New Dail / New Taoiseach

Rosahane

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Did you miss the challenge to Michelle O'Neill lately?

Are you aware how Leo was'annointed' chosen as leader?

Who elected O’Neill as Deputy Leader in 2108? I don’t remember anything other than the announcement that she was appointed.

gormdubhgorm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The 'difficult' questions nobody wants to address.

The north is 'different' will be the answer, because it suits.

Charles Babbage wrote: »

The north is different, it is a colonial appendage, not a normal place.

This is a fundamental tenet of SF policy, yet they are willing to abandon it for political point scoring, which in itself reflects poorly on them.

Sure FrancieBrady has said as much on numerous occasions on other threads. He resorts to just being disingenuous when he cannot think of anything of note to say.

FrancieBrady

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Sure FrancieBrady has said as much on numerous occasions on other threads. He resorts to just being disingenuous when he cannot think of anything of note to say.

That's because I think it is different and cannot be compared.

What I was sending up was FG in particular pivoting from it being the same, when they want to criticise SF's abilities to it being 'different' when it comes to why they encourage a party they won't work with here to go into government there.

feargale

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The 'difficult' questions nobody wants to address.

The north is 'different' will be the answer, because it suits.

The north is different. If it were the same as almost every other political system in Europe SF wouldn't get a smell of power there. The GFA is designed to give the belligerents in particular a share of power in NI.
Talking of difficult questions, you seem to have missed post 780.

FrancieBrady

feargale wrote: »

The north is different. If it were the same as almost every other political system in Europe SF wouldn't get a smell of power there. The GFA is designed to give the belligerents in particular a share of power in NI.
Talking of difficult questions, you seem to have missed post 780.

I disagree on how SF would do there in a normal state. Nobody is forcing people from all walks of life to vote for them.


I can't see a question that makes sense in 780. You seem to want an answer from MLMD.

feargale

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I can't see a question that makes sense in 780. You seem to want an answer from MLMD.

Exactly. You had plenty to say about it until an awkward question was asked, but in typical SF fashion when you don't like the question you skip it and hope nobody will notice.
Not for the first time.

Triangle

Umaro wrote: »

Were FG aware that SF is run by a shadowy IRA Army Council when they were helping to re-install them in Stormont a few weeks ago?

That's incredibly reckless to install a paramilitary organisation into power in a foreign country. It's like something the CIA would do.

Weird how they're only aware of it now that SF could get into power in this country.

That's absolutely crazy........

They went into power, unionists and republicans to stop the violence, bombings, murders, rocket launches, intimidation and having pretty much a police state (wire blockades, heavily armed military).
Pushing for a political solution (no matter their backing) was a way of moving forward.
We don't have those issues, so it's not similar or 'CIA' typical. It was a route to peace and growth.

Having a 'possible' backing of paramilitary forces or polarised agenda should be a moment for pause and questioning - not hysterics and emotional defence.

And I'm a voice for change, there are lots of options out there not getting a voice because we're getting so polarised in SF VS FFG

FrancieBrady

feargale wrote: »

Exactly. You had plenty to say about it until an awkward question was asked, but in typical SF fashion when you don't like the question you skip it and hope nobody will notice.
Not for the first time.

Ask the question again. Make it make sense. I have no idea what you are asking of me.
While I voted for SF this time, I am not a member btw.

Harry Palmr

I see the Shinners are taking it to the streets (including the streets of Newry for some arcane reason), oh dear.

https://www.thejournal.ie/sinn-fein-rallies-for-govenrment-for-change-5018083-Feb2020/

“Over the coming fortnight, Sinn Féin will host the first of a series of public rallies to bring the conversation about a Government for Change to the people. This will include events in Cork, Dublin, Newry, Cavan and Galway.”

Awful whiff of Norn Iron style mobilising here.

road_high

Harry Palmr wrote: »

I see the Shinners are taking it to the streets (including the streets of Newry for some arcane reason), oh dear.

https://www.thejournal.ie/sinn-fein-rallies-for-govenrment-for-change-5018083-Feb2020/



Awful whiff of Norn Iron style mobilising here.

Adolf hitler did something similar in 1930s Germany too though he had 38% of the vote. One can see the parallels alright.
I can foresee violence and property destruction at these mania rallies so I hope local businesses prepare themselves well

Godot.

Next Irish General Election
@NextIrishGE
How 2020 Green Party voters voted in 2016.
FG: 36%
GRN: 27%
FF: 8%
Did not Vote: 8%
LAB: 6%
Do not Recall: 6%
IND: 4%
SF: 2%
REN: 2%
S-PBP: 1%
SD: 1%

As per IPSOS MRBI Exit Poll.

Looks like they actually are FG on bikes :pac:

FF/FG/Greens could be surprisingly easy to do.

is_that_so

Godot. wrote: »

Looks like they actually are FG on bikes :pac:

FF/FG/Greens could be surprisingly easy to do.

To voters who just see numbers and are in an AB mood yes it is. Reality is always a whole lot more complicated. Heard over the last week or so some anecdotal stuff of angry middle-class forty-somethings who forced themselves to vote for one of the the traditional two to thwart the free houses for all they see coming down the track.

Field east

Umaro wrote: »

Wasn't the First Dáil full of former terrorists?

Or is that different somehow?

Why did you go back to the 1920s’ only. Why not go much further back to some similar situation in , say, 1400s’, 1500s’ or more recently in the 1700s’.
Jesus wept.

ThunbergsAreGo

Harry Palmr wrote: »

I see the Shinners are taking it to the streets (including the streets of Newry for some arcane reason), oh dear.

https://www.thejournal.ie/sinn-fein-rallies-for-govenrment-for-change-5018083-Feb2020/

Awful whiff of Norn Iron style mobilising here.

Why Newry? Why are SF rallying in another country

FrancieBrady

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

Why Newry? Why are SF rallying in another country

Ask a member of SF if they see Newry as 'another country'.

is_that_so

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Ask a member of SF if they see Newry as 'another country'.

And yet it's not in any Dail constituency. Seems a fairly dumb move.

Bishop of hope

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Ask a member of SF if they see Newry as 'another country'.

They signed up to it being so did they not?

FrancieBrady

Bishop of hope wrote: »

They signed up to it being so did they not?

Where was that?

They certainly signed up to respecting the decision of a majority to see it as another country as long as that majority accepted their rights to see themselves as part of Ireland.

ThunbergsAreGo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Ask a member of SF if they see Newry as 'another country'.

So why not Belfast?

Bishop of hope

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Where was that?

They certainly signed up to respecting the decision of a majority to see it as another country as long as that majority accepted their rights to see themselves as part of Ireland.

That is the ideal that it is another country until a majority deem it otherwise?

FrancieBrady

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

So why not Belfast?

Email them?

You are aware, I take it, of how life operates along the border? Sometimes it is logistically sensible to pick somewhere in the south or the north and to ignore the border. It may just be that the hotel is logistically sensible for the people to go to.

Happens here everyday of the week. Football clubs in the north will come here to use a hotel etc etc.

It's all the one country when you are in the GAA for instance.

FrancieBrady

Bishop of hope wrote: »

That is the ideal that it is another country until a majority deem it otherwise?

Don't understand the question...go again?

Bishop of hope

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Don't understand the question...go again?

No, you understand the question alright, just can't frame the answer yet. But you will indubitably.

FrancieBrady

Bishop of hope wrote: »

No, you understand the question alright, just can't frame the answer yet. But you will indubitably.

I don't understand it actually. I presume it is to try and get me to say SF have sold out in some way?
Carry on, if that is what you believe. I couldn't be arsed trying to persuade you otherwise.
It is pitiful and sad that some need that affirmation.

Bishop of hope

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I don't understand it actually. I presume it is to try and get me to say SF have sold out in some way?
Carry on, if that is what you believe. I couldn't be arsed trying to persuade you otherwise.
It is pitiful and sad that some need that affirmation.

Isn't it, I'm a pitiful sad man I am. Forever and ever sitting on boards traipsing out the same ould ****e.

FrancieBrady

Bishop of hope wrote: »

Isn't it, I'm a pitiful sad man I am. Forever and ever sitting on boards traipsing out the same ould ****e.

QED Bishop. QED. :rolleyes:

Umaro

Don't be so hard on yourself.

Bishop of hope

SF sit in parliament in Northern Ireland, they want a border referendun, they are even talking of a minister of state for Irish unity if the do get in to Govt.
All this is to me acceptance by them politically that at the minute that Northern Ireland is another country.
They have by agreeing to all of the above signed up to that line of thought.
Fair play to them.

terenc

Bishop of hope wrote: »

SF sit in parliament in Northern Ireland, they want a border referendun, they are even talking of a minister of state for Irish unity if the do get in to Govt.
All this is to me acceptance by them politically that at the minute that Northern Ireland is another country.
They have by agreeing to all of the above signed up to that line of thought.
Fair play to them.

With a nod and a wink from their handlers "dont f*ck with us we put you where you are", just remember how we handle child rapists and young criminals.
Fu*k the free state. Pass me the "cocaine" gERRY S gOD.

Scoondal

Will Ms. McDonald have her own security at the Rochestown Park Hotel tomorrow ? Will protestors be intimidated ?

beggars_bush

Scoondal wrote: »

Will Ms. McDonald have her own security at the Rochestown Park Hotel tomorrow ? Will protestors be intimidated ?

Intimidated by whom?

Scoondal

beggars_bush wrote: »

Intimidated by whom?

By her security personnel.

johnnyskeleton

terenc wrote: »

With a nod and a wink from their handlers "dont f*ck with us we put you where you are", just remember how we handle child rapists and young criminals.
Fu*k the free state. Pass me the "cocaine" gERRY S gOD.

Scoondal wrote: »

Will Ms. McDonald have her own security at the Rochestown Park Hotel tomorrow ? Will protestors be intimidated ?

Mod note:

Serious posts only please

johnnyskeleton

Mod note:

You two guys can take 24 hours off. Please read the chater and make serious contributions only

kah22

Riddle me this. Suppose there was a referendum called on how TD’s were to be elected to the Dáil, how would you vote: Keep the present system OR A first pass the post system like they have in Great Britain ?

Kevin

IAmTheReign

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What's the problem with 'former members' of the IRA taking part in democratic politics? Did you miss the whole GFA thing?

First of all the article you posted only said the IRA are committed to the political path, it doesn't say the IRA no longer exists meaning they're not really 'former members' at all.

Secondly there is nothing democratic about the people in charge of a former paramilitary organisation running a political party from the shadows. If 'former members' of the IRA military council want to take part in politics they should stand for election. That would be democratic.

IAmTheReign

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The 'difficult' questions nobody wants to address.

The north is 'different' will be the answer, because it suits.

The North IS different, as a SF supporter like yourself well knows. The GFA requires SF, as the largest republican party, to enter government or Stormont can't sit. Claiming it's anyway comparable to the Dail is dishonest.

is_that_so

kah22 wrote: »

Riddle me this. Suppose there was a referendum called on how TD’s were to be elected to the Dáil, how would you vote: Keep the present system OR A first pass the post system like they have in Great Britain ?

Kevin

It was tried twice, once in 1959 and again in about 1968. It failed both times and would never pass now.

FrancieBrady

IAmTheReign wrote: »

The North IS different, as a SF supporter like yourself well knows. The GFA requires SF, as the largest republican party, to enter government or Stormont can't sit. Claiming it's anyway comparable to the Dail is dishonest.

I didn't claim it was the same as the Dáil. I was sending up FG and FF, pivoting when it suited them.

Sam Russell

is_that_so wrote: »

kah22 wrote: »

Riddle me this. Suppose there was a referendum called on how TD’s were to be elected to the Dáil, how would you vote: Keep the present system OR A first pass the post system like they have in Great Britain ?

Kevin

It was tried twice, once in 1959 and again in about 1968. It failed both times and would never pass now.

It was not a change to FPTP but a change to single seat constituencies. The proposal was put by FF who thought that it would guarantee them a perpetual majority. It was rejected for precisely that reason.

There never was an attempt to go back to FPTP.

If we were to have a change, I would propose that the last action by the outgoing Dail would be to elect the Ceann Comhairle who would be the sole TD during the dissolution of the Dail. He/She would required to be non-party, and could not subsequently join a political party (just as the President is non-party). He/She would also not represent any constituency, as is the case with Senators. Obviously, (s)he would retire after the following dissolution of the Dail if (s)he is not re-elected.

Further, any act by a Minister during the dissolution and up to the formation of the new Gov would have a sunset effect, in that such acts would be required to be affirmed by the incoming Ministers, and by the Cabinet as a whole.

However, there are more important things to be achieved.

LuckyLloyd

kah22 wrote: »

Riddle me this. Suppose there was a referendum called on how TD’s were to be elected to the Dáil, how would you vote: Keep the present system OR A first pass the post system like they have in Great Britain ?

Kevin

FPTP is a terrible anti democratic system that would hopefully be rejected by a vast majority of the electorate. Our system is the best there is.

is_that_so

Sam Russell wrote: »

It was not a change to FPTP but a change to single seat constituencies. The proposal was put by FF who thought that it would guarantee them a perpetual majority. It was rejected for precisely that reason.

There never was an attempt to go back to FPTP.

If we were to have a change, I would propose that the last action by the outgoing Dail would be to elect the Ceann Comhairle who would be the sole TD during the dissolution of the Dail. He/She would required to be non-party, and could not subsequently join a political party (just as the President is non-party). He/She would also not represent any constituency, as is the case with Senators. Obviously, (s)he would retire after the following dissolution of the Dail if (s)he is not re-elected.

Further, any act by a Minister during the dissolution and up to the formation of the new Gov would have a sunset effect, in that such acts would be required to be affirmed by the incoming Ministers, and by the Cabinet as a whole.

However, there are more important things to be achieved.

Pretty sure this is FPTP.

The Third Amendment of the Constitution Bill 1958 –
At present, members of Dáil Éireann are elected on a system of proportional representation for constituencies returning at least three members, each voter having a single transferable vote. It is proposed in the Bill to abolish the system of proportional representation and to adopt, instead, a system of single-member constituencies, each voter having a single non-transferable vote. It is also proposed in the Bill to set up a Commission for the determination and revision of the constituencies, instead of having this done by the Oireachtas, as at present.

And the second time, also FPTP

The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution Bill, 1968, proposes –
To substitute for the present system of voting at Dáil elections the "straight vote" system in single-member constituencies;

Sam Russell

is_that_so wrote: »

Pretty sure this is FPTP.


And the second time, also FPTP

You are correct, it is FPTP.

I have always assumed it was to create single seat constituencies, but it went further than I thought. No wonder it was rejected, as it was a bare faced power grab.

realdanbreen

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

FPTP is a terrible anti democratic system that would hopefully be rejected by a vast majority of the electorate. Our system is the best there is.

Judging by the results of the recent election I wouldn't be putting too much faith in the majority of the electorate!

Amirani

Many of the Sinn Fein supporters on Twitter appear to be quite supportive of FPTP. Apparently getting elected on the 4th count via transferable votes doesn't count as much as getting elected with first preferences.

Seems to be one of the default criticisms aimed at any non-SF politicians these days.

blanch152

Sam Russell wrote: »

You are correct, it is FPTP.

I have always assumed it was to create single seat constituencies, but it went further than I thought. No wonder it was rejected, as it was a bare faced power grab.

There are other options, including a list system. There are also mixed systems, a combination of say, five-seater constituencies and a list system.

is_that_so

blanch152 wrote: »

There are other options, including a list system. There are also mixed systems, a combination of say, five-seater constituencies and a list system.

I'd be a fan of a list system as the theory is it makes TDs less beholden to parish pump politics.

Sam Russell

is_that_so wrote: »

I'd be a fan of a list system as the theory is it makes TDs less beholden to parish pump politics.

That is the system that put Farage into the EU Parliament. He was always No. 1 on his parties list.

L1011

The ability to specific vote against a TD while still supporting their party is an essential feature and our system provides it adequately

Break county borders and go back to allowing 9 seat constituencies; it'll make the parish pump basically impossible to maintain and probably make it hard for some of the awful independents who get in on super-local votes.

Bishop of hope

So nobody's totally happy with our pr system?
There's hope for SF after all.