General Election 2020 - See MOD note in First Post

Squidvicious

Interesting thread on the Kilkenny Boards. Dunmoreroader asks whether KK votes will keep the Cardiac care issue in mind when voting. Roadhigh in his reply says that if FF come to power, Martin is unlikely to help the cardiac care for Waterford case being a Cork TD and bearing in mind that CUH seems to want UHW to be a feeder hospital. He makes a good point IMO. A Cork Taoiseach is bad for Waterford.
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057756366&page=2

hardybuck

friendlyfun wrote: »

Correct me now if I'm wrong, but didn't Leo say something about Pearse wearing a balaclava straight to his face in the Dáil? You seem to have a selective memory. FG ministers are overwhelmingly from posh schools though. They all hail from privately educated boarding schools like Gonzaga, Blackrock, Presentation, they come from fairly cosseted backgrounds and will never have to endure the suffering many people in Ireland have to face. They could be called worse for doing sweet f all for sitting on the worst homeless and health crisis in this countries history.

That was a good one alright, chaotic scenes in the Dáil that day.

If I recall correctly, Leo did indeed accuse Sinn Fein of letting the balaclava slip in the context of not criticising the vigilantes who participated in the violent attack of the security guards carrying out the eviction in Roscommon. Because it is alleged that dissident Republicans from Dublin and Northern Ireland are involved, SF supporting them prompted the jibe from Leo.

Regarding FG members who went to private boarding schools, I don't think many of them have. There are 28 FG Ministers and Ministers of State, 6 are from Dublin. Of that 6, 4 went to a private secondary school - that I'm aware of.

The leader of SF is from the affluent south Dublin suburb of Rathgar, and went to a very nice school located close to the Dundrum shopping centre. I'm not sure if this puts her in the 'cosseted' background also, or if she left that behind her when she left Fianna Fail.

jmcc

hardybuck wrote: »

It's not becoming of an elected official, definitely not appropriate for anyone who has aspirations of being in Government, and would really alienate anyone in Unionist community that we might want to share a 32 counties with in the future.

You wouldn't be an FG supporter, would you?

Unionists are not idiots like Flanagan and Varadkar. Flanagan and Varadkar wanted to commemorate the Black and Tans. The Black and Tans were members of the RIC.

Ian Paisley senior described himself as a proud Irishman. Some Unionists may consider themselves as British and that's not a problem. What is a problem is the neo-Unionist types like Flanagan and John "Unionist" Bruton and their ilk in the Dublin media grovelling and tugging the forelock in an attempt to be British. That clip of Bruton grovelling to Charlie Windsor was disgusting and he disgraced the office of the Taoiseach.

The Irish people copped on long ago to this class of gombeenism as did the Unionists. In the North, it led to the collapse of "Big House Unionism" in favour of a more democratic form of Unionism. What happened in the 1918 General Election also destroyed the FG's ancestor party, the IPP.

What happened was that the franchise was extended beyond the big farmers and Middle Class. It was that extension that led to the collapse of the IPP (which could arguably be described as "West Brit" because it wanted Home Rule rather than Independence). Ordinary Irish people got the chance to vote in December 1918 and that vote was for Independence. There are still some who regret that vote and try to push a false narrative of those events.

Regards...jmcc

hardybuck

jmcc wrote: »

You wouldn't be an FG supporter, would you?

Unionists are not idiots like Flanagan and Varadkar. Flanagan and Varadkar wanted to commemorate the Black and Tans. The Black and Tans were members of the RIC.

Ian Paisley senior described himself as a proud Irishman. Some Unionists may consider themselves as British and that's not a problem. What is a problem is the neo-Unionist types like Flanagan and John "Unionist" Bruton and their ilk in the Dublin media grovelling and tugging the forelock in an attempt to be British. That clip of Bruton grovelling to Charlie Windsor was disgusting and he disgraced the office of the Taoiseach.

The Irish people copped on long ago to this class of gombeenism as did the Unionists. In the North, it led to the collapse of "Big House Unionism" in favour of a more democratic form of Unionism. What happened in the 1918 General Election also destroyed the FG's ancestor party, the IPP.

What happened was that the franchise was extended beyond the big farmers and Middle Class. It was that extension that led to the collapse of the IPP (which could arguably be described as "West Brit" because it wanted Home Rule rather than Independence). Ordinary Irish people got the chance to vote in December 1918 and that vote was for Independence. There are still some who regret that vote and try to push a false narrative of those events.

Regards...jmcc

I am not - I would be flexible with my vote. Would you care to declare if you are a supporter of any political party?

Regarding RIC etc., I think you would benefit from educating yourself further on that topic. This is a good article about a man from Ardmore which might help you: https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fergal-keane-ric-row-threatens-to-drag-us-into-a-dangerous-place-1.4133186

Max Powers

jmcc wrote: »

You wouldn't be an FG supporter, would you?

Unionists are not idiots like Flanagan and Varadkar. Flanagan and Varadkar wanted to commemorate the Black and Tans. The Black and Tans were members of the RIC.

Ian Paisley senior described himself as a proud Irishman. Some Unionists may consider themselves as British and that's not a problem. What is a problem is the neo-Unionist types like Flanagan and John "Unionist" Bruton and their ilk in the Dublin media grovelling and tugging the forelock in an attempt to be British. That clip of Bruton grovelling to Charlie Windsor was disgusting and he disgraced the office of the Taoiseach.

The Irish people copped on long ago to this class of gombeenism as did the Unionists. In the North, it led to the collapse of "Big House Unionism" in favour of a more democratic form of Unionism. What happened in the 1918 General Election also destroyed the FG's ancestor party, the IPP.

What happened was that the franchise was extended beyond the big farmers and Middle Class. It was that extension that led to the collapse of the IPP (which could arguably be described as "West Brit" because it wanted Home Rule rather than Independence). Ordinary Irish people got the chance to vote in December 1918 and that vote was for Independence. There are still some who regret that vote and try to push a false narrative of those events.

Regards...jmcc

Wow, there is a fair few over simplifications about Irish history in there and the general tone rightly or wrongly, intended or unintended is of the rabid republican bordering on hatred.

friendlyfun

Gardner wrote: »

Because there is now 3 different groups! Matt is a careerist and basically will jump ship to FG or FF if he gets in while Bernadette would be totally the opposite and would have the campaign at heart (excuse the pun). personally 24/7 is probably about 5th in my priority list when i'm considering who to vote for.

Wait what? Why is there three different groups? That's like people's front of Judea stuff.

jmcc

hardybuck wrote: »

I am not - I would be flexible with my vote. Would you care to declare if you are a supporter of any political party?

I'm a floating voter of the Brethren Of The Coast variety. I don't support political parties as such.

Regarding RIC etc., I think you would benefit from educating yourself further on that topic.

Really? Perhaps you didn't realise that the Black and Tans and the Auxillaries were members of the RIC.

This is a good article about a man from Ardmore which might help you: https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fergal-keane-ric-row-threatens-to-drag-us-into-a-dangerous-place-1.4133186

I don't have a high opinion of his journalism and that's only his opinion piece in a failing Dublin newspaper that inaccurately described the 1916 Rising as the "Sinn Fein Rebellion". (That was missing from the centenary commemoration edition of the comic.) There was an outbreak of establishment types trying to justify Flanagan's effort to commemorate the Black and Tans.

Regards...jmcc

friendlyfun

Max Powers wrote: »

Wow, there is a fair few over simplifications about Irish history in there and the general tone rightly or wrongly, intended or unintended is of the rabid republican bordering on hatred.

Seems like a couple of users here have a cultural cringe at our founding leaders. Some here would prefer revisionism and all traditions on this island respected as Leo would say. Now Where's my orange sash? I'm planning on marching through ardoyne to celebrate Protestant supremacy over vanguished Catholic army. But all in the name of tolerance!

jmcc

Max Powers wrote: »

Wow, there is a fair few over simplifications about Irish history in there and the general tone rightly or wrongly, intended or unintended is of the rabid republican bordering on hatred.

They are not over-simplifications. They are historical facts. There's no hatred or rabid republicanism in the post. The Representation of the People Act (1918) extended the franchise beyond the big farmers/Middle Class demographics who had voted for the IPP. The Rising had also changed the political environment as did the threat of Conscription. However, WW1 had ended in November 1918. The shift in voter demographics had a very big impact on the IPP's vote.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

friendlyfun wrote: »

Now Where's my orange sash? I'm planning on marching through ardoyne to celebrate Protestant supremacy over vanguished Catholic army. But all in the name of tolerance!

There is a rather funny aspect to that. The Pope was supporting the Williamite forces.

Regards...jmcc

debok

hardybuck wrote: »

And how do you think that'd make the 103,000 British people living in Ireland feel - welcome?


Imagine if we used terms that were derogatory to Polish people for example. At the very least it's xenophobic behaviour.

While the likes of Pearse Doherty appears to be very sharp and able, he also really lets himself down when he calls FG Ministers 'posh boys and girls'. It demeans him and I wonder does he feel the need to try and generate headlines in the tabloids.

Was butler looking for headlines when she mentioned army council etc? At least you say pearse Doherty is sharp and able, a lot if the fgff ministers look like there only two seconds from saying something stupid in an interview or debate. Even last night the fffg reps on tonight show were a disaster. Btw David cullinane spoke well .

hardybuck

debok wrote: »

Was butler looking for headlines when she mentioned army council etc? At least you say pearse Doherty is sharp and able, a lot if the fgff ministers look like there only two seconds from saying something stupid in an interview or debate. Even last night the fffg reps on tonight show were a disaster. Btw David cullinane spoke well .

In fairness to her I don't think she fully understood what she was talking about it. I could be wrong.

Squidvicious

friendlyfun wrote: »

Seems like a couple of users here have a cultural cringe at our founding leaders. Some here would prefer revisionism and all traditions on this island respected as Leo would say. Now Where's my orange sash? I'm planning on marching through ardoyne to celebrate Protestant supremacy over vanguished Catholic army. But all in the name of tolerance!

It is remarkable that this issue is being discussed in a thread about the 2020 General election. This is history, after all.

However.....I must admit to having a bit of a "cultural cringe at our founding leaders". Ireland had a proud tradition of in the Nineteenth century of effecting real change through peaceful means which was admired in many countries. I question the need for violence when the political process had brought us to the brink of Home Rule in 1914.

debok

hardybuck wrote: »

In fairness to her I don't think she fully understood what she was talking about it. I could be wrong.

She shouldn't be a politician then. She knew exactly what she was saying. Say army ,Belfast etc buzz words that's all she wanted to be stuck in listeners minds.

hardybuck

debok wrote: »

She shouldn't be a politician then. She knew exactly what she was saying. Say army ,Belfast etc buzz words that's all she wanted to be stuck in listeners minds.

You have the ability to hold her accountable.

wagtail99

hardybuck wrote: »

Snip

Regarding FG members who went to private boarding schools, I don't think many of them have. There are 28 FG Ministers and Ministers of State, 6 are from Dublin. Of that 6, 4 went to a private secondary school - that I'm aware of.

Snip

Thanks for the numbers - they seem to state that of those you know about, 66% (4 of 6) are privately educated. The other reason reason that people see them as posh boys is because their leadership actually is. Both Varadkar (Taoiseach) and Coveney (Tainiste) are both private school educated, and Varadkar main man - Eoghan Murphy, who lead his FG leadership campaign, is also privately educated.

As an aside, private education does not neccarily involve boarding.

debok

Squidvicious wrote: »

It is remarkable that this issue is being discussed in a thread about the 2020 General election. This is history, after all.

However.....I must admit to having a bit of a "cultural cringe at our founding leaders". Ireland had a proud tradition of in the Nineteenth century of effecting real change through peaceful means. I question the need for violence when the political process had brought us to the brink of Home Rule in 1914.

It's only being brought up again because fffg manage to mention historical things connected to sinn Fein in every interview or campaign piece. But it will work so they may as well. But it might be the last election it will work in because more people are questioning there methods now. Not enough people or other candidates to change it this election but I wouldn't be surprised if a government can't be formed and there's another election this year.

debok

hardybuck wrote: »

You have the ability to hold her accountable.

I do. How anyone voted for her the last time I don't know. She just comes across very under prepared everytime she's on TV or radio. We are well rid of her but the other candidates we have don't seem to be much better.

hardybuck

wagtail99 wrote: »

Thanks for the numbers - they seem to state that of those you know about, 66% (4 of 6) are privately educated. The other reason reason that people see them as posh boys is because their leadership actually is. Both Varadkar (Taoiseach) and Coveney (Tainiste) are both private school educated, and Varadkar main man - Eoghan Murphy, who lead his FG leadership campaign, is also privately educated.

As an aside, private education does not neccarily involve boarding.

The poster said private boarding, I mentioned private.

The poster also said the overwhelming majority were from posh schools. I think he's wrong.

Squidvicious

debok wrote: »

It's only being brought up again because fffg manage to mention historical things connected to sinn Fein in every interview or campaign piece. But it will work so they may as well. But it might be the last election it will work in because more people are questioning there methods now. Not enough people or other candidates to change it this election but I wouldn't be surprised if a government can't be formed and there's another election this year.

In fairness, the SF historical things are a bit more recent that 1916/21. The IRA ceasefire was mid-90's after all. I do accept that there is probably something of a generational divide here. IRA violence feels like history to younger voters, say under 30's. Many older voters find it hard to separate SF from the IRA and understandably so.

debok

Squidvicious wrote: »

It is remarkable that this issue is being discussed in a thread about the 2020 General election. This is history, after all.

However.....I must admit to having a bit of a "cultural cringe at our founding leaders". Ireland had a proud tradition of in the Nineteenth century of effecting real change through peaceful means which was admired in many countries. I question the need for violence when the political process had brought us to the brink of Home Rule in 1914.

Yeh by 1914 it had only taken 700 hundred years to get to the brink of home rule thru political progress

jmcc

Squidvicious wrote: »

Ireland had a proud tradition of in the Nineteenth century of effecting real change through peaceful means which was admired in many countries. I question the need for violence when the political process had brought us to the brink of Home Rule in 1914.

Home Rule is not Independence. Bruton used the same argument the Claire Byrne show a while ago. World War One changed a lot of the assumptions about nationhood and Independence. It destroyed empires and it started the collapse of the British Empire. At the end of the war, the USA was the new economic powerhouse with the effect that the 20th century became the American century. The old order, of which the IPP was very much a part, was destroyed by WW1. Borders were redrawn and new countries were created. The IPP, with its Home Rule aspirations, found itself, as a party, on the wrong side of history. A lot of its support shifted to Sinn Fein but the remnants of the IPP provided the seeds for FG.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

debok wrote: »

I do. How anyone voted for her the last time I don't know.

She was the FF candidate and she wasn't Brendan Keneally. There has always been a substantial FF vote in Waterford. If it wasn't her getting elected in 2016, it would have been another FF candidate.

Regards...jmcc

debok

Squidvicious wrote: »

In fairness, the SF historical things are a bit more recent that 1916/21. The IRA ceasefire was mid-90's after all. I do accept that there is probably something of a generational divide here. IRA violence feels like history to younger voters, say under 30's. Many older voters find it hard to separate SF from the IRA and understandably so.

Mid 90s is 25 years ago a quarter of a century. Many older voters including myself do remember it's violence, but I also remember industrial schools,magdenlene laundries ,baby's being buried, rampant sexual abuse people blame the church but what governments stood by and covered up and let them do it fffg governments. Everyone and every party has a history it should be about the best people fir the job. Leo, Simon Harris , Murphy have proved there nit good enough . Spin and lies will always be seen through because at the end of the day there results arent up to scratch.

Squidvicious

jmcc wrote: »

Home Rule is not Independence. John "Unionist" Bruton used the same argument as yours on the Claire Byrne show a while ago. World War One changed a lot of the assumptions about nationhood and Independence. It destroyed a lot of empires and it started the collapse of the British Empire. At the end of the war, the USA was the new economic powerhouse with the effect that the 20th century became the American century.

Regards...jmcc

Neither was the Free State, though. I do agree with you about WW1, though. I suspect, though, that a lot of the change that it brought about was less to people's abstract thinking about nationhood and it was more about pounds. schillings and pence. The war affected people's pockets and as it went on led to discontent with the status quo. You do make a very good point about the Representation of People Act. However, I would say that that was only one of a number of factors. My guess is partly that few in Ireland believed that "independence" was even a possibility until 1916, hence there was little overt support for it. Once it was put on the agenda, it gained widespread support. That said, the IPP was stronger in 1918 than many believe. FPTP voting results(i.e. SF winning everywhere outside Ulster bar Waterford and Trinity) masked the fact that many still voted IPP and in many constituencies, intimidation resulted in some IPP candidates standing down.

debok

jmcc wrote: »

She was the FF candidate and she wasn't Brendan Keneally. There has always been a substantial FF vote in Waterford. If it wasn't her getting elected in 2016, it would have been another FF candidate.

Regards...jmcc

Oh Brendan kenneally there's another one with things to answer for.

jmcc

Squidvicious wrote: »

Neither was the Free State, though. I do agree with you about WW1, though. I suspect, though, that a lot of the change that it brought about was less to people's abstract thinking about nationhood and it was more about pounds. schillings and pence.

The problem with WW1 was that it was initially fought on the terms of the US Civil War despite machineguns and chemical warfare being introduced. The British Army in 1914 was still very much a professional volunteer army and it offered a career for the Middle Classes and those aspiring to be Middle Class. (These new officers were described as "temporary gentlemen".) The problem was that machinegun bullets don't distinguish between the ranks and the casualties were high. But it created a kind of resistance to accept the old status quo that carried on beyond the war.

The war affected people's pockets and as it went on led to discontent with the status quo.

It also made people richer and many of them were not previously rich.

You do make a very good point about the Representation of People Act. However, I would say that that was only one of a number of factors. My guess is partly that few in Ireland believed that "independence" was even a possibility until 1916, hence there was little overt support for it.

Demographic changes can have more power to change politics than political arguments.

Once it was put on the agenda, it gained widespread support. That said, the IPP was stronger in 1918 than many believe. FPTP voting results(i.e. SF winning everywhere outside Ulster bar Waterford and Trinity) masked the fact that many still voted IPP and in many constituencies, intimidation resulted in some IPP candidates standing down.

Once Independence became an option, Home Rule was finished. FPTP did obscure some of the IPP's support but if there had been STV in 1918, the support for the IPP would not have been as strong. FPTP is an inherently democratically flawed system that suppresses all but the strongest parties. It was very much a binary choice for most voters prior to 1918 and that partially explains the IPP's support. The fragmentation of the IPP's support was a natural progression. The same kind of dynamics can be seen with the way that FF/FG along with the half-party of Labour dominated Irish politics up to the 1970s but once other parties provided alternative voting options, the old certainties fell away. The effect is amplified by STV. Without it, the other parties would not have had much of a chance at even getting TDs.

Regards...jmcc

Squidvicious

jmcc wrote: »

The problem with WW1 was that it was initially fought on the terms of the US Civil War despite machineguns and chemical warfare being introduced. The British Army in 1914 was still very much a professional volunteer army and it offered a career for the Middle Classes and those aspiring to be Middle Class. (These new officers were described as "temporary gentlemen".) The problem was that machinegun bullets don't distinguish between the ranks and the casualties were high. But it created a kind of resistance to accept the old status quo that carried on beyond the war.

It also made people richer and many of these were not previously rich.

Demographic changes can have more power to change politics than political arguments.

Once Independence became an option, Home Rule was finished. FPTP did obscure some of the IPP's support but if there had been STV in 1918, the support for the IPP would not have been as strong. FPTP is an inherently democratically flawed system that suppresses all but the strongest parties. It was very much a binary choice for most voters prior to 1918 and that partially explains the IPP's support. The fragmentation of the IPP's support was a natural progression. The same kind of dynamics can be seen with the way that FF/FG along with the half-party of Labour dominated Irish politics up to the 1970s but once other parties provided alternative voting options, the old certainties fell away. The effect is amplified by STV. Without it, the other parties would not have had much of a chance at even getting TDs.

Regards...jmcc

I think that we would need a separate thread to discuss this!

vriesmays

debok wrote: »

Oh Brendan kenneally there's another one with things to answer for.

Such as.

Max Powers

jmcc wrote: »

They are not over-simplifications. They are historical facts. There's no hatred or rabid republicanism in the post. The Representation of the People Act (1918) extended the franchise beyond the big farmers/Middle Class demographics who had voted for the IPP. The Rising had also changed the political environment as did the threat of Conscription. However, WW1 had ended in November 1918. The shift in voter demographics had a very big impact on the IPP's vote.

Regards...jmcc

the general tone comes across as hatred IMO anyway. I couldn't read that and subsequent posts and think anything less.