Saturday with Katie Hannon

Dempo1

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

Who is that govt TD this morning? He is flapping

Seamus Burke I think, Midlands TD, never heard of him until he appeared on this show a few weeks back

Cole

Cole wrote: »

Ivana Bacik - kind of ironic that a professor of law doesn't get the idea that you can't keep endlessly appealing a decision (by the electorate) by going to different courts (constituencies) to get the right one.

Hmm, that's quite a strained analogy. Not really comparable at all.
This is probably the first election where she has a real chance of getting elected. Obviously she should step forward. And we should be given the opportunity to vote for her, if we wish.

Dempo1

Adrian starts by making threats, ends with begging for additional supports FFS!

Cole

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Hmm, that's quite a strained analogy. Not really comparable at all.
This is probably the first election where she has a real chance of getting elected. Obviously she should step forward. And we should be given the opportunity to vote for her, if we wish.

I think it is somewhat comparable...but I think you over analysing it.

Fann Linn

Good on ye Ivana, a summer bonus for everyone on the PUP. Whatabout a summer bonus for all those who have continued to work all throughout this crisis. Or better still, what about a summer bonus for everyone to inject something back into the economy.

AndrewJRenko

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

Who is that govt TD this morning? He is flapping

Minister of State, would you believe.

Cole wrote: »

Ivana Bacik - kind of ironic that a professor of law doesn't get the idea that you can't keep endlessly appealing a decision (by the electorate) by going to different courts (constituencies) to get the right one.

generalgerry wrote: »

Ivana Bacik back on the radio now that there is an election coming up. She just wont get the message that the electorate send her every time.

ednwireland wrote: »

serially unelectable

What is about the smart, intelligent, female Professor Bacik with the non-Irish surname that really irritates the oul lads?

Not sure if you noticed lads, but she's been elected to the Seanad by the graduates of Trinity for the last three elections, which is not an insignificant feat.

Dempo1

Fann Linn wrote: »

Good on ye Ivana, a summer bonus for everyone on the PUP. Whatabout a summer bonus for all those who have continued to work all throughout this crisis. Or better still, what about a summer bonus for everyone to inject something back into the economy.

I've depended on PUP to be honest as my Job closed, I get your frustration and yes a silly idea a notion of PUP bonus, I'm greatful for what I got, certainly not looking for a bonus for being stopped from working. Just felt context required, majority on PUP, not on it out of choice.

Claire Byrne hasn't a chance of getting elected. If it weren't for Eamon Ryan trying to keep his seat, Hazel Chu would be the obvious choice. Selection will be interesting.

Fann Linn

Dempo1 wrote: »

I've depended on PUP to be honest as my Job closed, I get your frustration and yes a silly idea a notion of PUP bonus, I'm greatful for what I got, certainly not looking for a bonus for being stopped from working. Just felt context required, majority on PUP, not on it out of choice.

Exactly. I've three daughters out of 4 in PUP so I understand exactly where you're coming from. However, there are plenty of others out there on low wages who have worked throughout who also deserve to be recognised.
That was my point.

Dempo1

Fann Linn wrote: »

Exactly. I've three daughters out of 4 in PUP so I understand exactly where you're coming from. However, there are plenty of others out there on low wages who have worked throughout who also deserve to be recognised.
That was my point.

Yes and I agree 100% with you, I just wanted to put in context PUP from my experience and your point extremely well made

Cole

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What is about the smart, intelligent, female Professor Bacik with the non-Irish surname that really irritates the oul lads?

Not sure if you noticed lads, but she's been elected to the Seanad by the graduates of Trinity for the last three elections, which is not an insignificant feat.

The wild assumptions...and irony in how you worded them...says so much more about how you think (and those who give it the thumbs up) than those who commented on Ivana Bacik's political ambitions.

AndrewJRenko

Cole wrote: »

The wild assumptions...and irony in how you worded them...says so much more about how you think (and those who give it the thumbs up) than those who commented on Ivana Bacik's political ambitions.

It's awful seeing women who have ambitions, isn't it? Next they'll be expecting to get the vote...

Dempo1

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's awful seeing women who have ambitions, isn't it? Next they'll be expecting to get the vote...

Perhaps your attempting (badly) to bring gender into this, maybe I've missed something but this has not been raised, it's her, the person, her politics, her failed attempts at previous elections etc etc, not her Gender. I can abide Regina Doherty, Heather Humphries etc, I Like and respect Helen Mc Entee, Holly Cairns etc etc, I don't judge any politician on their Gender, I judge them on their Politics, Performance but more importantly if they understand and perhaps live in the real world.

ednwireland

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Minister of State, would you believe.








What is about the smart, intelligent, female Professor Bacik with the non-Irish surname that really irritates the oul lads?

Not sure if you noticed lads, but she's been elected to the Seanad by the graduates of Trinity for the last three elections, which is not an insignificant feat.

she doesnt irritate me I'm always amazed that she stood for election so many times and been in the fight for a last seat a few times doesnt seem to be able to cross the line. she seems intelligent and the sort of person you would think would be show in.
although been labour probably doesnt help

ShamNNspace

Dempo1 wrote: »

Seamus Burke I think, Midlands TD, never heard of him until he appeared on this show a few weeks back

He's been on it quite a lot lately actually, seems to be a bit like the lad thats thrown on in a Junior B match with ten minutes to go "to put himself about a bit and take no prisoners " and "make a nuisance of himself around the square"... but leave the fancy stuff to the lads that know

Gooser14

Dempo1 wrote:

Seamus Burke I think, Midlands TD, never heard of him until he appeared on this show a few weeks back

Peter Burke

Cole

Dempo1 wrote: »

Perhaps your attempting (badly) to bring gender into this, maybe I've missed something but this has not been raised, it's her, the person, her politics, her failed attempts at previous elections etc etc, not her Gender. I can abide Regina Doherty, Heather Humphries etc, I Like and respect Helen Mc Entee, Holly Cairns etc etc, I don't judge any politician on their Gender, I judge them on their Politics, Performance but more importantly if they understand and perhaps live in the real world.

ednwireland wrote: »

she doesnt irritate me I'm always amazed that she stood for election so many times and been in the fight for a last seat a few times doesnt seem to be able to cross the line. she seems intelligent and the sort of person you would think would be show in.
although been labour probably doesnt help

You don't have to defend your comments, as there was nothing objectionable in them. However, having another poster implying that we are racist and misogynist "oul lads" is objectionable, as well as being an incredibly lazy and offensive analysis/assumption of the comments made about Ivana Bacik.

I would have thought a mod would have addressed those comments in some way, rather than give them a thumbs up.

generalgerry

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What is about the smart, intelligent, female Professor Bacik with the non-Irish surname that really irritates the oul lads?

I think this is pretty stereotypical of the way any criticism of any person from a perceived minority group is shut down these days. Any criticism of them at all and you are labelled a racist, misogynist, homophobe, before leading to the eventual conclusion that the person making the remarks is "far right". This is dangerous for democracy, particularly when these people are in positions of power.

Like our Minister For Children, if you are correctly brought to task for your associations in the past, you just call everybody who asks questions "homophobes". This completely shuts down the debate. So, in essence, your minority identity provides you with a shield from all criticism.

B2021M

generalgerry wrote: »

I think this is pretty stereotypical of the way any criticism of any person from a perceived minority group is shut down these days. Any criticism of them at all and you are labelled a racist, misogynist, homophobe, before leading to the eventual conclusion that the person making the remarks is "far right". This is dangerous for democracy, particularly when these people are in positions of power.

Like our Minister For Children, if you are correctly brought to task for your associations in the past, you just call everybody who asks questions "homophobes". This completely shuts down the debate. So, in essence, your minority identity provides you with a shield from all criticism.

This is it in a nutshell. Entire groups of people can't be challenged about anything else due to one characteristic they share. It is a dangerous road that will end in a bad way.

AndrewJRenko

ednwireland wrote: »

she doesnt irritate me I'm always amazed that she stood for election so many times and been in the fight for a last seat a few times doesnt seem to be able to cross the line. she seems intelligent and the sort of person you would think would be show in.
although been labour probably doesnt help

She's won a seat in the last three Seanad elections.

AndrewJRenko

generalgerry wrote: »

I think this is pretty stereotypical of the way any criticism of any person from a perceived minority group is shut down these days. Any criticism of them at all and you are labelled a racist, misogynist, homophobe, before leading to the eventual conclusion that the person making the remarks is "far right". This is dangerous for democracy, particularly when these people are in positions of power.

Like our Minister For Children, if you are correctly brought to task for your associations in the past, you just call everybody who asks questions "homophobes". This completely shuts down the debate. So, in essence, your minority identity provides you with a shield from all criticism.

Criticism of someone who has won three Seanad elections because "She just wont get the message that the electorate send her every time" doesn't really stand up, does it?

B2021M

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Criticism of someone who has won three Seanad elections because "She just wont get the message that the electorate send her every time" doesn't really stand up, does it?

A General Election is very different to a Seanad one.

Cluedo Monopoly

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Minister of State, would you believe.

Wow he had a shocker. He was using very silly phrases to try and buy some time or deflect the question. FG have very little strength in depth when it comes to TDs. FF are worse though, doesn't help they lost 2 ministers for Agriculture I suppose.

AndrewJRenko

Cole wrote: »

The wild assumptions...and irony in how you worded them...says so much more about how you think (and those who give it the thumbs up) than those who commented on Ivana Bacik's political ambitions.

What's wrong with having ambitions? Do you remark snidely on the ambitions of every male candidate who has the guts to push forward in various elections?

AndrewJRenko

B2021M wrote: »

A General Election is very different to a Seanad one.

That's true, it's much harder to canvass for the Seanad and actually reach your electorate. It is a very substantial achievement to win a Seanad seat.

Dempo1

Gooser14 wrote: »

Peter Burke

Kinda says it all, not knowing his first name

Cole

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What's wrong with having ambitions? Do you remark snidely on the ambitions of every male candidate who has the guts to push forward in various elections?

The level of lazy and incoherent analysis is all a bit jaw-dropping at this stage. I'm almost getting embarrassed for myself engaging any further.

I'm out...enjoy yourself seeing what you want to see.

AndrewJRenko

Cole wrote: »

The level of lazy and incoherent analysis is all a bit jaw-dropping at this stage. I'm almost getting embarrassed for myself engaging any further.

I'm out...enjoy yourself seeing what you want to see.

What I see is the lads slagging off someone who has won three Seanad elections for not being able to win elections.

Brendan Bendar

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Hmm, that's quite a strained analogy. Not really comparable at all.
This is probably the first election where she has a real chance of getting elected. Obviously she should step forward. And we should be given the opportunity to vote for her, if we wish.

She is like Coppinger, keep trying and she will eventually get lucky.

Hopefully not.

Brendan Bendar

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

She's won a seat in the last three Seanad elections.

Because her mates and colleagues voted for her.

EmmetSpiceland

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Because her mates and colleagues voted for her.

Would that be enough to “carry” her, B? Maybe if only a handful of people were voting in these senate elections but I’d say she get a healthy portion of the “alumni” vote.

AndrewJRenko

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Because her mates and colleagues voted for her.

She got nearly 3,500 first preference votes. That's a lot of mates and colleagues. Must be fairly popular lady in the real world so.

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

She is like Coppinger, keep trying and she will eventually get lucky.

Hopefully not.

Interesting again to note the comparison against another female politician, and not against any of the lads who repeatedly 'keep trying' until they get lucky.

Brendan Bendar

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

She got nearly 3,500 first preference votes. That's a lot of mates and colleagues. Must be fairly popular lady in the real world so.




Interesting again to note the comparison against another female politician, and not against any of the lads who repeatedly 'keep trying' until they get lucky.

Swing and a miss there Andarew.

Trying to give the auld Brenner a beating with the sexist stick.

Ivana needs to stick with academia and the musty cloisters of Trinners.

Her brand of ‘politics’ duddnt cut it in the real world.

No Sir, as attempts to ‘break out’ have been proved.

First Up

I'm neutral at best about Bacik's politics but it was nice to hear someone express opinions without using every topic as a political attack on someone else. A reasonable voice is a rarity on that dreadful programme.

touts

generalgerry wrote: »

Ivana Bacik back on the radio now that there is an election coming up. She just wont get the message that the electorate send her every time.

She is unelectable anywhere in the country bar Dublin South. That constituency is utterly disconnected from the reality of life in the rest of the country.

Brendan Bendar

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Ivana needs to stick with academia and the musty cloisters of Trinners.

Her brand of ‘politics’ duddnt cut it in the real world.

No Sir, as attempts to ‘break out’ have been proved.

I don't like to disagree with you Brendan, but must interject.

I canvassed with her during the abortion referendum, when she was in charge of the canvassing in our neighbourhood. I would have thought she was detached and possibly not great at canvassing — quite the opposite. Absolutely no-nonsense individual, very practical, not interested in academic debates at the doorstep etc.

In any other labour-friendly constituency, she would probably have been returned in successive elections. Her constituency is just a very overcrowded field with a plethora of strong candidates. She should have been parachuted to Dun Laoghaire, I think there was talk of that happening in 2016.

Brendan Bendar

touts wrote: »

She is unelectable anywhere in the country bar Dublin South. That constituency is utterly disconnected from the reality of life in the rest of the country.

You could have something there Tee.

You see, as Luke would say, the electorate specifically dislike folk who are trousering large wedges plus expenses, telling them how to live their lives, paying for everything ,and not mummified in the alabaster of academia, cocooned from the choppy waters twixt Scylla and Charibdis.

Perfect examples

I Bacik

M.D. Higgins

Well heeled idealists who advocate extreme policies and operate on the edge of the envelope making sure what they put forward doesn’t impact them in any way, tend to annoy folk who struggle for everything, I feel.

Hypocrites I believe is the word for them....

jay0109

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I don't like to disagree with you Brendan, but must interject.

I canvassed with her during the abortion referendum, when she was in charge of the canvassing in our neighbourhood. I would have thought she was detached and possibly not great at canvassing — quite the opposite. Absolutely no-nonsense individual, very practical, not interested in academic debates at the doorstep etc.

In any other labour-friendly constituency, she would probably have been returned in successive elections. Her constituency is just a very overcrowded field with a plethora of strong candidates. She should have been parachuted to Dun Laoghaire, I think there was talk of that happening in 2016.

She was for the 2011 GE and failed to get elected.

First Up wrote: »

I'm neutral at best about Bacik's politics but it was nice to hear someone express opinions without using every topic as a political attack on someone else. A reasonable voice is a rarity on that dreadful programme.

Her first contribution today was to twist what Pearse Doherty had said so badly that even Katie had to interject to point out Pearse hadn't said what she was implying

B2021M

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

That's true, it's much harder to canvass for the Seanad and actually reach your electorate. It is a very substantial achievement to win a Seanad seat.

Ive no doubt its a good achievement but how is it harder to reach a closed and specific electorate?

AndrewJRenko

B2021M wrote: »

Ive no doubt its a good achievement but how is it harder to reach a closed and specific electorate?

Because you can't go out knocking on doors.

B2021M

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

You could have something there Tee.

You see, as Luke would say, the electorate specifically dislike folk who are trousering large wedges plus expenses, telling them how to live their lives, paying for everything ,and not mummified in the alabaster of academia, cocooned from the choppy waters twixt Scylla and Charibdis.

Perfect examples

I Bacik

M.D. Higgins

Well heeled idealists who advocate extreme policies and operate on the edge of the envelope making sure what they put forward doesn’t impact them in any way, tend to annoy folk who struggle for everything, I feel.

Hypocrites I believe is the word for them....

Hypocrites doesnt do it justice. Could there be a more inane sight than FG canvassing for MDH, a socialist? Talk about a kick in the teeth for their voters.

AndrewJRenko

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

You could have something there Tee.

You see, as Luke would say, the electorate specifically dislike folk who are trousering large wedges plus expenses, telling them how to live their lives, paying for everything ,and not mummified in the alabaster of academia, cocooned from the choppy waters twixt Scylla and Charibdis.

Perfect examples

I Bacik

M.D. Higgins

Well heeled idealists who advocate extreme policies and operate on the edge of the envelope making sure what they put forward doesn’t impact them in any way, tend to annoy folk who struggle for everything, I feel.

Hypocrites I believe is the word for them....

I'm not sure that you picked a great example for "unelectable anywhere in the country bar Dublin South" with MDH given his track record in the last two Presidential elections and indeed general elections before that.

First Up

jay0109 wrote:

Her first contribution today was to twist what Pearse Doherty had said so badly that even Katie had to interject to point out Pearse hadn't said what she was implying

I missed both those contributions so I can't comment. I just enjoy listening to someone making points that don't have to always include blaming somebody elsr for something.

I don't always agree with her but today she sounded the epitome of reasonable objectivity compared to the other shrills talking over each other.

AndrewJRenko

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Swing and a miss there Andarew.

Trying to give the auld Brenner a beating with the sexist stick.

Ivana needs to stick with academia and the musty cloisters of Trinners.

Her brand of ‘politics’ duddnt cut it in the real world.

No Sir, as attempts to ‘break out’ have been proved.

Fair enough, the great Brenner has spoken. I guess the thousands of people that voted for her should get back in their boxes and listen to Brenner instead.

Brendan Bendar

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Fair enough, the great Brenner has spoken. I guess the thousands of people that voted for her should get back in their boxes and listen to Brenner instead.

No, that would not be a good move.

If I was asked, Andrew, to critique her, and why she doesn’t ‘jell’ with the public it would be that she seems to be more interested in ‘issues’ which don’t concern the general public great numbers.

I’m sure there will be a thread at some stage on DBS, and I’m sure I’ll contribute.

AndrewJRenko

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

No, that would not be a good move.

If I was asked, Andrew, to critique her, and why she doesn’t ‘jell’ with the public it would be that she seems to be more interested in ‘issues’ which don’t concern the general public great numbers.

I’m sure there will be a thread at some stage on DBS, and I’m sure I’ll contribute.

I've no problem with anyone critiquing her politics.

It is more than a little disingenuous to suggest that she's some kind of loser because she's been a party stalwart and taken on tough elections that she probably never had any reasonable chance of winning, given her track record in winning Seanad elections.

It's rare to see white, Irish, male candidates treated in this way.

She could actually have a chance here. While Labour have struggled recently, there have no major screw ups from Kelly or no particular controversies. I don't think there is a strong SocDem candidate or 2nd SF candidate in the area as opposition for the general left vote.

There's probably a fairly high penetration of Trinity graduates in the constituency, who will have a track record of voting for her. It's a constituency where her role as a barrister and Trinity professor, her background in right to choose campaigns and marriage equality campaigns would go down well.

So she could possibly have a chance. But let's see who the players are first.

Brendan Bendar

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I've no problem with anyone critiquing her politics.

It is more than a little disingenuous to suggest that she's some kind of loser because she's been a party stalwart and taken on tough elections that she probably never had any reasonable chance of winning, given her track record in winning Seanad elections.

It's rare to see white, Irish, male candidates treated in this way.

She could actually have a chance here. While Labour have struggled recently, there have no major screw ups from Kelly or no particular controversies. I don't think there is a strong SocDem candidate or 2nd SF candidate in the area as opposition for the general left vote.

There's probably a fairly high penetration of Trinity graduates in the constituency, who will have a track record of voting for her. It's a constituency where her role as a barrister and Trinity professor, her background in right to choose campaigns and marriage equality campaigns would go down well.

So she could possibly have a chance. But let's see who the players are first.

You seem anxious to keep picking at the scab, for some reason.
You are correct, it will depend on the players.


However…….it will also depend on the electorate.

padd b1975

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Hmm, that's quite a strained analogy. Not really comparable at all.
This is probably the first election where she has a real chance of getting elected. Obviously she should step forward. And we should be given the opportunity to vote for her, if we wish.

She was basically given a slam-dunk in 2011 and still managed to fail.

Carpetbagging into another constituency is pretty undignified in my opinion.

AndrewJRenko

padd b1975 wrote: »

She was basically given a slam-dunk in 2011 and still managed to fail.

Carpetbagging into another constituency is pretty undignified in my opinion.

Slam dunk to do what no Labour candidate has done for a generation and take a second Labour seat?

AndrewJRenko

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

However…….it will also depend on the electorate.

Fully agree.