Dublin Bay South By-Election

Beechwoodspark · 05-07-2021 6:07pm

KevRossi wrote: »

O'Callaghan probably wanted her to run as she hasn't a hope. Means he has a free run at it at the next GE. That's also why he was made her Director of Elections, he can make sure she polls really badly.

I know you are probably saying this half in jest but if JOC has designs on FF leadership (which appears to be the case) then he simply must show he can bring in a running mate in his constituency.

He is failing miserably regarding this, this time out at least...

There will be fierce backbiting in FF should she (and by extension JOC) have a ‘mare of an election.

It’ll be a stick used to beat him by rivals in FF, you can be sure of it.

L1011 · 05-07-2021 6:16pm

Forgot that FF oddity that they used to expect of the entire front bench. Wasn't Martin the only one to do so in 2011?

When you can no longer be sure of even one seat in every constituency it becomes unworkable but if they choose to cling to it that's their choice!

jm08 · 05-07-2021 6:26pm

L1011 wrote: »

Forgot that FF oddity that they used to expect of the entire front bench. Wasn't Martin the only one to do so in 2011?

When you can no longer be sure of even one seat in every constituency it becomes unworkable but if they choose to cling to it that's their choice!

Leo has never brought in another FG TD in his constituency. FF got 2 in MM Cork South Central last time which was very good going as Coveney is in that constituency as well.

KevRossi · 05-07-2021 6:30pm

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

I know you are probably saying this half in jest but if JOC has designs on FF leadership (which appears to be the case) then he simply must show he can bring in a running mate in his constituency.

He is failing miserably regarding this, this time out at least...

There will be fierce backbiting in FF should she (and by extension JOC) have a ‘mare of an election.

It’ll be a stick used to beat him by rivals in FF, you can be sure of it.

I disagree. The days when FF were guaranteed 2 seats in most constituencies is long gone. Added to that, DBS and its preceding versions were always a bit fickle in how they voted. I think they have some record of failing to elect sitting ministers, but I could be wrong on that (it could be Dun Laoghaire).

Nobody in FF would expect JOC to bring in a 2nd running matein this bye-election, least of all someone as poor as Conroy. They had other options but knew that they had no hope of a seat. It suits JOC that he'll be the only one running there at the next GE. I actually don't see any party getting more than one seat there at the next GE.

As for JOC, he'll put JOC first, party second, country third.

L1011 · 05-07-2021 6:41pm

jm08 wrote: »

Leo has never brought in another FG TD in his constituency. FF got 2 in MM Cork South Central last time which was very good going as Coveney is in that constituency as well.

I meant the only FF TD at all - its almost solely an FF obsession that you need to get the running mate in to be seen as serious.

And I was wrong, on checking the list there were two in Laois Offaly - Fleming and Cowen II - as well as Martin and McGrath

In that election Enda Kenny had three running mates elected! Not common since the days of 9 seaters.

Marcusm · 05-07-2021 7:03pm

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

I know you are probably saying this half in jest but if JOC has designs on FF leadership (which appears to be the case) then he simply must show he can bring in a running mate in his constituency.

He is failing miserably regarding this, this time out at least...

There will be fierce backbiting in FF should she (and by extension JOC) have a ‘mare of an election.

It’ll be a stick used to beat him by rivals in FF, you can be sure of it.

There is no hope of a second FF TD in DBS and that would be clear to FF. JO’C’s actual problem is that his own seat is not safe.

Augme · 05-07-2021 7:03pm

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

I know you are probably saying this half in jest but if JOC has designs on FF leadership (which appears to be the case) then he simply must show he can bring in a running mate in his constituency.

He is failing miserably regarding this, this time out at least...

There will be fierce backbiting in FF should she (and by extension JOC) have a ‘mare of an election.

It’ll be a stick used to beat him by rivals in FF, you can be sure of it.

I doubt I'll ever see two FF TDs elected in a Dublin constituency ever again. They've completely lost their way in Dublin and will find it extremely difficult to get it back unless there is a massive shift in their mind set.

Marcusm · 05-07-2021 7:03pm

jm08 wrote: »

Leo has never brought in another FG TD in his constituency. FF got 2 in MM Cork South Central last time which was very good going as Coveney is in that constituency as well.

Remember, Cork is an oddity all of its own. One female TD and is it 6 or 7 Michaels.

L1011 · 05-07-2021 7:05pm

Marcusm wrote: »

Remember, Cork is an oddity all of its own. One female TD and is it 6 or 7 Michaels.

And two unrelated Moynihans in the same constituency for the same party.

zimmermania · 05-07-2021 9:07pm

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

I know you are probably saying this half in jest but if JOC has designs on FF leadership (which appears to be the case) then he simply must show he can bring in a running mate in his constituency.

He is failing miserably regarding this, this time out at least...

There will be fierce backbiting in FF should she (and by extension JOC) have a ‘mare of an election.

It’ll be a stick used to beat him by rivals in FF, you can be sure of it.

It certainly is not JOCs fault that FF chose a poor candidate who has not got a prayer of competing with some of the women candidates and is going to poll badly.

Blut2 · 05-07-2021 10:28pm

Dublin Bay South byelection candidate James Geoghegan organised an event for politicians expelled from Fine Gael for their opposition to abortion legislation.

Geoghegan also wrote a number of policy papers for the group of expelled politicians.

https://www.ontheditch.com/james-geoghegan-organised-conference-for-anti-abortion-tds-senators/

This sort of news coming out definitely won't be helping Geoghegan with younger or female voters.

Yellow_Fern · 05-07-2021 10:36pm

Blut2 wrote: »

https://www.ontheditch.com/james-geoghegan-organised-conference-for-anti-abortion-tds-senators/

This sort of news coming out definitely won't be helping Geoghegan with younger or female voters.

Geoghegan seems to be the only candidate who seems to be at least vaguely familiar with the academic literature on how to actually improve the housing market but yet people will vote against because he was formerly prolife. Joke of an electorate.

Breezer · 06-07-2021 12:16am

CarProblem wrote: »

By the way this is an attack on FG, not a defence. Idiotic levels of public expenditure, debt and personal taxation are some of the main reasons (from a list of many) that I refuse to even countenance voting for any party that has been in power since 1997

Out of interest, who would you countenance voting for then? Surely any party that hasn’t been in power since 1997, except perhaps far right parties, espouses more public spending than FG? I agree FG has actually spent quite a bit, but if you value fiscal conservatism, surely it is still the best of a bad lot?

banquo · 06-07-2021 2:34am

Chiparus wrote: »

That said I am not sure it is an election SF would mind losing.

Ah I'd say they'd love to clear out Andrews there and swap in Boylan.

I imagine (but do not know) that they'll have a few reps they'd love to replace in the next election.

banquo · 06-07-2021 2:36am

zimmermania wrote: »

It certainly is not JOCs fault that FF chose a poor candidate who has not got a prayer of competing with some of the women candidates and is going to poll badly.

This is true. JOC had no say in her selection, and it looks more like MM lumped him with DOE as a poison chalice.

Tbh, if she gets above 5%, I'll be impressed.

L1011 · 06-07-2021 8:13am

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

Geoghegan seems to be the only candidate who seems to be at least vaguely familiar with the academic literature on how to actually improve the housing market but yet people will vote against because he was formerly prolife. Joke of an electorate.

Being familiar with academic literature is no use if your party isn't going to do whatever is suggested regardless

iffandonlyif · 06-07-2021 8:33am

Has Una Mullally’s article on James Geoghegan been mentioned? Behind paywall, but the sub-headline is, ‘Dublin Bay South candidate has run superficial campaign based on brand of bland nothingness.’ Seems bizarre to single out a candidate for criticism like that.

Blut2 wrote: »

https://www.ontheditch.com/james-geoghegan-organised-conference-for-anti-abortion-tds-senators/

This sort of news coming out definitely won't be helping Geoghegan with younger or female voters.

I actually went to that conference because it seemed like it might be a significant moment in Irish politics (how wrong I was). I went as a sceptic and came away doubly so, but calling it a conference for anti-abortion TDs is very misleading. It was more a platform for pie-in-the-sky ideas for reform in Ireland. David McWilliams and Olivia O’Leary spoke, whom you’d hardly expect at a conservative conference.

blackwhite · 06-07-2021 10:30am

Mullaly also spends plenty of time giving out about how Geoghegan "comes from an intensely privileged background", but then cheerleads for Bacik who comes from the truly "humble beginnings" (to quote Mullaly's criticism of Geoghegan) of her family being the founders of Waterford Crystal.

No issue with either of their backgrounds, but using it to attack one candidate whilst cheerleading for another who also comes from a wealthy background is hypocrisy at it's finest (but no surprise from Mullaly tbh)

Brussels Sprout · 06-07-2021 10:31am

Johnny Fallon has released a podcast on the by-election. Clocking in at over 2 hours it's his usual deep dive:

https://twitter.com/jonnyfallon/status/1411768156226473986

CarProblem · 06-07-2021 10:58am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What kind of increases in public expenditure had no benefit to users?

Irrelevant to the point I was making but.....

No matter how much we spend I never see increased user experience in Public Services. I have 2 extended family members that have been exposed to the vagaries of health services (one with physical Health problems, one with mental). The so called care both received would shame a third world country, not one spending huge amounts per capita on health and taxing to death anyone with a half decent income

No point arguing - you appear to think we get value for money in public services, I don't.

That's completely irrelevant to the point I was making btw which is there is no evidence around the "Labour saved us from nasty FG" narrative based on FG actions from 2016 onwards when the "right wing" :rolleyes: FG continued to tax workers heavily, spend freely (with IMO little to no improvement in services) and increase welfare even further

CarProblem · 06-07-2021 11:03am

Breezer wrote: »

Out of interest, who would you countenance voting for then? Surely any party that hasn’t been in power since 1997, except perhaps far right parties, espouses more public spending than FG? I agree FG has actually spent quite a bit, but if you value fiscal conservatism, surely it is still the best of a bad lot?

I don't believe I or anyone should accept mediocrity so "best of a bad bunch" isn't what I believe we should settle for. I don't settle for it in my daily life, I don't accept it from my team in work and I'm not going to settle for it when voting

The first (non religious zealot / non xenophonic) party that merely looks at our model of expenditure and taxation and says out loud its unsustainable will get my vote. They don't even have to agree with me that its idiotic, unfair and completely punishes ambition. Just recognise in public that it's unsustainable

Until then my mantra is (almost) anyone but FF/FG/Labour/GP.

Yurt2 · 06-07-2021 11:42am

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

Geoghegan seems to be the only candidate who seems to be at least vaguely familiar with the academic literature on how to actually improve the housing market but yet people will vote against because he was formerly prolife. Joke of an electorate.

I haven't seen Geoghegan waxing lyrical about his knowledge of the intricacies of housing, but one thing you should know about barristers:

They are experts at condensing masses of information about a case, vomiting it back out using rhetoric and flourish to sound convincing, and then if you ask them 5 minutes later what they said, they'll give you a blank stare.

They're like actors in funny wigs. Simply put, they're paid to know their lines - and that looks very much like Geoghegan.

hotmail.com · 06-07-2021 11:53am

CarProblem wrote: »

I don't believe I or anyone should accept mediocrity so "best of a bad bunch" isn't what I believe we should settle for. I don't settle for it in my daily life, I don't accept it from my team in work and I'm not going to settle for it when voting

The first (non religious zealot / non xenophonic) party that merely looks at our model of expenditure and taxation and says out loud its unsustainable will get my vote. They don't even have to agree with me that its idiotic, unfair and completely punishes ambition. Just recognise in public that it's unsustainable

Until then my mantra is (almost) anyone but FF/FG/Labour/GP.

There are no religious parties/zenophobic parties in the Dail.

So you want more expenditure?

hotmail.com · 06-07-2021 11:54am

Yurt! wrote: »

I haven't seen Geoghegan waxing lyrical about his knowledge of the intricacies of housing, but one thing you should know about barristers:

They are experts at condensing masses of information about a case, vomiting it back out using rhetoric and flourish to sound convincing, and then if you ask them 5 minutes later what they said, they'll give you a blank stare.

They're like actors in funny wigs. Simply put, they're paid to know their lines - and that looks very much like Geoghegan.

Bacik is a barrister.

hotmail.com · 06-07-2021 11:59am

CarProblem wrote: »

Irrelevant to the point I was making but.....

No matter how much we spend I never see increased user experience in Public Services. I have 2 extended family members that have been exposed to the vagaries of health services (one with physical Health problems, one with mental). The so called care both received would shame a third world country, not one spending huge amounts per capita on health and taxing to death anyone with a half decent income

No point arguing - you appear to think we get value for money in public services, I don't.

That's completely irrelevant to the point I was making btw which is there is no evidence around the "Labour saved us from nasty FG" narrative based on FG actions from 2016 onwards when the "right wing" :rolleyes: FG continued to tax workers heavily, spend freely (with IMO little to no improvement in services) and increase welfare even further

FG is the only party to suggest reducing income tax in the next few years. They also reduced the top rate of tax under Michael Noonan.

If you want lower income tax, FG is the party for you.

AndrewJRenko · 06-07-2021 12:03pm

CarProblem wrote: »

I don't believe I or anyone should accept mediocrity so "best of a bad bunch" isn't what I believe we should settle for. I don't settle for it in my daily life, I don't accept it from my team in work and I'm not going to settle for it when voting

The first (non religious zealot / non xenophonic) party that merely looks at our model of expenditure and taxation and says out loud its unsustainable will get my vote. They don't even have to agree with me that its idiotic, unfair and completely punishes ambition. Just recognise in public that it's unsustainable

Until then my mantra is (almost) anyone but FF/FG/Labour/GP.

Can't wait for SF to get a term in Government so you can rule them out too.

CarProblem wrote: »

Irrelevant to the point I was making but.....

No matter how much we spend I never see increased user experience in Public Services. I have 2 extended family members that have been exposed to the vagaries of health services (one with physical Health problems, one with mental). The so called care both received would shame a third world country, not one spending huge amounts per capita on health and taxing to death anyone with a half decent income

No point arguing - you appear to think we get value for money in public services, I don't.

That's completely irrelevant to the point I was making btw which is there is no evidence around the "Labour saved us from nasty FG" narrative based on FG actions from 2016 onwards when the "right wing" :rolleyes: FG continued to tax workers heavily, spend freely (with IMO little to no improvement in services) and increase welfare even further

You brought up the issue, so don't blame me for the irrelevance.

I don't think the experience of your two extended family members is a great measure of the success or otherwise of the health service.

Have a look at the improvements in cancer outcomes, or stroke outcomes. Have a look at the quality of services provided to people with CF or residential services for people with intellectual disabilities.

There is a lot wrong with the health services, and lots of room for improvement. But to say we've had no improvement in services is just not true, by any objective measure.

FG manifesto had planned a €4 billion sell off of state assets. Labour's agreement to the Programme for Govt brought this down to €2 billion. The power lines bringing electricity to your house and the gas line fuelling your central heating (if you're in a big city) would almost certainly be in private hands today without Labour in govt. That's one very specific change to FG policy brought about by Labour in govt.

Brussels Sprout · 06-07-2021 12:07pm

CarProblem wrote: »

The first (non religious zealot / non xenophonic) party that merely looks at our model of expenditure and taxation and says out loud its unsustainable will get my vote. They don't even have to agree with me that its idiotic, unfair and completely punishes ambition. Just recognise in public that it's unsustainable

Until then my mantra is (almost) anyone but FF/FG/Labour/GP.

Sounds like the Progressive Democrats are the party for you. Unfortunately they spontaneously combusted in 2007 so FG are the only party that are anywhere near what you want but you've ruled them out so you're out of luck.

CarProblem · 06-07-2021 12:13pm

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

so you're out of luck.

And I recognise that

But until (if ever) I get a party I want to vote for I'll continue to vote against what we've been getting for the last 20+ years

CarProblem · 06-07-2021 12:15pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You brought up the issue, so don't blame me for the irrelevance.

Any response to there is no evidence for the "Labour saved us from nasty FG" narrative based on FG actions from 2016 onwards or do you still want to continue eulogising over the Irish public sector?

AndrewJRenko · 06-07-2021 12:16pm

CarProblem wrote: »

Any response to there is no evidence for the "Labour saved us from nasty FG" narrative based on FG actions from 2016 onwards or do you still want to continue eulogising over the Irish public sector?

Did you read my post?

FG manifesto had planned a €4 billion sell off of state assets. Labour's agreement to the Programme for Govt brought this down to €2 billion. The power lines bringing electricity to your house and the gas line fuelling your central heating (if you're in a big city) would almost certainly be in private hands today without Labour in govt. That's one very specific change to FG policy brought about by Labour in govt.

Dublin Bay South By-Election

Comments