FF/FG/Green Next Government

Jinglejangle69

Question for the SF lads here.

Would you be happy if SF and FG formed a government together?

Would that keep you content?

Itssoeasy

blanch152 wrote: »

Can't see that, as Sinn Fein haven't talked to anyone and made no attempt to form a government.

Well they must have in some form as others voted for Mary lou for Taoiseach the first day which seems like another world ago at this stage.

Truthvader

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Well, last time out more people saw them as the solution above FF and FG.

Chew on that.

Poor Francie, the 6th class maths problem again

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I suppose opinion polls don't matter this week, but will probably be back in favour when Sinn Fein get a bounce.

The one message coming loud and clear from the electorate at the moment is that they know which parties will step up to the plate. FG and Greens are up.

Opinion polls matter. They are a snapshot and only valid until the next one.

Here again is FG's record in GE's, it should, to anyone with a brain, make absolute sense in terms of where the party has been led. You can see the hope and expectation dashed in it and the follow on disillusionment. No doubt you will spin that by talking about some other party or what's under your bed and in your headspace.


FG Seats 2011 = 76
FG Seats 2016 = 50
FG Seats 2020 = 35

James Brown

Itssoeasy wrote: »

It's a weighted system which I think was used the first time for that last leadership election. I presume it was the way FF have it. Would it have been better if Simon coveney was Taoiseach ?

Yes. Much.

James Brown

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Cool.

So they blew it.

They got rinsed in the election.

When can we move on?

Japers we'd a lad claiming the mags cash story was a media crusade against FG. That was many months before the general election. I think showing FG blew it in a discussion on how they blew it is pretty valid, especially as it was the last two elections.
Back to the point, funnily enough if FG/Kenny showed even a modicum of sincerity in their claims of no more quangos, cronyism and changing the way we do business, they might have romped home instead of having to suck up to FF because they got too FG too quickly.
As for now, be hard for FF or FG to do the usual 'we're not great, but better than them' coming out of a partnership.
Is the Greens just Eamo desperate to be relevant? I mean they'll be wiped out of it again.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

This is right up there with Bowie thinking that Donnybrook was in South Dublin County Council.

Why did they stop teaching Civics in school?

I thought you'd left? Made a mistake, held my hand up, didn't change the point. I'll happily own that, it's not really that big a deal IMO. Didn't help your argument either way.
Any comment on the FG councilor O'Leary praising fascists, Eamo dropping the N word, the 'Irelands call' being a PR stunt, you posting a link on unemployment figures to try back up a claim that a lot of the luxury apartments leased (FG, party/government policy) go to them that wont work, you repeatedly making the same false claims that most A&E visitors aren't really that sick, homeless aren't really homeless all because the numbers dropped during a global pandemic.
Gas

Your Greens look like going in with FG. Surely you're happy and have many thoughts on what you'd like to see happen? Or will it be just more of the same, getting little digs in and dodging?

Yurt2

Truthvader wrote: »

Poor Francie, the 6th class maths problem again

He said more not most. SF won a plurality of the popular vote, so I'd suggest he's not the one with the Busy at Maths problem.

I can link to a definition of the word plurality if you're still struggling.

ThunbergsAreGo

Itssoeasy wrote: »

She was a negotiator for the Green Party though so there a two tier negotiating team for them then. By that I mean were there two agreements, one which was "neasa proof" and the actual document ? That's a poor state of affairs if that's the case.

Reading the link I honestly couldn't tell you what she wants..
Thd language she uses is vague, wooly

Faugheen

Sleety_Rain wrote: »

Is this a for real post? You think the President is going to attempt to get involved in politics and force a Sinn Fein FG coalition.

Assume youre talking through your trousers!

Michael D Higgins is well within his rights to refuse a dissolution. He’s also a second term President so he doesn’t have to be as reserved.

Yurt2

Bowie wrote: »

Your Greens look like going in with FG.

I'd know quite a few Green Party members and activists across the country. None of them have a bee in their bonnet about SF like our good friend Blanch. And none of them harbour fantastical and poisonous views about fake homeless people and spongers in A&E pretending they're sick.

Blanch is a member of the Greens as much as I'm a member of the Nepalese Communist Party.

Shefwedfan

Faugheen wrote: »

Michael D Higgins is well within his rights to refuse a dissolution. He’s also a second term President so he doesn’t have to be as reserved.

He has no power....

Shefwedfan

Shefwedfan wrote: »

He has no power....

Tbf he deos have power to refuse to dissolve the dail,has never been used mind.....but has discretion as is thory independant of politics


Afaik he can also refuse to sign laws into power by either sending them to supreme court for testing or demand a referendum/pledicide be held,if enough demand exists among opposition (not sure numbers required,but we deffo learnt something like this in cspe in school like)

Shefwedfan

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Tbf he deos have power to refuse to dissolve the dail,has never been used mind.....but has discretion as is thory independant of politics


Afaik he can also refuse to sign laws into power by either sending them to supreme court for testing or demand a referendum/pledicide be held,if enough demand exists among opposition (not sure numbers required,but we deffo learnt something like this in cspe in school like)

So any precedent for doing that?

Or more rambling from the SF party?

What happens if he does? Mary Lou and the gang will disappear again in the fear someone ask them to do a bit of work

McMurphy

Deleted User wrote: »

Tbf he deos have power to refuse to dissolve the dail,has never been used mind.....but has discretion as is thory independant of politics


Afaik he can also refuse to sign laws into power by either sending them to supreme court for testing or demand a referendum/pledicide be held,if enough demand exists among opposition (not sure numbers required,but we deffo learnt something like this in cspe in school like)

Shefwedfan wrote: »

So any precedent for doing that?

Or more rambling from the SF party?

What happens if he does? Mary Lou and the gang will disappear again in the fear someone ask them to do a bit of work

PS you just confirm you age with the mention of CSPE...:-)

Um, "never been used before" means there's no precedent of "it being used before".

You are not compelled to post nonsense you know, like your Louth TD ramblings yesterday, sometimes it's better to stay schtum.

Yurt2

Shefwedfan wrote: »

He has no power....

Congratulations, you just failed your 1st year Irish constitution class.


There is a lot of literature and academic work done on the permutations of the President's power in this regard.

Shefwedfan

McMurphy wrote: »

Um, "never been used before" means there's no precedent of "it being used before".

You are not compelled to post nonsense you know, like your Louth TD ramblings yesterday, sometimes it's better to stay schtum.

McMurphy hows the little keyboard warrior today?

Shefwedfan

Yurt! wrote: »

Congratulations, you just failed your 1st year Irish constitution class.


There is a lot of literature and academic work done on the permutations of the President's power in this regard.

So Michael D is going to stop a government forming? Who helping him? Iron man

What your Green Party friends tell you???

McMurphy

Shefwedfan wrote: »

McMurphy hows the little keyboard warrior today?

You tried this route yesterday, it's not bullying, insulting or being a keyboard warrior to point out someone is posting uninformed, uneducated and unfiltered manure.

Start putting a bit of forethought into your ramblings, and it won't need to be pointed out.

How's that?

Yurt2

Shefwedfan wrote: »

So Michael D is going to stop a government forming? Who helping him? Iron man

I can tell from that post you don't have a breeze about the constitution and the President's power.

Shefwedfan

Yurt! wrote: »

I can tell from that post you don't have a breeze about the constitution and the President's power.

So enlighten me and the rest of the forum with your intelligence!

Shefwedfan

Shefwedfan wrote: »

So Michael D is going to stop a government forming? Who helping him? Iron man

The constitution??

Its his job to uphold it,and it also awards him some limited powers



I doubt he would use them now,but legally he is within in his rights to do so


(Same as legally/in theory the queen can dissolve parliment without request,but afaik only used the powers to do so once,in oz in the 60s)

Yurt2

Shefwedfan wrote: »

So enlighten me and the rest of the forum with your intelligence!

Read a book. I'm not here to educate you or anyone else.

You don't have a breeze, Leo Varadkar referred to a potential constitutional crisis if the draft agreement deal fails and the three parties can't form a government. Whatever do you think he's referring to?

Take your time...

Shefwedfan

McMurphy wrote: »

You tried this route yesterday, it's not bullying, insulting or being a keyboard warrior to point out someone is posting uninformed, uneducated and unfiltered manure.

Start putting a bit of forethought into your ramblings, and it won't need to be pointed out.

How's that?

Keep banging away, someone at some stage will give a damn

Shefwedfan

Yurt! wrote: »

Read a book. I'm not here to educate you or anyone else.

You don't have a breeze, Leo Varadkar referred to a potential constitutional crisis if the draft agreement deal fails and the three parties can't form a government. Whatever do you think he's referring to?

Take your time...

So you think Michael D is what Leo was referring to and he was going to block them forming the government?

Yurt2

Shefwedfan wrote: »

So you think Michael D is what Leo was referring to and he was going to block them forming the government?

Once again, I can tell from your post you don't have a breeze about the President's powers enumerated in the constitution.

Shefwedfan

Yurt! wrote: »

Once again, I can tell from your post you don't have a breeze about the President's powers enumerated in the constitution.

Answer the question, your accusing people and saying they haven’t a breeze

Let repeat it

So you think Michael D is what Leo was referring to and he was going to block them forming the government?

Yurt2

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Answer the question, your accusing people and saying they haven’t a breeze

Why would I answer a stupid question?

Break open a copy of Bunreacht na hÉireann or read the literature from legal scholars on these powers and stop embarrassing yourself.

Shefwedfan

Yurt! wrote: »

Why would I answer a stupid question?



Break open a copy of Bunreacht na hÉireann or read the literature from legal scholars on these powers and stop embarrassing yourself.

So you haven’t a clue, yet you fire out abuse on here.

The only one who is making an embarrassment is you, hence why you won’t answer

Leo was talking about the parties approving the programme for government, nothing about Michael D....but of course you knew that

Next time learn some manners, stop trying out insult to cover up your ignorance on the subject

Yurt2

Shefwedfan wrote: »

So you haven’t a clue, yet you fire out abuse on here.

The only one who is making an embarrassment is you, hence why you won’t answer

Leo was talking about the parties approving the programme for government, nothing about Michael D....but of course you knew that

Next time learn some manners, stop trying out insult to cover up your ignorance on the subject

You haven't covered yourself in glory the past few posts. The way you framed the question, it's not just obvious to me, it's obvious to everyone else reading this you're laboring under delusions about the constitution and the President's powers.


I'm enjoying listening to one of the forum's most prickly and rude posters talk about manners.