New Dail / New Taoiseach

ThunbergsAreGo

I Am The Law wrote: »

A loudmouth with zero credibility.

Bit harsh, she has just won the popular vote

mayoman1973

I love the United Ireland talk from Sinn Fein. I have lived in the north for the past 15 years and Sinn Fein seem to think its a fore gone conclusion that nationalists here will vote for it when its put in front of them. The past aside ( We cant forget the past I hear ye say ) I am struggling to see how I would be better off as part of a United Ireland. Everytime I turn on RTE its the health service down below in free fall and housing crisis. The biggies in any persons life are 1 Health, 2.Education 3.House. 4. Prob Car or Transport. Once people up here are told that when they go to a doctor its 60 for a gawk, 100 for a look, 150 for a poke, 200 for your tablets etc they will soon have a rethink. Free is always better IMHO When they go to tax their big 2.0L + Audi ( Which everyone up here seems to drive, me included ) and they are asked for the guts of £1000 to do so ( I pay 150 for a 3L 4x4 at the min ) that might soften their cough. Education is "freeish in the south but sure I can avail of that anyways cause we can pretend to be in the EU for that bit cause it suits us Johnny Cash talks the talk at the end of the day and unless theres a unification grant coming my way ( which I'm sure ye southern folk will love paying through some new shinner tax lol ) then I may just well stay here and take the Queens shilling. The only decision the shinners made up here since I moved here was when good old Catriona Ruane I think it was abolished the 11+ exam. That worked out well if you ask any parents of P7 kids. NOT !!

Green&Red

Seamai wrote: »

I think there's a sizeable chunk of the population down here who think a United Ireland is inevitable in the next 20 years without giving much thought to what would be involved to get almost a million Unionists on side. The concessions we might have to make could be too much for some
I also think that whatever we would like to see happening, their decision will be more important and I don't think a simple majority up there will suffice, IMO, it would require AT LEAST a two thirds majority for things to work.

This is very accurate. If we take it that we want a peaceful unified Ireland, then you have to make them an offer they can't refuse. Much like the IRA haven't gone away neither have the UVF etc. So even if we ignore the massive financial cost, what does that offer look like?

Realistically a government split between Kildare St and Stormont, no more Irish language on the state bodies, police instead of gardai, Amhrain na bhfiann no longer the national anthem. That list goes on.

mayoman1973 wrote: »

I love the United Ireland talk from Sinn Fein. I have lived in the north for the past 15 years and Sinn Fein seem to think its a fore gone conclusion that nationalists here will vote for it when its put in front of them. The past aside ( We cant forget the past I hear ye say ) I am struggling to see how I would be better off as part of a United Ireland. Everytime I turn on RTE its the health service down below in free fall and housing crisis. The biggies in any persons life are 1 Health, 2.Education 3.House. 4. Prob Car or Transport. Once people up here are told that when they go to a doctor its 60 for a gawk, 100 for a look, 150 for a poke, 200 for your tablets etc they will soon have a rethink. Free is always better IMHO When they go to tax their big 2.0L + Audi ( Which everyone up here seems to drive, me included ) and they are asked for the guts of £1000 to do so ( I pay 150 for a 3L 4x4 at the min ) that might soften their cough. Education is "freeish in the south but sure I can avail of that anyways cause we can pretend to be in the EU for that bit cause it suits us Johnny Cash talks the talk at the end of the day and unless theres a unification grant coming my way ( which I'm sure ye southern folk will love paying through some new shinner tax lol ) then I may just well stay here and take the Queens shilling. The only decision the shinners made up here since I moved here was when good old Catriona Ruane I think it was abolished the 11+ exam. That worked out well if you ask any parents of P7 kids. NOT !!

Then you have the massive financial cost, theres no way we could afford to take on the public sector in NI.

CrankyHaus

Hearing Kathleen Lynch on the RTE Radio 1 this morning certainly shored up my determination to never vote Labour again.
Lots of big talk about doing the right thing for the country, when will they realise how self-harming this arrogance is?

Leonard Hofstadter

CrankyHaus wrote: »

Hearing Kathleen Lynch on the RTE Radio 1 this morning certainly shored up my determination to never vote Labour again.
Lots of big talk about doing the right thing for the country, when will they realise how self-harming this arrogance is?

I didn't hear it, but if that's what she said, then she is absolutely right. Labour did put the country first, and their reward for doing the right thing was to get thrashed in the 2016 election. Hardly an incentive for other politicians who think the national interest is more important than the party or self interest to try and form a Government, let alone do the right thing.

Panda Killa

The idea of a United Ireland is an unrealistic pipedream held by a few here....the ironic thing is, the only time this island was united...was under British rule.
The people of Northern Ireland voting for a United Ireland would be on a par with turkey's voting for Christmas...it's not ever happening imo

easypazz

scooby77 wrote: »

Ivan Yates today put a case for FF/FG/ Rural Independents. Either could be a good bet...wouldn't bet much on Mary-Lou as Taoiseach at all yet.

He,also said FF would get 60 seats.

mayoman1973

Dont get me wrong. I love the idea of a 32 county sovereign state. Us all waving shamrocks and gaith duine ag caint as gailge. Sinn Fein have done their homework and honed in on the voters who also like this idea but these are not the people who will end up paying for it. This Irish language Act nonsense also gets on my goat. Being force fed Irish from age 4 to 18 has not helped my gra for the language ( Or most people I know down south ) and I cant imagine that being any different up here if Irish were made compulsory. Nurses, teachers etc being underpaid here so that I can have road signs As gailge telling me it's 40 miles to Beal Feirsde is what Sinn Fein are pedalling. Like the Brexit vote, the people who will feel the real pinch when the Sinn Fein honeymoon period is over should they ever actually decide to take on the mantle of power and make some real decisions are the people who voted them in. I'm speaking as one of a limited number of people who can and does vote in both jurisdictions. Even Mary Lou cant do that. My bad. I probably shouldnt though

Bishop of hope

Panda Killa wrote: »

The idea of a United Ireland is an unrealistic pipedream held by a few here....the ironic thing is, the only time this island was united...was under British rule.
The people of Northern Ireland voting for a United Ireland would be on a par with turkey's voting for Christmas...it's not ever happening imo

Sort of like the election we just had.
Turkeys voting for Xmas is right.
You never know what an electorate will vote for if they think there's something in it for them.
The dream of generations has been for a united Ireland.

Plastik

BluePlanet wrote: »

It's actually a bit sad.

But Labour is basically a sinking ship and in fairness to him, a lifeboat is there.
Who would dare take the wheel now?

Kelly will want it. But can they afford to give it to him. I think he'll face the same problems as in 2016 where he couldn't get one of his party colleagues to second him in the leadership contest. And that wasn't as surprising then, as it won't it be now.

Sleepy

Scoundrel wrote: »

Oh god blame the unions for everything that's really original it takes some education to come up with that ground breaking conclusion alright:rolleyes:

Whether you like it or not, a large section of the population wants nothing to do with the trade union movement. Membership rates have been falling for decades: less than 30% of the Irish workforce are members of a union and even in the Public Sector, membership rates have fallen below 70%.

In a developing nation where the majority of workers are poorly educated and engaged in unskilled or semi-skilled work, membership of a trade union will be highly beneficial to workers (and, arguably, society at large).

In a country that boasts of having one of the most educated workforces in the world and strong labour laws protecting workers' rights, many of that workforce will see collective bargaining as little more than a means for the workshy to lay claim to the rewards of the productive.

For this majority of the workforce who eschew trade union membership, the unions role in the governance of a political party will be seen as a negative.

mayoman1973

Whats the security like around the Bank Of Ireland HQ? I wonder if Mary Lou has had the boys scope it out just incase there is a budget deficit that needs filling when Pearce get hold of the States purse strings. Northern Bank just springs to mind for some reason

Sam Russell

Fred Cryton wrote: »

Explain that one. How can your biggest rival for middle Ireland votes stepping aside not help you.

If FF or FG do not put candidates in to favour the other, then that reduces the 1st pref votes, and rules them out of the constituency all together. Also it then reduces the likelihood of their own voters actually voting at all.

Our voting system is not like the British one with a single vote in a single seat constituency and the first past the post wins. We have between 3 and 5 seats per constituency, so standing aside is of no use.

It is clear you do not understand the STV system here with multiple seats. The trick is to get good geographical spread of candidates over the larger constituencies, and to be transfer friendly. Not running candidates would be nuts.

Lockstep

Stewball wrote: »

Am I right in thinking only a sitting TD can be elected leader?

Yeah, you're right.

Otherwise, they'd most likely have Nash or AOR as leader. But they couldn't as they're senators.

I'd like to see Nash as the leader. Has actually focussed on workers rights and gangland crime.

L1011

Plastik wrote: »

Kelly will want it. But can they afford to give it to him. I think he'll face the same problems as in 2016 where he couldn't get one of his party colleagues to second him in the leadership contest. And that wasn't as surprising then, as it won't it be now.

A second nomination method was added to the party constitution after that; where 5 constituencies can nominate.

Johnboy1951

I think SF 'missed the boat' in this election.
They could have had a substantial majority if they had any inkling of what was about to happen.
EDIT: I did not mean to imply 'overall majority' ..... just a substantially greater number of seats than any of the other parties.
Of course hindsight is great

IMO, a very large portion of the SF vote was a 'protest' vote, simply due to voters wishing to send the incumbents a strong message that things must change - 'or else!'

None of the parties, nor the voters expect so many to vote in protest.

So now I expect some arrangement for a government to be formed including FF & FG in some capacity.
Should they get it right next time, and actually deal with the main problems (housing, health etc) then that SF protest vote will disappear very quickly.

I reckon that should FF & FG not put a government in place and we go to the country again, that the SF 'protest' vote will be just as loud, and maybe even louder.

I fully expect things to settle back to some semblance of 'normal', with the main difference being neither FF nor FG will be as arrogant as before, and might even listen to what the people said with this vote (for however long that lasts).

Let's hope that having received their kick up the rear those two (FF & FG) get their act together and resolve the greater part of the problems most uppermost in peoples' minds.

easypazz

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I think SF 'missed the boat' in this election.
They could have had a substantial majority if they had any inkling of what was about to happen.
Of course hindsight is great

IMO, a very large portion of the SF vote was a 'protest' vote, simply due to voters wishing to send the incumbents a strong message that things must change - 'or else!'

None of the parties, nor the voters expect so many to vote in protest.

So now I expect some arrangement for a government to be formed including FF & FG in some capacity.
Should they get it right next time, and actually deal with the main problems (housing, health etc) then that SF protest vote will disappear very quickly.

I reckon that should FF & FG not put a government in place and we go to the country again, that the SF 'protest' vote will be just as loud, and maybe even louder.

I fully expect things to settle back to some semblance of 'normal', with the main difference being neither FF nor FG will be as arrogant as before, and might even listen to what the people said with this vote (for however long that lasts).

Let's hope that having received their kick up the rear those two (FF & FG) get their act together and resolve the greater part of the problems most uppermost in peoples' minds.

They may have gotten another 10 or so seats. At the expense of other left wing parties.

I doubt the numbers would have been there on the left to form a strong, stable, left wing government, no matter how many candidates sf ran.

PommieBast

Riskymove wrote: »

they probably would have elected a second candidate in any of the constituencies they got high votes in and the surpluses brought in other left candidates at the expense of FF and FG generally

I have not played around with the numbers but I would not be surprised if there is one or two constituencies where SF could scrape a third seat, especially if those who gave PBP/WP/etc first pref. gave 2nd preferences to SF rather than each other..

The Tetrarch

PommieBast wrote: »

I have not played around with the numbers but I would not be surprised if there is one or two constituencies where SF could scrape a third seat, especially if those who gave PBP/WP/etc first pref. gave 2nd preferences to SF rather than each other..

In 2020 if FF and FG decided to carve the country between themselves, putting forward one FF candidate in a constituency, and in the next door constituency FG have the only candidate, that strategy would have impacted SF greatly.
You can not go back and now decide the best policy. SF can adopt the policy used in 2020 in the next election, or put up two candidates in a constituency in the next election.
The public voting pattern in the next election will be different, we just do not know what different.
You can not back the winner after the race is run.

Scoundrel

Mancomb Seepgood wrote: »

Indeed-they dragged Emmet Stagg out of retirement in my constituency,which frankly smelt of desperation

Yeah and Joe Costello in Dublin central as well they need new blood out front and quick.

No more ranting and insults please.

CrankyHaus

Leonard Hofstadter wrote: »

I didn't hear it, but if that's what she said, then she is absolutely right. Labour did put the country first, and their reward for doing the right thing was to get thrashed in the 2016 election. Hardly an incentive for other politicians who think the national interest is more important than the party or self interest to try and form a Government, let alone do the right thing.

Out of interest did you vote for Labour in the 2011 election? Because in my experience people who say this didn't vote for them, probably voted for FG and were delighted to see them abandon their pre election positions to join FG in an austerity government.

Sam Russell

The Tetrarch wrote: »

In 2020 if FF and FG decided to carve the country between themselves, putting forward one FF candidate in a constituency, and in the next door constituency FG have the only candidate, that strategy would have impacted SF greatly.
You can not go back and now decide the best policy. SF can adopt the policy used in 2020 in the next election, or put up two candidates in a constituency in the next election.
The public voting pattern in the next election will be different, we just do not know what different.
You can not back the winner after the race is run.

As I said in post #440, that is not how our voting system works. To form a Gov, a party must win at least an average of over 2 seats per constituency. FF and FG contest every constituency with more than an average of 2 candidates per constituency.

Even when they expect only one to succeed, they may field three candidates if it spreads the candidates geographically to attract voters in those areas. SF did not do this, but whatever their strategy, they only got less than 25% of the 1st pref vote. Adding extra candidates would not change that.

Any politician understands it is No. 1 votes that matter most. Transfers are welcome, but they want your No' 1 vote most.

Sam Russell

Sam Russell wrote: »

SF did not do this, but whatever their strategy, they only got less than 25% of the 1st pref vote. Adding extra candidates would not change that.

Running candidates in constituencies they didn't have any candidates in would though.

Sam Russell

Deleted User wrote: »

Running candidates in constituencies they didn't have any candidates in would though.

That is true. But it is true for all parties.

Dyr

They were always just the party for people who couldnt bring themselves to vote for FF/FG
They made the mistake of letting the stickies in once the iron curtain came down and their gig was up.

The likes of Gilmour, Rabitte and DeRossa were nothing but mercenary opportunists looking out for themselves and thats what Labour became

No loss tbh

Sleepy

Scoundrel wrote: »

Yeah and Joe Costello in Dublin central as well they need new blood out front and quick.

Where will the young blood come from? Most electable candidates of their political persuasion seem to be defecting to the Soc Dems.

James Brown

Many of us in the party felt opposition was better than going in with FG, however in Labour went.
I can't get over Joan Burton's attitude to protesters. It's a fine example of were Labour lost their way. You might not agree with protesters, but you respect their right to protest. She ridiculed them while supporting an obvious quango and 'looking after our own'.
Shortall was right to leave after Labour supported Reilly's clinics. Labour became a farce.
In my area they parachuted in a person, a rising star...who lost badly in this election.
They've not done anything except lick their wounds and hope public opinion looks fondly upon them. It didn't.
They need a complete clean out and rebuild with left leaning people.
If they did that after the last election they might have been were FF/SF are now.

L1011

Deleted User wrote: »

Running candidates in constituencies they didn't have any candidates in would though.

All one of them

The other constituencies they didn't get in in are nearly impossible to consider getting

tayto lover

RTÉ reporting that FF have agreed NOT to go into Government with SF.