Why are Irish conservatives not represented in the media/politics?

Silentcorner

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I backed up what I said, end of debate. We're done here.

You backed up nothing of the sort...I suggest the next time you hound a poster over a number a pages over a ridiculous pedantic point then you shouldn't be surprised if someone does the same to you...

AndrewJRenko

Silentcorner wrote: »

Paddy Casey during the Presidential Election.

He's a decent singer, but he'll never make President.

Silentcorner wrote: »

That didn't stop politicians and media behaving atrociously toward the people who did vote for Casey...they were pillared by media outlets afterwards....it was grotesque....it was vulgar indeed.

Media pillorying Casey voters? Again, I'd have to ask for some examples of this, because I've no memory. They certainly had a go at Casey, but I don't remember any media taking a swipe at his supporters.

Silentcorner wrote: »

But yet you can't even mention questioning the Ethnic status of the Travelling Community....

Of course you can question it. Casey did exactly this, questioning this particular issue.

I think what you mean is that you can't even mention it without other people disagreeing with you. You seem to see any disagreement as part of some massive conspiracy, when in fact, it's just people disagreeing with you.

Mad_maxx wrote: »

who on newstalk is any of those things ?

pat kenny is clearly pro free market but i would not call him a social conservative , he is a PD , its well known he was a PD

the political affiliation of many in the media is fairly well known

Yeah, PD sounds right, fairly hard right economically speaking.

Mad_maxx wrote: »

a social liberal can be free market

ive not heard ciara kelly speak out against big government - more public spending , she may have done so ? , i just have never heard it , shes most certainly a social liberal however and solidly PC on all the tick box issues which respectable media liberals must tick

matt cooper is in no way the kind of fiscally conservative advocate that the likes of karl deeter is or dan o brien , hes at best centrist on these matters , he is of course a painfully PC social liberal

I have heard Ciara sneering about public sector salaries, trade union roles, employee rights and the Government in general.

I wouldn't quite put Matt up their with Karl or Dan, but he's definitely leaning right economically.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

this is what it all comes down to, advertising is far more effective on women, women make up 80% of consumer spending and tend to be more prone to appeal to emotion type argument which is why media outlets who rely on advertising always trend left.

Perpetuating things like the gender pay gap, rape culture and all the other made up things that are designed to keep women reeled in is good for advertising which keeps outlets going.

Silentcorner wrote: »

You are correct...they are aware that women are more likely to share negative emotive content...

It is shameless manipulation in an attempt to stay or become profitable.

Gents, 1979 called for you. It wants your representation of women back.

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

You think the media in Britain is better than Ireland? The Daily Mail and the Guardian are exactly what we shouldn't be aiming for. The only half decent media over there I'm aware of is LBC, though I only listened to it now and then. The BBC is OK aswell as much as people like to thrash it.

LBC - Home of Nick Ferrari and Nigel Farage? Ah here.

And the Beeb - the organisation that edited out people laughing at Boris during the election? With Laura K acting as the PR dept of the Tories?

I can't watch any of their news programmes since their disgraceful role in handing power to the Tories.

Sean.3516 wrote: »

I don't think you can estimate the amount of conservatives in the country based on the vote size of the so called conservative parties like Renua or National Party. These parties tend to screw up because they take up some nutty positions or they attempt to imitate the american/european conservatism in a way that just puts people off.

I'd reckon most conservatives are just people in favour of free markets with some variety of views when it comes to the social stuff like abortion.

The vast majority of conservatives don't vote for Renua or the National Party but FF or FG or independents. There's actually a lot of diversity of thought in FF/FG. The social conservatives tend to vote FF while the free market types tend to vote FG. Some social conservatives in FG too. I'd consider myself a conservative on economics and a libertarian on the social issues with the exception of abortion and I'm a member of FG.

I'd generally agree with you, though the free market social liberals is exactly the territory the PDs held for their brief existence. They couldn't sustain a party on that support.

Silentcorner wrote: »

How in gods name do you think the media elected Donald Trump....

Can you provide for me documented evidence that the media industry was responsible for his election into the highest Political Office in the world please?

Have you tried watching Fox?
Have you looked at what Bannon did with Facebook during the election?

rightmove

not wanting to read 21 pages but Dave Rubin seems to agree with the OP's sentiment in "Don't Burn This Book:" and why he found the liberals regressive in thought and action so he jumped ship and whilst he maintains he is an old style liberal he values that the conservatives can think for themselves without punishment and he is "with" them now

mariaalice

rightmove wrote: »

not wanting to read 21 pages but Dave Rubin seems to agree with the OP's sentiment in "Don't Burn This Book:" and why he found the liberals regressive in thought and action so he jumped ship and whilst he maintains he is an old style liberal he values that the conservatives can think for themselves without punishment and he is "with" them now

That make no sense and that saying something coming from me:pac:

That another thing that interests me why are Ameican conservative commentators referenced in an Irish context.

Silentcorner

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

He's a decent singer, but he'll never make President.


Media pillorying Casey voters? Again, I'd have to ask for some examples of this, because I've no memory. They certainly had a go at Casey, but I don't remember any media taking a swipe at his supporters.



Of course you can question it. Casey did exactly this, questioning this particular issue.

I think what you mean is that you can't even mention it without other people disagreeing with you. You seem to see any disagreement as part of some massive conspiracy, when in fact, it's just people disagreeing with you.




Yeah, PD sounds right, fairly hard right economically speaking.


I have heard Ciara sneering about public sector salaries, trade union roles, employee rights and the Government in general.

I wouldn't quite put Matt up their with Karl or Dan, but he's definitely leaning right economically.




Gents, 1979 called for you. It wants your representation of women back.




LBC - Home of Nick Ferrari and Nigel Farage? Ah here.

And the Beeb - the organisation that edited out people laughing at Boris during the election? With Laura K acting as the PR dept of the Tories?

I can't watch any of their news programmes since their disgraceful role in handing power to the Tories.



I'd generally agree with you, though the free market social liberals is exactly the territory the PDs held for their brief existence. They couldn't sustain a party on that support.



Have you tried watching Fox?
Have you looked at what Bannon did with Facebook during the election?

Go look for yourself...or disagree with me...I own you nothing.

In 1979 the industry had no idea who was reading what article, in 2020 they know absolutely everything about what is shared, by whom...

In 1979 the advertisers were predominately chasing females, today they chase females....in 1979 women had a great argument that they were suffering under styfling conservatism and sexism...in 2020 it's a demented fantasy.

I don't watch fox...I've no idea why you have mentioned it or Bannon...it's got nothing to do with anything I have mentioned here.


I'd had no idea what you meant in your first line...until I spotted my error...and we will have to agree to disagree on his singing abilities!!!

rightmove

mariaalice wrote: »

why are Ameican conservative commentators referenced in an Irish context.

exact same issue no one but fox is conservative.

CtevenSrowder

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

LBC - Home of Nick Ferrari and Nigel Farage? Ah here.

And the Beeb - the organisation that edited out people laughing at Boris during the election? With Laura K acting as the PR dept of the Tories?

It also has James O'Brien who is left wing. There is a bit of balance and has some interesting discussions from time to time. As I said though, only listened to it now and then.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I can't watch any of their news programmes since their disgraceful role in handing power to the Tories.

Corbyn and his rag tag bunch of momentum racists handed power to the Tories. Not the BBC. The fact that both the hard left and hard right both hate the BBC shows that it's not doing too bad a job. Both accuse it of bias.

Yellow_Fern

mariaalice wrote: »

That make no sense and that saying something coming from me:pac:

That another thing that interests me why are Ameican conservative commentators referenced in an Irish context.

Works both ways. I once heard a commentator on one of the main current affairs shows on Radio 1 or Newstalk recommend the Young Turks as a good sophisticated insight into US politics. The Young Turks of all new sites

AndrewJRenko

Silentcorner wrote: »

Go look for yourself...or disagree with me...I own you nothing.

In 1979 the industry had no idea who was reading what article, in 2020 they know absolutely everything about what is shared, by whom...

In 1979 the advertisers were predominately chasing females, today they chase females....in 1979 women had a great argument that they were suffering under styfling conservatism and sexism...in 2020 it's a demented fantasy.

I don't watch fox...I've no idea why you have mentioned it or Bannon...it's got nothing to do with anything I have mentioned here.


I'd had no idea what you meant in your first line...until I spotted my error...and we will have to agree to disagree on his singing abilities!!!

I mentioned Fox and Facebook because you asked about the media influence on Trump election. The media won Trump election, Brexit vote and Boris election.

Your 'media pillorying Casey voters' never happened. You just made it up in your mad rush to position the poor middle aged middle class white man as the victim. Yet another in your long line of exaggerations.

AndrewJRenko

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Corbyn and his rag tag bunch of momentum racists handed power to the Tories. Not the BBC. The fact that both the hard left and hard right both hate the BBC shows that it's not doing too bad a job. Both accuse it of bias.

I'm not Corbyn's biggest fan, but you seem to have missed a few facts:

- the 'mistake' in using the wrong year's footage of Johnson laying the wreath to hide the fact that he put it upside down
- the mistake in editing the footage of the audience laughing at Johnson when he asked if the truth matters
-the mistake in the journalist announcing that Johnson was heading for the victory 'he so richly deserved'
- the mistake in reporting that Hancock had been assaulted by a Labour activist
-the rolling over on the commitment to not interview Johnson until he agreed to go on Andrew Neil

That's an awful lot of 'mistakes', isn't it? Spot any pattern?

CtevenSrowder

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm not Corbyn's biggest fan, but you seem to have missed a few facts:

- the 'mistake' in using the wrong year's footage of Johnson laying the wreath to hide the fact that he put it upside down
- the mistake in editing the footage of the audience laughing at Johnson when he asked if the truth matters
-the mistake in the journalist announcing that Johnson was heading for the victory 'he so richly deserved'
- the mistake in reporting that Hancock had been assaulted by a Labour activist
-the rolling over on the commitment to not interview Johnson until he agreed to go on Andrew Neil

That's an awful lot of 'mistakes', isn't it? Spot any pattern?

No. I spot you trying to make excuses for the complete cluster **** that was Labour under corbyn, and the embarrassment that the lib dems have become. The idea that you think footage of Johnson putting a wreath upside down would've swayed 3 million people to vote Labour just shows how desperate you are to lay blame were it doesn't belong.

The whole irony ofcourse is that your biggest ally in your little anti-BBC crusade is the Conservatives themselves.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

No. I spot you trying to make excuses for the complete cluster **** that was Labour under corbyn, and the embarrassment that the lib dems have become. The idea that you think footage of Johnson putting a wreath upside down would've swayed 3 million people to vote Labour just shows how desperate you are to lay blame were it doesn't belong.

The whole irony ofcourse is that your biggest ally in your little anti-BBC crusade is the Conservatives themselves.

The guy repeatedly dodged questions from jpurnalists and at one point hid in a fridge. That's right, he hid in a fridge. When you do that and they still elect you, you blame the electorate.

All the information they needed was there for them. It was freely available and easy to digrest, but they refused to actually read it and consider it. You can't blame the media for that.

AndrewJRenko

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

No. I spot you trying to make excuses for the complete cluster **** that was Labour under corbyn, and the embarrassment that the lib dems have become. The idea that you think footage of Johnson putting a wreath upside down would've swayed 3 million people to vote Labour just shows how desperate you are to lay blame were it doesn't belong.

The whole irony ofcourse is that your biggest ally in your little anti-BBC crusade is the Conservatives themselves.

Strange interpretation, given that I didn't mention Labour at all. There is none so blind as he that does not want to see.

CtevenSrowder

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

The guy repeatedly dodged questions from jpurnalists and at one point hid in a fridge. That's right, he hid in a fridge. When you do that and they still elect you, you blame the electorate.

All the information they needed was there for them. It was freely available and easy to digrest, but they refused to actually read it and consider it. You can't blame the media for that.

Yes all the info. Labour's manifesto which was more nuts then the Conservatives, the conceited effort by the lib dems to undo a democratic referendum result, rampit anti-semitism in labour, Corbyns dodgy past, flip flopping on Brexit. Thankfully Labour have seemed to have gotten their act together by electing Starmer as leader.

CtevenSrowder

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Strange interpretation, given that I didn't mention Labour at all. There is none so blind as he that does not want to see.

You talked of the BBC's role in 'handing power' to the Tories, whose biggest competition is Labour. Its implied. The facts are Labour lost to the Tories because they were awful, and the lib dems just as bad. It wasn't the media, or the BBC.

But since you seem to think the BBC amounts to a Conservative propagandist organisation, maybe you can cheer on those in the Tories that want to see its demise.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Yes all the info. Labour's manifesto which was more nuts then the Conservatives, the conceited effort by the lib dems to undo a democratic referendum result, rampit anti-semitism in labour, Corbyns dodgy past, flip flopping on Brexit. Thankfully Labour have seemed to have gotten their act together by electing Starmer as leader.

And yet, the guy never felt the need to dodge questions or hide in a fridge. Strange, that...

CtevenSrowder

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

And yet, the guy never felt the need to dodge questions or hide in a fridge. Strange, that...

How is Boris hiding away or dodging questions the media's fault, or indeed the BBC's?

The labour manifesto was awful, they'd rampant racism in the party which Corbyn had to be dragged kicking and screaming to apologise for, had no stance on Brexit etc etc.

Trying to blame the media for the above is an attempt to absolve Labour of the blame. They were utterly ****e. The crumbling of the red wall shows this.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

How is Boris hiding away or dodging questions the media's fault, or indeed the BBC's?

The labour manifesto was awful, they'd rampant racism in the party which Corbyn had to be dragged kicking and screaming to apologise for, had no stance on Brexit etc etc.

Trying to blame the media for the above is an attempt to absolve Labour of the blame. They were utterly ****e. The crumbling of the red wall shows this.

I didn't - I blamed the electorate for not informing themselves and for not realising that the partywthey were voting for was led by a proven coward and liar, with his own history of racism - how do you explain Johnson referring to Islamaphobia as "natural" and to muslim woman as "letterboxes"?

Eric Cartman

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

How is Boris hiding away or dodging questions the media's fault, or indeed the BBC's?

The labour manifesto was awful, they'd rampant racism in the party which Corbyn had to be dragged kicking and screaming to apologise for, had no stance on Brexit etc etc.

Trying to blame the media for the above is an attempt to absolve Labour of the blame. They were utterly ****e. The crumbling of the red wall shows this.

That period in UK politics was a strange one, don't vote UKIP because they're racist but do vote labour despite them being racist. It was nice to know that the guardian readers were full on willing to throw the jews right under the bus if it meant that they maybe unfurled Brexit or got free university.

CtevenSrowder

Eric Cartman wrote: »

That period in UK politics was a strange one, don't vote UKIP because they're racist but do vote labour despite them being racist. It was nice to know that the guardian readers were full on willing to throw the jews right under the bus if it meant that they maybe unfurled Brexit or got free university.

Thankfully the British public weren't!

MadYaker

Equating labour and UKIP as being equally racist is laughable. Corbyn was a joke but I don’t think he was really an anti semite. Just an idiot and weak politician.

2u2me

MadYaker wrote: »

Equating labour and UKIP as being equally racist is laughable.

You're right. Only one is being investigated by the EHRC for racism.

AndrewJRenko

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

How is Boris hiding away or dodging questions the media's fault, or indeed the BBC's?

The labour manifesto was awful, they'd rampant racism in the party which Corbyn had to be dragged kicking and screaming to apologise for, had no stance on Brexit etc etc.

Trying to blame the media for the above is an attempt to absolve Labour of the blame. They were utterly ****e. The crumbling of the red wall shows this.

Nobody tried to absolve Labour of blame. Obviously elections are complex situations, with multiple factors involved.

It is interesting to see your enthusiasm to downplay the very specific bias shown by the BBC.

How many times did they have Farage, from the party of no MPs on Question Time in the previous three years?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Eric Cartman wrote: »

That period in UK politics was a strange one, don't vote UKIP because they're racist but do vote labour despite them being racist. It was nice to know that the guardian readers were full on willing to throw the jews right under the bus if it meant that they maybe unfurled Brexit or got free university.

It was a strange one alright - certainly the racism/bigotry angle was a bit inconcistent. Seemed you could be bigoted towards Islam, no problem; but anti-semitism seemed to get you into serious ****.

8kczg9v0swrydm

I think there is an issue defining what constitutes conservative policy. As my opening post was about socially conservative politicians/media, allow me chip in:

- supporting abortion is not socially conservative;
- supporting homosexual unions is not socially conservative;
- supporting Gender Theory for kids is not socially conservative;
- supporting unlimited Muslim migration is not socially conservative;
- supporting an unduly lenient court system is not socially conservative;

Socially conservative values are those which promote strong family units comprising of father, mother and child; it is the promotion of healthy patriotism (as distinguished from xenophobia etc), a healthy respect for religion as an undeniable facet of the human experience as well as a strong idea of justice (this is where the courts come in).

My original observation was that socially conservative Irish people are pretty much voiceless. David Quinn is one guy

Some good observations on why this is, though.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Emmaline Tender Fowl wrote: »

I think there is an issue defining what constitutes conservative policy. As my opening post was about socially conservative politicians/media, allow me chip in:

- supporting abortion is not socially conservative;
- supporting homosexual unions is not socially conservative;
- supporting Gender Theory for kids is not socially conservative;
- supporting unlimited Muslim migration is not socially conservative;
- supporting an unduly lenient court system is not socially conservative;

Socially conservative values are those which promote strong family units comprising of fahttps://b-static.net/vbulletin/images/smilies/confused.pngther, mother and child; it is the promotion of healthy patriotism (as distinguished from xenophobia etc), a healthy respect for religion as an undeniable facet of the human experience as well as a strong idea of justice (this is where the courts come in).

My original observation was that socially conservative Irish people are pretty much voiceless. David Quinn is one guy

Some good observations on why this is, though.

Firstly, welcome back

The list you gave there is not really all that illustrative - you're telling us what is not socially conservstive, not what IS.

That said: items 1-3 are covered by the Catholic Church / Renua and tend not to be all that reflective of the agnostic conservative view.
Item 4 is bigoted (why Muslims...?) - most social conservative viewpoints are against ALL unlimited migration.
Item 5 would be most people in fairness. I'd consider myself socially liberal and would totally agree with you on that one.

Just to go back to your opening post:
"The referendums on the first two were by no means a landslide" - I'd consder 24% and 34% pretty comprensive margins, as would most people.

"I think it would be fair to say that the three biggest social issues of the day which divide liberals and conservatives are abortion, homosexual unions and mass Muslim migration (maybe EU membership, at a push)."
Definitely not the first two. Migration (regardless of origin) and justice would be the two.

Anyway, the general observations were that that level of soical conservatism either doesn't have the support or the means; and that Ireland is happy sitting on the fence and being centrist.

L1011

Emmaline Tender Fowl wrote: »

a healthy respect for religion as an undeniable facet of the human experience .

As soon as you bring religion in; the extra people who may have voted for an economically conservative/tough on crime party who are repelled by the full shopping list of right wing ideology are out. That was the vote the PDs got over and above the 2%

So you're back in to the 2% field. And far, far more than 2% of op/ed pieces in the Irish media, places on discussion panels etc are given to that 2%.

Election results show indisputably that there is only 2% support for hard social conservatism in Ireland. And you get your airtime and then some.

CtevenSrowder

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I didn't - I blamed the electorate for not informing themselves and for not realising that the partywthey were voting for was led by a proven coward and liar, with his own history of racism - how do you explain Johnson referring to Islamaphobia as "natural" and to muslim woman as "letterboxes"?

So if the electorate had informed themselves they'd have voted for Corbyns Labour, but because they voted for Bj they were ill informed? Strange how it works, considering the red wall collapsed. Sounds to me like voters were perfectly informed. The long time labour supporters who voted Conservative will bounce right back to Labour provided Starmer takes the party back towards the center.

The reported antisemitism within labour came from Labour members, delegates and MPs themselves. Next to no such accusations were labelled at the Tories as a whole, or at a level comparable to that of anti semitism in Labour.

At least we can both agree that the BBC didn't 'hand' power to the Tories like another poster suggested earlier.

AndrewJRenko

Emmaline Tender Fowl wrote: »

My original observation was that socially conservative Irish people are pretty much voiceless. David Quinn is one guy

Some good observations on why this is, though.

Yes, voiceless indeed, with his weekly national newspaper column, his regular radio appearance every time any related to sex comes up, his occasional TV appearances, his slightly bizarre appearance at the Dept Health press conferences as a 'journalist'.

And then you have Brenda's weekly column and occasional appearances, the occasional columns from Patricia and Maria.

All to represent a tiny minority that is ageing fast.

If this is 'voiceless', what does having a voice look like?

AndrewJRenko

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

The reported antisemitism within labour came from Labour members, delegates and MPs themselves. Next to no such accusations were labelled at the Tories as a whole, or at a level comparable to that of anti semitism in Labour.

Yes indeed, no one ever suggested that the Tories were racist, right?

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/06/boris-johnson-s-racist-insults-dog-whistles-and-slurs