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

Did You ever vote Fianna Fail?

124678

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    lugha wrote: »
    There certainly was that problem in the early years of the boom, surprising to recall, but there was a chronic housing shortage in the early years. But as more and more land was rezoned for residential use the appetite for acquiring houses and their prices only went one way. That would suggest to me that while the way the land banks were held back was done to try and drive up the price, it turned out to be unnecessary. I think the boom would have happened without the corruption.



    The regulation surely had more to do with the financial sector rather than the construction one? In any case, I would say this was in the interests of the government (as well as the financial sector) and should probably be filed more under poor, or even reckless management, rather than corruption.

    That chronic housing shortage was a relatively temporary thing as '' the youngest population in Europe'' aged a bit and could have been easily managed. A great part of the house price rise was do to corrupt zoning and planning and artificially distorting the market through those landbanks drip feeding into the sysyem to suit developers.

    A country of 4 million odd the size of England having at one time the highest prices per sq ft in the world ! An artificial bubble if ever there was one .

    The regulation had everything to do with construction sector, In no time at all there was no difference between the construction sector and the financial sector. For gods sake even the lawyers and auctioneers were becoming developers and financial advisors terrified that they would miss the out on the goose laying the golden eggs.

    And the climate for all this was set at the very top- fish rots from the head.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,271 ✭✭✭✭johngalway


    later12 wrote: »
    councillors named as corrupt

    Same question.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭yosser hughes


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    No short memory here. I was simply pointing out exactly what you have in your post.Some people need to be confronted with the reality of their position.
    Also as had been stated many times on this thread. Fianna Faíl never got more than around 41% of the vote so the majority of people have never voted for them,even during the bubble. Those people knew the reality of the corruption. The 40% are happy to vote for corrupt people.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,157 ✭✭✭Good loser


    I voted FF in the last election and in the previous few elections as far as I can remember.

    Knew there was going to be a landslide against them but considered balance and prudence were appropriate in the circumstances. Would never vote SF/ULA types.

    Aware of the crook-ish aspects in FF but that is to be expected in from all parties/individuals in power for a long time.

    Could well vote FG next time (if alive).


  • Registered Users Posts: 222 ✭✭marozz


    I have to admit I did from the early 80's. It was a family thing. My grandfather, my father and myself all voted FF and we all worked for the Irish Press. So no surprise there. I emigrated in 87 , was away 10 years and came back with a different outlook on things. I can't stand any of them.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 43,274 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    lividduck wrote: »
    In 2002 I voted for them because of the Peace Process and also because FG the main opposition party was promising lunatic things like:
    Compensating Taxi drivers for the loss of a monopoly they had abused for decades.
    Promising to compensate gamblers for their losses on Eircom shares.
    You see in 2002 there was no real other choice.


    Yep, I've voted FF for various reasons, the main reason, no strong Labour where I am and FG ditching Garret's reforming social agenda.

    Ray McSharry would have been a Minister for Finance I admired economically, so between liking Labour socially and him economically, not much realistic choice in Donegal, I suppose no PD's.

    By 2007 I thought the lowering tax agenda had become just as much a bubble as property and the only party proposing a tax rise was FF, a rise in PRSI and totally about time, until Bertie threw all Cowen''s promises aside and promised tax cuts.

    Voted Green last time!

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,247 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    Also as had been stated many times on this thread. Fianna Faíl never got more than around 41% of the vote so the majority of people have never voted for them,even during the bubble. Those people knew the reality of the corruption. The 40% are happy to vote for corrupt people.

    Doesn't really compute as only about 15% of our TDs are elected on the first count.
    So someone who gave FF say a Number 2 or a Number 10 may well have led to that TD being elected. For example I know people who hated FF but hated Sinn Fein more, and if seat 5 in a constituency was going to come down to a fight between the SFer and the FFer would happily give the FF candidate a low preference and the SFer none.

    FF understood the PRSTV system and fought tooth and nail for lower preferences. I'd say the percentage of voters who truly 'never voted FF' is closer to 30% than the 60% being quoted in the thread.


  • Registered Users Posts: 43,274 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    lugha wrote: »
    This misuse of statistics seems to me to be quite prevalent in politics. 40% support for a party in a many party political system is very impressive. It can be made to appear much less so by pointing out that 60% did not! And of course, you cannot by any stretch, argue that a sizable portion of those 60% were concerned about, or even aware of, the impending danger.

    There is an element of down playing how successful FF were and have been in Irish society and in particular recent Irish history. FF have been in power for about 62 of the last 80 years, it isn't that long ago that not getting an overall majority was seen as failure, then was seen as an impossibility and Bertie was damn close, twice in a row. Orher European parties would die for that level of success, particularly under PR. The most successful party in Western democracies for a reason.

    Why was Bertie so close? Transfers, simple.

    So people who saw FF as transfer toxic under DeV and Civl War politics and then under Haughey and his corruption, suddenly started giving No.2's to FF.

    It isn't just the 40%. It's the 1,000's of upon 1'000's of voters who gave a FF'er a No.2, leaving them only a few seats to get Government, turning the 3rd seat out of 5 to FF in the country, or that 2nd seat out of 4 in Dublin.

    People had their chance in 2007 to turn up their noses at FF, they didn't, and it sums up a lot!

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    I would have given them preferences in the 90's but as we moved out of the 90's and I became more politically aware I didn't like what I was seeing. I really couldn't stand the corruption and the way a lot of people were almost cheering it on as long as it didn't affect them directly. In 2002 I didn't give them a preference at all. By 2007 I was actively campaigning against them and was so pee'd off when they got in again. They stand for everything that is wrong with Irish politics, though the whole system needs to be sorted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,250 ✭✭✭lividduck


    marienbad wrote: »
    Never voted for them and I never will, and as for the notion that we all went along with it in the good times- this is just not true. A large minority were sick to the core with the goings on in this country but other than campaigning and voting responsibly there is'nt much one can do- that is the nature of democracy.

    As for the oft-stated idea that the other crowd would have behaved no differently, there is no evidence for this .As a matter of fact there is some indicators to the contrary - the Fitzgerald and Bruton governments did'nt follow the CJH model so why would later versions follow the Bertie model ?

    To say that the endemic corruption did'nt contribute to the boom and bust of our economy is just unbelievable- of course it did. More people need to read that report .
    I would suggest that you read the FG and labour manifestos for the elections in both 2002 and 2007. In 2007 FG and Lab were actually promising to outspend FF! Over the years both FG and Lab urged greater and greater levels of spending.
    As for corruption well FF led the way, hands down, but lets not forget Lowrey and the Mobile licience and his Ben Dunne connection, or Cosgrave , there was corruption in all the major parties to some degree.
    It is not as simple as FF voters evil , everyone else saints!


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭yosser hughes


    lividduck wrote: »
    I would suggest that you read the FG and labour manifestos for the elections in both 2002 and 2007. In 2007 FG and Lab were actually promising to outspend FF! Over the years both FG and Lab urged greater and greater levels of spending.
    As for corruption well FF led the way, hands down, but lets not forget Lowrey and the Mobile licience and his Ben Dunne connection, or Cosgrave , there was corruption in all the major parties to some degree.
    It is not as simple as FF voters evil , everyone else saints!

    How did Fine Gel deal with Lowry again? How did Fianna Faíl deal with Burke, Flynn, Lawlor, Haughey.............................
    Give me a break with "they're all the same" nonsense.
    Corruption in Fianna Faíl was admired by voter and party colleague alike.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭yosser hughes


    Doesn't really compute as only about 15% of our TDs are elected on the first count.
    So someone who gave FF say a Number 2 or a Number 10 may well have led to that TD being elected. For example I know people who hated FF but hated Sinn Fein more, and if seat 5 in a constituency was going to come down to a fight between the SFer and the FFer would happily give the FF candidate a low preference and the SFer none.

    FF understood the PRSTV system and fought tooth and nail for lower preferences. I'd say the percentage of voters who truly 'never voted FF' is closer to 30% than the 60% being quoted in the thread.

    Fair points made there.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    lividduck wrote: »
    I would suggest that you read the FG and labour manifestos for the elections in both 2002 and 2007. In 2007 FG and Lab were actually promising to outspend FF! Over the years both FG and Lab urged greater and greater levels of spending.
    As for corruption well FF led the way, hands down, but lets not forget Lowrey and the Mobile licience and his Ben Dunne connection, or Cosgrave , there was corruption in all the major parties to some degree.
    It is not as simple as FF voters evil , everyone else saints!

    I never said it was that simple and of course there is curruption in all parties but FF turned it into a business and virtually legitimised it , though that sound contradictory. And even now Bertie and Flynn instead of at least shutting the fcuk up still protest their innocence .

    You can mention on one hand the currupt politicians in other parties, the list seems endless when it come to FF- it is endemic as that report said.

    By the way I have read those manifestos and if you believe that then you are just naive. FG and Labour always have a get out of jail card in that the manifestos apply to single party government but it is always a coalition elected , so back to the drawing board. But anyway every manifesto is contingent on the state finances after a party takes office.
    This is not some 'Minority Report'' scenario , so lets judge on the actions taken and not on those that might have could have should have by an opposition that has essentially no power.l

    As your seriously contending that Alan Dukes Michael Noonan Pat Rabbitte Ruari Quinn would have allowed go in their parties or in government the behaviour that CJH Reynolds and Bertie not alone tolerated but themselves were involved in ?

    I never said the Fianna Fail voters were evil - less of the hyperbole please, but they should ask themselves why they did so . if only for practical reasons and if they wish to avoid being seduced again


  • Registered Users Posts: 207 ✭✭margio


    I voted Fianna Fail all my life as my family have done for generations. Yes my faith in the party has been damaged, but I would consider voting for them again, depending on the candidate etc.At the moment I would still be in the Republican spctrum, ie Fianna Fail/Sinn Fein. Although I think Fianna Fail has forgotten it's republican roots, and that's where the party went wrong.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,229 ✭✭✭✭ednwireland


    nope never , not even a preference, but then i'm a blow-in


  • Registered Users Posts: 865 ✭✭✭MajorMax


    In 1945 it was almost impossible to find anyone who would admit to voting for the Nazi party in 1933.
    Now I'm not comparing Fianna Fail to the Nazi party.
    One was a bunch of mindless thugs who ruthlessly oppressed their own people, were determined to hold onto power at any price in an Europe bound and enslaved under a fascist and despotic leader...................and the other was a German political party


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,774 ✭✭✭raymon


    MajorMax wrote: »
    In 1945 it was almost impossible to find anyone who would admit to voting for the Nazi party in 1933.
    Now I'm not comparing Fianna Fail to the Nazi party.
    One was a bunch of mindless thugs who ruthlessly oppressed their own people, were determined to hold onto power at any price in an Europe bound and enslaved under a fascist and despotic leader...................and the other was a German political party

    Ahhh yes , it was only a matter of time before Godwin's law was invoked.
    :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,299 ✭✭✭✭later12


    johngalway wrote: »
    Same question.

    Tom Hand, John Cosgrave will be named when his criminal case is completed, you might want to look at Ann Devitt as well who the tribunal criticised for having behaved "entirely inappropriately". It's not clear whether more of the un-named councillors (un-named because of ongoing court cases) are in Fine Gael.

    Is Anne Devitt still involved in a business relationship with James O'Reilly I wonder?


  • Registered Users Posts: 865 ✭✭✭MajorMax


    raymon wrote: »
    Ahhh yes , it was only a matter of time before Godwin's law was invoked.
    :)

    You Sir, are worse than Hitler;)


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,271 ✭✭✭✭johngalway


    later12 wrote: »
    Tom Hand, John Cosgrave will be named when his criminal case is completed, you might want to look at Ann Devitt as well who the tribunal criticised for having behaved "entirely inappropriately". It's not clear whether more of the un-named councillors (un-named because of ongoing court cases) are in Fine Gael.

    Is Anne Devitt still involved in a business relationship with James O'Reilly I wonder?

    No idea.

    As a FG voter (non member) I say don't let the door hit them in the arse on the way out. I don't care which party anyone is belonging to, if they're doing wrong get rid, simple as that.

    There was an ex FF TD on Newstalk, Jim Glennon, and he was asked if FF was synonymous with corruption. He said it was, and not only was FF toxic but that it was also tainted. (From memory it would have been some stage Friday morning on that prog with Ivan Yates).

    The reason people see it as such is the scale of the problem within FF. FG has/had whomever, but FF has had people right from the highest office in Govt down to the ground, and in Europe, who either have extremely serious smells coming from them or have actually been declared corrupt as in the case of P. Flynn.

    I'm not defending FG. I'm saying the scale of the problem is hugely skewed towards FF. On that basis I do have to object when corruption comes up and people say "They're all the same", no, they're not, some are a lot worse. That's not praise for FG at all, if there's a problem, then root it out and be quick about it.

    (By the by, at the outset I was asking the question simply out of curiosity).


  • Registered Users Posts: 43,274 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    MajorMax wrote: »
    In 1945 it was almost impossible to find anyone who would admit to voting for the Nazi party in 1933.
    Now I'm not comparing Fianna Fail to the Nazi party.
    One was a bunch of mindless thugs who ruthlessly oppressed their own people, were determined to hold onto power at any price in an Europe bound and enslaved under a fascist and despotic leader...................and the other was a German political party

    ;) I thought something like that when I saw the thread, was thinking more Thatcher though! ;)

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,299 ✭✭✭✭later12


    johngalway wrote: »

    The reason people see it as such is the scale of the problem within FF. FG has/had whomever, but FF has had people right from the highest office in Govt down to the ground, and in Europe, who either have extremely serious smells coming from them or have actually been declared corrupt as in the case of P. Flynn.

    We are one year on from the Moriarty report which found against a former Fine Gael Minister, and then we have details emerging from the Mahon tribunal whereby former Taoiseach and Fine Gael leader John Bruton was told about one of his councillors demanding a IR£200,000 corrupt payment from Frank Dunlop, and Bruton was told this by Frank Dunlop himself and dismissed it. Frank Dunlop told the Tribunal that Bruton said that Fine Gael was "not populated by angels".

    The fact is that in the early 1990s when much of this was happening, Fine gael only had 6 councillors on the council whereas Fianna Fail had twenty. However, from what I can see , Fine Gael is rather proportionately represented in Mahon - moreso than its other more popular rival, the Labour party, in fact,which is under-represented relative to its size.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    I can't remember the last time I bothered to vote.

    I have in the past given other forms of 'support' to Fianna Fail and a number of the other parties however. Fianna Fail gave poorer returns on such 'support' than most of the others, I found.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    As one local elections candidate told me about 10 years ago: we all lie, it's just a question of whose lies you choose to believe.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,375 ✭✭✭Boulevardier


    Once. Childers for president 1973. My first ever vote. That's it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 177 ✭✭lyndonjones


    How can you vote for a party that is steep in scandal and have total disregard for the working man??




  • margio wrote: »
    I voted Fianna Fail all my life as my family have done for generations. Yes my faith in the party has been damaged, but I would consider voting for them again, depending on the candidate etc.At the moment I would still be in the Republican spctrum, ie Fianna Fail/Sinn Fein. Although I think Fianna Fail has forgotten it's republican roots, and that's where the party went wrong.

    The only roots Fianna fail have is how to line their own pockets while bankrupting the country again and again. If you had any consideration for the generations after you you would ensure that that corruption on the state is removed for good.

    What exactly would it take for you to not vote for them ? Would it have to be mass genocide or something:mad::mad::mad:maybe if you or your children had to emigrate you may not "consider voting for them again":eek:

    Remember the last 3 previous Fianna Fail leaders have been found to be corrupt, and yet you'd consider voting for them again ???


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,271 ✭✭✭✭johngalway


    later12 wrote: »
    We are one year on from the Moriarty report which found against a former Fine Gael Minister, and then we have details emerging from the Mahon tribunal whereby former Taoiseach and Fine Gael leader John Bruton was told about one of his councillors demanding a IR£200,000 corrupt payment from Frank Dunlop, and Bruton was told this by Frank Dunlop himself and dismissed it. Frank Dunlop told the Tribunal that Bruton said that Fine Gael was "not populated by angels".

    The fact is that in the early 1990s when much of this was happening, Fine gael only had 6 councillors on the council whereas Fianna Fail had twenty. However, from what I can see , Fine Gael is rather proportionately represented in Mahon - moreso than its other more popular rival, the Labour party, in fact,which is under-represented relative to its size.

    Regarding John Bruton, did his version of events agree with Dunlops? If not, then forgive me but I'd have to cast a jaundiced eye over Frank "Bagman" Dunlop. I don't know anything about those events other than what you've posted.

    Michael Lowry was kicked out of FG, and I don't think there's much love lost there. Not sure why people in Tipp still vote for him, I wouldn't.

    I think a comparison would still have FF well ahead, it isn't just the numbers of corrupt people that is important, there is the level of Government they reached also.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,299 ✭✭✭✭later12


    johngalway wrote: »
    Regarding John Bruton, did his version of events agree with Dunlops?

    Initially, no. At first John Bruton denied having been informed of the request by Frank Dunlop. "On mature recollection" (four years after his vehement denials) John Bruton subsequently admitted that he had been told about this level of corruption. He doesn't deny it.

    http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/brutons-evidence-came-too-late-1200448.html


Advertisement