GE Exit Poll 10 pm

lmimmfn

Bill 2.0 wrote: »

Usually with a bunch of asterisks behind that completely explain the situation but lets ignore that!

So your own story is BS, right so, agreed.

Suckit

markodaly wrote: »

So SF are not interested at all in helping those people that voted for them, instead their supporters want them to stay off the field, yet again to 'play the long game'.
So, why vote for SF to enact 'change'?

Voting SF in has already been a massive change. Hopefully, it won't be long now, relaively speaking, FFFG Ireland will be like the catholic church. Old regime slowly dying. A thing of the past.

That, or they will actually have to make some changes themselves, which would be welcomed. But the time to tell everyone about what they plan to do, compared to actually doing it, has long passed.

LeinsterDub

Bill 2.0 wrote: »

Usually with a bunch of asterisks behind that completely explain the situation but lets ignore that!

Nope generally just the one asterisk.

*=caused by FG /FF 's political ideology

amacca

Calhoun wrote: »

My daughter is on the spectrum, she is non-verbal, and at six still needs to be toilet trained.

Oh yes and the current school system is trying to have her removed because she doesn't fit the model of student in school and requires a bit more work. Even though under the law she is guaranteed an inclusive education.

I'm no going to say I understand because I don't, I've never been in such a situation. You do have sympathy for what must be a difficult situation (and that's not meant to be patronising and if it causes offence my apologies)

But can I ask In relation to the above what is the school supposed to do? They're probably not resourced to deal with that in terms of manpower or facilities ... the school/teachers have the other students to consider too

I suppose I'm asking do you think the school/teachers could do more because speaking from the other side of things as a teacher I've been put in situations in the past which made it impossible to deliver a fully inclusive education for all - there was no way a human could achieve it even if one was prepared to work 16 hour days imo....a state can only guarantee inclusive education for all if it's prepared to resource it properly otherwise it's just PR imo

Bill 2.0

lmimmfn wrote: »

So your own story is BS, right so, agreed.

It isn't but i think we should just drop the whole thing because it is two people arguing on the internet who can't actually prove anything to each other.


If i met you in real life and you proved me wrong i'd genuinely be very apologetic for doubting you.

LeinsterDub

Bill 2.0 wrote: »

It isn't but i think we should just drop the whole thing because it is two people arguing on the internet who can't actually prove anything to each other.


If i met you in real life and you proved me wrong i'd genuinely be very apologetic for doubting you.

No it's you saying people are lying and finding any excuse to allow FG off the hook for the fact our health system is completely mismanaged

fritzelly

Another question re the transfers - someone answered previously for the first and second votes (thanks) but...
The second votes are shared based on the percentage - grand
So someone with the second votes gets over the line and elected, where do the next votes come from? Is it the 3rd preference from the first elected? Do the votes from the second elected come into play if they are over the quota?
I have googled this and there is nothing really online really explaining it.

lmimmfn

Bill 2.0 wrote: »

It isn't but i think we should just drop the whole thing because it is two people arguing on the internet who can't actually prove anything to each other.


If i met you in real life and you proved me wrong i'd genuinely be very apologetic for doubting you.

I have plenty of proof but I'm obviously not posting it here, if you actually think people are "pretending" to have disabled kids then I don't know what to say.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

So SF are not interested at all in helping those people that voted for them, instead their supporters want them to stay off the field, yet again to 'play the long game'.
So, why vote for SF to enact 'change'?

I don't want them to enable either FF or FG again. Simple as that.

I voted for change and I want change even if it means waiting another while.

There will be folk waiting for them to fail, like yourself, so whatever they do, go in or refuse, is going to be wrong. I couldn't care less about the taunts of people who have lost tbh.

McMurphy

Deleted User wrote: »

It obviously is. I'm sure you be happy with Catholics oppressing protestants "for the cause" in a 32 country republic. I don't want deaths which you want.

Seriously go to bed and stop embarrassing yourself.

And the deaths I want ?

Go to bed.

Bill 2.0

lmimmfn wrote: »

I have plenty of proof but I'm obviously not posting it here, if you actually think people are "pretending" to have disabled kids then I don't know what to say.

As i said, we should probably just drop the entire thing at this stage.


I posted my experience, then you posted yours and neither of us can verify it one way or the other so it's a bit pointless and drags a bunch of bystanders in because it is an emotive issue.

Blanco100

which count centres are working into the night?

McMurphy

Did Michelle Mulhern get shown the door again does anyone know?

road_high

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I don't want them to enable either FF or FG again. Simple as that.

I voted for change and I want change even if it means waiting another while.

There will be folk waiting for them to fail, like yourself, so whatever they do, go in or refuse, is going to be wrong. I couldn't care less about the taunts of people who have lost tbh.

So even though other people have "lost", they haven't really and should go into power just to allow you "win" more the next time..... Oh, and you want "change" as well, but just not yet and only at a time that suits and is convenient to SF.
Shinner logic is about as sensible as that amazing manifesto of change...that they don't want to implement...yet.

FrancieBrady

McMurphy wrote: »

Did Michelle Mulhern get shown the door again does anyone know?

Not yet...RTE just covered it there...3 way fight with Mulherin and running mate looking to be favourites...not clear which one yet though.

Calhoun

amacca wrote: »

I'm no going to say I understand because I don't, I've never been in such a situation. You do have sympathy for what must be a difficult situation (and that's not meant to be patronising and if it causes offence my apologies)

But can I ask In relation to the above what is the school supposed to do? They're probably not resourced to deal with that in terms of manpower or facilities ... the school/teachers have the other students to consider too

I suppose I'm asking do you think the school/teachers could do more because speaking from the other side of things as a teacher I've been put in situations in the past which made it impossible to deliver a fully inclusive education for all - there was no way a human could achieve it even if one was prepared to work 16 hour days imo....a state can only guarantee inclusive education for all if it's prepared to resource it properly otherwise it's just PR imo

There is a constitutional right guaranteeing an inclusive education, from the department of education/school system. So that is up for them to work that out, and if they cannot support well then legal action should be taken.

As for the other students, that is not a problem for parents paying taxes but the schools themselves.

My general attitude of school teachers is they don't like having to deal with special education. We don't even train them in the colleges how to deal with special needs children, and more often than not only take courses when forced to do so if they should have to come in contact with a child that needs it.

What do you think we should do with these children so they don't give you a headache? Just start smothering them? or should we actually invest in the services they require?

Its funny you crib about SF and all that being terrorists and your attitude to some of our most vulnerable would suggest your quite the monster yourself.

poppers

McMurphy wrote: »

Did Michelle Mulhern get shown the door again does anyone know?

Still in battle for a seat with alan dillon and lisa chambers

The national turnout was 62.9%, down 2.2% from 2016. So it seems holding an election on a Saturday hasn’t helped in this regard. Also the 4th lowest turnout for a GE in the history of the state.

lmimmfn

Bill 2.0 wrote: »

As i said, we should probably just drop the entire thing at this stage.


I posted my experience, then you posted yours and neither of us can verify it one way or the other so it's a bit pointless and drags a bunch of bystanders in because it is an emotive issue.

Sorry but you're in the wrong here because I accepted your stance on your dad becoming disabled and I shared my experience and how lucky you were which you in turn conveyed as a lie.
If it wasn't real I wouldn't give a crap but you come across as a wanker with a believe me but I won't believe anyone else attitude, especially on such a sensitive subject.

Anyway I'm done with that particular conversation but I'm not done with how FG handled it.

McMurphy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Not yet...RTE just covered it there...3 way fight with Mulherin and running mate looking to be favourites...not clear which one yet though.

The TV is off here because herself is beside me in the bed pushing out zzzz's.

Cheers, fingers crossed she's turfed out on her lug again.

Arghus

Ya can't beat a bit of late night proportional representation porn.

Bill 2.0

lmimmfn wrote: »

Anyway I'm done with that particular conversation

Good stuff.

poppers

McMurphy wrote: »

Did Michelle Mulhern get shown the door again does anyone know?

Just got the door now

fritzelly

McMurphy wrote: »

Did Michelle Mulhern get shown the door again does anyone know?

Gone now

FrancieBrady

road_high wrote: »

So even though other people have "lost", they haven't really and should go into power just to allow you "win" more the next time..... Oh, and you want "change" as well, but just not yet and only at a time that suits and is convenient to SF.
Shinner logic is about as sensible as that amazing manifesto of change...that they don't to implement...yet.

More or less. There is no onus on SF to go in with any of them.

They have been saying all along that a government without FF or FG is their preferred option.
They have every right now to pick and choose. If they get a programme for government they feel delivers core policy then, no problem. If not, 'feck off lads' and work it out yourselves.

That is my thinking on it, not SF's by the way.

Bill 2.0

Deleted User wrote: »

The national turnout was 62.9%, down 2.2% from 2016. So it seems holding an election on a Saturday hasn’t helped in this regard. Also the 4th lowest turnout for a GE in the history of the state.

People have a few pound in their arse pocket so they counldn't give a bollix who is driving the gravy train other than the ones that want a few more pound in their arse pocket.

McMurphy

poppers wrote: »

Just got the door now

Thank you Allah, Jesus, Buddha and Santa I love you all equally for answering my prayers!

namloc1980

poppers wrote: »

Just got the door now

Lisa Chambers to follow her out the door hopefully.

pheasant tail

ChikiChiki wrote: »

I'd imagine happenings outside of politics didn't go down too well in Mayo

Care to expand? Not in relation to the FG councilor..

fritzelly

fritzelly wrote: »

Gone now

Jesus, Mulherin will be gutted. Stayed ahead of Alan Dillon all the way until McHugh went. Dillon 700 behind Lisa Chambers, but should pass her out once Mulherrin’s votes are distributed.