this happens.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/boris-johnson-to-end-prosecutions-of-troubles-veterans-through-queens-speech-report-38797907.html?fbclid=IwAR2s8MXO_M1rdZfiG4YyaKcdT6rZ2diR6H6U2rfEv3ccq1j8W7nn_vSIXhQ

Agree it sickening but what would a Sinn Fein MP be able to do about it.
I fully agree with Sinn Fein policy of abstention, if that is the policy on which they're elected. If SDLP have a different approach so be it.

FrancieBrady

joe40 wrote: »

Agree it sickening but what would a Sinn Fein MP be able to do about it.
I fully agree with Sinn Fein policy of abstention, if that is the policy on which they're elected. If SDLP have a different approach so be it.

Johnson is effectively shutting down all nationalist campaigns for justice and giving the Unionist community what they want. And the SDLP are about to show quite effectively how useless nationalist representation still is in WM.
Not good optics starting off.
SF on the other hand can say they have nothing to do with this because there is nothing for them in WM.

L1011

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Johnson is effectively shutting down all nationalist campaigns for justice and giving the Unionist community what they want. And the SDLP are about to show quite effectively how useless nationalist representation still is in WM.
Not good optics starting off.
SF on the other hand can say they have nothing to do with this because there is nothing for them in WM.

Your logic doesn't work here.

SF aren't even going to try to vote against it.

Russman

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Johnson is effectively shutting down all nationalist campaigns for justice and giving the Unionist community what they want. And the SDLP are about to show quite effectively how useless nationalist representation still is in WM.
Not good optics starting off.
SF on the other hand can say they have nothing to do with this because there is nothing for them in WM.

But that's true of any parliament anywhere, where there's a majority government who bring in legislation that a particular group oppose. No point in anyone saying they're taking their ball home and not playing anymore.

Not agreeing for a second with Johnson and what he's doing / likely to do.

If Stormont was sitting, would it be able to stop such a move ? (genuinely asking)

FrancieBrady

L1011 wrote: »

Your logic doesn't work here.

SF aren't even going to try to vote against it.

Russman wrote: »

But that's true of any parliament anywhere, where there's a majority government who bring in legislation that a particular group oppose. No point in anyone saying they're taking their ball home and not playing anymore.

Not agreeing for a second with Johnson and what he's doing / likely to do.

If Stormont was sitting, would it be able to stop such a move ? (genuinely asking)

The logic of Abstentionism always was that 'there is nothing to be gained by an Irish person giving allegiance to the monarch or by sitting in Westminster'

Whether you agree with that or not, Johnson will prove it by doing this followed shortly by taking the majority out of the EU against their wills.

'Optically' it will not be a good look for a party who campaigned on the basis that representation in WM meant something.

P.S. No, I don't think Stormont have any power in this decision.

charlie14

L1011 wrote: »

Your logic doesn't work here.

SF aren't even going to try to vote against it.

I know this is a "What did the Romans ever do for us", but would history not show when it came to Ireland taking up those seats in Westminster all it achieve was to give a veneer to the British parliament having the right to govern Ireland?

The Home Rule campaigns achieved nothing other than getting more Irishmen slaughtered on the fields of France than were killed in both the Easter Rising and the War of Independence combined.

I don`t see why some cannot appear to understand why so many nationalists in the six counties have no faith in a parliament that right up until the Civil Rights Movement and the international attention this drew were happy to go along with gerrymandering and civil right abuse.

This proposed latest move by Johnston is hardly going to change their views on that.

L1011

charlie14 wrote: »

I know this is a "What did the Romans ever do for us", but would history not show when it came to Ireland taking up those seats in Westminster all it achieve was to give a veneer to the British parliament having the right to govern Ireland?

The Home Rule campaigns achieved nothing other than getting more Irishmen slaughtered on the fields of France than were killed in both the Easter Rising and the War of Independence combined.

I don`t see why some cannot appear to understand why so many nationalists in the six counties have no faith in a parliament that right up until the Civil Rights Movement and the international attention this drew were happy to go along with gerrymandering and civil right abuse.

This proposed latest move by Johnston is hardly going to change their views on that.

This is all reliant on the idea that sitting by and doing nothing is somehow more effective.

Which it isn't.

SF lost Foyle quite extensively on the basis that the constituents wanted someone to actually go to Westminster. That needs to be accepted.

FrancieBrady

L1011 wrote: »

This is all reliant on the idea that sitting by and doing nothing is somehow more effective.

Which it isn't.

SF lost Foyle quite extensively on the basis that the constituents wanted someone to actually go to Westminster. That needs to be accepted.

Wouldn't be so sure that is why they 'lost' it.

People are not stupid, and everyone saw that even Unionists, with 10 seats and real power over the government, NI was secondary when it came to what England wanted to do. Scots seen the exact same thing.
SF also ousted, for the first time, somebody who was willing to take a seat in Belfast. Would it be sensible to conclude therefore that people in one constituency have suddenly opted for Abstensionism? No, it would not be sensible at all.

It is wrong to put this all down to seats in Westminster IMO.

SF got trounced in Foyle because of candidate choice and the ongoing Stormont mess IMO.