People like SF candidates but won't vote for SF

McMurphy

Edgware wrote: »

One thing. If SF are so great why are 76 % not going to vote for them according to the polls

That's about the most ridiculous statement I've seen from your one liners ever, and that's saying something.

maccored

Edgware wrote: »

One thing. If SF are so great why are 76 % not going to vote for them according to the polls

jaysus lads, shouldnt ye's wait til the election is over before ****ting yourselves about the SF vote?

eagle eye

What have Sinn Fein supporters on here to say about all the not so nice stuff that gets brought up? How do you support a party that has this stuff in its history?
Please don't go the route, if you are responding, about failings of other parties.
Also if you can give a reasonable explanation to the above, can you then tell me what bracket you fall under as far as family and salary.
Can you then tell me how increasing social welfare payments is going to be paid for? What response do you expect if you tax the super wealthy more? How do you think the ordinary working man who is struggling to survive will feel about increasing social welfare payments?

Edgware

Matt Barrett wrote: »

'You think you're great. I know I am. Well if you're so great....'

Have you seen FF/FG combined? Hardly a ringing endorsement from the public now or even last election.
There'll be a few elections with many parties on middling support before we are rid of FF/FG in government I'd imagine.

Getting back to the question?

Edgware

:rolleyes:

McMurphy wrote: »

That's about the most ridiculous statement I've seen from your one liners ever, and that's saying something.

Any answer instead of deflect?

James Brown

eagle eye wrote: »

What have Sinn Fein supporters on here to say about all the not so nice stuff that gets brought up? How do you support a party that has this stuff in its history?
Please don't go the route, if you are responding, about failings of other parties.
Also if you can give a reasonable explanation to the above, can you then tell me what bracket you fall under as far as family and salary.
Can you then tell me how increasing social welfare payments is going to be paid for? What response do you expect if you tax the super wealthy more? How do you think the ordinary working man who is struggling to survive will feel about increasing social welfare payments?

I'm not a party supporter per se, I will be voting for them after the SD's. Mostly on housing.
What the IRA, (which is what I assume you are alluding to) did is not news and not that relevant to this jurisdiction, including what the British did and the UVF etc. with the GFA I've moved on in that regard. That's being general and I'd have differing opinions on differing events, but over all not relevant to my vote. I have issues with my local SF TD/candidate and have never voted for him.
If I were up north likely the troubles etc. would play more into my choices come election time, in that I might give SF a number 1 due to the DUP and other issues, mostly Unionist related. On the other hand SF should be commended for the GFA despite petty political jibes from FF/FG/Lab who are hypocrites when it comes to border issues IMO.

You earn more, you pay more. People are not use to quality or value for money. I'm fine with high taxes if we cut out the crony appointments, TD's not turning up/double jobbing, quangos etc.
The ordinary working man is struggling to survive now and we are charging vulture funds and other multi-million euro/dollar companies low tax, to keep them here, including they ones that don't employ much of anybody.
People get confused on welfare issues IMO. More welfare and foreva home sh*te talk are not related. A chancer will try con dole and not work regardless of the rate set. Raising welfare is to ensure people on welfare are not suffering. These are people out of work, sick etc. They deserve a livable state aid.
Chancers, committing fraud to stay on welfare, don't come into it. That's a separate issue. Raising welfare has sweet f*** all to do with them IMO.
This idea that we should punish people on welfare because of a minority just isn't decent or fair.

Now there is a distinct lack or taking digs and slagging off FG voters in the same manner we've seen aimed at SF voters/potential voters you may have noticed, that's because most people outside of FG are keeping it about policies outside of being pushed by trolls of course.

I mean look at this point scoring crapola:

Edgware wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Any answer instead of deflect?

This idea that people can't merely vote SF without supporting the IRA and everything they did and people we suspect of being affiliated did is beyond boring to me and less relevant as time passes, even when ever there's a crime and IRA/ex-IRA involvement is inferred, see Quinn/Cavan/Kidnapping etc. The good thing is it seems to be backfiring anyway and likely MM and LV will make tits of themselves while ML is talking issues people are dealing with and they bark about the troubles.

Bishop of hope

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I'm not a party supporter per se, I will be voting for them after the SD's. Mostly on housing.
What the IRA, (which is what I assume you are alluding to) did is not news and not that relevant to this jurisdiction, including what the British did and the UVF etc. with the GFA I've moved on in that regard. That's being general and I'd have differing opinions on differing events, but over all not relevant to my vote. I have issues with my local SF TD/candidate and have never voted for him.
If I were up north likely the troubles etc. would play more into my choices come election time, in that I might give SF a number 1 due to the DUP and other issues, mostly Unionist related. On the other hand SF should be commended for the GFA despite petty political jibes from FF/FG/Lab who are hypocrites when it comes to border issues IMO.

You earn more, you pay more. People are not use to quality or value for money. I'm fine with high taxes if we cut out the crony appointments, TD's not turning up/double jobbing, quangos etc.
The ordinary working man is struggling to survive now and we are charging vulture funds and other multi-million euro/dollar companies low tax, to keep them here, including they ones that don't employ much of anybody.
People get confused on welfare issues IMO. More welfare and foreva home sh*te talk are not related. A chancer will try con dole and not work regardless of the rate set. Raising welfare is to ensure people on welfare are not suffering. These are people out of work, sick etc. They deserve a livable state aid.
Chancers, committing fraud to stay on welfare, don't come into it. That's a separate issue. Raising welfare has sweet f*** all to do with them IMO.
This idea that we should punish people on welfare because of a minority just isn't decent or fair.

Now there is a distinct lack or taking digs and slagging off FG voters in the same manner we've seen aimed at SF voters/potential voters you may have noticed, that's because most people outside of FG are keeping it about policies outside of being pushed by trolls of course.

I mean look at this point scoring crapola:



This idea that people can't merely vote SF without supporting the IRA and everything they did and people we suspect of being affiliated did is beyond boring to me and less relevant as time passes, even when ever there's a crime and IRA/ex-IRA involvement is inferred, see Quinn/Cavan/Kidnapping etc. The good thing is it seems to be backfiring anyway and likely MM and LV will make tits of themselves while ML is talking issues people are dealing with and they bark about the troubles.

I knew, there was a wind warning somewhere tonight, wasn't expecting it here.
That's the most longwinded sinn fein piece of propoganda I've read in a while, and laughably from a poster going to give his no 1 to the SDs, give us a break.

efanton

Edgware wrote: »

One thing. If SF are so great why are 76 % not going to vote for them according to the polls

Why are 76% not supporting FF

Why are more than 76% not supporting FG

Is that the best you can do as an argument not to support SF?

James Brown

Bishop of hope wrote: »

I knew, there was a wind warning somewhere tonight, wasn't expecting it here.
That's the most longwinded sinn fein piece of propoganda I've read in a while, and laughably from a poster going to give his no 1 to the SDs, give us a break.

Well I'm honest and mean every word. If you read it like that so what? It means absolutely nothing. You know he specifically asked about SF? Anyway, what ever comrade

maccored

eagle eye wrote: »

What have Sinn Fein supporters on here to say about all the not so nice stuff that gets brought up? How do you support a party that has this stuff in its history?
Please don't go the route, if you are responding, about failings of other parties.
Also if you can give a reasonable explanation to the above, can you then tell me what bracket you fall under as far as family and salary.
Can you then tell me how increasing social welfare payments is going to be paid for? What response do you expect if you tax the super wealthy more? How do you think the ordinary working man who is struggling to survive will feel about increasing social welfare payments?

its the past, and its a past that needed to happen unfortunately. easy to scoff at if you didnt live through it and I totally understand how people just dont get that - but to me, its the past and the party is trying to grow.

As for social welfare - ask any of the parties who have been in government who have actually increased social welfare - they're the ones you want to ask that question of.

can you then tell me what bracket you fall under as far as family and salary

Im work in software development with a decent salary - not thats anyone's business. Personally i think the average working man would do quite well under SF.

Bishop of hope

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Well I'm honest and mean every word. If you read it like that so what? It means absolutely nothing. Carry on.

Reminds me of the politician and the prostitute joke.
It reads like something MLMD might read out as her final statement tomoro night and then advise people to vote no1 SDs.

James Brown

Bishop of hope wrote: »

Reminds me of the politician and the prostitute joke.
It reads like something MLMD might read out as her final statement tomoro night and then advise people to vote no1 SDs.

Chief you're making a child of yourself.
You could put the SD's or even a few indies in there and it wouldn't change a word.
We'll talk politics you do your little jeering.

efanton

Edgware wrote: »

Paul Quinn's Mam on R.T.E. now.
Not very nice listening for Conor Murphy, Lynn Boylan etc

Are you suggesting SF candidates had any involvement at all?

Are you suggesting they had prior knowledge that that crime was going to be committed?

If not there is no connection whatsoever between SF candidates and those crimes.

There's been many a crime that has been committed by FF and FG members or supporters.
It would be equally ridiculous to suggest that either party were responsible, even partly, for those crimes.

I have absolutely no problem whatsoever anyone speaking out about any crime a SF candidate has committed, or been accused of. After all it is them standing forward and being judged as to whether they are individually fit for public duty.
But trying to make them responsible for other peoples actions, even by association, is simply wrong.

maccored

efanton wrote: »

Are you suggesting SF candidates had any involvement at all?

Are you suggesting they had prior knowledge that that crime was going to be committed?

If not there is no connection whatsoever between SF candidates and those crimes.

There's been many a crime that has been committed by FF and FG members or supporters.
It would be equally ridiculous to suggest that either party were responsible, even partly, for those crimes.

I have absolutely no problem whatsoever anyone speaking out about any crime a SF candidate has committed, or been accused of. After all it is them standing forward and being judged as to whether they are individually fit for public duty.
But trying to make them responsible for other peoples actions, even by association, is simply wrong.

I'd say most of the people making those remarks had to google who paul quinn was. If politicians and interviewers didnt mention them, they'd had no idea.

endainoz

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/sinn-f%C3%A9in-leads-way-in-irish-times-ipsos-mrbi-poll-with-highest-support-ever-1.4160461?mode=amp


Ha ha ha

McMurphy

Latest poll released tonight sees Sinn Fein leapfrog FF, putting them above FF+FG.

The shlt has hit the big mechanical whirly yoke, leo and mehawl and RTE will be bricking it now.

McMurphy

Edgware wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Any answer instead of deflect?

Deflect?

I thought it was a pisstake question, not meant to be taken seriously in the slightest.

Get a grip.

James Brown

Expect the nasty FF/FG behavior to be ramped up.

_Kaiser_

Too many threads on the same sub-topics, but as I said in the other one - we could well be heading for our own Trump/Brexit moment.

The narrative that people have had enough of the FF/FG merry-go-round seems to be gathering pace. Mary Lou will be thrilled tonight! MM squirming over his pledge not to go in with SF. Leo also, but I couldn't see SF laying down with FG anyway.

FrancieBrady

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Expect the nasty FF/FG behavior to be ramped up.

SF would be delighted judging on those figures, they've tried everything.

McMurphy

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Expect the nasty FF/FG behavior to be ramped up.

Toning it down is what they need to be doing by the looks of things, I dunno how much you can trust these polls tbh, but from social media (definitely twitter anyway) the more they attack the shinners, the more of a backlash FFG seem to be getting.

I think meehawl will have to eat crow and either have a coalition with SF or else confidence and supply with the blueshirts.

It's a clear trend now that's emerging too. Neither of the two gombeens seen this coming.

endainoz

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Expect the nasty FF/FG behavior to be ramped up.

How much damage could the do in a few days though? And what are the chances of it backfiring in them?

ricero

Very proud of the younger generations who are waking up and abandoning the ff/fg monopoly.

FrancieBrady

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Too many threads on the same sub-topics,

Wish a mod would tidy them up...a few of them could be rolled into one.

FrancieBrady

McMurphy wrote: »

I think meehawl will have to eat crow and either have a coalition with SF or else confidence and supply with the blueshirts.

I think they will be queuing up in FF to shoot down C&S if FF and SF alone can go into government.

James Brown

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Too many threads on the same sub-topics, but as I said in the other one - we could well be heading for our own Trump/Brexit moment.

The narrative that people have had enough of the FF/FG merry-go-round seems to be gathering pace. Mary Lou will be thrilled tonight! MM squirming over his pledge not to go in with SF. Leo also, but I couldn't see SF laying down with FG anyway.

Hopefully, but Trump is more in line with FG policy wise.

FrancieBrady

Edgware wrote: »

One thing. If SF are so great why are 76 % not going to vote for them according to the polls

It's only 75% now and counting.

Fann Linn

ricero wrote: »

Very proud of the younger generations who are waking up and abandoning the ff/fg monopoly.

I hope so. They got out for gay marriage, abortion etc. Time now to get out one more time now that Leo has given them that Saturday opportunity.

McMurphy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's only 75% now and counting.

:pac:

_Kaiser_

Actually, this could work against SF.

People who would ordinarily stay away on polling day, figuring that FF or FG will be in charge one way or another, may actually get out and vote for one or other of them to prevent SF becoming kingmakers.