Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What will happen to sinn fein after this election.

Options
1…5681011…13

Comments

  • Options
    #212
    facehugger99
    Registered Users Posts: 7,324 ✭✭✭facehugger99


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    The fact that they are excluding a party on 'fitness' grounds when they have no problem with that party in another jurisdiction is the 'hypocritical' issue here.

    So FF and FG should tell the Nordies to stop voting for the Shinners?


  • Options
    #213
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 69,179 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Salary Negotiator wrote: »
    Because a sizable portion of the people of NI have voted for SF, nothing hypocritical about it. It is simply respecting the wishes of the people.

    Technically FF and SF could end up with similar mandates in a GE. FG are only one point ahead in the latest poll.


  • Options
    #214
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,467 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Technically FF and SF could end up with similar mandates in a GE. FG are only one point ahead in the latest poll.

    I'm sure that is possible. it still does not change the fact that both mandates are for no cooperation with SF.


  • Options
    #215
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,519 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    FG and FF certainly have no issue with their 'fitness' to govern in NI. That is whu they (FF and FG) are being accused of being hypocrites.

    If you receive a mandate from the electorate, who have said they do not trust any one party with power, no democrat should be excluding you before you have tried to negotiate a place in government.

    In essence that is wrong, no matter what party is being excluded.



    Political parties rule our coalition with SF because it it a red line issue for a large portion of the electorate and their supporters.

    If FF or FG suggested they would coalesce with SF it would send their prospective voters running for the hills.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Options
    #216
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 69,179 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    I'm sure that is possible. it still does not change the fact that both mandates are for no cooperation with SF.

    The confidence and supply arrangement had 'no mandate'. The jumble of Independents had no mandate.

    Plenty of indications within FF that they can do a deal with SF...yet the leader excludes them.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #217
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,467 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    The confidence and supply arrangement had 'no mandate'. The jumble of Independents had no mandate.

    Plenty of indications within FF that they can do a deal with SF...yet the leader excludes them.

    Indications from who? the voters dont want anything to do with SF.


  • Options
    #218
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    The confidence and supply arrangement had 'no mandate'. The jumble of Independents had no mandate.

    Plenty of indications within FF that they can do a deal with SF...yet the leader excludes them.
    The only mandate the collective in the Dail gets is to sort out the formation of government, do what they can get through the Dail and run the country. Not sure why you imagine SF & FF as a natural fit when the former are looking at 100,000 social homes as policy for one.


  • Options
    #219
    BarryD2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,732 ✭✭✭BarryD2


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    This is just an extension of the exclusionary politics of FF and FG.... don't want they upsetting the cosy consensus politics we have imposed cultivated since partition'.

    Possibly true, but the reality is in doing so, that FF/FG are simply reflecting a general consensus in middle of the road voters down south. The roots of the current SF party lie up north and they'll have to prove themselves up there before making progress down south. And the last three years have been pretty poor in that regard... you judge by what parties do and not just what they spout on about.


  • Options
    #220
    marieholmfan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,744 ✭✭✭marieholmfan


    is_that_so wrote: »
    The only mandate the collective in the Dail gets is to sort out the formation of government, do what they can get through the Dail and run the country. Not sure why you imagine SF & FF as a natural fit when the former are looking at 100,000 social homes as policy for one.
    And yet they have declined to raise property taxes to pay for building more council houses.


  • Options
    #221
    rdwight
    Registered Users Posts: 541 ✭✭✭rdwight


    If FG and FF rule out a coalition with SF and make this a promise during the campaign, it is up to the electorate to register their opinion on this issue through the ballot box. It's called democracy, n'est ce pas?

    Just a little bit like if SF campaigned on a promise not to take up any seats in a Free State, partitionist, parliament - or any other assembly/parliament they might get elected to.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #222
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    marieholmfan wrote: »
    And yet they have declined to raise property taxes to pay for building more council houses.
    They keep reducing it in councils they have influence on. Money for it most likely to come from a higher income tax rate on a randomly selected income level anywhere from €75K plus.


  • Options
    #223
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 69,179 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Indications from who? the voters dont want anything to do with SF.

    There are a number of FF reps who don't have a problem with a coalition. John McGuinness, O'Keefe and Moynihan and Bobby Aylward are a few who have said they would be open to it, with one of them saying ''the voters would decide the make-up of the next Dáil and how the government will be made up".

    It is undemocratic in my opinion to exclude a party you have no problems with in another jurisdiction.
    If they had issues with them there, then no problems here.

    I think many are turning a blind eye to what the real reason is for the exclusion.


  • Options
    #224
    Salary Negotiator
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,148 ✭✭✭Salary Negotiator


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    There are a number of FF reps who don't have a problem with a coalition. John McGuinness, O'Keefe and Moynihan and Bobby Aylward are a few who have said they would be open to it, with one of them saying ''the voters would decide the make-up of the next Dáil and how the government will be made up".

    It is undemocratic in my opinion to exclude a party you have no problems with in another jurisdiction.
    If they had issues with them there, then no problems here.

    I think many are turning a blind eye to what the real reason is for the exclusion.

    Were you saying the same back in 2016 when SF refused to enter coalition as a junior partner?

    It's not directly comparable, but the end result was the same.


  • Options
    #225
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,467 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    There are a number of FF reps who don't have a problem with a coalition. John McGuinness, O'Keefe and Moynihan and Bobby Aylward are a few who have said they would be open to it, with one of them saying ''the voters would decide the make-up of the next Dáil and how the government will be made up".

    It is undemocratic in my opinion to exclude a party you have no problems with in another jurisdiction.
    If they had issues with them there, then no problems here.

    I think many are turning a blind eye to what the real reason is for the exclusion.

    What happens in another jurisdiction is irrelevant to what happens in this jurisdiction. Especially when that jurisdiction has been an absolute shambles and an embarrassment for all involved. I'm sure the voters in this jurisdiction can make their own mind up on what constitutes democracy in this jurisdiction.


  • Options
    #226
    Gunmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 4,067 ✭✭✭Gunmonkey


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Indications from who? the voters dont want anything to do with SF.

    Given they are running fewer candidates than in 2016, I think the feeling is mutual.


  • Options
    #227
    olestoepoke
    Registered Users Posts: 2,386 ✭✭✭olestoepoke


    IAMAMORON wrote: »
    They need to make the transition from targeting the local council estate issues to targeting the entire community. Unless they can attract the middle class vote they will never succeed. That is their newest obstacle. Their economic policies appear daunting, highly unworkable and possibly scary to wealthy Irish people. They are never going to achieve growth without appeasing these voters.

    They can always and should always be targeting the civil service classes. That is what FF, FG and labour do so well. If Sinn Féin could dangle a big enough carrot on genuine deliverables like a better Health Service, especially one that could provide cheaper health insurance premiums, they get pricey. Offering genuine fiscal alternatives, Irish voters are not stupid either, they haven't gone away you know:P.

    But the biggest mountain Sinn Fein have to climb in the republic is convincing FF, FG and Labour voters that they have some sort of a plan. Far left nonsense might appease a few council estates and some inner city types, but most of the country actually have jobs and are paying taxes and would like to see alternatives that are workable. SF just don't seem to have a bona fide offer here.

    Apart from all that it never helps when their councilors end up in prison for waterboarding citizens over motorbikes deals which go wrong, ffs... please.
    The ignorance is this post is amazing.


  • Options
    #228
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,519 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    Going back to the OP, what will happen to SF after the election.
    If SF lose seats then serious questions will be asked of leader Mary Lou Mc Donald.
    In a normal party there would probably be a vote of no confidence and a leadership challenge but as we have seen time and time again SF is not a normal party.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Options
    #229
    bladespin
    Registered Users Posts: 7,358 ✭✭✭bladespin


    olestoepoke wrote: »
    The ignorance is this post is amazing.

    It's accurate though :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #230
    Brendan Bendar
    Registered Users Posts: 19,555 ✭✭✭✭Brendan Bendar


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Given that people continue to vote for FF/FG despite their well known stance on working SF it seems that FF/FG have a mandate from the people to continue not working with SF. Surely you are not arguing with a mandate from the people? that would be very undemocratic of you.

    That is exactly the nub of the issue.

    Exactly!

    Rightly or wrongly the electorate support the parties who adopt the stance they take with SF, everything else is just chaff and of no consequence.

    It’s the most democratic of situations.


  • Options
    #231
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,971 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    SF will prosper when they develop decent policies and can attract the coping class.

    As it is their baggage is toxic to a huge number of people who work and contribute to society. They appear to jump on any bandwagon they see as being popular. Many of their supporters are shady to say the least of it, and their support in the Border counties is testament to their baggage, much as they would like to shake it off.

    They are Marmite and I don't love them! I don't think they will gain many (if any) seats this time around. Will be interesting to see what happens though.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #232
    Brendan Bendar
    Registered Users Posts: 19,555 ✭✭✭✭Brendan Bendar


    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    SF will prosper when they develop decent policies and can attract the coping class.

    As it is their baggage is toxic to a huge number of people who work and contribute to society. They appear to jump on any bandwagon they see as being popular. Many of their supporters are shady to say the least of it, and their support in the Border counties is testament to their baggage, much as they would like to shake it off.

    They are Marmite and I don't love them! I don't think they will gain many (if any) seats this time around. Will be interesting to see what happens though.

    Good synopsis Spanish, for me that’s telling it as it is .


  • Options
    #233
    olestoepoke
    Registered Users Posts: 2,386 ✭✭✭olestoepoke


    bladespin wrote: »
    It's accurate though :rolleyes:

    So it is accurate to say that people in "council estates and inner city types" do not work or pay taxes?


  • Options
    #234
    CeNedra
    Registered Users Posts: 157 ✭✭CeNedra


    marieholmfan wrote: »
    As opposed to B B B B Bertie or Cowen the tedious bore or Squeaky Leo - Enda had a great voice but Enda is a gobsh...


    Screechy voice is just a codeword for misogyny.

    This is so true. Another example of measuring female leaders differently than males. So transparent.


  • Options
    #235
    Brendan Bendar
    Registered Users Posts: 19,555 ✭✭✭✭Brendan Bendar


    olestoepoke wrote: »
    So it is accurate to say that people in "council estates and inner city types" do not work or pay taxes?

    Who said that?


  • Options
    #236
    CeNedra
    Registered Users Posts: 157 ✭✭CeNedra


    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    SF will prosper when they develop decent policies and can attract the coping class.

    As it is their baggage is toxic to a huge number of people who work and contribute to society. They appear to jump on any bandwagon they see as being popular. Many of their supporters are shady to say the least of it, and their support in the Border counties is testament to their baggage, much as they would like to shake it off.

    They are Marmite and I don't love them! I don't think they will gain many (if any) seats this time around. Will be interesting to see what happens though.

    This is so true. It is t about Mary Lou’s voice. I think she is actually very good. It is about what they stand for. I cannot vote for them as a party, though I admire Mary Lou and what a strong leader she is. It will take time to move Them away from their past.


  • Options
    #237
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 69,179 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    What happens in another jurisdiction is irrelevant to what happens in this jurisdiction. Especially when that jurisdiction has been an absolute shambles and an embarrassment for all involved. I'm sure the voters in this jurisdiction can make their own mind up on what constitutes democracy in this jurisdiction.

    Oh I am sure there are plenty who will pretend there is something 'noble' in this.
    But the reality is it a sleazy and increasingly desperate (as their vote share continues to fall) holding on to power.
    Their little nod and wink to one another to continue the illusion of a government and an opposition hasn't fooled everyone.


  • Options
    #238
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,467 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Oh I am sure there are plenty who will pretend there is something 'noble' in this.
    But the reality is it a sleazy and increasingly desperate (as their vote share continues to fall) holding on to power.
    Their little nod and wink to one another to continue the illusion of a government and an opposition hasn't fooled everyone.

    I never said there was anything noble in it. you are arguing against a point that hasn't been made. It is just FF/FG sensing the way the wind is blowing and realising that SF are toxic to the majority in this jurisdiction.


  • Options
    #239
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 69,179 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    are toxic to the majority in this jurisdiction.

    You could say that about a party on 20% in the polls and one on 31% for that matter.

    FG are toxic to the majority as are FF, for a very long time now. That is the application of your logic here.


  • Options
    #240
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,467 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    You could say that about a party on 20% in the polls and one on 31% for that matter.

    FG are toxic to the majority as are FF, for a very long time now. That is the application of your logic here.

    Leave it off francie. You know exactly what i meant. You're just getting annoyed because your beloved SF are getting a kicking. Try to respond maturely.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #241
    Brendan Bendar
    Registered Users Posts: 19,555 ✭✭✭✭Brendan Bendar


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    You could say that about a party on 20% in the polls and one on 31% for that matter.

    FG are toxic to the majority as are FF, for a very long time now. That is the application of your logic here.

    Toxic..... hmmmm FG and FF.... so toxic they have been in power since.... wtf....... eh...... yonks.


    That’s supertoxic.


Advertisement