Election

recedite · 14-02-2016 11:32pm

Basically, regarding schools, FG promises all things to all people.
Only one thing really stands out there; increased taxpayer subsidies for elite private schools.

Hotblack Desiato · 15-02-2016 2:20am

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I probably won't vote for Wallace.

You probably won't be voting for anyone else either, unless you have Irish or British citizenship! :eek:

I say probably given the FUBAR state of the election register, there are no doubt tens of thousands of people on it who aren't entitled to be.

Kiwi in IE · 15-02-2016 10:25am

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

You probably won't be voting for anyone else either, unless you have Irish or British citizenship! :eek:

Have always been able to vote as came to country with Bristish citizenship. My Dad is originally from Glasgow. Immigrated to NZ when he was 3. Has proved very handy

Hotblack Desiato · 15-02-2016 12:11pm

Arra, shure yer practically one of us then

expectationlost · 15-02-2016 2:08pm

Equality in Education
Labour Party Manifesto
https://www.labour.ie/manifesto/equality-in-education/

More multi-denominational schools and an end to baptism requirements

A growing number of parents want their children to experience multi-denominational education. The situation where parents feel forced to baptise their children to ensure a school place must come to an end.

Labour in Government established the Forum on Patronage and Pluralism and has overseen a 43% increase in the number of multi-denominational schools.

Our plan for the next five years:

Provide a further 100 multi-denominational schools by 2021
Publish a White Paper building on the report of the Forum on Patronage and Pluralism to set out long-term policy in this area
Amend the Equal Status Act to ensure that schools prioritise children from the local community rather than focusing on their religion
Include an exception for minority faith schools that serve diverse communities

Publication cover - Labour Manifesto 2016 Download the full manifesto in PDF format (9.3MB). https://www.labour.ie/download/pdf/labour_manifesto_2016.pdf

has to be seen in context of FG policy above (and other possible coalition partners) can they really amend equal status act?

sheep? · 15-02-2016 2:13pm

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I've just seen that Brendon Howlin voted against the proposal to ban religious discrimination in school admission policies! WTF? This is inconsistent with his answers in the above survey. Will email him and ask his reasoning. Otherwise it's Social Democrats once I've clarified Kelly's position on abortion.

I'm in the same boat as yourself, in Wexford and trying hard to find a credible candidate. ("HAHAHAHAHAHA" - Rest of Ireland)

Cheers for sending that to Howlin, would you mind posting a reply if you get one?

expectationlost · 15-02-2016 2:38pm

Anseo review of manisfestos (before LP published) http://www.anseo.net/ge16-and-primary-education-religion-in-schools/ though im not quite sure what his criteria actually means

Shrap · 15-02-2016 3:57pm

sheep? wrote: »

I'm in the same boat as yourself, in Wexford and trying hard to find a credible candidate. ("HAHAHAHAHAHA" - Rest of Ireland)

Cheers for sending that to Howlin, would you mind posting a reply if you get one?

Just to clarify.....I assume you mean "HAHAHAHAHAHA, so are we" - Rest of Ireland ?

Huntergonzo · 15-02-2016 4:14pm

Would the Social Democrats be the most socially liberal party in Ireland? I mean will they activity campaign to repel the 8th?, call for abortion on demand?, end religious patronage of publicly funded schools? etc etc. Their website does seem to point out that they do hold some liberal views but what is their main selling point, are they a liberal party or not?

I'm in Meath East and they're running a candidate here but I know nothing about her, apart from the fact that she doesn't stand a chance of getting elected of course.

seamus · 15-02-2016 4:24pm

Huntergonzo wrote: »

Would the Social Democrats be the most socially liberal party in Ireland? I mean will they activity campaign to repel the 8th?, call for abortion on demand?, end religious patronage of publicly funded schools? etc etc. Their website does seem to point out that they do hold some liberal views but what is their main selling point, are they a liberal party or not?

They're covering the centre-left standpoint, which has traditionally been vacant or small in Ireland. The Greens and Labour have always stood in that space, but we've never had a large or cohesive party in that space in the same way that FG/FF stand in centre-right.

They're going for the "socially liberal, financially responsible" vote, which is probably the biggest vote out there, once you can convince people who are afraid to pick a "new" party.

At the moment, voters are more concerned about the financial aspect rather than the social one, so all of the parties will focus most of their time on that.

Huntergonzo · 15-02-2016 4:39pm

seamus wrote: »

They're covering the centre-left standpoint, which has traditionally been vacant or small in Ireland. The Greens and Labour have always stood in that space, but we've never had a large or cohesive party in that space in the same way that FG/FF stand in centre-right.

They're going for the "socially liberal, financially responsible" vote, which is probably the biggest vote out there, once you can convince people who are afraid to pick a "new" party.

At the moment, voters are more concerned about the financial aspect rather than the social one, so all of the parties will focus most of their time on that.

From what you say they sound like the only party that would remotely interest me, now personally I'm socially hard liberal and economically right leaning and I don't know if the Social Democrats fit that perfectly but they certainly appear to be as close as you'll get currently in Ireland.

The problem is though that people generally are afraid to pick a new party and what really frustrates me is people voting the same way mammy and daddy vote, I mean for jaysus sake it's not even your vote if you do that!!!

sheep? · 15-02-2016 4:41pm

Shrap wrote: »

Just to clarify.....I assume you mean "HAHAHAHAHAHA, so are we" - Rest of Ireland ?

Bingo! ^_^

Kiwi in IE · 15-02-2016 6:01pm

I'm quite shocked at how socially conservative the candidates from FG/FF are in my electorate. With the exception of one woman, who is standing for FF. She seems totally incongruent with the rest of FF. I would never vote for FF, but if the same woman with the same views was standing for Labour, I'd consider voting for her.

Kiwi in IE · 15-02-2016 10:42pm

sheep? wrote: »

I'm in the same boat as yourself, in Wexford and trying hard to find a credible candidate. ("HAHAHAHAHAHA" - Rest of Ireland)

Cheers for sending that to Howlin, would you mind posting a reply if you get one?

No reply as yet!

robdonn · 16-02-2016 11:03am

So, the second Leaders Debate was on last night, thoughts anyone?

Religion in education wasn't mentioned once, but not surprising as it doesn't seem to be a big issue for any of the parties.

Huntergonzo · 16-02-2016 11:14am

I saw a good bit of the debate and I found it very disappointing, from what I saw religion in education was totally ignored and so was abortion (apart from a mention by Boyd Barrett).

All they wanted to do last night was get as much populist bullshít in as possible, particularly about the economy and being tougher on crime (I might start praying myself if Lucinda ever gets the justice portfolio!),

It was rehearsed rhetoric all the way, very very bland stuff and on the back of that, impossible to declare a winner or even say that somebody done well. For me a politician has to break from script and say something of genuine value before they're even considered for praise, can't say I found any of them particularly encouraging last night.

Canadel · 16-02-2016 11:16am

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I'm quite shocked at how socially conservative the candidates from FG/FF are in my electorate. With the exception of one woman, who is standing for FF. She seems totally incongruent with the rest of FF. I would never vote for FF, but if the same woman with the same views was standing for Labour, I'd consider voting for her.

I'm surprised that you're shocked. I also doubt some of those candidates are as socially conservative as they say they are. They're appealing to a largely conservative country remember. Don't let the recent referendum fool you into thinking otherwise.

robdonn wrote: »

So, the second Leaders Debate was on last night, thoughts anyone?

Religion in education wasn't mentioned once, but not surprising as it doesn't seem to be a big issue for any of the parties.

Nor was abortion.

robdonn · 16-02-2016 11:27am

Huntergonzo wrote: »

It was rehearsed rhetoric all the way, very very bland stuff and on the back of that, impossible to declare a winner or even say that somebody done well. For me a politician has to break from script and say something of genuine value before they're even considered for praise, can't say I found any of them particularly encouraging last night.

I'm not very big into politics so take my opinion as "on first glance", but I think Stephen Donnelly did fairly well. I'm currently on the SocDem website trying to find out a little more about them but obviously their own promo website probably isn't a great indicator of how they would actually perform.

Lucinda was awful, it's like she was picking some of the worst policies from America and trying to transplant them here. She'll be wanting to privatise the prison system next.

robdonn · 16-02-2016 11:30am

Canadel wrote: »

Nor was abortion.

I'm both surprised and not surprised by this. It's one of the biggest discussion in politics at the moment but it's also one of the most decisive, they would wipe out half their supporters no matter which way they went on it so it seemed best to ignore it.

Canadel · 16-02-2016 11:41am

robdonn wrote: »

Lucinda was awful, it's like she was picking some of the worst policies from America and trying to transplant them here. She'll be wanting to privatise the prison system next.

Yeah that's the next logical step going by their already laid out policies. Horrible party. Hope they burn in hell. Politically speaking of course.

robdonn wrote: »

I'm both surprised and not surprised by this. It's one of the biggest discussion in politics at the moment but it's also one of the most decisive, they would wipe out half their supporters no matter which way they went on it so it seemed best to ignore it.

Instead of giving them 45 seconds at the end to speak about their general political priorities and promises, they should have had to speak specifically on abortion and about repealing the 8th. And inform them the camera will cut to the next candidate if they diverge from that issue. :pac:

robdonn · 16-02-2016 11:43am

Canadel wrote: »

Instead of giving them 45 seconds at the end to speak about their general political priorities and promises, they should have had to speak specifically on abortion and about repealing the 8th. And inform them the camera will cut to the next candidate if they diverge from that issue. :pac:

They'd probably prefer the camera cut away! :P

Huntergonzo · 16-02-2016 12:00pm

robdonn wrote: »

I'm not very big into politics so take my opinion as "on first glance", but I think Stephen Donnelly did fairly well. I'm currently on the SocDem website trying to find out a little more about them but obviously their own promo website probably isn't a great indicator of how they would actually perform.

Lucinda was awful, it's like she was picking some of the worst policies from America and trying to transplant them here. She'll be wanting to privatise the prison system next.

Stephen Donnolly presented himself well, probably the best of the lot in that regard but it's the content that really counts and there was nothing inspirational from any of them last night.

But to be fair to them the questions were very unoriginal, again there was nothing about religion in schools or abortion which was very disappointing. I was waiting for those 2 questions in particular and neither came up, but then again RTE is a station which uses tax payers money to broadcast mass every Sunday and play the catholic call to prayer every day, so more fool me for expecting those questions.

Lucinda is in the wrong country, she should be looking for the Republican nomination.

robdonn · 16-02-2016 12:24pm

Huntergonzo wrote: »

Stephen Donnolly presented himself well, probably the best of the lot in that regard but it's the content that really counts and there was nothing inspirational from any of them last night.

But to be fair to them the questions were very unoriginal, again there was nothing about religion in schools or abortion which was very disappointing. I was waiting for those 2 questions in particular and neither came up, but then again RTE is a station which uses tax payers money to broadcast mass every Sunday and play the catholic call to prayer every day, so more fool me for expecting those questions.

Very true, it all just seemed to be the same old questions with the same old answers. I'm also not a very nationalistic person, so it drives me mad every time I hear 1916 being brought up in any of these discussions. This stupid attitude that the "founding fathers" had the perfect plan for Ireland and that we must uphold values that are 100 years old is ridiculous.

Huntergonzo wrote: »

Lucinda is in the wrong country, she should be looking for the Republican nomination.

I've seen comments calling her an Irish Sarah Palin.

================

Going through the SocDem website and I found these 2 videos on their positions on abortion and religion in school.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3t-d7SlH344

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8eD-dvFqFA

Huntergonzo · 16-02-2016 12:52pm

robdonn wrote: »

Very true, it all just seemed to be the same old questions with the same old answers. I'm also not a very nationalistic person, so it drives me mad every time I hear 1916 being brought up in any of these discussions. This stupid attitude that the "founding fathers" had the perfect plan for Ireland and that we must uphold values that are 100 years old is ridiculous.

I've seen comments calling her an Irish Sarah Palin.

Ye I can't stand politicians bladdering on about 1916 either, it's nothing more than cynical attempt to grab the juvenile 'Brits out' vote, this is 2016, shut the f up about 1916.

In all honesty Renua are a joke, Lucinda is masquerading around promising people a new type of politics when all Renua are, are an even more conservative version of FF and FG.

robdonn wrote: »

Going through the SocDem website and I found these 2 videos on their positions on abortion and religion in school.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3t-d7SlH344

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8eD-dvFqFA

They're clear about wanting to remove the 8th ammendment and I hope they're genuine and won't jettison that commitment if they're negotiating to go into government but they're not clear on whether or not they're for abortion on demand (which I believe should be available).

Their stance on education is very mild, they're pushing for 'equal access', which should be a given but equal access to what, a catholic school? Ok they say that they want schools to provide for the needs of all parents in a particular area (or something to that effect) but practically speaking that can't be done. Secular schools provide neutral education which is fair for all, but the Social Democrats don't mention that.

I think they're on the right track but they are a little weak on education.

Kiwi in IE · 16-02-2016 1:17pm

robdonn wrote: »

I'm both surprised and not surprised by this. It's one of the biggest discussion in politics at the moment but it's also one of the most decisive, they would wipe out half their supporters no matter which way they went on it so it seemed best to ignore it.

Any politician who states that they are happy with the status quo on abortion or opposes repealing the 8th, will never get a vote from me, no matter how capable they seem otherwise, but likewise if they are wishy washy about it, without any firm position or ignore the issue entirely, there is no way I will vote for them either. I would only vote for a candidate who satisfactorily reflects my position on abortion. If everyone on both sides of the fence took the same stance, a candidate who takes a definite position one side or the other might wipe out half their votes, but ignoring it or giving wishy/washy rhetoric, would potentially wipe out far more than half!

Bristolscale7 · 16-02-2016 7:55pm

This on the repeal of the 8th amendment:
http://i.imgur.com/65DePKO.jpg

Zamboni · 19-02-2016 2:06pm

The Social Democrats have already put forth a motion in the Dail and have included in their mainfesto the repeal of Section 7 (3)(c) of the Equal Status Act 2000.

You may think (ah sure that only gets them in) but this would provide a FATAL blow to the churches hold over this state.

This is why Iona Institute are vociferous about providing non and multi-denominational schools. They want to distract. They don't want this touched!

Imagine the immediate and drastic reduction in Catholics in this country if the baptism barrier was removed. I dream of such a day.

If this falls - the issue of inclusion is a natural, logical and sequential event.

Kiwi in IE · 19-02-2016 4:24pm

Zamboni wrote: »

The Social Democrats have already put forth a motion in the Dail and have included in their mainfesto the repeal of Section 7 (3)(c) of the Equal Status Act 2000.

You may think (ah sure that only gets them in) but this would provide a FATAL blow to the churches hold over this state.

This is why Iona Institute are vociferous about providing non and multi-denominational schools. They want to distract. They don't want this touched!

Imagine the immediate and drastic reduction in Catholics in this country if the baptism barrier was removed. I dream of such a day.

If this falls - the issue of inclusion is a natural, logical and sequential event.

Thanks for that! I'm wavering again now. It's between them, Labour and an Independent in my area whose views match mine almost perfectly. I will give them 1,2and 3 but the order swings hourly at the moment.

realdanbreen · 19-02-2016 4:30pm

Bristolscale7 wrote: »

I've emailed all the candidates in my local area. The Labour and Fianna Fail candidates gave me boiler-plate copy/paste response. Labour seems to think revoking rule 68 was a HUUUUGE deal. The independent gave me a personal response and stated outright that he supports the separation of church and state.

Why doesn't an atheist canditate run for election and promise to support your wishes?
If it's the will of the people he/she will be elected if not well, that's democracy isn't it?

Huntergonzo · 19-02-2016 5:32pm

realdanbreen wrote: »

Why doesn't an atheist canditate run for election and promise to support your wishes?
If it's the will of the people he/she will be elected if not well, that's democracy isn't it?

What, does a candidate have to be an atheist to support separation of church and state?

Also what is an atheist candidate? For me atheist is just a quick word used to describe someone who doesn't believe in any god, I don't attach any other meanings or political causes to the word atheist.

You can of course have candidates who happen to be atheist but I wouldn't just vote for them because of that, I'd need to know whether or not they shared the same views as me first, that's quite important.

Kiwi in IE · 19-02-2016 5:40pm

For anyone who feels like making their feelings known on Twitter or Facebook, I found these;

http://twibbon.com/support/repeal-the-eighth-amendment-2

http://twibbon.com/support/i-support-secular-schools/twitter

Canadel · 20-02-2016 7:34pm

realdanbreen wrote: »

Why doesn't an atheist canditate run for election and promise to support your wishes?
If it's the will of the people he/she will be elected if not well, that's democracy isn't it?

Separation of church and state is intended to protect religious liberty. It was created to stop the threat of one religion towards another, to avoid the possibility of having one state religion, and to keep religion and government separate. Effectively it was designed to protect religion far more than atheism or anti-theism. In theory, every religious person should strongly support separation of church and state. The 1st amendment is probably the greatest piece of legislation ever written and Ireland would be a much better off society with something similar.

Cabaal · 22-02-2016 12:24pm

remember everyone

robdonn · 22-02-2016 1:07pm

Cabaal wrote: »

remember everyone

What constituency is he running in?

sheep? · 22-02-2016 2:54pm

The constituency in all our hearts.

robdonn · 22-02-2016 3:46pm

https://twitter.com/SocDems/status/701769077254201344

Pherekydes · 22-02-2016 10:31pm

Cabaal wrote: »

remember everyone

Is he running this time? I thought he retired 2000 yrs ago on massive pensions.

expectationlost · 22-02-2016 10:39pm

Joan Burton thinks she'll get bills pass that weren't passed in the 31st Dail with even less TDs http://www.rte.ie/news/election-2016/2016/0222/770028-joan-burton/ and FG with their promise of Admissions and Innovation BIll want to stuf more things in it to get it passed

Kiwi in IE · 22-02-2016 11:45pm

sheep? wrote: »

I'm in the same boat as yourself, in Wexford and trying hard to find a credible candidate. ("HAHAHAHAHAHA" - Rest of Ireland)

Cheers for sending that to Howlin, would you mind posting a reply if you get one?

Still no reply from Mr Howlin. I want to vote Labour, so unfortunately I will have to vote for him.

sheep? · 23-02-2016 12:21am

Cheers for the update. I still have no clear idea myself to be honest, and it ain't for lack of searching.

Kiwi in IE · 23-02-2016 12:39am

sheep? wrote: »

Cheers for the update. I still have no clear idea myself to be honest, and it ain't for lack of searching.

I'm thinking about voting Leonard Kelly 1, because if he gets in great, and if he doesn't my transfer will go to Howlin.

Daddy's boy really annoys me for some reason, so many people I've spoken to in extended family/work are voting for him because of Daddy. What is he, the democratic version of the Prince of Wales? He was in class with my OH and by all accounts he's a perfectly pleasant person, but one of OH's family members who's a diehard FF supporter because their parents supported FF, seriously suggested to me that I should be voting for him because he went to school with OH! OH himself wouldn't even consider voting for him. As if that's a reason to vote for someone. I hate that whole small town attitude toward such things! It's a perfect example of why politics here is the way it is!

Absolam · 23-02-2016 2:35am

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Daddy's boy really annoys me for some reason, so many people I've spoken to in extended family/work are voting for him because of Daddy. What is he, the democratic version of the Prince of Wales? He was in class with my OH and by all accounts he's a perfectly pleasant person, but one of OH's family members who's a diehard FF supporter because their parents supported FF, seriously suggested to me that I should be voting for him because he went to school with OH! OH himself wouldn't even consider voting for him. As if that's a reason to vote for someone. I hate that whole small town attitude toward such things! It's a perfect example of why politics here is the way it is!

Welcome to Ireland. Dig into it a little bit and you'll discover it goes back to who p*ssed on whose wall during the civil war. And regardless of what Daddy's boy does (including getting caught with his hand in the kitty/envelope, not suggesting that it's the case with this particular candidate) there were still be people who vote for him because his family did the 'right' thing once upon a time. Our inability to let go of our history is sometimes laughable, but our inability to hold politicians to account for their own actions is always infuriating.

Kiwi in IE · 23-02-2016 7:37am

Absolam wrote: »

Welcome to Ireland. Dig into it a little bit and you'll discover it goes back to who p*ssed on whose wall during the civil war. And regardless of what Daddy's boy does (including getting caught with his hand in the kitty/envelope, not suggesting that it's the case with this particular candidate) there were still be people who vote for him because his family did the 'right' thing once upon a time. Our inability to let go of our history is sometimes laughable, but our inability to hold politicians to account for their own actions is always infuriating.

Oh yes, once upon a time this mans father did something for someone and so now, 25 years later, his son will get the vote on account of that, not the slightest consideration to his policies or ability need be given. Now I might be giving this particular person a hard time unfairly, I wouldn't vote for him because I don't like the party he stands for and he's too conservative for me, but it's that attitude, rather than him personally that I find abhorrent.

A good example is someone in our extended family is very religious, they go to 'pro life' meetings etc and for them 'pro life' would be as much of a red line as repealing the 8th is for me. This person has always voted FF, because daddy voted FF. Has told me the 3 candidates for FF are getting 1,2 and 3. When I was looking into the candidates in the area, was very surprised to find my opinions matched quite well with a new, young FF Candidate. I don't like FF but I would have voted for this woman, if it wasn't for the fact she represents them. She wants to extend circumstances where abortion is legal and deal with religious patronage in schools. Two issues that this person is very against. Now I am 100% certain that this voter has no idea about this and knows nothing about the candidate. I am also certain she would not vote for this candidate if she was aware and would probably complain to FF for dropping the standards. But no, they will blindly vote for her because FF and daddy. Usually I am quite nice about such things in real life, and despite my polar opposite views, I have pointed out this sort of thing before, I wouldn't usually like to see someone unknowingly go against their personal beliefs, even if they are the opposite of mine. But not this time! She can vote for the pro choice FF candidate and next time I see her after the election, I will point out she is pro choice!

Absolam · 23-02-2016 7:55am

In a party political system I can't see any point in considering a party candidates position on any major issue at all; when it comes down to it they are obliged to vote with the party or lose the whip, impacting their political career. You can only rely on them to vote their conscience (or in accordance with the wishes of those who elect them) on matters which the party doesn't care about, which simply isn't going to be anything of national consequence. At least an independent is reasonably likely to do what they say they will, since they're not beholden to anyone other than their supporters.

Kiwi in IE · 23-02-2016 8:02am

Absolam wrote: »

In a party political system I can't see any point in considering a party candidates position on any major issue at all; when it comes down to it they are obliged to vote with the party or lose the whip, impacting their political career. You can only rely on them to vote their conscience (or in accordance with the wishes of those who elect them) on matters which the party doesn't care about, which simply isn't going to be anything of national consequence. At least an independent is reasonably likely to do what they say they will, since they're not beholden to anyone other than their supporters.

Yeah I know that, but I know for a fact that no matter what difference it made to party/nationally or whether of not this politician can vote with her own conscience in such issues, the voter in question would be unlikely to vote someone touting pro choice views, as I would someone who is pro life. The FF because Daddy liked FF, blinds everything and maybe there will be a lesson to be learned from it re voting a bit more responsibly.

Absolam · 23-02-2016 8:12am

I agree; some people see no further than the party though. I suspect if your candidate stated categorically that she would vote against the party on abortion if elected she'd still get their vote, because they know FF (or FG, makes no odds) would make sure she toe'd the party line when it came to it. At the end of her day her opinions don't matter; she's a party bum on a seat.

Kiwi in IE · 23-02-2016 8:19am

If you are a supporter of that party because you have studied their manifesto and support their policies then fair enough I guess, but only voting for a candidate/party because they are the party your parent (who passed away 40 years ago) voted for is to me, just bizarre and quite irresponsible, the attitude or a variation of it, is so, so common in these parts. "We are a ...... Family"!

realdanbreen · 23-02-2016 9:28am

Absolam wrote: »

Welcome to Ireland. Dig into it a little bit and you'll discover it goes back to who p*ssed on whose wall during the civil war. And regardless of what Daddy's boy does (including getting caught with his hand in the kitty/envelope, not suggesting that it's the case with this particular candidate) there were still be people who vote for him because his family did the 'right' thing once upon a time. Our inability to let go of our history is sometimes laughable, but our inability to hold politicians to account for their own actions is always infuriating.

What p1sses me off is people who have a complex about being Irish or about living in Ireland. Fact is we are blessed to be living in a democracy where the electorate decide who represents us in parliament. Name one other country where there is a better system? China? Yemen?Syria? Russia? I don't think so.

seamus · 23-02-2016 9:34am

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

If you are a supporter of that party because you have studied their manifesto and support their policies then fair enough I guess, but only voting for a candidate/party because they are the party your parent (who passed away 40 years ago) voted for is to me, just bizarre and quite irresponsible, the attitude or a variation of it, is so, so common in these parts. "We are a ...... Family"!

2011 blew that out of the water for a lot of people. The absolute mess that FF made of everything gave everyone pause for thought and FF lost a lot of life-long voters and their children.

It was probably the first time a lot of people reconsidered whether simply sticking by the family mantra was actually a good idea.

Last year's referendum too would have given a lot of young people impetus to realise that they should make up their own mind when casting their votes.

We're still really only one generation removed from civil war politics. My father was born (just) before the birth of the Republic and his own father was a teenager during the civil war. So for his generation a lot of that old civil war crap between FF & FG was still very "real" and relevant - their own parents and grandparents were able to talk to them (indoctrinate them, even) with first hand accounts of the period.

PopePalpatine · 23-02-2016 10:03am

realdanbreen wrote: »

What p1sses me off is people who have a complex about being Irish or about living in Ireland. Fact is we are blessed to be living in a democracy where the electorate decide who represents us in parliament. Name one other country where there is a better system? China? Yemen?Syria? Russia? I don't think so.

86 countries, along with the Dutch overseas territory of Sant Maartin and Northern Ireland, use some form of proportional representation. Personally, I'd prefer a national party list system to elect up to half of the Dail as well as the whole Seanad.

Election

Comments