FG to just do nothing for the next 5 years.

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

That of course is your opinion
Regarding Sinn Féin,unfortunately for them,they had/have realistically 'no way in' as too many elected T.D's and by extension a majority of the public don't trust them

What does getting 20% of the vote say about how the other 80% of the electorate views you?
Maybe the other 80% think you are tired being trustworthy and competent and need a wee holiday?

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What does getting 20% of the vote say about how the other 80% of the electorate views you?
Maybe the other 80% think you are tired being trustworthy and competent and need a wee holiday?

Then lobby your non-FG TD's to get them out?

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What does getting 20% of the vote say about how the other 80% of the electorate views you?
Maybe the other 80% think you are tired being trustworthy and competent and need a wee holiday?

The issue with that analysis is 2 fold:
1. More than 50% of the electorate voted for T.D's that can do business with FG
2.can the same be said for Sinn Féin ?
FF FG ,labour, A good share of independents shun them
That's why SF cannot have a Taoiseach at this time

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

The issue with that analysis is 2 fold:
1. More than 50% of the electorate voted for T.D's that can do business with FG
2.can the same be said for Sinn Féin ?
FF FG ,labour, A good share of independents shun them
That's why SF cannot have a Taoiseach at this time

Why are you making this about Sinn Fein? I'll ask you again.

What does getting 20% of the vote say about how the other 80% of the electorate views you?

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why are you making this about Sinn Fein? I'll ask you again.

Its pretty simple,your premise in the question is wrong
It lacks context
Your premise implies 80% are implacably opposed to FG being in government when it couldn't be farther from the truth just as there arent 96% opposed to the Soc Dems being in there or labour

Sinn Féin on the other hand....

It ain't rocket science as to which is the better position to be in
A party with multiple options or a party with none

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

Its pretty simple,your premise in the question is wrong
It lacks context
Your premise implies 80% are implacably opposed to FG being in government when it couldn't be farther from the truth just as there arent 96% opposed to the Soc Dems being in there or labour

Sinn Féin on the other hand....

It ain't rocket science as to which is the better position to be in
A party with multiple options or a party with none

What data are you basing that on?

80% didn't vote for FG to be in government.
76% didn't vote for SF to be in government.

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What data are you basing that on?

80% didn't vote for FG to be in government.
76% didn't vote for SF to be in government.

Therein lies your analytical problem
Let's pose the question properly to include context again
Which party is in the better position, the one with several options to be in government or the one with none?

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

Therein lies your analytical problem
Let's pose the question properly to include context again
Which party is in the better position, the one with several options to be in government or the one with none?

Now you want to change the question to get the answer that doesn't hurt your hyper sensitivity?

Gas!

James Brown

Mortelaro wrote: »

When all other attempts at government formation are exhausted, then,we are at a last resort which is what FG told their voters pre election they'd explore and only at that point
So colour it up whatever way you like you are factually wrong again

It's your opinion based on your error. Varadkar said they relished going into opposition and told FF that same thing twice. They changed their mind. Factually speaking.

Mortelaro wrote: »

That of course is your opinion
Regarding Sinn Féin,unfortunately for them,they had/have realistically 'no way in' as too many elected T.D's and by extension a majority of the public don't trust them

Cheers.
Gymnastics aside you could say the public don't trust SF, but trust FF and FG even less. SF didn't have the candidates, what's FG's excuse? Besides the obvious electorate going elsewhere of course.

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Now you want to change the question to get the answer that doesn't hurt your hyper sensitivity?

Gas!

If I was that sensitive, I should be whooping for joy really given they are most likely to be in government

No I think of your comment there like a fart
You who smelt it usually dealt it

Mortelaro

Bowie wrote: »

It's your opinion based on your error. Varadkar said they relished going into opposition and told FF that same thing twice. They changed their mind. Factually speaking.

Au contraire,It is you who is wrong as a last resort means when all other options are jaded

Cheers.
Gymnastics aside you could say the public don't trust SF, but trust FF and FG even less. SF didn't have the candidates, what's FG's excuse? Besides the obvious electorate going elsewhere of course.

If SF had the candidates, they would have gained more seats,no question but other left parties would have lost loads
You'd still have the same problem, not enough elected to prevent others forming a government including FG

IAMAMORON

I think the Taoiseach has said it on more than one occasion, in fact he said it before and after the elections. When asked about government with Sinn Féin he has consistently sighted the intransigence based on Sinn Féin's economic policy and on their proposed amendments to the Criminal Justice system, for starters.

I think this is what has Shinners going all Rumpelstiltskin on it most. They want the reason being the RA, but the Taoiseach, while not wholeheartedly disagreeing with this, has consistently said it is their garbage unworkable policies that he fears the most. He is right as well. Their domestic policies are pie ball. Totally unworkable and unrealistic.

Sure Sinn Féin had no intention of getting into government before the election. If they had they would have fielded 40 more candidates. O'Snodaigh battered his quota 2 times over, how they didn't envisage this happening really indicates how naïve they were going into the election.

Fann Linn

Games over now for SF in forming a govt. However, its up to FF/FG and whoever to get in and work their magic.
For if it goes pear shaped, SF are sitting in the best position to gain advantage next time around.

IAMAMORON

Fann Linn wrote: »

Games over now for SF in forming a govt. However, its up to FF/FG and whoever to get in and work their magic.
For if it goes pear shaped, SF are sitting in the best position to gain advantage next time around.

I don't think they are and I will tell you why.

I frankly think that they saturated their popularity. They left around 6 - 10 seats in the ballot boxes from bad re-election planning. This might not happen again, but if you look at how their 2nd preference transferred they all went to left wing candidates. When you add up all the left wing TD's in the Dáil you are still falling short of the 80 or so required, I count around 60 with a weak argument around Labour to maybe 66. That is their next issue, convincing the rest of the country that they are interested in running it.

People are not stupid either.

The other issue they will have to focus on is a rebounding Fianna Fáil party. All their gains were at their expense. Any Fianna Fáil election strategist worth their salt will be examining this and looking for a solution.

FrancieBrady

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I think the Taoiseach has said it on more than one occasion, in fact he said it before and after the elections. When asked about government with Sinn Féin he has consistently sighted the intransigence based on Sinn Féin's economic policy and on their proposed amendments to the Criminal Justice system, for starters.

I think this is what has Shinners going all Rumpelstiltskin on it most. They want the reason being the RA, but the Taoiseach, while not wholeheartedly disagreeing with this, has consistently said it is their garbage unworkable policies that he fears the most. He is right as well. Their domestic policies are pie ball. Totally unworkable and unrealistic.

Sure Sinn Féin had no intention of getting into government before the election. If they had they would have fielded 40 more candidates. O'Snodaigh battered his quota 2 times over, how they didn't envisage this happening really indicates how naïve they were going into the election.

Bit of a biased read there. They hadn't done well in the locals and decided that they would try to hold their own.
There is no suggestion (only tired old taunts) that they had 'no intention of going into government'.

i mean what are these white haired bearded old men (who apparently have a master cunning plan for SF) thinking? Do they want to take over the country or not?

IAMAMORON

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Bit of a biased read there. They hadn't done well in the locals and decided that they would try to hold their own.
There is no suggestion (only tired old taunts) that they had 'no intention of going into government'.

i mean what are these white haired bearded old men (who apparently have a master cunning plan for SF) thinking? Do they want to take over the country or not?

They could care less Francie, as long as they are shifting their diesel and taxing shady business folk they are not fussed. The last thing they need is more spotlight on them at this point, which is probably coming anyway. The adverse effect of the Sinn Féin surge will be the heightened scrutiny around their stakeholders.

They will have more trouble burying their reputation than they will have burying their contraband.:)

blanch152

Bowie wrote: »

There are numerous advantages to being in government, albeit a caretaker one. When FG brought FF to the table under the 'stability' con it meant everything MM said got column lines. Anytime government did anything FF were asked for an opinion. This had the mutual interest of FF/FG not wanting another party getting as much attention be it SF or whomever.
Now is no different. With all eyes on FF/FG and the Greens. Out of sight out of mind for SF/PBP/SD etc.

From 'relishing' going into opposition having been humiliated in the election, likely FG are hoping the electorate will become jaded by the next election and even as toothless caretakers they get the attention. Any cobbled together government will prolong this.
Sadly it looks like a rinse and repeat with the Greens. Falling into the 'better in than out' junior partner trap. They'll be eaten alive.

There are bitter deluded posts and then there is this.

The only reason that FG are still in government is because the party (SF) that claimed to have won the election wasn't able to form a government. They couldn't find a single partner to even agree some principles on forming a government.

Only when SF quietly slunk off their self-created stage did FG revert to forming a government. It is SF who by their failure to compromise with anyone else who have rejected the people's mandate.

As for the Greens, I am astounded at the continued inability on here to actually understand that making policy for the next five years is much more important to many Greens than waiting for the never never land of a left-wing government even if they get destroyed in the process. Whether that chunk of Greens is enough to get a two-thirds majority remains to be seen.

James Brown

Mortelaro wrote: »

Au contraire,It is you who is wrong as a last resort means when all other options are jaded

You incorrectly claimed FG were going to go in with FF as a last resort. The fact is FG intended to go into opposition. You sell it like trying to form a government was the goal. It wasn't. They changed their mind. On trying to form a government FF were their first option. Before deciding to try form one with FF, opposition was the choice. There is no 'last resort' scenario here.

Mortelaro wrote: »

If SF had the candidates, they would have gained more seats,no question but other left parties would have lost loads
You'd still have the same problem, not enough elected to prevent others forming a government including FG

Possibly. But it ignores the likely possibility that many who voted SF previously voted FG. However, this is not related to your opinion that the country doesn't trust them. As explained if that's the case, based on your reasoning, they trust FF and FG less.
Thems the breaks.
Varadkar is the longest serving taoiseach to have yet to receive a mandate from the people. That's some achievement all right.
Sure the party under Kenny got it last time out but even FG wanted Coveney ffs.

FrancieBrady

IAMAMORON wrote: »

They could care less Francie, as long as they are shifting their diesel and taxing shady business folk they are not fussed. The last thing they need is more spotlight on them at this point, which is probably coming anyway. The adverse effect of the Sinn Féin surge will be the heightened scrutiny around their stakeholders.

They will have more trouble burying their reputation than they will have burying their contraband.:)

But surely the most effective way to do that is not to be getting the highest share of the vote?

I mean, if SF run more candidates next time around, that would blow your fanciful theory out of the water?

You cannot seriously posit the above after watching how SF fight for every last vote they can get and the work they do locally to achieve that. Ridiculous and not grounded in any reality I know tbh.

Leonard Hofstadter

RandomViewer wrote: »

FF councillors have written to MM saying they do not a prove of FG our the Vegetables, Grassroots threatenening to leave party, expect similar from FG councillors, their rural supporters will not want Veggies either

Good. Plenty of opposition in Fine Gael Grassroots too, even amongst the younger members.

IAMAMORON

FrancieBrady wrote: »

But surely the most effective way to do that is not to be getting the highest share of the vote?

I mean, if SF run more candidates next time around, that would blow your fanciful theory out of the water?

You cannot seriously posit the above after watching how SF fight for every last vote they can get and the work they do locally to achieve that. Ridiculous and not grounded in any reality I know tbh.

Or getting their heavies to follow TD's home at night?

Try explaining that one to the millennials, see how it sits.

FrancieBrady

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Or getting their heavies to follow TD's home at night?

Try explaining that one to the millennials, see how it sits.

The internet equivalent of 'Squirrel!'

If you are gonna come up with theory's try grounding them in actual reality. The idea a party 'had no intention of going into an election' is just biased, lazy spoof.

IAMAMORON

RandomViewer wrote: »

FF councillors have written to MM saying they do not a prove of FG our the Vegetables, Grassroots threatenening to leave party, expect similar from FG councillors, their rural supporters will not want Veggies either

Can you supply copies of these letters? Surely they would be available under FOI?

Actually, for the craic why don't you name the councillors ? I would love to hear about the disenfranchised FG ones for starters, go on spit them out why don't ya?

IAMAMORON

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The internet equivalent of 'Squirrel!'

If you are gonna come up with theory's try grounding them in actual reality. The idea a party 'had no intention of going into an election' is just biased, lazy spoof.

Now you are ranting and changing the subject Francie.

Are you denying the Spy ring so?

What about the party whip's call for the abolition of the SCC?

FrancieBrady

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Now you are ranting and changing the subject Francie.

Are you denying the Spy ring so?

What about the party whip's call for the abolition of the SCC?

Changing the subject? Here is what I said when you posited your fanciful unbacked up theory that they had 'no intention of going into government'.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=113353144&postcount=5296

I think somebody else is trying to 'change the subject'.

IAMAMORON

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Changing the subject? Here is what I said when you posited your fanciful unbacked up theory that they had 'no intention of going into government'.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=113353144&postcount=5296

I think somebody else is trying to 'change the subject'.

Well in fairness I answered that too. I said that a lot of the diesel smuggling and racketeering will be open to more public scrutiny now. Especially from the millennials. I mean given the GFA is over 20 years old now there should be no need for such fundraising?

I mean why won't they share the wealth and build a few houses with the profits like the rest of country is trying to do? Help the homeless like? Or maybe improve working conditions for the "working class"?

FrancieBrady

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Well in fairness I answered that too. I said that a lot of the diesel smuggling and racketeering will be open to more public scrutiny now. Especially from the millennials. I mean given the GFA is over 20 years old now there should be no need for such fundraising?

I mean why won't they share the wealth and build a few houses with the profits like the rest of country is trying to do? Help the homeless like? Or maybe improve working conditions for the "working class"?

You can no doubt prove that SF are profiting from the proceeds of such activity?

Fire away.

If a random poster on boards.ie know they are doing this, why would more 'public scrutiny' bother them?

*None of your fabulous shiny 'theories add up. If you apply bog standard common sense that is.

IAMAMORON

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You can no doubt prove that SF are profiting from the proceeds of such activity?

Fire away.

If a random poster on boards.ie know they are doing this, why would more 'public scrutiny' bother them?

*None of your fabulous shiny 'theories add up. If you apply bog standard common sense that is.

So no comment on the spy ring then?

James Brown

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Or getting their heavies to follow TD's home at night?

Try explaining that one to the millennials, see how it sits.

Clare Daly and that whole drunk driving thing or Paul Murphy having his home raided at dawn or the Garda giving the same false 'evidence' at his trial or Tulsa accidentally putting Garda McCabe down as a child molester?
Or if you're talking further back Lugs 'law unto himself' Brannigan or Flanagan's father and his hatred of the Jews? be specific :rolleyes:

Mortelaro

Bowie wrote: »

Clare Daly and that whole drunk driving thing or Paul Murphy having his home raided at dawn or the Garda giving the same false 'evidence' at his trial or Tulsa accidentally putting Garda McCabe down as a child molester?
Or if you're talking further back Flanagan's father and his hatred of the Jews? be specific :rolleyes:

Are you accusing FG of directing the above?
You've a vivid imagination