Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Latest Poll, Red C

24

Comments

  • #32
    PeterIanStaker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,072 ✭✭✭PeterIanStaker


    I'd take polls with a pinch of salt but happy FF are down of course.


  • #33
    nkay1985
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,975 ✭✭✭nkay1985


    trapsagenius wrote: »
    In fairness, it's not like FG haven't been trotting out populism since the 2007 GE, so how do you explain their relative lack of support? (yes they're still number 1, but they should be far, far higher up the polls)
    Possibilities wrote: »
    Yes they have been populist but not to the same extent as Labour.

    Both of these are fair points.

    I used to have a lot of respect for Labour but now I just see a load of electioneering and vote-getting promises that simply aren't realistic given the situation we're in. But it seems that that's what the Irish public want - someone to make them feel all warm and cosy, no matter how bad a state we're in. I can see how people get very disillusioned with politics.


  • #34
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,058 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    nkay1985 wrote: »
    Both of these are fair points.

    I used to have a lot of respect for Labour but now I just see a load of electioneering and vote-getting promises that simply aren't realistic given the situation we're in. But it seems that that's what the Irish public want - someone to make them feel all warm and cosy, no matter how bad a state we're in. I can see how people get very disillusioned with politics.

    All parties over populism. There is never a "straight talking political party" which does not shine on something they cant give. Its just how it all works and no amount of reform will change it.

    I think there is a line and Labour cross it all the time. They seem to even cross what I would class as the "Labour Line" because the Irish people are down in the dumps, fed up of cuts and job losses, fed up and tired of lies and want change.

    Perfect opportunity for Labour to jump in and offer the world. Free of course.


  • #35
    nkay1985
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,975 ✭✭✭nkay1985


    Sully wrote: »
    Ill never get why we must insist on a leader rather then a party. This includes the attacks against FF/Greens/Labour etc. We seem to look at the leader a lot of the time and use that as a basis of whether a party is credible or not.

    Its sad, because FG have an awful lot of credible policies and TDs/Senators/MEPs. They are an excellent party in respect but we cant seem to see past Enda, whome may not be the best but is much further from the worst. I believe he is a more credible leader then Cowen who has shown to be offering nothing.

    It was FG who were calling for Anglo to be shut down but FF were insisting it wont be. Then Europe says it should be and FF then call for it! Yet, nobody even looks at FG for it and dismisses the party as "Oh, Enda? Never". Yet Varadkar, Hayes, Creighton, Bruton and Waterford's Paudie Coffey, and Maurice Cummins are bringing together a string of political plans - education, economy, health and political reform being a selection. They have, IIRC, something on agriculture taking shape now from what I gather. But - all dismissed because of Enda.

    So, what, do FG need to hire a good looking entertainer, who can talk with absolute ease and be impressive to get people to consider the real structure and political power behind the very man who put it together in the first place? Ludicrous.

    Look at Labour - water politics. Have very little potential and offer very little bar throwing punches at the government and making speeches that will win over public service workers and the general public - hitting the right notes and winning them over with stuff they want to hear. There a slow party in terms of policies and plans. They seem to offer very little in terms of front bench.

    Yet, Gilmore is the face of the party and a damn good speaker winning over the hearts and minds of the voters with "Whatever you want, Labour will give" approach. Hey presto, the party jumps in support and looks to get an overall majority by robbing the voters blind just like FF did. Just not corrupt or in bed with bankers - just in bed with public sector unions and making speeches that people want to hear even if its unrealistic.

    SF need an overhaul. Doesn't matter what they come out with, they will never be considered by the large majority to be an alternative.

    Personally, I would prefer the party that can offer real change. Real reform. Real and fair politics. Even if it meant being "stuck" with a leader who isn't the best at public engagements and winning over the hearts and minds with political bull****.

    Seems like this country wants change - but not the right type of change. Same circle we will remain in, just a different shower.

    I agree with the thrust of what you're saying and have thought that many times but it's just ridiculous that FG have stuck with a leader who's so grossly unpopular with the public they want to elect them. Part of it is this; why would we vote for a party who is willing to have this muppet as their leader. And that's what he is. I've never been anything but underwhelmed by him. It feels strange saying it but if the party had taken the step of removing him as leader after the last GE, I'd probably be voting for them or at least giving thema high preference. But, as it is, I just don't know. The idea of having him represent us on the international stage is just frightful. If he's Taoiseach, he's the face of Ireland for an enormous number of people. To think that I could have a part in putting him in that position makes me very seriously think about whether I could vote for anybody who supports him as leader.

    I fully accept that he did a very good job healing old wounds etc but he had done as much as he could by 2007 and IMO should have been ousted in favour of Richard Bruton or Gay Mitchell. With that move, FG would be the number one party by a long way right now; of that I have no doubt. Instead, they'll end up being run closer than they should be by Gilmore's bluster and ridiculous promises. Serious failing from the party members.


  • #36
    Pride Fighter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,729 ✭✭✭Pride Fighter


    Sully wrote: »



    Look at Labour - water politics. Have very little potential and offer very little bar throwing punches at the government and making speeches that will win over public service workers and the general public - hitting the right notes and winning them over with stuff they want to hear. There a slow party in terms of policies and plans. They seem to offer very little in terms of front bench.

    Yet, Gilmore is the face of the party and a damn good speaker winning over the hearts and minds of the voters with "Whatever you want, Labour will give" approach. Hey presto, the party jumps in support and looks to get an overall majority by robbing the voters blind just like FF did. Just not corrupt or in bed with bankers - just in bed with public sector unions and making speeches that people want to hear even if its unrealistic.

    Labour has a series of easily implemented policy documents that can help turn this country around. I've mentioned some of them on this and other threads. As for being a party of the public sector unions, thats nonsense. It was Fianna Fail that bloated the public sector between 1997-2005. Not Labour in government from 1992-1997. The last time Labour was in power 1000 jobs were being created a week. Ireland had its first ever surplus with a Labour finance minister.

    I would not knock a party for having no policies when they actually have policies. I recognise Fair Care and New Era policy documents by Fine Gael. I disagree with them but recognise that Fine Gael have policies. Fianna Fail are the party without policies. Labour does have policies. By creating jobs we can get out of recession.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    trapsagenius
    Closed Accounts Posts: 410 ✭✭trapsagenius


    Sully wrote: »
    Ill never get why we must insist on a leader rather then a party. This includes the attacks against FF/Greens/Labour etc. We seem to look at the leader a lot of the time and use that as a basis of whether a party is credible or not.

    Its sad, because FG have an awful lot of credible policies and TDs/Senators/MEPs. They are an excellent party in respect but we cant seem to see past Enda, whome may not be the best but is much further from the worst. I believe he is a more credible leader then Cowen who has shown to be offering nothing.

    It was FG who were calling for Anglo to be shut down but FF were insisting it wont be. Then Europe says it should be and FF then call for it! Yet, nobody even looks at FG for it and dismisses the party as "Oh, Enda? Never". Yet Varadkar, Hayes, Creighton, Bruton and Waterford's Paudie Coffey, and Maurice Cummins are bringing together a string of political plans - education, economy, health and political reform being a selection. They have, IIRC, something on agriculture taking shape now from what I gather. But - all dismissed because of Enda.

    So, what, do FG need to hire a good looking entertainer, who can talk with absolute ease and be impressive to get people to consider the real structure and political power behind the very man who put it together in the first place? Ludicrous.

    Look at Labour - water politics. Have very little potential and offer very little bar throwing punches at the government and making speeches that will win over public service workers and the general public - hitting the right notes and winning them over with stuff they want to hear. There a slow party in terms of policies and plans. They seem to offer very little in terms of front bench.

    Yet, Gilmore is the face of the party and a damn good speaker winning over the hearts and minds of the voters with "Whatever you want, Labour will give" approach. Hey presto, the party jumps in support and looks to get an overall majority by robbing the voters blind just like FF did. Just not corrupt or in bed with bankers - just in bed with public sector unions and making speeches that people want to hear even if its unrealistic.

    SF need an overhaul. Doesn't matter what they come out with, they will never be considered by the large majority to be an alternative.

    Personally, I would prefer the party that can offer real change. Real reform. Real and fair politics. Even if it meant being "stuck" with a leader who isn't the best at public engagements and winning over the hearts and minds with political bull****.

    Seems like this country wants change - but not the right type of change. Same circle we will remain in, just a different shower.

    Good post in general.You're like Gilmore-you articulate well.But there's still a lot I disagree with.
    Sully wrote: »

    Its sad, because FG have an awful lot of credible policies and TDs/Senators/MEPs. They are an excellent party in respect but we cant seem to see past Enda, whome may not be the best but is much further from the worst. I believe he is a more credible leader then Cowen who has shown to be offering nothing.

    He's actually not that far from the worst, IMO.But anyway that's the point, it's not just about Kenny and Cowen, Gilmore is in the mix as well.And he's the best of the 3.This is one thing that helps secure my vote for Labour in 2012.
    Sully wrote: »

    Yet Varadkar, Hayes, Creighton, Bruton and Waterford's Paudie Coffey, and Maurice Cummins are bringing together a string of political plans - education, economy, health and political reform being a selection. They have, IIRC, something on agriculture taking shape now from what I gather. But - all dismissed because of Enda.

    Agree with you about Varadkar and Bruton-both are good politicians. Disagree about Creighton and especially Hayes-apologies if this is slightly out of kilter with the politics forum etiquette, but the man's a ****.
    Sully wrote: »

    So, what, do FG need to hire a good looking entertainer, who can talk with absolute ease and be impressive to get people to consider the real structure and political power behind the very man who put it together in the first place? Ludicrous.

    No, not a good looking entertainer.Just a much more competent leader who say, for instance, could give a reason not to go into government with SF.


  • #38
    Sergeant
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,362 ✭✭✭Sergeant


    I would have to agree. As Sully pointed out earlier, FG have some serious talent in the ranks, and have at least offered some definable policies. The shutting down of Anglo was a call they made a number of months back.

    I do think Kenny is now hamstringing the party, he did help rebuild a decimated organisation after the 2002 election. But he does not inspire support in the voting populace. While politics shouldn't be showbiz, it does require an air of gravitas, which I believe Kenny lacks.

    While I would love to see a change of government, I don't think a Labour/FG coalition will bring about the necessary changes this country so dearly needs. FG should aspire to majority government, and Kenny appears to be putting a ceiling on their support.


  • #39
    Stroke Politics
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 570 ✭✭✭Stroke Politics


    FG have a decision to make: do they stick with Kenny as leader and just beat FF or do they switch to Bruton and absolutely trounce them?

    The slippage of 2% to Labour is also interesting, another 4% swing would leave them almost tied....


  • #40
    Darsad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 679 ✭✭✭Darsad


    When will the FF faithful realise that they need to get rid of that ignorant depressive apologist of a man Clowen, he has zero personality or leadership skills . He needs to go along with that numb nuts from donegal . with a new leader FF could actually rally a little and as it is a given that FF will do terrible at the next GE any new leader should be given until the fall or natural end of the next government . Nobody wants to leads FF now because they know tthey will be wiped out t the next GE so were all have to suffer.:mad:


  • #41
    Byron85
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,443 ✭✭✭Byron85


    Sully wrote: »
    Ill never get why we must insist on a leader rather then a party. This includes the attacks against FF/Greens/Labour etc. We seem to look at the leader a lot of the time and use that as a basis of whether a party is credible or not.

    Its sad, because FG have an awful lot of credible policies and TDs/Senators/MEPs. They are an excellent party in respect but we cant seem to see past Enda, whome may not be the best but is much further from the worst. I believe he is a more credible leader then Cowen who has shown to be offering nothing.

    It was FG who were calling for Anglo to be shut down but FF were insisting it wont be. Then Europe says it should be and FF then call for it! Yet, nobody even looks at FG for it and dismisses the party as "Oh, Enda? Never". Yet Varadkar, Hayes, Creighton, Bruton and Waterford's Paudie Coffey, and Maurice Cummins are bringing together a string of political plans - education, economy, health and political reform being a selection. They have, IIRC, something on agriculture taking shape now from what I gather. But - all dismissed because of Enda.

    So, what, do FG need to hire a good looking entertainer, who can talk with absolute ease and be impressive to get people to consider the real structure and political power behind the very man who put it together in the first place? Ludicrous.

    Look at Labour - water politics. Have very little potential and offer very little bar throwing punches at the government and making speeches that will win over public service workers and the general public - hitting the right notes and winning them over with stuff they want to hear. There a slow party in terms of policies and plans. They seem to offer very little in terms of front bench.

    Yet, Gilmore is the face of the party and a damn good speaker winning over the hearts and minds of the voters with "Whatever you want, Labour will give" approach. Hey presto, the party jumps in support and looks to get an overall majority by robbing the voters blind just like FF did. Just not corrupt or in bed with bankers - just in bed with public sector unions and making speeches that people want to hear even if its unrealistic.

    SF need an overhaul. Doesn't matter what they come out with, they will never be considered by the large majority to be an alternative.

    Personally, I would prefer the party that can offer real change. Real reform. Real and fair politics. Even if it meant being "stuck" with a leader who isn't the best at public engagements and winning over the hearts and minds with political bull****.

    Seems like this country wants change - but not the right type of change. Same circle we will remain in, just a different shower.

    Here here!! Well said!!


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Euro_Kraut
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,957 ✭✭✭Euro_Kraut


    Dob74 wrote: »
    It's a three way race. Popular vote wont matter as much as vote transfers.
    And where the vote is. If Labour can get 2 in 4&5 seaters in Dublin they can be the largest Party.

    Very unlikely. Labour will struggle to pick up seats outside of the urban areas. FF and FG will still dominate rural constituencies, with a couple exceptions.


  • #43
    yoshytoshy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,305 ✭✭✭yoshytoshy


    Great news for labour and greens ,hopefully there might be a few phonecalls between them.
    It would be nice to get an early election ,seriously though ,it's suprising that fianna fail have such support. Hopefully the 23% or so won't bother to vote for them.


  • #44
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Rumours of the death of the Green Party vote appear to have been somewhat exaggerated...wishful thinking, perhaps?

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #45
    Sergeant
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,362 ✭✭✭Sergeant


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    Rumours of the death of the Green Party vote appear to have been somewhat exaggerated...wishful thinking, perhaps?

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    A Red-C poll, margin of error.


  • #46
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Sergeant wrote: »
    A Red-C poll, margin of error.

    Yes, I'm able to read, thanks. My point is that according to those who hate them, Green support has collapsed irretrievably - but there it is fluctuating within its margin of error, time after time. If it had collapsed, the margin of error in a single poll wouldn't prevent that collapse showing up over multiple polls.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #47
    yoshytoshy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,305 ✭✭✭yoshytoshy


    Margin of error ,gulf oil slick ,Volcanic ash ,whatever floats the boat.

    The green party will be the first port of call when people think about envoirnmental issues. The anger over backing up fianna fail is starting to fade and I think thats why their support is coming back.


  • #48
    Pride Fighter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,729 ✭✭✭Pride Fighter


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    Yes, I'm able to read, thanks. My point is that according to those who hate them, Green support has collapsed irretrievably - but there it is fluctuating within its margin of error, time after time. If it had collapsed, the margin of error in a single poll wouldn't prevent that collapse showing up over multiple polls.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    The collapse is not in poll numbers the collapse is in the Green party itself. I think at heart the Green party is a good party. However, many Green people have left the party. While 4-6% will vote green, unless they are canvassed by activists those votes will not materialise. And with the party being more transfer toxic for going in with Fianna Fail I think that the Greens will get no seats unfortunately.

    I am sorry, as you said you're a Green voter. But the party organisation is in tatters.


  • #49
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Pride Fighter wrote: »
    The collapse is not in poll numbers the collapse is in the Green party itself. I think at heart the Green party is a good party. However, many Green people have left the party. While 4-6% will vote green, unless they are canvassed by activists those votes will not materialise. And with the party being more transfer toxic for going in with Fianna Fail I think that the Greens will get no seats unfortunately.

    I am sorry, as you said you're a Green voter. But the party organisation is in tatters.

    I accept that point, which is entirely separate from the claims usually made. Admittedly, I vote without being canvassed (I don't think any political party has ever canvassed me), but I have no idea whether I'm typical in that respect.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #50
    Pride Fighter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,729 ✭✭✭Pride Fighter


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    I accept that point, which is entirely separate from the claims usually made. Admittedly, I vote without being canvassed (I don't think any political party has ever canvassed me), but I have no idea whether I'm typical in that respect.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    I'm the same. I've only ever been canvassed by Fine Gael and Fianna Fail and would never ever vote for them. Even though they are in government with Fianna Fail, the Greens will be getting a preference off me, but it will be lower than the number 3 they got the last time.


  • #51
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Pride Fighter wrote: »
    I'm the same. I've only ever been canvassed by Fine Gael and Fianna Fail and would never ever vote for them. Even though they are in government with Fianna Fail, the Greens will be getting a preference off me, but it will be lower than the number 3 they got the last time.

    Slightly soiled, then?

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    hallelujajordan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,080 ✭✭✭hallelujajordan


    skelliser wrote: »
    Nice mis-direction here lads!

    The real story is the fact that Fianna Fail are now third on 2 different polls.
    People now know they are solely to blame for the economic mess we are now in.
    Looks like this could be the begininng of the end of them.

    Thank god!

    Actually, I think the real story is that we are moving from a 2 party state to a 3 party state which, ironically is probably better for FF than it is for FG. Who has benefitted most from the rise of the Lib-Dems in the UK, Labour or the Tories?
    Pride Fighter wrote: »
    . I disagree with them but recognise that Fine Gael have policies. Fianna Fail are the party without policies. Labour does have policies. By creating jobs we can get out of recession.

    Have you read the PfG . . to state that FF have no policies is just silly tbh . .
    Stroke Politics wrote: »
    FG have a decision to make: do they stick with Kenny as leader and just beat FF or do they switch to Bruton and absolutely trounce them?

    The slippage of 2% to Labour is also interesting, another 4% swing would leave them almost tied....

    Or, to put it a different way . . they have a choice between changing their leader now, taking a risk and pushing for an overall majority or accepting an inevitable coalition with an ever-growing Labour party. They won't take the risk and Kenny-Gilmore will form an unworkable coalition.
    Sergeant wrote: »
    A Red-C poll, margin of error.
    Love the way people discount those trends they don't like by quoting the old 'margin of error' . . If you want to look at the data that way then you might as well consider that FF could be +2 . . .


  • #53
    Lockstep
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,026 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    Pride Fighter wrote: »
    I'm the same. I've only ever been canvassed by Fine Gael and Fianna Fail and would never ever vote for them. Even though they are in government with Fianna Fail, the Greens will be getting a preference off me, but it will be lower than the number 3 they got the last time.

    I've been canvassed by;
    FF, FG, Sf, Labour, Republican SF, Libertas, independants etc. Surprised at how many people I've heard claim they've never been canvassed. I can't move for them when an election is on the cards.

    I'll probably give the local Green in my area a high preference, he's a good skin and genuinely believes in green issues. Shame the man is saddled with the party the way it is now.

    I do get a bit sick of hearing "POPULIST" levelled at Gilmore the whole time. I heard him speak when he just got in, after a weak Labour performance in 2007. He was saying the exact same stuff that he is now at a time when it was a lot less popular.


  • #54
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,058 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    nkay1985 wrote: »
    I agree with the thrust of what you're saying and have thought that many times but it's just ridiculous that FG have stuck with a leader who's so grossly unpopular with the public they want to elect them. Part of it is this; why would we vote for a party who is willing to have this muppet as their leader. And that's what he is. I've never been anything but underwhelmed by him. It feels strange saying it but if the party had taken the step of removing him as leader after the last GE, I'd probably be voting for them or at least giving thema high preference. But, as it is, I just don't know. The idea of having him represent us on the international stage is just frightful. If he's Taoiseach, he's the face of Ireland for an enormous number of people. To think that I could have a part in putting him in that position makes me very seriously think about whether I could vote for anybody who supports him as leader.

    Good points and one of the strongest arguments I have seen so far.

    The question is; What exactly is wrong with Enda? It seems that people blame his accent, his "grin", his hair, where he is from, that he is no "bertie" etc. Are we looking for "Personality of the Year" award here, before we can consider a party? I have yet to hear a genuine "Whats wrong with Enda" reason. All just "Well, since there is SOMETHING wrong with Enda - he cant be a leader and therefore we cant vote for his party" which is not a greart mentality to have.

    Enda is far from a "muppet". Without Enda, FG would not be where it is today. That means, you would not have a credible opposition in terms of a healthy mix of young and old politicans, experienced and upcoming politicans, a strong front bench, strong politicans in the making or in ranks, constant stream of proposals hitting the key areas that need attention and so on. Instead, we would be left with a weak FG offering very little and Labour in strong position for overall majority at least. Not something this country needs or wants.
    I fully accept that he did a very good job healing old wounds etc but he had done as much as he could by 2007 and IMO should have been ousted in favour of Richard Bruton or Gay Mitchell. With that move, FG would be the number one party by a long way right now; of that I have no doubt. Instead, they'll end up being run closer than they should be by Gilmore's bluster and ridiculous promises. Serious failing from the party members.

    I think he continues to improve the party and make it where and what it is today. Its not about reforming the party and making it strong, then stepping aside and letting someone who can speak very well and be a strong personality liking for the country. Why? Because the change stops and you have nobody with a desire to push the country forward with a strong and a credible party with strong policies which are streaming out on how FG would tackle the ****e we are in now. It just stops.
    trapsagenius wrote: »
    He's actually not that far from the worst, IMO.But anyway that's the point, it's not just about Kenny and Cowen, Gilmore is in the mix as well.And he's the best of the 3.This is one thing that helps secure my vote for Labour in 2012.

    How is he even close to the worst?

    Cowen sits on his arse doing nothing, and offers no communication. He has no balls to do anything in the party. He seems to be just a figure head with everybody poking fun at him. The party seems to be running with no control and into infinity with little or no control. The party under his leadership is offering the country nothing - it got us into a mess, is making a mess of getting us out and just seems to have that in its target - getting us out and forgetting everything else.

    Gilmore offers what exactly? Yes, hope. The world. Excellent speaches, very good at attacking and chooses his moments carefully - winning all those gold stars. A bit of the Bertie factor. Pure populism, but thats what everybody loves and wants to hear. But what is he offering? Honestly. Look behind him and you have a party cowering away muttering, moaning, complaining and screaching coming from Joan. Seems to be more siding with public sector and little or nothing for the country at whole. I hear very little from them other then complain and Gilmore speaking very well.

    Kenny. Ah yes, the boy with that "sly grin" and "cheeky hair style". Where do I start. Usual line - brought FG back from the brink, into a strong party with a healthy mix of TDs, Senators and MEPs. A great strong team to bring the country forward. They have, under his leadership, brought together a number of policies - NewERA (economy & jobs), 3rdway (Education), Budget 2010 Proposal, FairCare (Health Care Reform), Hope for A Lost Generation (Youth Unemployment) etc.

    These are a selection of a wide range of policies - more on farming, consumer rights, broadband, businesses, political reform etc. This all done by Kennys leadership. He toured the country on many of these policies along with the respective team members. With more policies in the working, why the hell wouldn't we give this party a damn vote and say thanks to Kenny for giving us a credible alternative to get Ireland working again? Because he may not be the best speaker? He hardly makes a fool of himself or the country. He does come across a tad wooden, but thats hardly a reason to say "No Thanks" when he offers much more? When you meet him, he is a lot more at ease and chatty. So representing us abroad wont be a major issue.

    Considering he is vice chairperson of the EPP Group (European Peoples Parliment) since 2006 he must be doing something right.
    Agree with you about Varadkar and Bruton-both are good politicians. Disagree about Creighton and especially Hayes-apologies if this is slightly out of kilter with the politics forum etiquette, but the man's a ****.

    Matter of personal opinion I guess :)
    No, not a good looking entertainer.Just a much more competent leader who say, for instance, could give a reason not to go into government with SF.

    At least he was honest, but jesus, even he admitted that was a major error on his part but once again - hardly a reason to judge him. Not a vital issue with many making cockups and not making their point well in politics.
    Stroke Politics wrote: »
    FG have a decision to make: do they stick with Kenny as leader and just beat FF or do they switch to Bruton and absolutely trounce them?

    Many would say FG are not "beating FF" in the sense they are not attacking them hard enough. Most decent parties would run rings around FF as it is now, which is why FG & Labour are so far ahead. The question often asked is; should they be doing better? FF may be down in the dumps and suffering a major defeat and blow, but its a party that wont be wipped out and no matter how much you canvas and shout from the rooftops - even barrack obama style - you will strugle to run away with it. There a dark horse and have thick, strong roots. Far to early for any party to kill those roots and walk away with it, despite what people think.
    The slippage of 2% to Labour is also interesting, another 4% swing would leave them almost tied....

    Politics is an interesting game. That could drop, increase, steady out. Same for FG. FF/Greens etc. will only change slightly.

    Its a two horse race, and the horses will need to improve their communication. Labour will see now that Gilmores speach won a huge vote (which makes leaders debates in an election very interesting indeed!) and will manipulate that. FG need to drum out their party plan, be more vocall and ensure their punches are hard. They need to push for a majority and not slack to a "Ah, Labour will do".


  • #55
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,058 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    kickoutthejams wrote: »
    I do get a bit sick of hearing "POPULIST" levelled at Gilmore the whole time. I heard him speak when he just got in, after a weak Labour performance in 2007. He was saying the exact same stuff that he is now at a time when it was a lot less popular.

    Never said he was never singing the populist line. He always did. It just works better now. ;)


  • #56
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Sully wrote: »
    What exactly is wrong with Enda? It seems that people blame ...... that he is no "bertie" etc.

    That's one massive endorsement right there, for a start!
    Sully wrote: »
    Are we looking for "Personality of the Year" award here, before we can consider a party? I have yet to hear a genuine "Whats wrong with Enda" reason. All just "Well, since there is SOMETHING wrong with Enda - he cant be a leader and therefore we cant vote for his party" which is not a greart mentality to have.

    Unfortunately, it's a mentality that does persist around the country, and while I'd agree with you 100% (we need a doer/leader, not a vacuous, corrupt, evasive, self-interested egoist) there unfortunately are people who refuse to acknowledge the damage that having an apparent "one of the lads" instead of someone who might not be someone you'd go to the pub with*, but actually gets things done.

    * Disclaimer : I wouldn't go to the pub with Ahern, and I'd probably leave if the little weasel came in - I prefer to hang out with decent, honest folk

    But it is a serious issue in politics......at one stage, I'd have voted for Michael McDowell because you knew where you stood with him; even if you disagreed with him on half of the issues, at least you knew that he wouldn't talk out of both sides of his mouth on the ones you did agree with.

    Unfortunately, McDowell rolled over on Ahern's finances, and hence his banishment from consideration for those who prefer honest and common-good poltics.


  • #57
    trapsagenius
    Closed Accounts Posts: 410 ✭✭trapsagenius


    Sully wrote: »


    How is he even close to the worst?

    Cowen sits on his arse doing nothing, and offers no communication. He has no balls to do anything in the party. He seems to be just a figure head with everybody poking fun at him. The party seems to be running with no control and into infinity with little or no control. The party under his leadership is offering the country nothing - it got us into a mess, is making a mess of getting us out and just seems to have that in its target - getting us out and forgetting everything else.

    Gilmore offers what exactly? Yes, hope. The world. Excellent speaches, very good at attacking and chooses his moments carefully - winning all those gold stars. A bit of the Bertie factor. Pure populism, but thats what everybody loves and wants to hear. But what is he offering? Honestly. Look behind him and you have a party cowering away muttering, moaning, complaining and screaching coming from Joan. Seems to be more siding with public sector and little or nothing for the country at whole. I hear very little from them other then complain and Gilmore speaking very well.

    Kenny. Ah yes, the boy with that "sly grin" and "cheeky hair style". Where do I start. Usual line - brought FG back from the brink, into a strong party with a healthy mix of TDs, Senators and MEPs. A great strong team to bring the country forward. They have, under his leadership, brought together a number of policies - NewERA (economy & jobs), 3rdway (Education), Budget 2010 Proposal, FairCare (Health Care Reform), Hope for A Lost Generation (Youth Unemployment) etc.

    These are a selection of a wide range of policies - more on farming, consumer rights, broadband, businesses, political reform etc. This all done by Kennys leadership. He toured the country on many of these policies along with the respective team members. With more policies in the working, why the hell wouldn't we give this party a damn vote and say thanks to Kenny for giving us a credible alternative to get Ireland working again? Because he may not be the best speaker? He hardly makes a fool of himself or the country. He does come across a tad wooden, but thats hardly a reason to say "No Thanks" when he offers much more? When you meet him, he is a lot more at ease and chatty. So representing us abroad wont be a major issue.

    Considering he is vice chairperson of the EPP Group (European Peoples Parliment) since 2006 he must be doing something right.


    At least he was honest, but jesus, even he admitted that was a major error on his part but once again - hardly a reason to judge him. Not a vital issue with many making cockups and not making their point well in politics.

    Before I start, let me clarify one thing-I think Cowen is a terrible leader and Taoiseach.

    Anyway,while I admire your commitment to Kenny,and can see where you are coming from, I will never think Kenny is a good leader.He has been leader since 2002 and he has never struck as anything other than unconvincing.I have lost track of the number of times I have seen or heard him make a hash of TV or radio interviews.Then there was the whole "Contract for a better Ireland" rubbish in the 2007 GE-I mean, was that the best he could come up with in 5 years in opposition?He also lost the Leaders debate to Bertie that year, IMO.He let what was potentially a great TD in George Lee slip through his fingers.The proof is in the pudding with Kenny-his personal approval has been declining recently, while Gilmore's has been soaring, so I am hardly in the minority with this viewpoint.


  • #58
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    trapsagenius wrote: »
    Before I start, let me clarify one thing-I think Cowen is a terrible leader and Taoiseach.

    The proof is in the pudding with Kenny-his personal approval has been declining recently, while Gilmore's has been soaring, so I am hardly in the minority with this viewpoint.

    But can you not see how your earlier endorsement of Ahern casts doubt on your ability to judge a "good" TD, Minister or Taoiseach ?


  • #59
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,058 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    trapsagenius wrote: »
    Before I start, let me clarify one thing-I think Cowen is a terrible leader and Taoiseach.

    Anyway,while I admire your commitment to Kenny,and can see where you are coming from, I will never think Kenny is a good leader.He has been leader since 2002 and he has never struck as anything other than unconvincing.I have lost track of the number of times I have seen or heard him make a hash of TV or radio interviews.Then there was the whole "Contract for a better Ireland" rubbish in the 2007 GE-I mean, was that the best he could come up with in 5 years in opposition?He also lost the Leaders debate to Bertie that year, IMO.He let what was potentially a great TD in George Lee slip through his fingers.The proof is in the pudding with Kenny-his personal approval has been declining recently, while Gilmore's has been soaring, so I am hardly in the minority with this viewpoint.

    May I add - I don't think Gilmore wouldn't be a good leader and representative of Ireland. I just fail to see what he actually offers and would not get behind him or his party because they offer very little and I do not trust them to bring change and radical change. He is all talk and little or no action - I can read behind his approach, his speech and see whats behind the front.

    Its hardly commitment. You can call me a deep thinker and its something I hear a lot in various political circles and debates but not once have I been given a remotely convincing argument that suggests he is not a credible leader. Even when I point out all the good and what he was created for Ireland - people cant shine a negative light on it and just float around the usual nonsense. Thats why I cant see past the line and are not with a lot of people calling for such. Its why I can see Kenny as being a better leader. If he had the communication skills that Gilmore had and everything else remained the same about Kenny - he would be onto a winner. What does that tell you?

    So what if he comes up with political advertising nonsense - its the message that counts behind that whole contract nonsense. The party was weaker then and has become a lot stronger and in a much better viewpoint and position to attack and attack well and hard. Its also known with FG circles that its not Kennys fault they are failing to do that - its the whole party. I see plenty of it down here in Waterford. So I generally laugh at the approach and read into what exactly the point being raised is and whether he represents something credible or not. Also weather he can be credible in his position and his position alone.

    Everyone who understands politics knew that no matter what party George Lee was in, he was a dead duck and a failure of a politician. Even those who would stab Kenny within FG noted that - as did other political parties and publicly. I think Kenny handled him well and if he handed him over (remember, its George Lee - no political experience at all) a huge chunk of power he would be blasted from within and outside FG. Lee could not handle or cut politics. End of.

    As for Bertie - tough match and we all know Enda is out of his depth when it comes to Bertie style communication. Even Gilmore would find him tough. Just look how that leader [Bertie] turned out to be in the end.

    Enda or Bertie? Choice is easy.


  • #60
    trapsagenius
    Closed Accounts Posts: 410 ✭✭trapsagenius


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    But can you not see how your earlier endorsement of Ahern casts doubt on your ability to judge a "good" TD, Minister or Taoiseach ?

    I find that quite insulting actually.And where did I say anything about Bertie on this thread?


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Eliot Rosewater
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,745 ✭✭✭Eliot Rosewater


    A Labour Party government will be disastrous for the economy, in my opinion. I outlined why I think this in a thread: Will a Labour government only prolong the economic ruin?

    I supported most of my assertions there with links to newspapers. Unfortunately no Labour supporters challenged my claims. As such, do I just accept my conclusion as generally correct?


Advertisement