Is it just me or have SF vanished?

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You'll be starting a PLM movement next.
Get out a dictionary, perfectly sound and acceptable term for a certain outlook.

It's a silly term to throw out for someone who votes SF.

How's MON getting on at the COBRA meetings with the British Army? Is she and Kelly still under threat from the dissidents for attending the PSNI conference not too long ago and encouraging Nationalists to join , you know, a 6 county police force!

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

It's a silly term to throw out for someone who votes SF.

How's MON getting on at the COBRA meetings with the British Army? Is she and Kelly still under threat from the dissidents for attending the PSNI conference not too long ago and encouraging Nationalists to join , you know, a 6 county police force!

No idea jh79, Google is as much your friend as it is mine

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No idea jh79, Google is as much your friend as it is mine

Must google who attends alright, must be some sight to see her in middle of the Eton types waiting for her orders!

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Must google who attends alright, must be some sight to see her in middle of the Eton types waiting for her orders!

Is that a taunt? Would you rather she didn't attend? What is the problem with it exactly?
Should she be ashamed of herself with these Eton types? Is that what you are implying?

So many questions as you reveal yourself.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Is that a taunt? Would you rather she didn't attend? What is the problem with it exactly?
Should she be ashamed of herself with these Eton types? Is that what you are implying?

So many questions as you reveal yourself.

She definitely should attend as a public representative. It is her duty but whatever way you spin it, her and her party are partitionists and you by extension by voting for them.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

She definitely should attend as a public representative. It is her duty but whatever way you spin it, her and her party are partitionists and you by extension by voting for them.

Stop, you are dehumanising me!

You go ahead and knock yourself out on that one jh79...as an old Etonian might say...'one doesn't care really, old chap'.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Stop, you are dehumanising me!

You go ahead and knock yourself out on that one jh79...as an old Etonian might say...'one doesn't care really, old chap'.

I didn't say that! That was Blanch.

I'm more than happy for SF to be partitionist for another 100 years. At least you're not voting for Republican SF!

Bishop of hope

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Stop, you are dehumanising me!

You go ahead and knock yourself out on that one jh79...as an old Etonian might say...'one doesn't care really, old chap'.

So you're a partionist Mr Brady?
You deny it but jh is convinced you are, is he right or are you really not a partionist.
Someone called you one, you must be one surely.
I mean everyone you call one must be one too surely?

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

I didn't say that! That was Blanch.

I'm more than happy for SF to be partitionist for another 100 years. At least you're not voting for Republican SF!

But you and I know they won't be. The two parts are drawing inexorably together as they transparently work the agreement they said they would work.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

But you and I know they won't be. The two parts are drawing inexorably together as they transparently work the agreement they said they would work.

Biggest threat to a UI at this pace is global warming!

Bishop of hope

jh79 wrote: »

Biggest threat to a UI at this pace is global warming!

Yes, and Michelle is pretty hot is she not:D:D
And Arlene, well she's on fire!

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Biggest threat to a UI at this pace is global warming!

You would say that...of course.

smurgen

blanch152 wrote: »

Nope, I didn't call the supporters the lowest of the low, I called the party the lowest of the low.

You can't dehumanise something that isn't human.

Parties aren't made up of people? What are they made out of? Fiberglass?

Bishop of hope

I see Michelle in the news today holding up pension payments for needy people.
The Judge is not too impressed with her and claims, she is holding up the rule of law.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-53813371

Superfoods

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I'll ask again.

What did SF do wrong here?

How come the witness said he needed to go to Sinn Fein and then weeks later came in to talk. So why did it take weeks for Sinn Fein to give the green light?

FrancieBrady

Superfoods wrote: »

How come the witness said he needed to go to Sinn Fein and then weeks later came in to talk. So why did it take weeks for Sinn Fein to give the green light?

How would I know...I am only going on what is reported.

Truthvader

OK I generally dont "debate" with the Sinn Fein/ IRA crew here but I think in this instance they genuinely dont know what they have done wrong. So...

They have created a twisted criminalised sub society in which when a Guard is murdererd a witness has to pause and "see where he stands". Is the murder "authorised" ? Are the murderers "connected"? He then has to check with Gerry Adams whether it is OK to assist the investigation and then wait for Gerry to decide whether this particular murder is actually wrong or whether it is merely "regrettable" or "understandable". A sick parallel society. The ludicrous Sinn Fein economic policy is only a secondary issue as far as I am concerned; the corruption of normal society and creation of a criminalised one in its stead being a far bigger issue. Everybody happy?

Truthvader

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Leaving aside the veracity of the story, does the fact that so many young people are willing to overlook issues such as this and vote for SF anyway not give right leaning folks any pause for thought about just how f*cked people feel by the status quo? What I find amazing is how the media in Ireland and the "I'm alright Jack" class will point to all of these allegations against SF, see how it fails to dent their support among young Irish people, and not stop and think about why people might be willing to overlook a party being steeped in so much controversy about its past paramilitary connections, and vote for them anyway based on policy concerns.

Like, how does anyone look at this and not say "If people are willing to overlook news stories like this just so they can vote for a party which claims to have a desire to destroy the status quo, we have really, really failed this entire demographic of people that they feel so desperate as to be willing to do this"?

That's the part I always fail to understand. You all believe every allegation made against Sinn Fein, or at least believe that such allegations should rule a party out of being in power. Yet large, vast swathes of at least 2-3 generations of young Irish people are willing to overlook these controversies and vote for them anyway.

How is it that anyone can avoid the logical next conclusion, which is "maybe our policies and our attitude has genuinely harmed these people and their prospects to such a great extent that they're desperate and willing to try anything to get us out of power"? How do you avoid coming to that conclusion, when you can see with your own eyes that so many people are willing to vote for a party which in your eyes is so unpalatable? If you believe SF to be unpalatable, and you don't deny that young people have been voting for them in their droves, then how can you not also question whether maybe, just maybe, we have a legitimate point to make about the current status quo being utterly unbearable for us?

This is actually a very good point. At the time of the last election we had more or less full employment and the economy was so vibrant that hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans and South Americans flocked here to get a piece of the action. So it is a bit of a mystery why 25% of the population should turn to a group of criminals chancers and morons. Perhaps an ongoing sense of reckless entitlement coupled with a moral bankruptcy which allows huge amounts of people to vote for any perceived personal advantage no matter how unlikely or corrupted the source.

Open to other suggestions however as you are certainly correct that it is a very real problem

nigeldaniel

looking for a buz is my take on some Sf voters.

Squidvicious

nigeldaniel wrote: »

looking for a buz is my take on some Sf voters.

The above is obviously a huge simplification but there is a grain of truth in it. SF is a classic anti establishment party, down South at least. Young people hear older voters saying that they'd never vote for Sinn Fein. So perhaps a little part of the attraction in voting SF is good old youth rebellion?

FrancieBrady

Truthvader wrote: »

Open to other suggestions however

The incumbent government was so incompetent it was time to turf them out?

Truthvader

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The incumbent government was so incompetent it was time to turf them out?

The government that had turned around a dead economy run by the IMF to one of full employment ? Can only imagine where we would be if Dessie Ellis, Slab and Gerry were running things through their yapping puppet ,Mary Lou, and the thickos she surrounds herself with

jm08

Truthvader wrote: »

Open to other suggestions however as you are certainly correct that it is a very real problem

I would be described as a floating voter who has voted for all party candidates over the years (but will never again give a FF candidate a vote) and in the last election, I gave my first every vote to the Sinn Fein candidate (it was 2nd preference vote) for the following reasons.


1. Performance of Mary Lou. I think she was excellent when on public accounts committee and she is well able to take Leo down a peg or two which can be often required.
2. FF/FG policy on housing. It is just is not working. I think a radical approach is required, and I think Eoin O Broin's actually knows something about it.
3. FF/FG will never stand up to vested interests (like Property developers, banks, insurance etc). Pearse Doherty was excellent on exposing what was going on in the insurance industry.
4. Health. Poor management and over spending on Children's Hospital Cervical Smear Scandal. Someone needs to take the vested interests on in the HSE.


Fine Gael were in for long enough, as far as I'm concerned, FF are just not trustworthy anymore and I am glad that Sinn Fein are in a good positition now to be an effective opposition because we haven't had that for the last couple of years really.

maccored

Truthvader wrote: »

The government that had turned around a dead economy run by the IMF to one of full employment ? Can only imagine where we would be if Dessie Ellis, Slab and Gerry were running things through their yapping puppet ,Mary Lou, and the thickos she surrounds herself with

full employment?

Approximately 23% of Ireland’s full-time workforce is on what is categorised as low pay, or earning less than two thirds of median earnings, according to 2017 figures.

https://www.thejournal.ie/workers-in-ireland-on-low-pay-4764896-Aug2019/

FrancieBrady

Truthvader wrote: »

The government that had turned around a dead economy run by the IMF to one of full employment ? Can only imagine where we would be if Dessie Ellis, Slab and Gerry were running things through their yapping puppet ,Mary Lou, and the thickos she surrounds herself with

They got turfed out and had to effectively merge with FF to hold on to power?

Truthvader

maccored wrote: »

full employment?



https://www.thejournal.ie/workers-in-ireland-on-low-pay-4764896-Aug2019/

I assume that would be the 23% with no skill set at all or who work part time etc

Is there some Sinn Fein fantasy society where everyone earns barrister money without actually learning how to do anything- like their TD's? Plus what % of a society do you expect to be on low pay. Been on low pay and on the dole myself but learnt how to do a few things that not everybody knows and moved into the other 77%

jm08

Truthvader wrote: »

I assume that would be the 23% with no skill set at all or who work part time etc

Is there some Sinn Fein fantasy society where everyone earns barrister money without actually learning how to do anything- like their TD's? Plus what % of a society do you expect to be on low pay. Been on low pay and on the dole myself but learnt how to do a few things that not everybody knows and moved into the other 77%

Actually, it includes the people who will end up wiping your bottom for you because you won't be able to do it yourself. Those carers are all on the minimum wage.

hatrickpatrick

Truthvader wrote: »

This is actually a very good point. At the time of the last election we had more or less full employment and the economy was so vibrant that hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans and South Americans flocked here to get a piece of the action. So it is a bit of a mystery why 25% of the population should turn to a group of criminals chancers and morons. Perhaps an ongoing sense of reckless entitlement coupled with a moral bankruptcy which allows huge amounts of people to vote for any perceived personal advantage no matter how unlikely or corrupted the source.

Open to other suggestions however as you are certainly correct that it is a very real problem

You're so, so, so close to getting it, but you're so blinded by your right wing ideology that it's not getting over the line.

A booming macroeconomy is bad for young people whose jobs have not experienced wage inflation during the "recovery" in the second half of the 2010s. It means that they're still getting paid the same amount roughly speaking, whereas the cost of living for that demographic has skyrocketed. I keep quoting the FT ad nauseum, but a 14% increase in average wages compared with a 40% increase in average rents represents a dramatic plunge in quality of life at a time when politicians and leaders are preaching about how great everything is compared with a few years back. If your career has turned into the "gig economy" type of career which so many young peoples' have over this decade, then a 40% increase in your rent since 2011 compared with a 14% increase in your wages is a backwards step.

That's why the arguments about how SF's policies will impact the macro economy are rolling off young people like water on a duck's back. The macro economy has become totally disconnected from the reality of quality of life, as more often than not, macroeconomic factors "improving" simply means that everything gets more and more expensive. If your take-home pay is not increasing during that time, then ultimately all this talk of "recovery" is a gigantic "f*ck you" from those in power.

That's why "keep the recovery going" was such a failure as an election slogan in 2016. That's why "a future to look forward to" was even more of a failure in 2020.

The dramatic increase in the cost of housing has meant that to those who weren't already on the ownership ladder when the "recovery" began, life has been getting sh!ttier and sh!ttier for the last five years, with particular acceleration occurring between 2018 and 2020. And the laissez-faire "let them eat cake" approach of Fine Gael and Fianna Fail is making this worse.

Using terms like "entitlement" and "perceived personal advantage" are just showing your complete lack of empathy once again. Someone who could afford to move out and start their own independent life in the early 2010s being forced to move home with their parents again because the government has entirely turned the housing sector over to the greedy c*nts that are the investor class has experienced real, demonstrable, devastating reversal in their quality of life and in their prospects for the future.

It is not the public who are to blame for rejecting a government policy which hurts them, FFS, it's the government which pursued harmful policies without regard to the harm and pain they were causing. That's what FG supporters don't seem to get. That's why all the arguments the government tried to make in the run up to the election didn't work on young people - not when you had Eoghan Murphy allowing quality of life to slide further and further into the abyss while telling young people "this is the future, get used to it".

No. We won't. And that will be reflected at the ballot box - simple as that.

christy c

^^^ again you keep mentioning FG and totally ignoring the absolute boll1x spouted by SF. A good housing policy is useless without some semi coherent plan to go with it. Dangerously naive "spend the apple tax", "raise €700m from an intangible asset tax", etc. unfortunately for all of us are not coherent policies.

Maybe SF will adapt, but people looking to them as saviours will be very disappointed.

Yeah_Right

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

You're so, so, so close to getting it, but you're so blinded by your right wing ideology that it's not getting over the line.

A booming macroeconomy is bad for young people whose jobs have not experienced wage inflation during the "recovery" in the second half of the 2010s. It means that they're still getting paid the same amount roughly speaking, whereas the cost of living for that demographic has skyrocketed. I keep quoting the FT ad nauseum, but a 14% increase in average wages compared with a 40% increase in average rents represents a dramatic plunge in quality of life at a time when politicians and leaders are preaching about how great everything is compared with a few years back. If your career has turned into the "gig economy" type of career which so many young peoples' have over this decade, then a 40% increase in your rent since 2011 compared with a 14% increase in your wages is a backwards step.

That's why the arguments about how SF's policies will impact the macro economy are rolling off young people like water on a duck's back. The macro economy has become totally disconnected from the reality of quality of life, as more often than not, macroeconomic factors "improving" simply means that everything gets more and more expensive. If your take-home pay is not increasing during that time, then ultimately all this talk of "recovery" is a gigantic "f*ck you" from those in power.

That's why "keep the recovery going" was such a failure as an election slogan in 2016. That's why "a future to look forward to" was even more of a failure in 2020.

The dramatic increase in the cost of housing has meant that to those who weren't already on the ownership ladder when the "recovery" began, life has been getting sh!ttier and sh!ttier for the last five years, with particular acceleration occurring between 2018 and 2020. And the laissez-faire "let them eat cake" approach of Fine Gael and Fianna Fail is making this worse.

Using terms like "entitlement" and "perceived personal advantage" are just showing your complete lack of empathy once again. Someone who could afford to move out and start their own independent life in the early 2010s being forced to move home with their parents again because the government has entirely turned the housing sector over to the greedy c*nts that are the investor class has experienced real, demonstrable, devastating reversal in their quality of life and in their prospects for the future.

It is not the public who are to blame for rejecting a government policy which hurts them, FFS, it's the government which pursued harmful policies without regard to the harm and pain they were causing. That's what FG supporters don't seem to get. That's why all the arguments the government tried to make in the run up to the election didn't work on young people - not when you had Eoghan Murphy allowing quality of life to slide further and further into the abyss while telling young people "this is the future, get used to it".

No. We won't. And that will be reflected at the ballot box - simple as that.

I think I get what you are saying about the younger generation voting for SF. It was a single issue vote. Housing was the issue. I can understand why someone might vote on a single issue but I think its narrow minded and stupid. Like the Americans that vote purely on abortion or gun rights. It leads to parties saying what they think is popular but not actually having any sensible policies. Like SF.