Dublin Bay South By-Election

For Forks Sake

Probably of more relevance if it plays out like that on polling day..

https://twitter.com/NextIrishGE/status/1409594451127799811

https://twitter.com/NextIrishGE/status/1409595948578258950

Peregrine

That's a very strong second and third preference for Byrne. Hard to know if they'll come into play though. Could be FG's 2nd preference.

Bacik too.

It would be a very bad day at the office for Sinn Féin if the result looks like that.

iffandonlyif

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Probably of more relevance if it plays out like that on polling day..

https://twitter.com/NextIrishGE/status/1409594451127799811

https://twitter.com/NextIrishGE/status/1409595948578258950

Wow, SF are not transfer-friendly.

JPup

Peregrine wrote: »

That's a very strong second and third preference for Byrne. Bacik too.

It would be a very bad day at the office for Sinn Féin if the final result looks like that.

Bacik clearly the favourite based on those numbers. Seems weird how far off national polls it is though. Nothing in the national polls to suggest a Labour surge or that SF are going backwards. I thought Lynn Boylan would make a strong candidate too.

golfball37

expectationlost wrote: »

why the is this thread last few pages filled with talk of candidate that didnt even put themselves forward to their party to choose?

Because the party in telling her not to bother have engineered a situation where they could lose a td in a constituency they should be comfortably winning

retalivity

Although she's an awful candidate, 10% & 5th place for FF is laughably bad

golfball37

It’s not a sf constituency, nowhere near it. The fact they won a seat here and would retain it in a general on these numbers is good news for them imo. After the surge of 2020 this constituency was one ward I had them nailed down not holding onto next time.

expectationlost

golfball37 wrote: »

Because the party in telling her not to bother have engineered a situation where they could lose a td in a constituency they should be comfortably winning

who told her not to bother I thought she was complaining that she never heard from HQ.

KevRossi

There's a fair bit of the SF vote in DBS that is a personal vote for Chris Andrews. He had a decent presence there.... FF history... family name .... would be on the left of FF back then. His support of Palestine would have helped him too with a lot of the trendy left set there. Boylan had no presence or track record in the constituency up to last month, that will hurt her.

Byrne's performance in 2nd and 3rd preferences is interetsing. If she can stay ahead of Boylan and ends out as last to be eliminated (apart from Geoghegan and Bacik), then she'll transfer heavily to Bacik. Labour and GP have the same voting set in DBS in my personal experience.

Incidentally, FG have 37% in the poll, but Geoghegan only has 27%, so he's not loved a lot there it seems.

hotmail.com

JPup wrote: »

Bacik seems to have great momentum on the ground. Loads of houses with her poster in the window. Way more than any other candidate that I can see.

A bonus from her campaigning during the last 2 referendums. She would have gained a lot of followers.

It doesn't reflect the whole constituency.

I doubt Labour will figure high in the end.

Darc19

Caquas wrote: »

I call BS of this poll.

There is no way Bacik will outpoll Boylan by 2:1 or anything like it . Labour (K. Humphreys 7.9%) trailed SF (C. Andrews 16.1%) by that margin a year ago. Nothing in the other polls suggests that Labour could flip the outcome of the general election. The Greens will be hammered - Conroy will be lucky to get half of her boss’s vote last year. Hard to know where the disillusioned Greens (12%) will go but it is laughable to think they will return to Labour.

I think Geoghegan will top the poll with Boylan second. Transfers will be fascinating but I don’t think Boylan could catch him if FF and Greens are loyal to the coalition. If Bacik wins this it will be the biggest electoral upset since...well, since the last election.

Lynn boylan was parachuted into a constituency that simply in the main has a decent level of education and would not vote for sinn fein

Geoghegan's issue is that he has history with Renua and is probably too right wing.

Bacik has a very strong profile in the area and is well liked. Has no cobwebs in the closet and is seen as a hard worker. She will attract a wide variety of votes.

By elections are rarely a sign of party performance and just like the lib Dems in the UK last week, a middle ground candidate can win quite easily.


They always say swim with the tide and the tide is with bacik.

PommieBast

hotmail.com wrote: »

I doubt Labour will figure high in the end.

By any measure it would be a big turnaround. Back in the days of Dublin South-Central Labour did respectably well but I don't see any obvious reason why there would be a big swing to them at this stage.

hotmail.com

Darc19 wrote: »

Lynn boylan was parachuted into a constituency that simply in the main has a decent level of education and would not vote for sinn fein

Geoghegan's issue is that he has history with Renua and is probably too right wing.

Bacik has a very strong profile in the area and is well liked. Has no cobwebs in the closet and is seen as a hard worker. She will attract a wide variety of votes.

By elections are rarely a sign of party performance and just like the lib Dems in the UK last week, a middle ground candidate can win quite easily.


They always say swim with the tide and the tide is with bacik.

Uneducated people used to vote for Labour here then.

Darc19

If bacik wins it might give labour momentum and help them start growth again.

And that would take from sinn fein

And that would be seen as a win all round

Jizique

retalivity wrote: »

Although she's an awful candidate, 10% & 5th place for FF is laughably bad

Surprised she hits double digits, suspect it will end up 7-8%

Shoelaces

One of the most horrific car crash debate performances in memory from Brigid Purcell on Virgin

Marcusm

Caquas wrote: »

I call BS of this poll.

There is no way Bacik will outpoll Boylan by 2:1 or anything like it . Labour (K. Humphreys 7.9%) trailed SF (C. Andrews 16.1%) by that margin a year ago. Nothing in the other polls suggests that Labour could flip the outcome of the general election. The Greens will be hammered - Conroy will be lucky to get half of her boss’s vote last year. Hard to know where the disillusioned Greens (12%) will go but it is laughable to think they will return to Labour.

I think Geoghegan will top the poll with Boylan second. Transfers will be fascinating but I don’t think Boylan could catch him if FF and Greens are loyal to the coalition. If Bacik wins this it will be the biggest electoral upset since...well, since the last election.

I think it’s a personal vote and not a Labour vote. I expect Geoghegan will do very badly on transfers from FF and GP. There is no threat to the coalition and a traditional FF voter would prefer to see FG be seatless in what should be a must win constituency for FG. Ivana Bacik will have a lot more attraction for the average GP voter than FG also. Again, her election does not threaten Eamon Ryan in any way and there’s no way that Greens could get two. Perhaps at the last election but definitely not at the next.

Marcusm

Faugheen wrote: »

Plus Alan Kelly is an excellent campaigner. He’s been heavily involved in her campaign.

It’s not to suggest that Labour are making a comeback but she would appeal to a lot of voters in the area. She’ll comfortably outperform them nationally.

In fairness, I’d see Alan Kelly as fairly toxic to Ivana Bacik’s electorate - traditional Labour supporters in Ringsend etc will not warm to a culchie and her own voting base would see him as a bit of a loose cannon/blowhard.

Marcusm

expectationlost wrote: »

who told her not to bother I thought she was complaining that she never heard from HQ.

In an orchestrated manner, within 2 days of Murphybstanding down, every FG branch declared for Geoghegan. It had clearly been contemplated for some time.

Shoelaces

Shoelaces wrote: »

One of the most horrific car crash debate performances in memory from Brigid Purcell on Virgin

Was pretty brutal alright

expectationlost

Marcusm wrote: »

In an orchestrated manner, within 2 days of Murphybstanding down, every FG branch declared for Geoghegan. It had clearly been contemplated for some time.

so multiple branches of FG knew Murphy was quitting but she didn't?

...Ghost...

Darc19 wrote: »

Lynn boylan was parachuted into a constituency that simply in the main has a decent level of education and would not vote for sinn fein.

So, it's uneducated/dumb people who vote SF? You'd need a pretty big bucket for that broad brush. What must ones IQ be to vote for Ivana? Can they be renters, or must they own their own homes?

Bit of a nasty attitude to suggest that educated people don't vote for SF. The enlightened and educated must have been out of the country when the Lab, FF and FG did so poorly in comparison to SF in the last GE.

disclaimer: I'm not a SF supporter

hatrickpatrick

Very, very depressing poll result tbh. I'd generally be an "Anyone but FFG" kind of person but Ivana Bacik is one of the most despicably bigoted politicians in current Irish politics. Or at least, she was ten or fifteen years ago, perhaps she's chilled out a bit since then - it appears to have been scrubbed from all online existence, but I distinctly remember an article or lecture authored by her in which she suggested that only men could be criminals, and that if a woman commits a crime it's either because she had a legitimate reason to do it or because a man in her life pressured her into it.

Absolutely vile stuff. Flagrant "woman good, man bad" lowest common denominator sh!te. I'm digging through the archives to see if I can dig it up, all I can say is that you don't quickly forget an article which boiled your blood to that extent and her name is very unique.

I'd be as supportive of reducing incarceration rates for non-violent crimes as anyone else, but to do so in a bigoted, discriminatory manner? F*ck off with that absolute bollocks.

Does anyone else remember this policy plank of hers from back in the day?

Honestly between her and Geoghegan I'd have to very, very, very grittingly support her but it's very much a frying pan and fire situation.

blanch152

...Ghost... wrote: »

So, it's uneducated/dumb people who vote SF? You'd need a pretty big bucket for that broad brush. What must ones IQ be to vote for Ivana? Can they be renters, or must they own their own homes?

Bit of a nasty attitude to suggest that educated people don't vote for SF. The enlightened and educated must have been out of the country when the Lab, FF and FG did so poorly in comparison to SF in the last GE.

disclaimer: I'm not a SF supporter

Well, I wouldn't say dumb people vote for Sinn Fein, but any of the analyses show that the more educated you are, the less likely you are to vote for Sinn Fein, and vice versa. That is pretty much an established fact.

iwasliedto

Had FG twice at the door in the last week here in Sandymout. They are hitting the canvas hard, they really want this seat. I didnt really give them much time and told them straight that I would never vote for them in a million years, the first canvasers asked for a second preference, I laughed. Tonight I had Jennifer Carroll MacNeill she does do a good passing impression of a stepfor wife like James could be a stepford husband. She made a shapish and polite retreat.

Atlantic Dawn

It will all boil down to those who have a house v's those who want to be able to buy or be 'given' a house.

Larbre34

This poll being published is the biggest fillip Geoghegan could get.

The concern about Bacik transfers will galvanise the FG base and see him through. Bacik offends both SF and FG voters alike and she will fall between two stools.

Peregrine

blanch152 wrote: »

Well, I wouldn't say dumb people vote for Sinn Fein, but any of the analyses show that the more educated you are, the less likely you are to vote for Sinn Fein, and vice versa. That is pretty much an established fact.

Would you care to share this analysis?

Yurt2

blanch152 wrote: »

Well, I wouldn't say dumb people vote for Sinn Fein, but any of the analyses show that the more educated you are, the less likely you are to vote for Sinn Fein, and vice versa. That is pretty much an established fact.

Data for this is usually thin on the ground except around election time, but for instance, in pre-election Red C polling 2020, SF was only 3% behind FG with ABC1 voters (the 'educated' so to speak) nationwide. You can take it to Ladbrokes that young ABC1s broke overwhelmingly for SF, and pensioners broke heavily for FF/FG.

Like much of your theories, they belong in the guff bin. The governing parties are in trouble in ABC1 and well they know it.

Yurt2

KevRossi wrote: »

There's a fair bit of the SF vote in DBS that is a personal vote for Chris Andrews. He had a decent presence there.... FF history... family name .... would be on the left of FF back then. His support of Palestine would have helped him too with a lot of the trendy left set there. Boylan had no presence or track record in the constituency up to last month, that will hurt her.

Byrne's performance in 2nd and 3rd preferences is interetsing. If she can stay ahead of Boylan and ends out as last to be eliminated (apart from Geoghegan and Bacik), then she'll transfer heavily to Bacik. Labour and GP have the same voting set in DBS in my personal experience.

Incidentally, FG have 37% in the poll, but Geoghegan only has 27%, so he's not loved a lot there it seems.

That's a decent analysis. DBS is really its own political micro climate.

Darc19

Darc19 wrote: »

Lynn boylan was parachuted into a constituency that simply in the main has a decent level of education and would not vote for sinn fein

Did Lynn Boylan not live off Baggot Street up until fairly recently? I always thought she did, becuase I saw her in Tesco and there was always a VOTE BOYLAN car squatting in a space on Pembroke Road.

In any case, this talk of parachuting is a nonsense. People seem to complain about the parish pump until it comes to urban constituencies. If someone asked about a candidate living in Roscrea vs Birr, people would probably dismiss it as provincialism (rightly so).

I wouldn't vote SF in a month of Sundays, but who cares where a TD lives?

We probably need more parachutes.

Marcusm

expectationlost wrote: »

so multiple branches of FG knew Murphy was quitting but she didn't?

I assume a fair number of the branch chairs or whatever they are called. It does look as if she was not popular with them.

...Ghost...

blanch152 wrote: »

Well, I wouldn't say dumb people vote for Sinn Fein, but any of the analyses show that the more educated you are, the less likely you are to vote for Sinn Fein, and vice versa. That is pretty much an established fact.

That really is a load of sh1te to be honest. What is established, is that SF have greater support in working class areas. Such areas tend to have less educated citizens for a myriad of reasons, but their level of education is not the reason they support SF. The people in these areas can't relate to the Varadkars of politics. They can however relate to SF.

At best, it's a disingenuous misrepresentation to use the data to correlate voting preferences with level of education. I once voted SF and I assure you that I wasn't having a moment of brain absentia at the time. The candidate was the only one who hadn't personally jumped on a certain populist issue in a sordid attempt to cream a few cheap votes.

Annasopra

hotmail.com wrote: »

Uneducated people used to vote for Labour here then.

Wtf is this crap

Annasopra

blanch152 wrote: »

Well, I wouldn't say dumb people vote for Sinn Fein, but any of the analyses show that the more educated you are, the less likely you are to vote for Sinn Fein, and vice versa. That is pretty much an established fact.

Is it? Im not a SF supporter but honestly it just seems like this is all conjecture and and anti SF snobbery.

blanch152

...Ghost... wrote: »

That really is a load of sh1te to be honest. What is established, is that SF have greater support in working class areas. Such areas tend to have less educated citizens for a myriad of reasons, but their level of education is not the reason they support SF. The people in these areas can't relate to the Varadkars of politics. They can however relate to SF.

At best, it's a disingenuous misrepresentation to use the data to correlate voting preferences with level of education. I once voted SF and I assure you that I wasn't having a moment of brain absentia at the time. The candidate was the only one who hadn't personally jumped on a certain populist issue in a sordid attempt to cream a few cheap votes.

You accept the factual basis of my statement - the bit in bold. Remember, all I said was that "the analyses show that the more educated you are, the less likely you are to vote for Sinn Fein, and vice versa."

The reasons for that were left unsaid. You have postulated a reason, that the real cause is location rather than education. That only explains the correlation, but it doesn't magic it away.

Marcusm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Did Lynn Boylan not live off Baggot Street up until fairly recently? I always thought she did, becuase I saw her in Tesco and there was always a VOTE BOYLAN car squatting in a space on Pembroke Road.

In any case, this talk of parachuting is a nonsense. People seem to complain about the parish pump until it comes to urban constituencies. If someone asked about a candidate living in Roscrea vs Birr, people would probably dismiss it as provincialism (rightly so).

I wouldn't vote SF in a month of Sundays, but who cares where a TD lives?

We probably need more parachutes.

Is it really an issue of a parachuted in candidate or is the fact that she has declined to commit to the constituency at the next GE being held against her?

jm08

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Very, very depressing poll result tbh. I'd generally be an "Anyone but FFG" kind of person but Ivana Bacik is one of the most despicably bigoted politicians in current Irish politics. Or at least, she was ten or fifteen years ago, perhaps she's chilled out a bit since then - it appears to have been scrubbed from all online existence, but I distinctly remember an article or lecture authored by her in which she suggested that only men could be criminals, and that if a woman commits a crime it's either because she had a legitimate reason to do it or because a man in her life pressured her into it.

Absolutely vile stuff. Flagrant "woman good, man bad" lowest common denominator sh!te. I'm digging through the archives to see if I can dig it up, all I can say is that you don't quickly forget an article which boiled your blood to that extent and her name is very unique.

I'd be as supportive of reducing incarceration rates for non-violent crimes as anyone else, but to do so in a bigoted, discriminatory manner? F*ck off with that absolute bollocks.

Does anyone else remember this policy plank of hers from back in the day?

Honestly between her and Geoghegan I'd have to very, very, very grittingly support her but it's very much a frying pan and fire situation.

From what I recall, from academic studies (she is Reid Professor of Law in Trinity) what was claimed was that the type of crimes women committed were usually to do with poverty (most female prisoners were there because of shop lifting or minor crimes). I can well believe that - how many women head up criminal gangs, or are in prison for murder?

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

You accept the factual basis of my statement - the bit in bold. Remember, all I said was that "the analyses show that the more educated you are, the less likely you are to vote for Sinn Fein, and vice versa."

The reasons for that were left unsaid. You have postulated a reason, that the real cause is location rather than education. That only explains the correlation, but it doesn't magic it away.

I thing the analyses is that the older you are, the more conservative you get.

I would think that the 18-35s are far more educated than those in the over 50s. SF gets a lot of support from this cohort.

hotmail.com

Annasopra wrote: »

Is it? Im not a SF supporter but honestly it just seems like this is all conjecture and and anti SF snobbery.

I was pointing out the posters madness. Former Labour voters voting SF now in many cases.

So by his mad logic, they must have been uneducated then too.

I suspect he doesn't see it like that.

hotmail.com

jm08 wrote: »

I thing the analyses is that the older you are, the more conservative you get.

I would think that the 18-35s are far more educated than those in the over 50s. SF gets a lot of support from this cohort.

Where has this education snobbiness come from? Another American culture import.

Leave it out. Thank you very much.

AndrewJRenko

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Very, very depressing poll result tbh. I'd generally be an "Anyone but FFG" kind of person but Ivana Bacik is one of the most despicably bigoted politicians in current Irish politics. Or at least, she was ten or fifteen years ago, perhaps she's chilled out a bit since then - it appears to have been scrubbed from all online existence, but I distinctly remember an article or lecture authored by her in which she suggested that only men could be criminals, and that if a woman commits a crime it's either because she had a legitimate reason to do it or because a man in her life pressured her into it.

Absolutely vile stuff. Flagrant "woman good, man bad" lowest common denominator sh!te. I'm digging through the archives to see if I can dig it up, all I can say is that you don't quickly forget an article which boiled your blood to that extent and her name is very unique.

I'd be as supportive of reducing incarceration rates for non-violent crimes as anyone else, but to do so in a bigoted, discriminatory manner? F*ck off with that absolute bollocks.

Does anyone else remember this policy plank of hers from back in the day?

Honestly between her and Geoghegan I'd have to very, very, very grittingly support her but it's very much a frying pan and fire situation.

How convenient for you that it's all been "scrubbed from all online existence", given that it allows you to basically make up anything about what she said and attribute that to her. It's kind of amazing, almost unbelievable, that someone with as many enemies as Bacik, has managed to hide or scrub anything in her past, that no-one managed to keep a copy or a quote. Literally unbelievable.

Marcusm wrote: »

In an orchestrated manner, within 2 days of Murphybstanding down, every FG branch declared for Geoghegan. It had clearly been contemplated for some time.

There's no way that a secret like that could be kept quiet in political circles. There's no way that multiple branch chairs knew well in advance, and if they did, there's no way they could have ensured that their branches voted in one particular direction.

Marcusm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How convenient for you that it's all been "scrubbed from all online existence", given that it allows you to basically make up anything about what she said and attribute that to her. It's kind of amazing, almost unbelievable, that someone with as many enemies as Bacik, has managed to hide or scrub anything in her past, that no-one managed to keep a copy or a quote. Literally unbelievable.



There's no way that a secret like that could be kept quiet in political circles. There's no way that multiple branch chairs knew well in advance, and if they did, there's no way they could have ensured that their branches voted in one particular direction.

My only sources are the press reports at the time. If Murphy knew he was leaving for 6 months or more then it would not be hard to “pack” the electorate. Periods immediately after elections are often pretty fallow.

She said there had been an increase in membership in the constituency since she lost her seat in the general election last year and that, if the conventional selection path was chosen, it would be impossible for her to be chosen.

“They added that just because 12 branches nominated Geoghegan to be their by-election candidate did not preclude O’Connell from seeking a nomination.“

“I’ve spoken to people across the country, people across the constituency, people who have supported me and people who would be in the know.

“And it appears that preparations have been made for a long time, that it would be impossible for me to win a convention.

She said there seems to be many reasons why she was not the “desired” candidate in this by-election.

Shelga

Don’t know who I would vote for if I lived in this constituency. Probably Soc Dems- surprised Sarah Durcan seems to not have a hope in hell.

FG/FF- absolutely not
SF- absolutely not
Labour- Bacik seems like a head wreck.

Doesn’t leave very much!

Furze99

Will there be a good kicking for government parties from voters in their 60s? Who are looking askance at the vaccination regime foisted on them by this government - take it or go to the back of the queue.

VinLieger

Id fully expect to see a protest vote after today's outrageous shenanigans but again its not like there's any opposition calling for anything different.

...Ghost...

blanch152 wrote: »

You accept the factual basis of my statement - the bit in bold. Remember, all I said was that "the analyses show that the more educated you are, the less likely you are to vote for Sinn Fein, and vice versa."

The reasons for that were left unsaid. You have postulated a reason, that the real cause is location rather than education. That only explains the correlation, but it doesn't magic it away.

Apples and Oranges. Working class areas may have a higher proportion of people with less educated people living there than in a middle or upper class area, but it doesn't translate into votes for SF and that's a well established fact. I know plenty of working class people, most of whom are SF flag supporters, but they don't vote...not a single one of them vote.

I happen to have a family member who's marriage broke up and he ended up homeless for months, literally sleeping in parks. It was a SF TD who helped him secure accommodation and he has never voted for SF, or anyone. All the support in the world means nothing unless it's marked on a ballot slip.

If you can show me the analyses you speak of, I would gladly take a look. It matters who paid for the analyses, as one would need to know what, if any bias exists in the compiling of such data.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How convenient for you that it's all been "scrubbed from all online existence", given that it allows you to basically make up anything about what she said and attribute that to her. It's kind of amazing, almost unbelievable, that someone with as many enemies as Bacik, has managed to hide or scrub anything in her past, that no-one managed to keep a copy or a quote. Literally unbelievable.

I remember the article on this too. She also spoke about it on Newstalk a few years ago. She said there was no benefit to society to lock women up, because they aren't violent criminals like men could be. She argued that women only act violently to protect themselves, or their children from violent men. The stuff that woman comes out with is truly unbelievable. I'll see if I can find any reference to the article and will post it up if I do. Any search for the prisons article seems to just bring up her law stuff.

edited to add: This isn't the article I am trying to find, but this one does show that Bacik was calling for a review of "womens imprisonment" with a view to moving to "non-custodial sentences". You'll notice that there is a link to her statement on the Labor website at the bottom of the article, but that statement has been scrubbed. An article on the same issue from the Echo....also scrubbed.

There's no way that a secret like that could be kept quiet in political circles. There's no way that multiple branch chairs knew well in advance, and if they did, there's no way they could have ensured that their branches voted in one particular direction.

Kate was a bit of an outsider and didn't really gel with the main FGers, least of all Varadkar, who she referenced as a choir boy (veiled slur?). They made the right call leaving her out, because her interview said all we needed to know about her. Entitled, back stabbing, vindictive man hater. With 9 out of 15 candidates put forward for this by-election being women, nobody can argue unfair representation for women. May the best person win.

PhilOssophy

Furze99 wrote: »

Will there be a good kicking for government parties from voters in their 60s? Who are looking askance at the vaccination regime foisted on them by this government - take it or go to the back of the queue.

Well if the worst they have to complain about in their lives is not getting a menu of options for vaccines, Jesus wept for the poor things.

Marcusm

Marcusm wrote: »

Is it really an issue of a parachuted in candidate or is the fact that she has declined to commit to the constituency at the next GE being held against her?

What do you mean, "commit to the constituency", commit what?

This is such a weird view of a TD's role, it implies that someone is elected to 'deliver' for the constituency. People can dress it up however they like, but it's little more than parish pump politics in an urban setting.

I always found it interesting that prior to about 1922-ish, it was reasonably common for TDs to run in more than one constituency. Even well into independence, some TDs were representatives in the north and south (I bet people didn't know that Sir James Craig was a TD up until at least 1927).

It still happens in the UK, with the likes of Boris Johnson merrily parachuting himself into a handy constituency. Why did we get into this mode where every TD has to be extremely local? They are elected to adance national policies.

Anyway, in other news, I see the odds have shortened against Bacik, now 6/5 giving chase to Geoghegan... what the hell happened? Lynn Boylan way at the back of the field, Claire Byrne a faller.

L1011

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

(I bet people didn't know that Sir James Craig was a TD up until at least 1927).

Not that Sir James Craig, though. This one.

The future Lord Craigavon was only notionally a TD by virtue of being an MP in 1918. He never attended the First Dail, obviously

And it was for a University seat, so basically a Seanad electorate.