What have we come to

Idbatterim

SF if they had run more candidates, would have received over 25% of the td's in the dail, its not like 2% you could brand as loons. they obviously have a diverse enough voter base

James Brown

Was reading an article in the Times, just an opinion piece. However BBC's John Simpson was cited as being under the impression Brexit was the big reason we voted the way we did. It was rightly pointed out that the British have little to no knowledge or interest in how it actually is on the ground in Ireland north or south. With the DUP lad calling Varadkar 'the Indian' and Johnson asking why he's not called Murphy like the rest of them. Trade talks should be interesting.

machaseh

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Was reading an article in the Times, just an opinion piece. However BBC's John Simpson was cited as being under the impression Brexit was the big reason we voted the way we did. It was rightly pointed out that the British have little to no knowledge or interest in how it actually is on the ground in Ireland north or south. With the DUP lad calling Varadkar 'the Indian' and Johnson asking why he's not called Murphy like the rest of them. Trade talks should be interesting.

Brexit is definitely not the main reason, but I do think that brexit has awoken some latent irish unification sentiments.

Ush1

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Was reading an article in the Times, just an opinion piece. However BBC's John Simpson was cited as being under the impression Brexit was the big reason we voted the way we did. It was rightly pointed out that the British have little to no knowledge or interest in how it actually is on the ground in Ireland north or south. With the DUP lad calling Varadkar 'the Indian' and Johnson asking why he's not called Murphy like the rest of them. Trade talks should be interesting.

Didn't a Sinn Fein councillor recently call Varadkar Indian? I think we're more similar to the Brits than we think.

James Brown

Ush1 wrote: »

Didn't a Sinn Fein councillor recently call Varadkar Indian? I think we're more similar to the Brits than we think.

He'd likely be Irish and not relevant to the point but a try at a dig at SF, sure why not.

thequarefellow

Idbatterim wrote: »

happy to be corrected if that is the case! Him being possibly the biggest failure of a Taoiseach we have ever had here, is subjective, but for my money, he is!

lets see leo, I have to make a decions, how will I go about that "oh, Ill fly a kite" that will tell me...

I'm no Leo fan but come on...

Enda Kenny
Bertie Ahern
Brian Cowan
Albert Reynolds
John Bruton
Jack Lynch

Cupatae

Ush1 wrote: »

Didn't a Sinn Fein councillor recently call Varadkar Indian? I think we're more similar to the Brits than we think.

Yeah paddy holihan, he got the boot i think, but then again SF got what they wanted out of him another platform to reach youth, which infairness to em was shrewd.

Cupatae

Matt Barrett wrote: »

He'd likely be Irish and not relevant to the point but a try at a dig at SF, sure why not.

Do you think theirs any negatives to SF specifically getting in power? or anything bad about the party ?

FrancieBrady

Ush1 wrote: »

Didn't a Sinn Fein councillor recently call Varadkar Indian? I think we're more similar to the Brits than we think.

No, he called his great grandfather Indian, and said Leo had Indian heritage but was obviously an Irish citizen.

In his blunt, awkward way to make a stupid point he ignored his maternal side's Irish heritage.

James Brown

Cupatae wrote: »

Do you think theirs any negatives to SF specifically getting in power? or anything bad about the party ?

I think trying to completely change the point of a comment not even mentioning SF to try get a dig in at SF is a waste of my time anyway.
You are merely continuing the tactic. Be honest. Just post about SF don't try twist posts of people trying to speak on something.

Negatives, yes. They've a lot of baggage making the transition from the troubles until now and the obvious ex this and that affiliates and criminality.
If every policy/political comment needs to be a discussion on such matters, I'm not interested.
Do you bring up bloody sunday anytime Boris Johnson gets a mention?

Cupatae

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I think trying to completely change the point of a comment not even mentioning SF to try get a dig in at SF is a waste of my time anyway.
You are merely continuing the tactic. Be honest. Just post about SF don't try twist posts of people trying to speak on something.

Seems to me you are happy to waste your time banging on about how great they are but when it comes to anything negative or inconvenient to your points its deemed "Waste of time"

You don't seem very balanced in your own views if you are not willing to atleast acknowledge the bad, or negative aspects..

By the way i was all for SF breaking up the big two and happy for them if they were genuine about change so your excuse of "Me continuing the tactic" for not answering the question doesnt really fly.

Ush1

Matt Barrett wrote: »

He'd likely be Irish and not relevant to the point but a try at a dig at SF, sure why not.

How is it not relevant to the point?

You're pointing out British electorate ignorance, and I'm pointing out Irish.

thequarefellow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No, he called his great grandfather Indian, and said Leo had Indian heritage but was obviously an Irish citizen.

In his blunt, awkward way to make a stupid point he ignored his maternal side's Irish heritage.

Not that it matters but wasn't De Valera born in another country and to a Spanish father?

I'm glad SF had the sense to give that Holohan idiot the boot. An embarrassment.

Ush1

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No, he called his great grandfather Indian, and said Leo had Indian heritage but was obviously an Irish citizen.

In his blunt, awkward way to make a stupid point he ignored his maternal side's Irish heritage.

Backs up what I'm saying so.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

He'd likely be Irish and not relevant to the point but a try at a dig at SF, sure why not.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Was reading an article in the Times, just an opinion piece. However BBC's John Simpson was cited as being under the impression Brexit was the big reason we voted the way we did. It was rightly pointed out that the British have little to no knowledge or interest in how it actually is on the ground in Ireland north or south. With the DUP lad calling Varadkar 'the Indian' and Johnson asking why he's not called Murphy like the rest of them. Trade talks should be interesting.

So you are allowed to make a dig at the British (which could be considered racist), but someone who points out the blatant racism of a SF councillor is not allowed to have a dig.

That takes hypocrisy to a new level. The mind boggles.

blanch152

thequarefellow wrote: »

Not that it matters but wasn't De Valera born in another country and to a Spanish father?

I'm glad SF had the sense to give that Holohan idiot the boot. An embarrassment.

I think Holohan is still a member. He was quietly brushed under the carpet but he wasn't expelled. We can expect a celebratory video from him any day soon.

Plumbthedepths

blanch152 wrote: »

So you are allowed to make a dig at the British (which could be considered racist), but someone who points out the blatant racism of a SF councillor is not allowed to have a dig.

That takes hypocrisy to a new level. The mind boggles.

Xenophobic prehaps , but to the best of my knowledge nationality does not equate to race. Even British.

James Brown

Cupatae wrote: »

Seems to me you are happy to waste your time banging on about how great they are but when it comes to anything negative or inconvenient to your points its deemed "Waste of time"

You don't seem very balanced in your own views if you are not willing to atleast acknowledge the bad, or negative aspects..

By the way i was all for SF breaking up the big two and happy for them if they were genuine about change so your excuse of "Me continuing the tactic" for not answering the question doesnt really fly.

That's an exaggeration bordering on a lie.
I was speaking on the british view of Ireland and how they feel brexit played a major role in how we voted, so yes, you're talking sh*te.

It's a given for me, (their past).
You are poor at this. I was speaking on the effect or non-effect of brexit on our vote as seen from Britain. You comments are a fraud.

Ush1

Matt Barrett wrote: »

That's an exaggeration bordering on a lie.
I was speaking on the british view of Ireland and how they feel brexit played a major role in how we voted, so yes, you're talking sh*te.

It's a given for me, (their past).
You are poor at this. I was speaking on the effect or non-effect of brexit on our vote as seen from Britain. You comments are a fraud.

So your comments were nothing to do with ignorance of the Brits on Irish matters?

Very confusing altogether.

James Brown

Ush1 wrote: »

How is it not relevant to the point?

You're pointing out British electorate ignorance, and I'm pointing out Irish.

My point was the british view of how brexit played a major role in our election and how they don't seem to know or care about what's actually going down. So yes, irrelevant. Be honest, just post on SF rather than wasting my time with your sad dishonest twisting.

Ush1

Matt Barrett wrote: »

My point was the british view of how brexit played a major role in our election and how they don't seem to know or care about what's actually going down. So yes, irrelevant. Be honest, just post on SF rather than wasting my time with your sad dishonest twisting.

I agree, but I added, this being a discussion forum, that there is ignorance from Irish politicians on our own side.

Sorry is anything remotely negative about SF irrelevant because you say so? Maybe read the OP again.

gormdubhgorm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That is just more arrogant denigration of the electorate. Stop it please...accept the vote and don't be embarrassing yourself.

In your favour, you do seem to have stopped with the diatribe. I sense you are coming to terms with it all.

I am just discussing it as are you - note the OP created the title what have we come to. SF have only got one fifth of the seats as have FG as have FF.

And no it is not an arrogant denigration of the electorate - it is clear that there was a vacuum in the left SF filled. Some of it was vote in desperation, some of it was vote taking a chance like you, and some of it was in ignorance of the full facts.

blanch152

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Xenophobic prehaps , but to the best of my knowledge nationality does not equate to race. Even British.

https://www.lawreform.ie/_fileupload/RevisedActs/WithAnnotations/HTML/EN_ACT_2000_0008.HTM

Section 3 (2) (h) of the Equal Status Acts defines discrimination on the grounds of race as follows:

"(h) that they are of different race, colour, nationality or ethnic or national origins (the “ground of race”),"

Unfortunately, the best of your knowledge is wrong. Making derogatory remarks about the British is racist.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

So you are allowed to make a dig at the British (which could be considered racist), but someone who points out the blatant racism of a SF councillor is not allowed to have a dig.

That takes hypocrisy to a new level. The mind boggles.

You are very dishonest here and purposefully so.
I am attempting to pass comment on the British view of our election regarding Brexit and lack of interest in the realities on the ground. That's not a dig, that's their view and my commenting on it.
Why not throw in Kenny's N word joke or a tirade by Tommy Robinson? Because it's irrelevant to my comment.

You are either unable to comprehend or pretending you can't. Neither a good look.

James Brown

Ush1 wrote: »

I agree, but I added, this being a discussion forum, that there is ignorance from Irish politicians on our own side.

Sorry is anything remotely negative about SF irrelevant because you say so? Maybe read the OP again.

Ush1 wrote: »

So your comments were nothing to do with ignorance of the Brits on Irish matters?

Very confusing altogether.

Not my fault you can't comprehend.
Ongoing if I make any comment about any entity on any issue I'll be sure to mention Bobby Sands and Martin McGuinness :rolleyes:

FrancieBrady

Matt Barrett wrote: »

That's an exaggeration bordering on a lie.
I was speaking on the british view of Ireland and how they feel brexit played a major role in how we voted, so yes, you're talking sh*te.

It's a given for me, (their past).
You are poor at this. I was speaking on the effect or non-effect of brexit on our vote as seen from Britain. You comments are a fraud.

The Telegraph is currently making the case that SF's success is Varadkar's fault:

Then, along comes Brexit and in 2017 the new Irish Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, forgets his modernising, liberal stance and puts on the old green jersey of Irish nationalism. It turned out that virulent nationalism had not gone away after all. So, if Brit-bashing is again the approved, mainstream sport in the republic’s politics, why not turn to Sinn Fein, the best qualified players in that nasty game?

James Brown

The FG lads are desperate and bitter.

A comment on how the British viewed the election as it related to Brexit turns into a shinner bare knuckle troll fest.
Get over it lads

gormdubhgorm

Idbatterim wrote: »

SF if they had run more candidates, would have received over 25% of the td's in the dail, its not like 2% you could brand as loons. they obviously have a diverse enough voter base

If me granny had balls she would be me uncle. This new SF voter based clearly does not bother voting at local council level? Where SF got hammered. They were very worried.

Which caused SF to run this amount of candidates in the GE
Which leads me to believe it is more of a protest vote than anything else.

My suspicion is my of these new fickle SF voters are only trying them out, and the novelty will ware thin fairly quick.

blanch152

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

If me granny had balls she would be me uncle. This new SF voter based clearly does not bother voting at local council level? Where SF got hammered. They were very worried.

Which caused SF to run this amount of candidates in the GE
Which leads me to believe it is more of a protest vote than anything else.

My suspicion is my of these new SF voters are only trying them out, and the novelty will ware thin fairly quick.

It has worn thin already.

An English neighbour of mine was telling me earlier that there were fellas in his workplace apologising to him for Cullinane saying they didn't realise what they were voting for.

Duke of Url

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The Telegraph is currently making the case that SF's success is Varadkar's fault:

SF success is based on the largest socialist programme the state has ever seen.

Everyone will sit back and watch now.