FF/FG/Green Government - part 2

Floppybits

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That was a quick flip flop. :eek:

Yesterday:


https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0326/1206270-hospital-vaccines/

Today:



https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40252778.html

He is right to stop the vaccines at the Beacon and a tougher line should have been taken when the Coombe did it to set the example. Its is about time something was done about, how many times has this happened that we know about since the vaccine roll out began?

I have no problem if there is left over vaccine that there is a standby list of people to be called to get the vaccine but it seems to be a free or all at the moment with what has gone at the Coombe and now the Beacon.

James Brown

Floppybits wrote: »

He is right to stop the vaccines at the Beacon and a tougher line should have been taken when the Coombe did it to set the example. Its is about time something was done about, how many times has this happened that we know about since the vaccine roll out began?

I have no problem if there is left over vaccine that there is a standby list of people to be called to get the vaccine but it seems to be a free or all at the moment with what has gone at the Coombe and now the Beacon.

There is a protocol in place. The Beacon chose to vaccinate those teachers.

Bubbaclaus

New Red C poll won't be happy reading for MM

https://twitter.com/NextIrishGE/status/1375916393430982657?s=19

Loafing Oaf

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

New Red C poll won't be happy reading for MM

https://twitter.com/NextIrishGE/status/1375916393430982657?s=19

Anyone know anywhere these polll results are converted into potential Dail seats, or have a stab at it themselves?

Adrian Kavanagh of Maynooth used to do it but he hasn't updated his webpage in nearly a year.
https://adriankavanaghelections.org/author/adriankavanagh/

Bubbaclaus

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Anyone know anywhere these polll results are converted into potential Dail seats, or have a stab at it themselves?

Adrian Kavanagh of Maynooth used to do it but he hasn't updated his webpage in nearly a year.
https://adriankavanaghelections.org/author/adriankavanagh/

Without knowing what the polled people's 2nd preferences etc are it would probably be a bit futile/impossible for the most part I would think. Very hard to do with proportional representation.

Leonard Hofstadter

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Without knowing what the polled people's 2nd preferences etc are it would probably be a bit futile/impossible for the most part I would think. Very hard to do with proportional representation.

You're probably talking about 55-60 seats for both FG and SF, hard to know who would come first in seat numbers, depends on transfers obviously and whether the mood is to keep SF out (which would clearly benefit FG) or to get rid of FF and FG (which wouldn't). My guess is with an increasing level of polarisation amongst the electorate, both parties will get decent transfers. FF would struggle to get more than 20 seats on current numbers.

The Greens could still hold onto 5-6 seats provided they don't disintegrate in the mealtime, given their ability to far exceed that of FG for shooting themselves in the foot, that might not prove to be possible either.

Loafing Oaf

Leonard Hofstadter wrote: »

You're probably talking about 55-60 seats for both FG and SF, hard to know who would come first in seat numbers, depends on transfers obviously and whether the mood is to keep SF out (which would clearly benefit FG) or to get rid of FF and FG (which wouldn't). My guess is with an increasing level of polarisation amongst the electorate, both parties will get decent transfers. FF would struggle to get more than 20 seats on current numbers.

The Greens could still hold onto 5-6 seats provided they don't disintegrate in the mealtime, given their ability to far exceed that of FG for shooting themselves in the foot, that might not prove to be possible either.

So in that scenario you're envisaging SF gaining mainly at the expense of other left parties (rather than of FF which is what ideally they would want) and FG swallowing most of the lost FG seats? Not sure, my guess would be if FG and SF won a similar FPV, SF would end up clearly ahead in seats given they would have transfers coming in from everywhere...

Cluedo Monopoly

We do need to talk about the permanent government. The contempt shown by this highly paid senior civil servant to the PAC was completely obvious.

https://twitter.com/GarNob/status/1376094827062960129

I enjoyed watching Catherine Connolly skewer him. Have our senior civil servants becomes too powerful and untouchable?

Leonard Hofstadter

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

So in that scenario you're envisaging SF gaining mainly at the expense of other left parties (rather than of FF which is what ideally they would want) and FG swallowing most of the lost FG seats? Not sure, my guess would be if FG and SF won a similar FPV, SF would end up clearly ahead in seats given they would have transfers coming in from everywhere...

Oh for sure. If SF had ran more candidates last time most of the extra seats they would have gotten would have been at the expense of others on the far left; the most notable one is Paul Murphy's seat in Dublin South West.

So I think they'll wipe out many of the PBP etc candidates to start - so that makes up no difference to FG or FF. They'll knock lumps out of FF as well - but then again so will FG.

Loafing Oaf

Leonard Hofstadter wrote: »

Oh for sure. If SF had ran more candidates last time most of the extra seats they would have gotten would have been at the expense of others on the far left; the most notable one is Paul Murphy's seat in Dublin South West.

So I think they'll wipe out many of the PBP etc candidates to start - so that makes up no difference to FG or FF. They'll knock lumps out of FF as well - but then again so will FG.

But if they're both taking a big chunk of FF seats, surely that puts SF well ahead overall, as they'll be picking up seats from other left parties, whereas I don't see where else FG is making significant gains.

a very cool kid

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

We do need to talk about the permanent government. The contempt shown by this highly paid senior civil servant to the PAC was completely obvious.

https://twitter.com/GarNob/status/1376094827062960129

I enjoyed watching Catherine Connolly skewer him. Have our senior civil servants becomes too powerful and untouchable?

The PAC seem to be very thin skinned.

Watching those videos, it looks like Mr Watt was justified calling it a mob!

I don't know how he is performing in his role but nowadays the PAC seems like an opportunity for opposition TDs to pick holes and get soundbites.

Cluedo Monopoly

a very cool kid wrote: »

The PAC seem to be very thin skinned.

Watching those videos, it looks like Mr Watt was justified calling it a mob!

I don't know how he is performing in his role but nowadays the PAC seems like an opportunity for opposition TDs to pick holes and get soundbites.

I think you are most wrong. I thought he acted like a spoilt child. Catherine Connolly doesn't give a hoot about soundbites.
So are you are saying our government and public service needs less oversight?

a very cool kid

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

I think you are most wrong. I thought he acted like a spoilt child. Catherine Connolly doesn't give a hoot about soundbites.
So are you are saying our government and public service needs less oversight?

Oversight is a function of the PAC, getting all high and mighty because someone called you a mob is not related to oversight of government spending.

Catherine Connolly is just another of the no value added TDs, I don't get the grá at all - she's another crusty anti everything parliamentarian. Also, she loves soundbites as much as any of them, always bursting to get on tv.

a very cool kid

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

I think you are most wrong. I thought he acted like a spoilt child. Catherine Connolly doesn't give a hoot about soundbites.
So are you are saying our government and public service needs less oversight?

Oversight is a function of the PAC, getting all high and mighty because someone called you a mob is not related to oversight of government spending.

Catherine Connolly is just another of the no value added TDs, I don't get the grá at all - she's another crusty anti everything parliamentarian. Also, she loves soundbites as much as any of them, always bursting to get on tv.

Cluedo Monopoly

a very cool kid wrote: »

Oversight is a function of the PAC, getting all high and mighty because someone called you a mob is not related to oversight of government spending.

Catherine Connolly is just another of the no value added TDs, I don't get the grá at all - she's another crusty anti everything parliamentarian. Also, she loves soundbites as much as any of them, always bursting to get on tv.

Ok cool kid. That's fine.

Leonard Hofstadter

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

But if they're both taking a big chunk of FF seats, surely that puts SF well ahead overall, as they'll be picking up seats from other left parties, whereas I don't see where else FG is making significant gains.

FG got 35 seats on 21% of the vote the last time. SF got 37 on 24.5% (but would have gotten 42-43 had they ran more candidates, but those extra seats would have been seats like Paul Murphy's in DSW and other far left seats). FF are on 38.

So assuming SF runs the right number of candidates the next time they'll take those ones, that's 42-43 minimum. Then there will be some FF votes which will give them about 50, plus there will be a seat bonus for being so far ahead of the next largest party (FF) and possible they'll eat into some Lab/GP/Ind seats too (Thomas Pringle in Donegal springs to mind although he might hold on), so that brings them to 55-60.

For FG well most of the 11% of the vote FF has lost compared to the last GE has gone directly to them so FG will take seats all over the place at FF's expense. Then there will be the seat bonus for being the largest (which as noted above will also benefit SF) and they could take some of the soft GP vote as well, e.g. the GP seat in Dún Laoghaire plus Francis Noel Duffys seat in DSW would go back to FG. FG will get to 55 seats at least on 30% (they managed 50 back in 2016 on 25.5% of the vote and they and the then second biggest party - FF - were well ahead of the others although not quite to the extent that is the case now) - there will be so many FPVs even if there's no transfers it won't matter as much.

It's certainly possible depending on the mood music that FG tops the FPV but doesn't come back with the highest number of seats - that's where the transfers will impact.

In fact, both FG and SF could top 60 seats because both are nearly 20% ahead of the next biggest party.

blanch152

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

So in that scenario you're envisaging SF gaining mainly at the expense of other left parties (rather than of FF which is what ideally they would want) and FG swallowing most of the lost FG seats? Not sure, my guess would be if FG and SF won a similar FPV, SF would end up clearly ahead in seats given they would have transfers coming in from everywhere...

One of the problems with the last election is that Sinn Fein didn't run second candidates so we have no idea whether they were picking up transfers from everywhere. In previous elections, they didn't pick up transfers from everywhere.

Loafing Oaf

blanch152 wrote: »

In previous elections, they didn't pick up transfers from everywhere.

It's a whole different ball game now. Going forward it'll be pretty much automatic for voters for other left elements to give a lower preference to SF...

Nobotty

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

It's a whole different ball game now. Going forward it'll be pretty much automatic for voters for other left elements to give a lower preference to SF...

You'd have to think,SF will run 2nd candidates in all constituencies
They've nothing to lose
The losers will be other left wing seats
It looks like they've an available transfer pool of 10% from other left wing candidates which is concentrated in a few constituencies which isnt a lot
Some of those sitting left wing t.d's will get eliminated pushing 2nd SF candidates over the line IMO

James Brown

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

It's a whole different ball game now. Going forward it'll be pretty much automatic for voters for other left elements to give a lower preference to SF...

That's how I roll.
Use to give FG a nod, but I can't stomach the brazen criminality

McMurphy

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

It's a whole different ball game now. Going forward it'll be pretty much automatic for voters for other left elements to give a lower preference to SF...

Wasn't the mantra last time "< vote left < transfer left"

Cluedo Monopoly

Leonard Hofstadter wrote: »

FG got 35 seats on 21% of the vote the last time. SF got 37 on 24.5% (but would have gotten 42-43 had they ran more candidates, but those extra seats would have been seats like Paul Murphy's in DSW and other far left seats). FF are on 38.

So assuming SF runs the right number of candidates the next time they'll take those ones, that's 42-43 minimum. Then there will be some FF votes which will give them about 50, plus there will be a seat bonus for being so far ahead of the next largest party (FF) and possible they'll eat into some Lab/GP/Ind seats too (Thomas Pringle in Donegal springs to mind although he might hold on), so that brings them to 55-60.

For FG well most of the 11% of the vote FF has lost compared to the last GE has gone directly to them so FG will take seats all over the place at FF's expense. Then there will be the seat bonus for being the largest (which as noted above will also benefit SF) and they could take some of the soft GP vote as well, e.g. the GP seat in Dún Laoghaire plus Francis Noel Duffys seat in DSW would go back to FG. FG will get to 55 seats at least on 30% (they managed 50 back in 2016 on 25.5% of the vote and they and the then second biggest party - FF - were well ahead of the others although not quite to the extent that is the case now) - there will be so many FPVs even if there's no transfers it won't matter as much.

It's certainly possible depending on the mood music that FG tops the FPV but doesn't come back with the highest number of seats - that's where the transfers will impact.

In fact, both FG and SF could top 60 seats because both are nearly 20% ahead of the next biggest party.

Interesting analysis, thanks. I think SF will outperform FG for seats but I also think the SDs will double their seat count and become king-makers.

Floppybits

Nobotty wrote: »

You'd have to think,SF will run 2nd candidates in all constituencies
They've nothing to lose
The losers will be other left wing seats
It looks like they've an available transfer pool of 10% from other left wing candidates which is concentrated in a few constituencies which isnt a lot
Some of those sitting left wing t.d's will get eliminated pushing 2nd SF candidates over the line IMO

Do they have 2nd candidates to run though and are those candidates capable? This would be my problem with it. The ex-MMF fighter is a prime example and I am sure there are few others. Not saying that SF are the only ones we only need look at the few FG TD's like Bailey and Murphy.

Loafing Oaf

Nobotty wrote: »

You'd have to think,SF will run 2nd candidates in all constituencies
They've nothing to lose
The losers will be other left wing seats
It looks like they've an available transfer pool of 10% from other left wing candidates which is concentrated in a few constituencies which isnt a lot
Some of those sitting left wing t.d's will get eliminated pushing 2nd SF candidates over the line IMO

Now you say it, I suppose the bounce SF will receive from transfers from other left parties will mostly come through eliminations rather than surpluses...

M_Murphy57

Latest Red C poll. 50% of the idiots who voted FF last Feb seeing the error of their ways. Dropped from 22% to just 11% support. We need a general election asap.

James Brown

The lady who passed a letter of good character for an animal abuser banned from owning animals, convicted of abusing animals again, was just on the radio.
Talking great stuff about funding remote working....with no specifics, timeline etc.
It seems saying what you say you plan to do is enough and the two cases of vaccines cronyism, (passing to friends and well wishers) are probably all there is... No plan to police vaccine distribution.

Leonard Hofstadter

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

Interesting analysis, thanks. I think SF will outperform FG for seats but I also think the SDs will double their seat count and become king-makers.

I actually think if current polling trends continue, FF will be kingmakers believe it or not. If what we saw in the RedC poll materialised in a General Election, then FG and SF would each get about 60 seats and FF will get 16-17 seats. That's very close to overall majority territory. Throw in a few independents or a smaller party like the Soc Dems or Labour and it's game on. I don't think the Greens will want to go in.

If you count out FF it's going to be a coalition of 5-6 parties and it won't last a wet week.

I don't see how it is possible to have a Government next time without either FG or FF as much as some might hope to otherwise be the case. If the vaccination programme really steps up a gear next month and the month after and we start getting things open (and they stay open) then the Government will get a bounce in the polls (just look at what's happening in the UK) and as FF are in that department they will surely get some credit.

Of course longer term things like housing and having to pay off the debts incurred from Covid, not to mention implementing Green Party ideas (like those to achieve a 50% reduction in emissions by 2030) will knock lumps out of FF and FG.

a very cool kid

If the Soc Dems cared they'd have joined the current coalition and demanded Sláintecare as a policy but keeping the party pure was more important.

McMurphy

a very cool kid wrote: »

If the Soc Dems cared they'd have joined the current coalition and demanded Sláintecare as a policy but keeping the party pure was more important.

They didn't want to be part of a government with FG in it.

https://twitter.com/SeanDefoe/status/1229702721562910725?s=19

Watching the imminent implosion of the greens you can hardly blame them.

Leonard Hofstadter

McMurphy wrote: »

They didn't want to be part of a government with FG in it.

https://twitter.com/SeanDefoe/status/1229702721562910725?s=19

Watching the imminent implosion of the greens you can hardly blame them.

The Greens are doing that all on their own. FF and FG gave them everything including the kitchen sink to get into power the last time, and look at all the thanks they're getting for it. I'm still shocked at how unprincipled both parties are and how little regard they have for their own voters.