What have we come to

FrancieBrady

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 fickle SF voters are only trying them out, and the novelty will ware thin fairly quick.

It's all Leo's fault with his 'virulent nationalism'. The English say so!

Well, it's as valid a theory as your, 'the young are all stupid', or maybe both of you are desperately looking for excuses?

tjhook

FrancieBrady wrote: »

he abandons the 22% who wanted FG in government, even when there may be a path to government opening up to them.

SF has already said they'd rather not have a coalition with FF or FG.

Let SF put together whatever other coalition they can. I see no benefit to having FF or FG along for the ride, to be blamed when promises can't be fulfilled. Both FF and FG have said before the election that they wouldn't go into coalition with SF, so it's fair to assume that the voters who voted FF/FG voted with that knowledge.

Governing is tricky. Make life more expensive/difficult for companies, and they move out or do less business here. Less tax. Fewer jobs. On the other hand, make life more expensive/difficult for citizens, and they revolt. Quite possibly leading to the same end result. I think that's what's happening here.

I'm confident that SF in government will make life worse for people overall. Maybe better in some ways, but worse in others. Let's see. Let them do it with real "change". Leave FF/FG out of it. If it's a failure, let SF own it. If I'm wrong and it's a success, let SF have the clear credit - I'll be wrong, but with the significant consolation that I'll be living in a better country.

Ush1

Matt Barrett wrote: »

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:

I'll ask one more time, did you read the OP and thread title?

James Brown

Ush1 wrote: »

I'll ask one more time, did you read the OP and thread title?

Look you tried to fit a square peg into a round hole. Move on.
We've had discussions on housing policy and homelessness and the over riding topic is the election result.
My post was on the british view as it relates to brexit.

oh, nearly forgot....Gerry Adams something...

FrancieBrady

tjhook wrote: »

SF has already said they'd rather not have a coalition with FF or FG.

Let SF put together whatever other coalition they can. I see no benefit to having FF or FG along for the ride, to be blamed when promises can't be fulfilled. Both FF and FG have said before the election that they wouldn't go into coalition with SF, so it's fair to assume that the voters who voted FF/FG voted with that knowledge.

Governing is tricky. Make life more expensive/difficult for companies, and they move out or do less business here. Less tax. Fewer jobs. On the other hand, make life more expensive/difficult for citizens, and they revolt. Quite possibly leading to the same end result. I think that's what's happening here.

I'm confident that SF in government will make life worse for people overall. Maybe better in some ways, but worse in others. Let's see. Let them do it with real "change". Leave FF/FG out of it. If it's a failure, let SF own it. If I'm wrong and it's a success, let SF have the clear credit - I'll be wrong, but with the significant consolation that I'll be living in a better country.

My point was that all any of them can do is 'try' to form a government. That was the mandate given by their electorates.
The parties put themselves forward as potential governments or government partners.

None of them put themselves forward as the 'opposition'.

Yet Leo, ignoring the mandate he has been given, has said he is going into opposition and wants to be there.

If SF fail, there is then a path to government for both FF and FG without breaking their pledge to not go in with SF.

Ush1

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Look you tried to fit a square peg into a round hole. Move on.
We've had discussions on housing policy and homelessness and the over riding topic is the election result.
My post was on the british view as it relates to brexit.

oh, nearly forgot....Gerry Adams something...

It's not my fault you can't stay on topic. Quite ironic you accuse me of irrelevant comments.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

My point was that all any of them can do is 'try' to form a government. That was the mandate given by their electorates.
The parties put themselves forward as potential governments or government partners.

None of them put themselves forward as the 'opposition'.

Yet Leo, ignoring the mandate he has been given, has said he is going into opposition and wants to be there.

If SF fail, there is then a path to government for both FF and FG without breaking their pledge to not go in with SF.

At the end of the day, it all comes down to the political nous and the diplomatic and negotiating skills of the various leaders. Mary-Lou has said she can form a government without FF and FG. Let her off. If she fails, that's on her, not on FF, not on FG.

When she fails, and she will fail, whether it is in creating a government, or failing to keep it going for more than a few months, then I would guess that FF and FG might do the right thing for the country and step in to take up the slack. She'll have had her chance.

Odhinn

blanch152 wrote: »

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.

I believe ye. Honestly.

tjhook

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yet Leo, ignoring the mandate he has been given, has said he is going into opposition and wants to be there.

If SF fail, there is then a path to government for both FF and FG without breaking their pledge to not go in with SF.

Surely Leo's mandate is to defined by the promises he made in the run up to the election? In the same way that the Green party would be correct in declining coalition with a party that didn't have a significant emphasis on environmental issues?

I'm not sure I understand the second point above. If I read it correctly, we're on the same page - I.e. if SF fail either to put together a coalition or to govern well, then there will be an opportunity for all other parties in a future election. There's no need for FF or FG to go into government with SF.

James Brown

Ush1 wrote: »

It's not my fault you can't stay on topic. Quite ironic you accuse me of irrelevant comments.

You claimed your post related to mine. When I embarrassed you on that you now claim it was my post was off topic. Sit down.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

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.

Was he holding two pints?

storker

blanch152 wrote: »

At the end of the day, it all comes down to the political nous and the diplomatic and negotiating skills of the various leaders. Mary-Lou has said she can form a government without FF and FG. Let her off. If she fails, that's on her, not on FF, not on FG.

I'm pretty sure she said her preference was to try form a government without FF or FG. Everyone knows what the numbers look like and how difficult that will be. IF she fails, only those who are sore at the election result will consider it to be "on her". And if she fails to form a coalition with FF, who "it's on" will depend on what causes the negotiations to fail. Not that that will stop the business-as-usual fanboys from beating their chests and shouting victory. :rolleyes:

Ush1

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You claimed your post related to mine. When I embarrassed you on that you now claim it was my post was off topic. Sit down.

Your post was off topic and a very transparent dig at "de thick Brits".

Ignoring that SF voters were largely Brexiteers with country songs.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

At the end of the day, it all comes down to the political nous and the diplomatic and negotiating skills of the various leaders. Mary-Lou has said she can form a government without FF and FG. Let her off. If she fails, that's on her, not on FF, not on FG.

When she fails, and she will fail, whether it is in creating a government, or failing to keep it going for more than a few months, then I would guess that FF and FG might do the right thing for the country and step in to take up the slack. She'll have had her chance.

Where did she say 'she can'? She said she wants to try. Are you looking for brickbats to throw again blanch? Second video on this page.

https://www.rte.ie/news/election-2020/2020/0211/1114491-election-outcome-government/

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Where did she say 'she can'? She said she wants to try. Are you looking for brickbats to throw again blanch? Second video on this page.

https://www.rte.ie/news/election-2020/2020/0211/1114491-election-outcome-government/

Are you saying she can't? The numbers are there Frankie, 86 non-FFG seats, just use her diplomatic and negotiating skills and she'll get there.

Fair play if she does, and I hope the government works out for her, but I don't believe she has it.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Are you saying she can't? The numbers are there Frankie, 86 non-FFG seats, just use her diplomatic and negotiating skills and she'll get there.

Fair play if she does, and I hope the government works out for her, but I don't believe she has it.

I agree with her...it is going to be difficult.

And I am prepared to wait and see before judging.

bmc58

rtron wrote: »

Let's just get it over with.
Vote them in.
Watch them feck up the country.
Then revote FF in 4 or 7 years whatever it is.

Seem to remember FF doing a "feck up" on the country last time.Have you forgotten?

Plumbthedepths

blanch152 wrote: »

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.

Jaysus Enda Kenny is posting on Boards now. lol. This is almost as believable as your claim that you are really a Green party supporter.

storker

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's all Leo's fault with his 'virulent nationalism'. The English say so!

Ah yes, Planet Telegraph with its finger so delicately placed on the Irish pulse, never missing a detail or a nuance...

gormdubhgorm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's all Leo's fault with his 'virulent nationalism'. The English say so!

Well, it's as valid a theory as your, 'the young are all stupid', or maybe both of you are desperately looking for excuses?

It is just human nature. Some votes for Sinn Fein because they are like the duurty girlfriend that promises all sorts of pleasures, but it is only a short term thing not marriage material. SF would open thier legs for anyone DUP FF etc to get into power.

The irony is what Leo is being critiqued for, SF have done much worse in NI .... but sure who cares about NI?

FrancieBrady

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

It is just human nature. Some votes for Sinn Fein because they are like the duurty girlfriend that promises all sorts of pleasures, but it is only a short term thing not marriage material. SF would open thier legs for anyone DUP FF etc to get into power.

The irony is what Leo is being critiqued for, SF have done much worse in NI .... but sure who cares about NI?

And we pivot again...like a drunken ballerina.

SF only want to be in opposition...now they would do anything for power.

James Brown

Ush1 wrote: »

Your post was off topic and a very transparent dig at "de thick Brits".

Ignoring that SF voters were largely Brexiteers with country songs.

That's how you view the world.
It was specifically about how the BBC's John Simpson believed Brexit was the main reason for voting as we did. I commented on their disinterest in the realities on the ground and I included two comments regarding thoughts about any trade negotiations. I have British family I'm very fond of and I've lived in England, so grow up and get out of the team bunker.

Pathetic. It was about housing, health and homelessness, not a UI and you know it.

US2

Glad I voted SF now, just to see people lose their **** haha

MrMusician18

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And we pivot again...like a drunken ballerina.

SF only want to be in opposition...now they would do anything for power.

Well, just like in every other party there are clearly a few schools of thought in SF. There's one that wants to use this opportunity to grab power now that it is within their grasp. There's another that takes a longer term view - going into opposition could easily be spun as the establishment defying the will of the people leaving SF much more likely to return something much closer to a single SF party majority next time around. They would of course be the only real opposition party, getting the appropriate airtime that comes with that position.

James Brown

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Well, just like in every other party there are clearly a few schools of thought in SF. There's one that wants to use this opportunity to grab power now that it is within their grasp. There's another that takes a longer term view - going into opposition could easily be spun as the establishment defying the will of the people leaving SF much more likely to return something much closer to a single SF party majority next time around. They would of course be the only real opposition party, getting the appropriate airtime that comes with that position.

I believe your are taking the views of individuals on Boards and assigning them to SF party policy. It's a weighing of scenarios really.

FrancieBrady

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Well, just like in every other party there are clearly a few schools of thought in SF. There's one that wants to use this opportunity to grab power now that it is within their grasp. There's another that takes a longer term view - going into opposition could easily be spun as the establishment defying the will of the people leaving SF much more likely to return something much closer to a single SF party majority next time around. They would of course be the only real opposition party, getting the appropriate airtime that comes with that position.

I accept that there are many views within a party. But all we can do is take the view postulated by the leader.
The FG leader has expressed the view that they are going into opposition without making any effort to get into government even though there may be opportunities.

If SF expressed that view the lid would come off this forum as certain posters wore the pads off their little fingers, typing.

jimmycrackcorm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yet Leo, ignoring the mandate he has been given, has said he is going into opposition and wants to be there.

If SF fail, there is then a path to government for both FF and FG without breaking their pledge to not go in with SF.

When the government party loses TDs so that it's not the major party let alone in the top two then it's clear the mandate is not to be in government.

If you want to insist about a mandate then surely all the left leaning parties and independents have been given a mandate to govern? Especially as they outnumber the parties in the outgoing S&C. After all they all sought to be elected to change the current government policies.

Yurt2

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If SF expressed that view the lid would come off this forum as certain posters wore the pads off their little fingers, typing.

'Don't look at us, we lost the election'


*mass hiding behind a potted plant hoping no one will ask them to form a coalition*

James Brown

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

When the government party loses TDs so that it's not the major party let alone in the top two then it's clear the mandate is not to be in government.

If you want to insist about a mandate then surely all the left leaning parties and independents have been given a mandate to govern? Especially as they outnumber the parties in the outgoing S&C. After all they all sought to be elected to change the current government policies.

So FG aren't top dog, so why bother. I'm sure their supporters are impressed.

Cupatae

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.

Do you have generic replies set out for anything you deem against sf, I merely asked you what the negatives of them getting power would be...

And you are screaming I'm a fraud, I'm wasting your time , continuing the same tactics (I'd like to know which)

It was a straight forward question asked to see if you were level headed in your views but you are clearly unwilling to be either wrong or open to other people's points no matter how backed up they maybe ,

You are abit too fanatical tbh it's hard to discuss any points with you, carry on.