Election 2020

Brontosaurus

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Of all the names I've seen sofar mentioned.Marian Harkin would be the most knowledgeable on any firearms issues.As she was an Irish MEP and was involved in the EU gun ban on our side. She and the man who cant be named here,did at least chair a meet for us agreived shooters in Athlone on this topic,and her voting record in the EU was pro gun,unlike her colleuge Mariead Mc Guinness who went Judas on us.

PS thanks Yuba for remembering her.

Care to PM he who can't be named? Trying to make a list of "decent" politicians.

yubabill

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Along with Germany's most incompetent defence minister ever..."Flinten Ushi" Van der Leyen,now as EU president, off on a green save the mother Gaia Earth religious nutter bent in her policies....:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Aw well, without about the exceptionally competant few out there.The global political Sisterhood,is getting ready to make a bigger tits up of life as we know it,than anything us knuckle dragging White male western sexist mysigonistic warlike male pigs have ever managed to do. Yeah I'm being sexist... Sue me!!:P:P:rolleyes:

Van der Leyen's plan is to spend $1Trillion over 10 years.

No mention where it's to come from, though. Maybe a replacement for QE? Just a guess, genuinely don't know.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/eu-unveils-trillion-euro-plan-to-meet-net-zero-carbon-emissions-goal-1.4139737

And the UN is expanding its trial to train teachers in the UK to teach that climate change is man-made

https://ie-today.co.uk/Article/could-you-be-a-climate-change-teacher/

If anyone ever tells you we are experiencing record temperatures, look around wherever you are, think about recent temperatures and remember, only the radiosonde data is pure.

extremetaz

tudderone wrote: »

No i know they are capable of more, but they are ideal for people commuting, dunno if i'd trust one to get me from Belfast to Cork and back. The charging time is what worries people.

I wouldn't use one Cork to Belfast either - I'd rent for that journey.
In fact that's precisely what I do, from Enterprise in Naas specifically, and I get precisely the vehicle I need for the journey in doing so be it a long wheelbase van, an MPV, or a compact.

There is zero barrier to daily drive adoption for commuting or housekeeping roles.
Commercial roles there's still a ways to go, but even light load, on-the-road operators should be looking at them at this stage. They're far from only being useful for short hops.

[/derail]

Cass

tudderone wrote: »

I think there are 60,000 gun owners in total,.

225,000 licenses spread out over an estimated 150,000 owners.

Sparks

yubabill wrote: »

I'm highly sceptical of CO2 causing climate change and I've read a lot of scientific articles on the subject. I did not come to that conclusion lightly, but I have a degree in chemistry and understand the more mathematical side of it well.

Degrees in chemistry are of little comfort when performing brain surgery
At this point, anyone who thinks the IPCC are wrong needs to be given a quick tour of Australia. Or Greenland. I'd add Nuatambu to that list but it's not there any more, it's literally underwater and the people there are now refugees (it was in the Solomon islands).

Still wouldn't vote for the Greens though.




BTW, about that poll showing FF/FG in front, the distribution of first preference votes over our history is interesting:

https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/1235915/?utm_source=showcase&utm_campaign=visualisation/1235915

Every election until the economic crash had FF or FG way out in front.
Every election since has seen FF and FG combined getting less than 50% of the vote.
That's a seismic fundamental change in politics in this country, so we should see that change reflected sometime in the next 20 years :rolleyes:

Sparks

Brontosaurus wrote: »

Soooo....
Any parties have any positive policies regarding firearms and some deregulation? Property rights? Self-defense rights?

Firearms are not linked to property or self-defence rights, neither of which are in need of amending despite what the tabloids would scare you with to sell adverts for Murdoch.
Knock that one on the head please.

National Party is too Catholic for my tastes.

Justin Barret's lot? Their problem isn't religion (though Barret having founded Youth Defence should have barred him from public life for the rest of time), the problem with them is that they're literally nazis. They're less about National stuff and more about National Socialist stuff like banning anyone with different skin colour or who goes to the wrong church or who doesn't think that Justin is El Duce.

Grizzly 45

Sparks wrote: »

Degrees in chemistry are of little comfort when performing brain surgery
At this point, anyone who thinks the IPCC are wrong needs to be given a quick tour of Australia. Or Greenland. I'd add Nuatambu to that list but it's not there any more, it's literally underwater and the people there are now refugees (it was in the Solomon islands).

Still wouldn't vote for the Greens though.

As is being a professor in UCD in modern interpertative dance and jazz music,and signing off on a climate manifesto at the Fridays for dossing off school protests.;):)

I wouldnt be trumpeting Austrailia too loudly as a climate change alarmist mind.Seems the Green policies prohibiting controlled burning of dead bush and brush every year had quite a bit to do with that firestorm down there.As well as a bunch of arrests of human firebugs all rather young and "Green" themselves.

Greenland or as the Vikings called it when they were living there raising barley a thousand years ago, Groneland[sorry havent got the nordic yokes on my keyboard to write it properly]

The IPCC??After Climategate and their non stop ad hominien attacks and attempts to deplatform anyone challenging their high priests views,rather than defend their science....

yubabill

Sparks wrote: »

Degrees in chemistry are of little comfort when performing brain surgery
At this point, anyone who thinks the IPCC are wrong needs to be given a quick tour of Australia. Or Greenland. I'd add Nuatambu to that list but it's not there any more, it's literally underwater and the people there are now refugees (it was in the Solomon islands).

Still wouldn't vote for the Greens though.




BTW, about that poll showing FF/FG in front, the distribution of first preference votes over our history is interesting:

https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/1235915/?utm_source=showcase&utm_campaign=visualisation/1235915

Every election until the economic crash had FF or FG way out in front.
Every election since has seen FF and FG combined getting less than 50% of the vote.
That's a seismic fundamental change in politics in this country, so we should see that change reflected sometime in the next 20 years :rolleyes:

Just to say that there is a paper doing the rounds, written by two Irish scientists, the Connollys, which uses thermodynamics to show that the greenhouse contribution of CO2 to warming is massively overstated. By people like the IPCC (who are not scientists, BTW).

Now, the work is only published in a lowly open source journal, but it makes fundamental sense to someone who has studied chemical thermodynamics.
http://oprj.net/articles/atmospheric-science/19

So chemistry is fundamental to my scepticism. And I can read the ice core proxies for CO2 and temperature, as can most people. I can't find any time in those ice cores where CO2 rose before temperature rose and they go back hundreds of thousands of years.

The first degree course in climate science started around 2005, taught by people from many disciplines. So anyone with a degree in climate science has not been around that long. Just saying.

Grizzly 45

Only lot that I have come across that are pro gun&self defence with less leathl methods are Liberterian Alliance UK.Sadly not here in this election.

Grizzly 45

yubabill wrote: »

Just to say that there is a paper doing the rounds, written by two Irish scientists, the Connollys, which uses thermodynamics to show that the greenhouse contribution of CO2 to warming is massively overstated. By people like the IPCC (who are not scientists, BTW).
.

Come on Yuba! You know "THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED !":D:D:D:D:D:D:D Because.."reasons" and "feelings"!

Brontosaurus

Sparks wrote: »

Firearms are not linked to property or self-defence rights, neither of which are in need of amending despite what the tabloids would scare you with to sell adverts for Murdoch.
Knock that one on the head please.


Justin Barret's lot? Their problem isn't religion (though Barret having founded Youth Defence should have barred him from public life for the rest of time), the problem with them is that they're literally nazis. They're less about National stuff and more about National Socialist stuff like banning anyone with different skin colour or who goes to the wrong church or who doesn't think that Justin is El Duce.

Is the NP being "literally Nazis" based on established policy and past behavior, or tabloids trying to scare you?

I've been following most the social media of most parties, I've never seen or heard the NP espouse "literal" national socialism.

Feisar

BryanL wrote: »

One of my deer permissions borders Healy rae country. I was having a coffee with the family recently and the woman there in her 70's mentioned she'd had her knee done. I asked about it and she told me she got the "Healy Rae bus to belfast and got it done up there" in 6 weeks.

She has VHI and a medical card but would have been waiting narly 2 years to have it done in Cork. The Healy Rae's had her sorted in 6 weeks. Gob****es they may be but they garner support.

In this election I care mostly about what the representitives in my area will do for hunting and human welfare.

The greens did nothing in government only ban one pack hunting deer. That isn't going to reverse climate change only TAX TAx TAX.

In fairness you can't argue with that! Of course the system is broken and the gombeen men are taking advantage of that fact but you cannot argue with their results.

Grizzly 45

Brontosaurus wrote: »

Is the NP being "literally Nazis" based on established policy and past behavior, or tabloids trying to scare you?

I've been following most the social media of most parties, I've never seen or heard the NP espouse "literal" national socialism.

Guilt by association of Barett sharing a platform with the now proscribed NPD in Germany years ago when he was with Youth Defence. Thing is; he seems to be cultivating the cult of the Furher around himself and his wife,who is running in Limerick,rather than going out and running himself. TBH anyone calling for the death penalty for jailable offences is going over the top,and while I agree that we had better get some handles on immigration policies EU wide before we end up like Sweden,and our gangs end up with grenades and more explosives,and that young fellah getting chopped up becomes a pleasent death in gangland.Just yelling at Johhny Foreigner because of his skin colour,is not going to win you much votes.

Cass

Anyone watching the "debate"?

useurowname

Yep, Martin appeared better.
Still voting Green !

Brontosaurus

useurowname wrote: »

Yep, Martin appeared better.
Still voting Green !

I've a degree in environmental science and conservation. I care about the environment and think we're in dire straits in Ireland.

However, the Greens and other such parties have no real interest, knowledge or expertise in actually protecting the environment. They'll blindly chase the dragon that is carbon emissions, consequences and actual effectiveness be damned.

They'll drain every bog to fit as many bird-killing wind turbine they can get pay-backs for, they'll plant as many non-native trees as possible for the sake of "reforestation", they'll gladly stay in the EU and let their fishing vessels strip our seas, they'll gladly let our population grow artificially through immigration so that they can keep the demand of houses high and supply low, while copy pasting estate after estate all over those green fields.

I'd worry more about what we're doing to our own backyard than carbon emissions, Ireland is barely a blip at 0.10% of the world's emissions. No need to tank our economy over it. I also doubt the Greens would make a dent on our emissions either.

Anyway just my 2 cents.

Cass

useurowname wrote: »

Yep, Martin appeared better.

Varadkar appeared to agree too much with Martin. Think his PR personnel should tell him its not good politics to agree with the "opposition".

It seemed too much, although not surprisingly, like a shouting session with Kenny woefully unable to properly moderate. Mud slinging, dragging up dirt, all the while boasting about perceived achievements.

Still voting Green !

If you're serious well i won't waste both our time trying to explain why i think its a mistake.

If you're joking, well......................

useurowname

I’ll be honest, every other major issues, housing and health in particular I see and have felt firsthand for years and years. I can’t see any of our polished, career politicians fixing any of it, all they want is re-elected and once in they’ll be guided by whatever senior, career heads of depts tell them.
So it’s as much cos I wouldn’t waste a vote on someone who just wants a big job. Climate change is one big big problem so that’s where my vote is going.

Let them and their rewilding and every other daft idea they have, let them at it! .. I’m rarely out in the mountains and I hear wolves rarely attack humans anyways !!

Kramer

useurowname wrote: »

Let them and their rewilding and every other daft idea they have, let them at it! .. I’m rarely out in the mountains and I hear wolves rarely attack humans anyways !!

A protest vote in effect then, although the saying "cut off your nose to spite your face" springs to mind .

Birdnuts

useurowname wrote: »

I’ll be honest, every other major issues, housing and health in particular I see and have felt firsthand for years and years. I can’t see any of our polished, career politicians fixing any of it, all they want is re-elected and once in they’ll be guided by whatever senior, career heads of depts tell them.
So it’s as much cos I wouldn’t waste a vote on someone who just wants a big job. Climate change is one big big problem so that’s where my vote is going.

Let them and their rewilding and every other daft idea they have, let them at it! .. I’m rarely out in the mountains and I hear wolves rarely attack humans anyways !!

If you nuked this country it would make FA difference (even if you believe the hysteria on the subject) since our yearly emissions consist of 2 hours worth of China's!!

garrettod

It doesn't matter what percentage impact our emissions make on a global scale.. What matters is that we make a serious effort to reduce them.

Every little helps! :-)



Moving on, I don't think it's essential to give the Greens significant power in the Dail, to see the next Government doing more - the fact that we're likely to get fined for missing our 2020 targets by a massive amount, and may well miss our 2030 targets, should be enough to motivate the next Government. Then you can add the regular coverage of the issue on TV, in the papers etc.

garrettod

Getting back to the question about who we should be voting for, if we want to support individuals or parties who won't cause our supporting interests more problems, perhaps we should all be emailing the value parties and asking for their official position on relevant issues?

Like everything else, if the politicians get asked the same question often enough, they'll finally pick up on the reasoning for it.

Sparks

yubabill wrote: »

Just to say that there is a paper doing the rounds, written by two Irish scientists, the Connollys, which uses thermodynamics to show that the greenhouse contribution of CO2 to warming is massively overstated. By people like the IPCC (who are not scientists, BTW).
Now, the work is only published in a lowly open source journal

The Connollys aren't climatologists, and they're not published in a "lowly open source journal", they're hosting their blog post on their own website. The problem with that is that they can write up any old junk and post it there without opposition. If you want to get published in a real journal, your work has to pass review by other people in the field who are independent of both you *and* the journal doing the publication. And all of the thousands of climatologists who have been doing that since the middle of the last century have all come to a consensus on this and it's that it's real, it is happening today, and we're the cause. The IPCC report isn't even what most of them are saying; it's what all of them can agree upon. It's the most conservative opinion in the field. And it always lags behind the latest awful discoveries, like finding that the deep oceans are warmer than we hoped so we have less time, like finding that the methane emissions from the permafrost regions in northern russia are much higher than we hoped so we have less time, like finding that things seem to be accellerating faster than even the more worried people in the field thought they would.
Ignoring that and hoping that a father and son in Galway manage to find something in other people's data that was missed by a field of tens of thousands of non-idiots for over seventy years? That's beyond daft and into perverse.

Sparks

garrettod wrote: »

Getting back to the question about who we should be voting for, if we want to support individuals or parties who won't cause our supporting interests more problems, perhaps we should all be emailing the value parties and asking for their official position on relevant issues?

Like everything else, if the politicians get asked the same question often enough, they'll finally pick up on the reasoning for it.

I mean, I have little faith in them sticking to official positions, but at least this is a constructive idea. Asking individual TDs about their feelings on the issue is a waste of time unless that specific TD winds up as the Minister for Justice. And even there, it's not worth much, just look at the past promises of our last Minister for Justice and his actual actions in office with specific regard to firearms legislation.

Sparks

Brontosaurus wrote: »

Is the NP being "literally Nazis" based on established policy and past behavior, or tabloids trying to scare you?

Based on what they've said, what they've done, and what people at their protest marches tend to do with their right hands to say hello to the world.
Barret didn't emerge fully formed from Jove's brow last month, that little gurrier has been fouling our doorsteps for several decades now and his copybook is well and truly marked.

Brontosaurus

Sparks wrote: »

Based on what they've said, what they've done, and what people at their protest marches tend to do with their right hands to say hello to the world.
Barret didn't emerge fully formed from Jove's brow last month, that little gurrier has been fouling our doorsteps for several decades now and his copybook is well and truly marked.

The only instance of a nazi solute I've seen at recent protest was at the Google HQ protest, and as videos have shown it was a counter protester who went amongst them, face the cameras, solute, and walk back.

I'm not saying the NP aren't "literal" nazis, but I have yet to see or hear anything to suggest such, I dislike them for other things anyway so it's not like I'm out to defend them out of party affiliation.

I'm only skeptical because at the recent free-speech/anti-hate-speech-legislation protests, protesters were labeled as far right, nazis and every other buzzword, while the counter protesters included Antifa (communist flags in hand) and Sarodh amongst a few well-meaning but misinformed people.

So again, I've become skeptical, and perhaps a victim of modern politics, because of the portrayal of pro free speech.

I won't be voting for the NP either way, but in my area that pretty much only leaves me with the established parties and the crazies.

Sparks

Brontosaurus wrote: »

The only instance of a nazi solute I've seen at recent protest was at the Google HQ protest, and as videos have shown it was a counter protester who went amongst them, face the cameras, solute, and walk back.

Nope, he wasn't a counterprotestor, that lad was seen at several more of their protests and photographed there.

Brontosaurus

Sparks wrote: »

Nope, he wasn't a counterprotestor, that lad was seen at several more of their protests and photographed there.

Well there's a video of him pacing around, looking and waiting for a counter protester photographer, they line up, he solutes quickly, infamous photo taken, then he walks off...

I also know for a fact he was told to go away at the recent free speech protest in Dublin. Also these's are not NP protests, some NP members were at the protests, along with other parties (including ACI, Freedom party, Independents) and individuals.

And I don't get what one guy at a non-NP specific protest has to do with the NP being literal nazis.

Again I'm not going to vote for them, but I think the nazi term is thrown around a bit too liberally these days.

Garret being associated with some nazi group in his youth is sufficient guilt by association to make you weary. Some random yob who may-or-may-not be a plant, who's been told off, doesn't.

Grizzly 45

Sparks wrote: »

I mean, I have little faith in them sticking to official positions, but at least this is a constructive idea. Asking individual TDs about their feelings on the issue is a waste of time unless that specific TD winds up as the Minister for Justice. And even there, it's not worth much, just look at the past promises of our last Minister for Justice and his actual actions in office with specific regard to firearms legislation.

AHEM...Dermot Aherne...Cough...Well known in Louth for his anti gun views since being a legal eagle.... Just sayin.

Grizzly 45

Sparks wrote: »

The Connollys aren't climatologists, and they're not published in a "lowly open source journal", they're hosting their blog post on their own website. The problem with that is that they can write up any old junk and post it there without opposition. If you want to get published in a real journal, your work has to pass review by other people in the field who are independent of both you *and* the journal doing the publication. And all of the thousands of climatologists who have been doing that since the middle of the last century have all come to a consensus on this and it's that it's real, it is happening today, and we're the cause. The IPCC report isn't even what most of them are saying; it's what all of them can agree upon. It's the most conservative opinion in the field. And it always lags behind the latest awful discoveries, like finding that the deep oceans are warmer than we hoped so we have less time, like finding that the methane emissions from the permafrost regions in northern russia are much higher than we hoped so we have less time, like finding that things seem to be accellerating faster than even the more worried people in the field thought they would.
Ignoring that and hoping that a father and son in Galway manage to find something in other people's data that was missed by a field of tens of thousands of non-idiots for over seventy years? That's beyond daft and into perverse.

Sparks,unfortunatly you have just given the best arguement against the entire AGW industry and cult in that answer.:P