People like SF candidates but won't vote for SF

gormdubhgorm

maccored wrote: »

This is the Republic of Ireland - not northern ireland

So let me get this straight when things are palatable and politically expedient for SF to take credit for in NI they do so. Gerry used to talk up SF track record in NI for ROI voters as did Mary Lou.

When it is not politically expedient to do so suddenly SF become partionist and say that is a different jurisdiction!

SF the bipolar party one foot in and one foot out depending on the day of the week.

gormdubhgorm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Dodging what?

It was an allegation of rape/abuse against one man. Singular.

And it was and still is an 'allegation'. That man was willing and did turn up to court of his free will to defend himself.

You are either a democrat or you aren't.

That is an ironic use of the phrase as SF are clearly only democrats and follow the rule of law when it suits.

maccored

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

So let me get this straight when things are palatable and politically expedient for SF to take credit for in NI they do so. Gerry used to talk up SF track record in NI for ROI voters as did Mary Lou.

When it is not politically expedient to do so suddenly SF become partionist and say that is a different jurisdiction!

SF the bipolar party one foot in and one foot out depending on the day of the week.

we are talking about the law system in the south and you are warbling on about things that happen int he north - which the law system here wouldnt deal with.

Seriously - its like debating with a 5 year old. cop on a bit with your hatred there.

FrancieBrady

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

That is an ironic use of the phrase as SF are clearly only democrats and follow the rule of law when it suits.

Never mind SF for a minute...you have assumed this man's guilt here without him being given a fair trial and a chance to clear his name. That is the essence of 'anti democratic'.

I have my opinion of Mairia's allegations but I always use the word 'alleged' when talking about the accused.

gormdubhgorm

maccored wrote: »

whats your point? SF were in talks forever with the DUP and the DUP kept walking. Read the news fella - dont expect me to educate you

We saw what the republic of ireland and Britian thought of the DUP during brexit. FF and FG wouldnt last a day with them

SF could have entered WM and changed the history of Brexit but no they hid behind talk of a mandate despite the extraordinary circumstances that effected the island. Instead SF left the vaccum that allowed the DUP to hold the balance of power.
Where was the alternative and plea for change then from SF?

maccored

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Never mind SF for a minute...you have assumed this man's guilt here without him being given a fair trial and a chance to clear his name. That is the essence of 'anti democratic'.

I have my opinion of Mairia's allegations but I always use the word 'alleged' when talking about the accused.

he told me I would 'disappear' him. Not much of a debater

maccored

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

SF could have entered WM and changed the history of Brexit but no they hid behind talk of a mandate despite the extraordinary circumstances that effected the island. Instead SF left the vaccum that allowed the DUP to hold the balance of power.
Where was the alternative and plea for change then from SF?

sorry, i fell alseep. catch a grip, they couldnt have changed brexit.

gormdubhgorm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Never mind SF for a minute...you have assumed this man's guilt here without him being given a fair trial and a chance to clear his name. That is the essence of 'anti democratic'.

I have my opinion of Mairia's allegations but I always use the word 'alleged' when talking about the accused.

Using the word alleged does not protect you legally so that point is moot.

gormdubhgorm

maccored wrote: »

sorry, i fell alseep

Another classic SF dodge yet you specfically asked blanch to answer a question.
Yet you fall asleep when you are asked one.

Typical SF I suppose asleep during brexit both in Stormont and Westminster.
Asleep during Liam Adams abuse. Asleep during Conor Murphy's initial comments on Paul Quinn.

maccored

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Another classic SF dodge.

aye, you are correct. its in the SF Book Of Dodgyiness. Its a fair cop gov

FrancieBrady

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Using the word alleged does not protect you legally so that point is moot.

What???

gormdubhgorm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What???

Saying that something is 'alleged' does not protect a person legally they can still be done for defamation through innuendo etc.
As long as there is proof that it defames the person in the eyes of right thinking members of society,

FrancieBrady

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Saying that something is 'alleged' does not protect a person legally they can still be done for defamation through innuendo etc.
As long as there is proof that it defames the person in the eyes of right thinking members of society,

What???

maccored

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

.
As long as there is proof that it defames the person in the eyes of right thinking members of society,

and who decides what the right way to think is? Just wondering thats all

smurgen

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What???

Is it just me or are these FGers getting crazier? Starting to sound like the mental tin foil hat trump supporters you see on Twitter.

gormdubhgorm

maccored wrote: »

aye, you are correct. its in the SF Book Of Dodgyiness. Its a fair cop gov

So you have no real retort grand so to my points.

Maybe you should take your own advice at this stage?

maccored wrote: »

step. back. from. the. thread.

maccored

smurgen wrote: »

Is it just me or are these FGers getting crazier? Starting to sound like the mental tin foil hat trump supporters you see on Twitter.

boring the arse off me so they are. I may stop replying - though its just too weird to avoid. Its like a car crash

maccored

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

So you have no real retort grand so to my points.

Maybe you should take your own advice at this stage?

i think i will because its like talking to a brick

gormdubhgorm

maccored wrote: »

and who decides what the right way to think is? Just wondering thats all

The rule of law the judicary which SF are against when it suits.

FrancieBrady

smurgen wrote: »

Is it just me or are these FGers getting crazier? Starting to sound like the mental tin foil hat trump supporters you see on Twitter.

Did you hear McDowell this AM?

Or see FF's latest video about Mary Lou and Leo making eyes at one another?

Pure Trump stuff alright.

FrancieBrady

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

The rule of law the judicary which SF are against when it suits.

Where did the judiciary decide on Cahill's allegations and her alleged abusers guilt?

maccored

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

The rule of law the judicary which SF are against when it suits.

ah, so a court decides - not 'right thinking members of society'. you should have said that the last time

gormdubhgorm

maccored wrote: »

i think i will because its like talking to a brick

The reality is because you do not have an answer to the question and you have to resort to metaphorically throwing bricks which is a clear sign that an individual has lost an argument.

You told me to leave the thread, you have called me out of my depth and now you have compared me to a brick.

In doing so you have shown an unwillingness to address the points I have made as they are unpalatable to you.

I think it is best that I do what SF wish they could do with Breege Quinn and put you on the ignore list. As any further engagement will prove pointless

gormdubhgorm

maccored wrote: »

ah, so a court decides - not 'right thinking members of society'. you should have said that the last time

You are getting confused the definition of defamation includes

“a statement that tends to injure a person's reputation in the eyes of reasonable members of society”.

That decision is then decided by the courts on the basis of this definition.

gormdubhgorm

Anyway Maccored I will now put you on the ignore list.
I hope you put a good amount of thought into who you are voting for in this election. And think about the points I have made. Even though you are unwilling to answer them in a public forum.

maccored

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

The reality is because you do not have an answer to the question and you have to resort to metaphorically throwing bricks which is a clear sign that an individual has lost an argument.

You told me to leave the thread, you have called me out of my depth and now you have compared me to a brick.

In doing so you have shown an unwillingness to address the points I have made as they are unpalatable to you.

I think it is best that I do what SF wish they could do with Breege Quinn and put you on the ignore list. As any further engagement will prove pointless

better than saying someone is going to 'disappear' you.

BTW - i didnt call you a brick. Debating with the FG/FFs is like talking to a brick. Jaysus - stop with the drama

FrancieBrady

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

The reality is because you do not have an answer to the question and you have to resort to metaphorically throwing bricks which is a clear sign that an individual has lost an argument.

You told me to leave the thread, you have called me out of my depth and now you have compared me to a brick.

In doing so you have shown an unwillingness to address the points I have made as they are unpalatable to you.

I think it is best that I do what SF wish they could do with Breege Quinn and put you on the ignore list. As any further engagement will prove pointless

Would you agree that the sitting governments have 'ignored' Breege Quinn for 13 years until now?

Or was she just not loud enough?

maccored

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Anyway Maccored I will now put you on the ignore list.
I hope you put a good amount of thought into who you are voting for in this election and think about the points I have made. Even though you are unwilling to answer them in a public forum.

I laugh at the points you made

smurgen

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Did you hear McDowell this AM?

Or see FF's latest video about Mary Lou and Leo making eyes at one another?

Pure Trump stuff alright.

They're all over the stuff. The caricatures of the average SF supporter they're painting reminds me over Hillary's deplorables comment also. They're picking the bad aspects of both sides of the US election campaigns and not realizing it's going down like a lead balloon.fascinating to watch!

gormdubhgorm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Would you agree that the sitting governments have 'ignored' Breege Quinn for 13 years until now?

Or was she just not loud enough?

I feel it was the latter - SF NI government led not ROI government led.

https://www.thejournal.ie/paul-quinn-sinn-fein-conor-murphy-4994057-Feb2020/