Stupid questions from a first time voter

jesus smith

Hi all I'm kind of new to the whole politics things and the voting etc i was wondering if you folk could help me out with some basic questions?

ok first off can you tell me (or link me to somewhere where i can find out) what each party is about with out all the party rhetoric.

any help would be appreciated because I'm getting massively conflicting views off every gob****e left right and center at the moment, like for instance I was planning on voting greens then i heard they're connected to Sinn Fein and that theres some thing where if they don't get seats their votes go to Sinn Fein, at this point i asked what was so very bad about this and was told about the whole Sinn Fein- IRA connection, which i assumed was kind of a thing of the past at this point, i was then informed that this was not the case but that if Sinn Fein got into government that they would secure the release of IRA prisoners etc, I was then told by the next person i asked that Fianna Fail where semi linked to Sinn Fein,

my basic wish is to get Fianna Fail out of power but i don't really know how to vote.

At this point it seems like a case of voting less for who's better and more for who'll do the least damage.

sorry i know theses are pretty simplistic questions but any help really would be appreciated,
thanks!

upmeath

Em... I'm a first-time voter myself but I'll do what I can to explain matters...

In Irish politics there's the left (liberal/socialist i.e. even distribution of wealth, single-tier public services and facilities for everyone at a low cost, etc.), and the right (conservative i.e. preservation of the status quo)

The left consists of the Labour Party, the Green Party, the Socialist Party and Sinn Féin. These parties generally tend to issue policies which cater to the needs of the population as a whole and not just the well-off, privileged minority in our society.

On the other hand you have the political right, consisting of the PDs, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, although the latter two may claim to be centrist or centre-right (i.e. neither extremely liberal or conservative, perhaps best described as progressive)

Fianna Fáil and the PDs have been in power for 10 years. Now Fine Gael and Labour are offering the people an alternative government, with the public health, education, transport and legal systems featuring high in the agendas of both parties.
The Green Party (who are most definitely not associated with Sinn Féin) has not pledged to enter government with any of these parties yet, but most pundits reckon a FG-Labour-Green coalition seems more likely, with the Greens taking transport and the environment as their ministries in a newly-formed cabinet.

Any further questions, feel free to ask.

The_Minister

OP, you asked for unbiased commentary, and the previous poster provided a very slanted view. The easiest way to measure the parties is by comparing them to Europe.

Labour: Social Democrat
Greens: Greens (although I'm given to understand that the Greens in Europe are more....practical shall we say, then the Irish Greens).
Fine Gael: Christian Democrat (with a few big differences) EDIT: Just to make sure none of the anti-church group go into up-their-hole rants, this does not mean that they are like the American religious right.
Progressive Democrats: Liberal party. (It was set up as a classic European Liberal party, and still retains most of the values of such)
Fianna Fail: No European equivilant, a catch-all party.

Dalfiatach

jesus smith wrote:

any help would be appreciated because I'm getting massively conflicting views off every gob****e left right and center at the moment, like for instance I was planning on voting greens then i heard they're connected to Sinn Fein and that theres some thing where if they don't get seats their votes go to Sinn Fein, at this point i asked what was so very bad about this and was told about the whole Sinn Fein- IRA connection, which i assumed was kind of a thing of the past at this point, i was then informed that this was not the case but that if Sinn Fein got into government that they would secure the release of IRA prisoners etc, I was then told by the next person i asked that Fianna Fail where semi linked to Sinn Fein,

Jaysus. And they say we have an informed intelligent electorate :eek: Dude, you need better friends if this is their level of basic political knowledge.

Anyways. The Greens aren't in any way linked to SF, and there's no such thing in our system as "If we don't get the seat we'll give it to party Y instead". Whoever said that doesn't have a clue. Fianna Fáil aren't linked to SF either. All the Provo prisoners were released nearly 10 years ago as part of the Good Friday Agreement, apart from the 3 boyos who killed a Garda in Limerick way back in the 90s.

The Greens, SF and Labour are usually classed as the "left" in Irish politics, though the Greens are really much more focused on the environment (global warming, alternative energy, water quality, pollution etc), public transport, ethics in public office (anti corruption measures), and better planning. SF used to be mad Marxists years ago, though these days they're just yer average European Social Democrats. The IRA basically don't exist any more in any real sense - even Ian Paisley is satisfied on that score! Both SF and Greens tend to have a good record on being active and visible on the ground in their constituencies. A lot of people are still a bit worried by SFs fairly recent *ahem* colourful past, but over the last 2 years the peace process seems to have finally come to a stable end with SF and the DUP (finally!) setting up a power-sharing Government for the North next week.

The PDs are nutters, in my admittedly biased opinion. Raving Thatcherite right-wing "privatise everything" policies, and though they claim to be a liberal party there's not much evidence for it. The party of the wealthy few, looking after the interests of the wealthy few IMO.

Fianna Fáil basically don't really stand for anything much except being in power. They'll happily go into coalition with just about anybody to stay in office, and the smaller coalition party tends to have great influence over the kind of policies an FF-led Government follows. They're basically the political wing of the property developer/construction industry.

Fine Gael are an odd bunch. It's kindof a coalition all by itself with a mix of small farmer Michael Collins fans, big ranchers, the remnants of the Big House Ascendancy, Social Democrats, hang-em-and-flog-em conservative reactionaries, Deefers....overall they tend to be moderately conservative, centre to centre-right, with the occasional spasm of lefty social concern and/or WingNut uber-conservatism.

Labour? Well, Labour.....meh. In origin a working-class party, though these days they're a bit bland and middle-class. Harmless, safe, very worthy and dull really.

Now, in our system we have 43 constituencies around the country. Each of these has from 3 to 5 seats. We use Proportional Representation, which means you vote for candidates in order of preference. Your favourite 1, your next favourite 2, and so on. Do NOT vote with an 'X' or your vote will be discarded. You can vote for as many, or as few, people as you like in this way, though in practice preferences after 4 or so rarely get counted. If your #1 choice doesn't do well and is eliminated, they then go through all his first preference votes and divide them out among the other candidates according to his #2s. So your vote remains in the race and might help get your #2 elected (or your #3, if your #2 is already elected or eliminated). So, in our system, there is no such thing really as a "wasted vote" because even if you give a no-hoper candidate your first preference your vote will still transfer on to your lower preferences after he is eliminated. You will get people telling you that voting for Candidate X is a "wasted vote", but just ignore them.

As the two biggest parties, FF and FG usually have multiple candidates running in each constituency hoping to win 2 or more of the seats on offer. The party faithful will vote for the candidates in different orders depending on their location within the constituency in order to balance out the votes each will get and (hopefully) get 2 or more of them a seat. This is known as "vote management" and can sometimes backfire spectacularly on the party

Now, in this election we have a FF/PD coalition led by Bertie and McDowell who have been in power for 10 years and looking for another 5. FG/Lab have a pact and are running as an alternative coalition, though they'll probably end up needing the Greens as well. The Greens are being coy and refusing to commit to a formal pact before the election, but nobody doubts that if FG, Lab and the Greens have the magic 83 seats in the Dáil that the Greens will join FG and Labour in Government.

If neither FG/Lab/Green nor FF/PD have 83 seats (with SF, Socialists, Independents etc having enough seats to deprive both blocs of a majority) then we have what's called a "hung Dáil". All sorts of negotiating and horse-trading will commence. In this scenario, it's likely that only FF/Lab will have the numbers for a stable coalition, even though Pat Rabbitte has ruled it out in advance. But if the numbers fall that way, "in the national interest" etc etc.... Other possible, if unlikely, alternative coalitions include FF/SF/Green and FG/Lab/Green/PD. If nobody can agree, we have another election. In 1981-82 we had no less than three elections before a stable result was reached.

So. If you want FF out of power, your best tactic is to vote FG and Green.

Senator

jesus smith wrote:

Hi all I'm kind of new to the whole politics things ... my basic wish is to get Fianna Fail out of power.

I don't buy this. You know enough about "the whole politics things" to want FF out. Why ?

Cardinal

I think anyone with even a basic understanding of politics can see that having the same group in power for too long is a bad thing.

Raiser

Senator wrote:

I don't buy this. You know enough about "the whole politics things" to want FF out. Why ?

In fairness you don't have to be a political scholar to notice the odd damning headline or come to the conclusion that you want to see far less of "Happy Bertie to me"........

- Sincere thanks to Dalfiatach - I needed that post as my own understanding of events come May 24th was a bit lacking

The_Minister

Dalfiatach wrote:

Greens are really much more focused on the environment (global warming, alternative energy, water quality, pollution etc), public transport, ethics in public office (anti corruption measures), and better planning.

They are often described as the watermelons -green on the outside, red on the inside. They're policies also show a reckless disregard for the economy.

Dalfiatach wrote:

SF used to be mad Marxists years ago, though these days they're just yer average European Social Democrats.

Bollocks. Plain old bollocks. They are not social democrats, and still subscribe to many ideals of Marxism.

Dalfiatach wrote:

The IRA basically don't exist any more in any real sense - even Ian Paisley is satisfied on that score!

The problem most of us have is that they refuse to admit what the IRA did when blowing up kids and shooting single mothers was wrong.

Dalfiatach wrote:

The PDs are nutters, in my admittedly biased opinion. Raving Thatcherite right-wing "privatise everything" policies, and though they claim to be a liberal party there's not much evidence for it. The party of the wealthy few, looking after the interests of the wealthy few IMO.

This OP, is also a pile of crap. The party of the wealthy would not have introduced the highest minimum wage in Europe, or exposed the Ansbacher accounts, for just two examples. The PDs were formed at a time when every other party in Ireland did not understand how tax cuts could pay for themselves, when the economy was in ruins thanks to crippling taxes, rampant public spending, and high state involvement. They have always kept the focus on the economy because "the best form of social welfare is a job".



I'll let others defend the other parties. The OP asked for an unbiased answer, I gave him one the best I could, now could others do the same? This lefty rubbish is sickening.

Ardent

Dalfiatach wrote:

Do NOT vote with an 'X' or your vote will be discarded.

I haven't voted before either - can I ask you expand on the above point? Are we talking here about how you mark the card? Also, I presume this what we hear referred to as a 'spoiled' vote during election counting..?

shoutman

The_Minister wrote:

I'll let others defend the other parties. The OP asked for an unbiased answer, I gave him one the best I could, now could others do the same? This lefty rubbish is sickening.

Although I dont entirely disagree with your point as a whole, I hardly think you can hardly say that you are totally unbiased with regards to the P.D's, afterall you do have a link to their website in your sig.

Cardinal

You mark the person you most want to be elected with a 1. The second with a 2 etc. Ideally, you should mark everyone on the ballot paper with some number to ensure your vote is counted for someone.

I never want my vote to go to the PDs though, so I never give them any number.

And X would result in a spoiled vote.

Judt

Cardinal wrote:

You mark the person you most want to be elected with a 1. The second with a 2 etc. Ideally, you should mark everyone on the ballot paper with some number to ensure your vote is counted for someone.

That's actually a stupid thing to do. If you only vote 1 and 2, you've only given a vote to those candidates. But if you go all the way down the list, marking people you don't like as well as those you do, then when it gets to round 10 and Looney Communist You Don't Like needs another handful of votes to get himself a seat, you'll have been one of the people to give it to him.

You only have to vote as far as you want to, so if there's 3 you wouldn't mind seeing in but a fourth you wouldn't, putting 4 on his/her name technically means that you've voted for them, come the fourth round of counting (if it happens, and it's in the latter stages that every vote counts.)

And yes, mark them 1, 2, 3, etc.

Cardinal

Yeah. You're right. I was thinking that at least your vote would be counted, but it makes more sense to have it not counted than counted for someone you don't like.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

jmayo

Can I ask is The Mintister a moderator on this fourm or is he/she just a Moderator on other Boards forums?
I think it is not advisable to have this forum moderated by somebody connected to one particular party and intrenched in their political views.
If that is the case then the forum should be renamed the PD Forum.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

jmayo

Daveirl thanks for the feedback. Does that mean it is now save to slag off the monster raving looney party ;-)

Senator

Why does JS just want to get rid of FF - why no mention of the PDs ?

Dalfiatach

The_Minister wrote:

This lefty rubbish is sickening.

And the arrogant ranting holier-than-thou selfish sneering attitude of the PDs is why your 1% micro-party is facing complete oblivion in 3 weeks. Not a moment too soon, and couldn't happen to a nicer bunch.

Dalfiatach

Ardent wrote:

I haven't voted before either - can I ask you expand on the above point? Are we talking here about how you mark the card? Also, I presume this what we hear referred to as a 'spoiled' vote during election counting..?

Yeah, when you go in to vote you bring your voting card (which should be arriving in the post some day soon) and some ID. You walk up the desk and identify yourself, and they cross your name off the register so that nobody else can pretend to be you later in the day and use your vote. You get a sheet of paper which has a list of all the candidates and their parties, with a box beside each one. You take that to the booth where nobody can see how you are voting. Silly Auld Pencils are provided

You write a '1' in the box beside your favourite candidate, a '2' in the box beside your second favourite, and so on. You can stop at just '1' if you really want to, or keep on going all the way down. It's up to you.

If there is anything in any of the boxes apart from a number your vote is likely to end up on the "spoiled" heap and simply won't be counted at all. Also be careful with your numbering. If you have a 1, a 2 and then two 3s for example by mistake, your first and second preferences will probably still be counted but 3 onwards will be ignored - your vote will end up having the same effect as if you had just voted 1 and 2 then stopped.

When you've finished, you leave the booth, fold the sheet and post it into the big black box.

Nobody is supposed to be watching you as you mark your preferences, and nobody has a right to know how you voted. You might get asked on the way out by representatives of various parties, or the media. These are "exit polls", and you can tell them, lie to them, or ignore them as you see fit. On the way in, there might be hawkers from various parties looking for a last-minute preference, you can just ignore them. Just stare straight ahead and pretend they aren't there.

It only takes 5 minutes, but I suppose posts like this make it easier for first-time voters if they know what to expect!

The_Minister

shoutman wrote:

Although I dont entirely disagree with your point as a whole, I hardly think you can hardly say that you are totally unbiased with regards to the P.D's, afterall you do have a link to their website in your sig.

I was referring to my first post, where I gave the European equivilants of the parties. I think it s fair to say that I gave an unbiased opinion in that post, I did not pass comment on the goodness/badness of the parties (I would actually say that I was overly kind to FG;)). I was giving the OP unbiased information, not saying that I myself was unbiased. It just annoys me that he asked for unbiased info, I resisted the temptation to preach, and then those other two, start spouting completely biased, over-the-top rubbish. Obviously, my second post was a mostly my own opinion.

jmayo wrote:

Can I ask is The Mintister a moderator on this fourm or is he/she just a Moderator on other Boards forums?
I think it is not advisable to have this forum moderated by somebody connected to one particular party and intrenched in their political views.
If that is the case then the forum should be renamed the PD Forum.

I have no moderator powers on this forum.
If I had, I would not abuse them.
All moderators on this forum have some political bias one-way-or-another. As long as they do not use it to silence debate from certain quarters, then there is no problem.
Also, even if I was a mod here, there are about six mods on these boards, so having one mod support one party would not mean that the boards should be named after that party. (Also, FYI, the majority of posters here would be pro-FG/Lab, so it is not a PD-friendly board)

Dalfiatach wrote:

And the arrogant ranting holier-than-thou selfish sneering attitude of the PDs is why your 1% micro-party is facing complete oblivion in 3 weeks. Not a moment too soon, and couldn't happen to a nicer bunch.

It's now 3% actually
The polls and pundits alway underestimate the PDs. Also, "micro-party" is unfair, as the PDs are the fourth biggest party in the Dail, bigger the SF or th Greens.

Senator

Whatever is supposed to be the case, the truth is that any person's vote can actually be traced back to them.

When you state your name or hand over your polling card to the Returning Officer, you are given a Ballot Paper with a number on it. The number of that Ballot Paper is then entered by the Returning Officer alongside your name on the Electoral Register in front of him/her.

All you have to do to ascertain how any person voted (when the votes are being counted or later because Ballot Papers are not immediately destroyed) is go through the pile of Ballot Papers and match the numbers on them to the names beside which those numbers are written on the Returning Officer's copy of the Electoral Register which is returned with the ballot boxes and other documentation at close of polling.

It is, of course, even easier to ascertain how someone votes in postal ballots such as the Seanad election (e.g. university seats).

Zaph

The_Minister wrote:

They are often described as the watermelons -green on the outside, red on the inside. They're policies also show a reckless disregard for the economy.

Would these be the same policies that were described by the Irish Times yesterday in the following terms?

"The Green Party has set out to show that it is living in the real world, both politically and economically. The publication of itseconomic policy document, Fairness and Prosperity, yesterday went a long way toward establishing its credentials on both fronts."

"By taking the prudent line on growth, the Greens have earned the right to have their economic policies treated with respect."

Stephen Collins - Political Editor

"Radical you might say, controversial even. However you describe their manifesto, there is little doubt in the mind of this writer at least on one thing. For its cohesiveness and prudence, yesterday's Green Party manifesto was the most impressive in this campaign so far."

Marc Coleman - Economics Editor

While I don't agree with the arbitrary bank levy element of their policy (why not an American multi-national levy or a publican levy instead?), their policies are far more imaginative than the PD's perennial call for a reduction in the top rate of income tax and they would be of more benefit to more people.

Milktrolley

Nicely put Dalfiatach, one question though...

Dalfiatach wrote:

On the way in, there might be hawkers from various parties looking for a last-minute preference, you can just ignore them. Just stare straight ahead and pretend they aren't there.

Election posters are prohibited from being within a radius of about 50 metres or so from stations. At least they can't talk. So are official party representatives allowed to hassle voters as they make their way in?

Dalfiatach

Milktrolley wrote:

Nicely put Dalfiatach, one question though...


Election posters are prohibited from being within a radius of about 50 metres or so from stations. At least they can't talk. So are official party representatives allowed to hassle voters as they make their way in?

Well, they won't be right outside, but they will be roaming the nearby streets in hungry packs

Milktrolley

Dalfiatach wrote:

Well, they won't be right outside, but they will be roaming the nearby streets in hungry packs

...or driving about the place with loudspeakers urging you to vote for whoever interests you. Because their campaign's not for themselves remember, it's all in the national interest

Our man in Havana

Senator wrote:

Whatever is supposed to be the case, the truth is that any person's vote can actually be traced back to them.

When you state your name or hand over your polling card to the Returning Officer, you are given a Ballot Paper with a number on it. The number of that Ballot Paper is then entered by the Returning Officer alongside your name on the Electoral Register in front of him/her.

All you have to do to ascertain how any person voted (when the votes are being counted or later because Ballot Papers are not immediately destroyed) is go through the pile of Ballot Papers and match the numbers on them to the names beside which those numbers are written on the Returning Officer's copy of the Electoral Register which is returned with the ballot boxes and other documentation at close of polling.

It is, of course, even easier to ascertain how someone votes in postal ballots such as the Seanad election (e.g. university seats).

There was a high court case regarding this years ago. The practice you describe of them writing down the ballot number beside your name is highly illegal. It is a secert ballot and it should remain so.