Ms. McHugh and national broadcaster

Poor_old_gill

Tell me how wrote: »

She is picking a different path.

Einstein is purported to have said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. You appear to disagree.

I don't think it matters anyhow, I've seen people here call Leo a failed Doctor. Some people just look for an angle to be able to be judgmental about others. It's as old as time itself.

Once again this is just deflectionary nonsense- she is leaving because she failed.

I don’t see why you have brought Leo into it- his record is far superior to hers.

As I’ve said- I hope she is a success as an activist & will revisit my opinion if she is but as of now she has done nothing but lose elections

KiKi III

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

You are giving her a fair bit of airtime yourself.

I laughed out loud.

Poor_old_gill

KiKi III wrote: »

I laughed out loud.

Remember when you claimed that she was a very successful activist & then couldn’t give a single example of her activism?

That was great craic, it was like 20 mins ago, do you remember it?

KiKi III

Poor_old_gill wrote: »

Remember when you claimed that she was a very successful activist & then couldn’t give a single example of her activism?

That was great craic, it was like 20 mins ago, do you remember it?

I gave three or four examples, you just didn’t like them. You seem real heated up about this, maybe have a cup of peppermint tea before bed.

Poor_old_gill

KiKi III wrote: »

I gave three or four examples, you just didn’t like them. You seem real heated up about this, maybe have a cup of peppermint tea before bed.

Yo didn’t give any examples of her activism, you talked about some failed political promises she had made!

They’re not the same thing.

I’m having a bowl of crunchy nut, peppermint tea doesn’t float my boat unfortunately

I’m not particularly heated other than thinking that she is a bit of a charlatan who has achieved nothing so far- I’m open to people debating this- and can’t quite understand how successful politicians of substance with proven track records get less airtime than a failed dream catcher salesperson

zerosugarbuzz

How many greens in total resigned today?

KiKi III

Poor_old_gill wrote: »

Yo didn’t give any examples of her activism, you talked about some failed political promises she had made!

They’re not the same thing.

I’m having a bowl of crunchy nut, peppermint tea doesn’t float my boat unfortunately

activism
/ˈaktɪvɪz(ə)m/
Learn to pronounce
noun
the policy or action of using vigorous campaigning to bring about political or social change.

Saoirse has certainly campaigned vigorously, and while her ongoing activism hasn't had any tangible results yet, I have no doubt she will be making an impact for years to come.

I have no doubt she understands what many here fail to: most activism doesn't get results overnight, it takes years and years of hard work to get major results and she's willing to put the hours in. She's decided that her path isn't electoral politics and I don't blame her, I look forward to seeing what she does next.

Poor_old_gill

KiKi III wrote: »

activism
/ˈaktɪvɪz(ə)m/
Learn to pronounce
noun
the policy or action of using vigorous campaigning to bring about political or social change.

Saoirse has certainly campaigned vigorously, and while her ongoing activism hasn't had any tangible results yet, I have no doubt she will be making an impact for years to come.

I have no doubt she understands what many here fail to: most activism doesn't get results overnight, it takes years and years of hard work to get major results and she's willing to put the hours in. She's decided that her path isn't electoral politics and I don't blame her, I look forward to seeing what she does next.

But that’s a different discussion altogether.

If she becomes a successful activist then we can reopen this & I’ll happily apologise to you for my skepticism but at the moment it’s all hypothetical and I’m only willing to deal in facts

Tell me how

Poor_old_gill wrote: »

Once again this is just deflectionary nonsense- she is leaving because she failed.

I don’t see why you have brought Leo into it- his record is far superior to hers.

As I’ve said- I hope she is a success as an activist & will revisit my opinion if she is but as of now she has done nothing but lose elections

Look, many of the same people who are undermining Saoirse or are glad to be able to call her a failure, say the same about Greta. 'She has achieved nothing','she should leave it to those in power', 'what has she ever done' and so on and so on.

And very few 30 year olds can claim to have Euorpean and General election experience with very respectful results in each case even if not quite crossing the line to be elected.

Her stepping away is very much her choice, should she have been cynical enough, she could easily have switched tack to appeal to more conventional political groups such as FF, FG and both those would have been glad to accept a young popular female in to their ranks and as such, would probably walk home. If she had gone that route, she'd be a success in your book. Because she has retained her principles and dignity, you view her as a failure. This is not the case.

KiKi III

Poor_old_gill wrote: »

But that’s a different discussion altogether.

If she becomes a successful activist then we can reopen this & I’ll happily apologise to you for my skepticism but at the moment it’s all hypothetical and I’m only willing to deal in facts

She's already a successful activist; the fact that she's attracting so much media attention is actually testament to this. The results of successful activism today come tomorrow.

seligehgit

She didn't run for the presidency.

European, general and seanad elections.

bfa1509

I personally would like to thank RTE for giving her a disproportionately large amount of airtime. Because had they not, I wouldn't know how much of a donkey she is.

Let's not forget this trainwreck of an interview on primetime back in January:

alias no.9

KyussB wrote: »

FF, FG and the Greens just agreed to a Programme for Government that has an almost certainty of leading to austerity in ~2 years, for no reason at all...this is absolutely supporitve of and an endorsement of austerity, by these parties.

Austerity is neither unavoidable nor does it lead to any long-term gain - it serves no economic purpose - it explicitly slows down economic recovery, prolonging economic crises, for no reason at all.

FF, FG and the Greens have just agreed a program of Deficit Spending for the next two years in an attempt to grow the economy and avoid swingeing cuts as they return towards a balanced budget. Hardly austerity.

Edgware

bfa1509 wrote: »

I personally would like to thank RTE for giving her a disproportionately large amount of airtime. Because had they not, I wouldn't know how much of a donkey she is.

Let's not forget this trainwreck of an interview on primetime back in January:

Mayo has elected so many donkeys over the years she thought that one more would have a good chance. Transition year " best girl in the convent" Greta wannabee is her limit.

elperello

Edgware wrote: »

Mayo has elected so many donkeys over the years she thought that one more would have a good chance. Transition year " best girl in the convent" Greta wannabee is her limit.

Calling her a donkey is just common abuse.

She has a bit more education than transition year, Bsc and Masters I think.

As for her limit the story's not over yet.

MrMusician18

Tell me how wrote: »

Look, many of the same people who are undermining Saoirse or are glad to be able to call her a failure, say the same about Greta. 'She has achieved nothing','she should leave it to those in power', 'what has she ever done' and so on and so on.

And very few 30 year olds can claim to have Euorpean and General election experience with very respectful results in each case even if not quite crossing the line to be elected.

Her stepping away is very much her choice, should she have been cynical enough, she could easily have switched tack to appeal to more conventional political groups such as FF, FG and both those would have been glad to accept a young popular female in to their ranks and as such, would probably walk home. If she had gone that route, she'd be a success in your book. Because she has retained her principles and dignity, you view her as a failure. This is not the case.

Greta Thunberg is a successful activist, it's her movements wave that Green parties across the world (Europe in particular) are riding. That fits the definition of changing the direction of government and society. Greta has done more to get greens elected here, in terms of awareness than the greens themselves.

Politics is also the art of the compromise, especially here. Those unwilling to do a deal usually end up sidelined. The purists that are unwilling to take half of something usually end up with all of nothing.

zerosugarbuzz

elperello wrote: »

Calling her a donkey is just common abuse.

She has a bit more education than transition year, Bsc and Masters I think.

As for her limit the story's not over yet.

I agree, really likeable honest Person. Exactly what is needed in the filthy world of politics. If she can stomach the unjustifiable abuse.

bfa1509

elperello wrote: »

Calling her a donkey is just common abuse.

I was just waiting for someone to post this. I called her an airhead in an older thread and it sparked 2 pages of misogyny-this and sexist-that. Thankfully the word donkey is just "common" abuse this time.

You expect someone who publicises herself as much as she does and takes multiple attempts to obtain a seat as a public representative should somehow be immune from scrutiny or have any of her extreme views ridiculed just because she's a young woman?

referring to her as a failure or a donkey is very unfair

she had good showings in tough constituencies and she got a good profile for herself in doing so

that said

i would disagree with giving her individual credit for the prominence of a green agenda that has been prominent everywhere. that smacks of greta-figurehead revisionism to me

her showing against casey was good, but it is not at all unfair to say that her performance since in front of the camera at crucial times has not been at all impressive *on the terms which they needed to be* and her not getting elected cannot be painted as success when- as has been pointed out, the green agenda proved so popular elsewhere, she enjoyed a very easy platform from the press and the aim had to have been electoral success.

and its fine to laud her principled stance- as has been said by more than myself, who would be critical of her bytimes- she definitely comes across as bright committed, genuine and sincere. but she went into politics and really did behave as if she was too good for it, including damaging her own party with her behaviour when she really had earned nothing yet.

Doherty is a bad comparison, he is sinn fein and has been an asset to his party throughout, success with voters or otherwise. saoirse in this context is more like george lee, if george lee had never won his seat to begin with.

and i dont remember anyone demanding that george lee not be criticised when he embarrassed himself with his similar ego trip.

id also take issue with the tone of the defence in parts here and all over twitter. a load of the usual lefty rubbish that ignores any of the issues of substance in order to moan about gammon and how dare anyone not give a young woman in politics a soft go of it.

that simply won't wash with the irish as a whole, electorate or public- as popular an approach as it may be amongst twitterati and many here too (who are as quick to behave like the clichéd left as they are to accuse everyone that doesn't fall into line with them of being the clichéd right).

public figures are subject to public comment, thats the territory. of course that doesnt make any such comment fair game, but attempting to paint any criticism as unfair comment is profoundly counterproductive as well as fairly obviously a double standard.

few enough of the same posters here pull their punches about people that actually go into government and try their best at the frustrating and difficult real-world scenarios that comes with it.

good luck to her, but the green agenda did not start with her and will not finish with her departure in this guise. interesting to see what she does next

elperello

bfa1509 wrote: »

I was just waiting for someone to post this. I called her an airhead in an older thread and it sparked 2 pages of misogyny-this and sexist-that. Thankfully the word donkey is just "common" abuse this time.

You expect someone who publicises herself as much as she does and takes multiple attempts to obtain a seat as a public representative should somehow be immune from scrutiny or have any of her extreme views ridiculed just because she's a young woman?

Sorry you had a bad experience in previous thread.

I never mentioned anything about her gender.

No problem with scrutiny of anyone's political views.

Repeat, calling someone a donkey is common abuse.

bfa1509

elperello wrote: »

Sorry you had a bad experience in previous thread.

I never mentioned anything about her gender.

No problem with scrutiny of anyone's political views.

Repeat, calling someone a donkey is common abuse.

Please... you clearly wouldn't have an issue if I said it about a man.

Water John

The 'man' would actually be delighted, if you said he was hung like a donkey.

bfa1509

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Politics is also the art of the compromise, especially here. Those unwilling to do a deal usually end up sidelined. The purists that are unwilling to take half of something usually end up with all of nothing.

Very true but with Eamon Ryan being a blatantly unique exception - a dozy purist unwilling to take half of something and yet he's the minister for Climate Action, Communications Networks and Transport! Incredible.

imme

cml387 wrote: »

I notice that she says that her cause cannot be advanced by "electoral politics".

What exactly does that mean?

She will go forth with a watering can in one hand and a hemp seed in the other.

She's either full of her own self importance or a visionary.

KyussB

alias no.9 wrote: »

FF, FG and the Greens have just agreed a program of Deficit Spending for the next two years in an attempt to grow the economy and avoid swingeing cuts as they return towards a balanced budget. Hardly austerity.

They've agreed to inadequate spending for 2 years, followed by (unless there is an economic miracle in those 2 years) austerity - so yes, that is precisely agreeing to austerity.

No party should ever agree to austerity (if the budget ever balances, it should only ever be incidental, as a side effect of dampening an overheating economy that is already at Full Output and Full Employment).

Front-loading austerity, with an anaemic stimulus, doesn't magically transform them into Keynesians - they are fiscal conservatives who agreed to almost certain austerity - for no reason at all, it serves no economic purpose, it is inherently incompatible with achieving green policy goals.

KyussB

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Greta Thunberg is a successful activist, it's her movements wave that Green parties across the world (Europe in particular) are riding. That fits the definition of changing the direction of government and society. Greta has done more to get greens elected here, in terms of awareness than the greens themselves.

Politics is also the art of the compromise, especially here. Those unwilling to do a deal usually end up sidelined. The purists that are unwilling to take half of something usually end up with all of nothing.

The Greens didn't get anything - they got a promise of future austerity and a 'Fuck you' to their voterbase - they have done harm to green politics, like they did in 2007.

The art of compromise, is not defined by accepting a barge pole being shoved up your constituency, in return for nothing other than personal gain for careerist politicians.

Tell me how

KyussB wrote: »

The Greens didn't get anything - they got a promise of future austerity and a 'Fuck you' to their voterbase - they have done harm to green politics, like they did in 2007.

The art of compromise, is not defined by accepting a barge pole being shoved up your constituency, in return for nothing other than personal gain for careerist politicians.

Where do you see the change coming from which is needed? The greens were the only ones advocating for anything for the environment in the PFG?

Would SF have been better? Based on what evidence?

KyussB

The Greens advocated for more of the same in the PfG, and slapped a 'green' label on it. They are a pretend alternative, there to co-opt the green vote.

The place I see change coming from, is from the younger Greens and others who actually have principles and genuinely give a toss about green policies and/or economic justice (two things which must go together), and who are willing to split from the main parties and form a new one, which will make government spending and opposition to austerity, the uncompromising no.1 means for implementing both green policies and economic justice - because there is no other way to do it...

What we have now is a Green Party which panders to middle class folk who've already made it financially and suffer from an eco-guilt-complex, but only insofar as the solutions don't threaten their property/financial interests - so to ease the burden of their guilt, they want almost the entire cost to fall on people who can barely afford accommodation or the cost of living, without providing any funding to give them a hand up in any way (e.g. jobs), nor to alleviate the fucked cost of accommodation/living...

Poor_old_gill

bfa1509 wrote: »

I personally would like to thank RTE for giving her a disproportionately large amount of airtime. Because had they not, I wouldn't know how much of a donkey she is.

Let's not forget this trainwreck of an interview on primetime back in January:

Ben Swain-esque.

Did she not expect to be asked on her policies?

MFPM

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

I didn’t see the debate, I have no idea if she was any good or not.

You and your buddies are so busy downplaying the gains the GP made countrywide that I would have thought providing proof of her being responsible for the gains would have been easy to find.

I didn’t see the debate, I have no idea if she was any good or not.

Her performance received quite a bit of media coverage in the hours and days post the debate and it was referenced quite a bit when the poll was released showing her ascent.

You and your buddies are so busy downplaying the gains the GP

Is this the method you use in every debate when you're caught out, ignore the reply, shift the goal posts and post any old thought that come into your head?

I didn't downplay anything, I responded to your jibe against SMcH about her unsuccessful Dail campaign pointing out that she was more typical of the Green performance than those who were victorious - that's simply a fact no matter how inconvenient it is for you to accept.

I would have thought providing proof of her being responsible for the gains would have been easy to find

More disingenuous posting - I didn't say she was 'responsible for the gains' - I pointed out that your narrative that SMcH as a candidate was irrelevant to her performance is imbalanced and I pointed out the evidence of her performance in the debate, which you allegedly didn't see but now that you're aware of it you can post with a little more insight in the future.