Has Kenny shot himself in the foot?

bmaxi

Has Enda Kenny, with Fine Gael riding high in the polls, shot himself and his party in the foot by suggesting some future changes in the Constitution be decided by the Supreme Court?

oscarBravo

bmaxi wrote: »

Has Enda Kenny, with Fine Gael riding high in the polls, shot himself and his party in the foot by suggesting some future changes in the Constitution be decided by the Supreme Court?

Two part answer from me: is he right? quite possibly. Will people get the hump at the suggestion? Almost certainly.

Frankie Lee

I think he is lucky the FAS story has developed but a lot of Fine Gaels policies I would worry about especially their position on neutrality.

He also coloured his hair a more brownish colour than normal at the weekend.

dresden8

Frankie Lee wrote: »

He also coloured his hair a more brownish colour than normal at the weekend.

Indeed. I wonder how many votes his "Ming the Merciless" GE posters cost.

He's just looking ridiculous again.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Is there something we don't know about fine gael voters regards enda kenny? Or does Richard Bruton just not want to be party leader?

Sully

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Is there something we don't know about fine gael voters regards enda kenny? Or does Richard Bruton just not want to be party leader?

Enda is a grand leader and while he comes across a bit "rigid" (probably not the right word im looking for) he actually is a very down to earth and nice guy. Met him a few times and he is completely different to when he speaks on TV etc. A lot of the party and voters are generally happy with him.

As for Richard, even if he was to replace Enda, we would loose a damn fine Finance Minister.

Think FG have came a long way and offer a lot to voters as a good alternative. Despite how Enda may act or appear.

Bob Z

Sully wrote: »

Enda is a grand leader and while he comes across a bit "rigid" (probably not the right word im looking for) he actually is a very down to earth and nice guy. Met him a few times and he is completely different to when he speaks on TV etc. A lot of the party and voters are generally happy with him.

You are probably right about him being a nice if you meet him in person but you have to be able to reach people through the medium of tv and i dont think he can

Frankie Lee

I met him in person when he was canvassing for the European elections a few years ago, I found him incredibly dull but I suppose you could say that about 90% of politicians.
He never strikes me as a good intellect or a charismatic leader.

Sully

Bob Z wrote: »

You are probably right about him being a nice if you meet him in person but you have to be able to reach people through the medium of tv and i dont think he can

Completely different. Obama (bad example maybe) is full of smiles, relaxed while Enda seems rigid and firm. Probably serious even but perhaps this shows a "I mean business attitude". Meet him in person and he is completely different. Perhaps when he meets people outside of the TV set it may work .

Well, it seems to be working. He isn't doing to badly in the polls past and present.

Sully

Frankie Lee wrote: »

I met him in person when he was canvassing for the European elections a few years ago, I found him incredibly dull but I suppose you could say that about 90% of politicians.
He never strikes me as a good intellect or a charismatic leader.

Completely different with me anyway and plenty of friends who met him. Plenty of people said it to me in the past about him. *shrrugs*

Bob Z

Sully wrote: »

Completely different. Obama (bad example maybe) is full of smiles, relaxed while Enda seems rigid and firm. Probably serious even but perhaps this shows a "I mean business attitude". Meet him in person and he is completely different. Perhaps when he meets people outside of the TV set it may work .

Well, it seems to be working. He isn't doing to badly in the polls past and present.

i may be wrong but even though FGs rating went up didnt his own approval rating go down?

Sully

Bob Z wrote: »

i may be wrong but even though FGs rating went up didnt his own approval rating go down?

Yup, I meant the general party tho and the leader does have an effect on the overall rating.

The_Minister

Bob Z wrote: »

You are probably right about him being a nice if you meet him in person but you have to be able to reach people through the medium of tv and i dont think he can

I thought he was quite nice actually. A bit like a puppy though, I didn't want to follow him, just let him tag along behind me.

Agent Smith

Frankie Lee wrote: »

I met him in person when he was canvassing for the European elections a few years ago, I found him incredibly dull but I suppose you could say that about 90% of politicians.
He never strikes me as a good intellect or a charismatic leader.

admittedly I'm bias, (member of FG), but on the number of occasions that i've met the man, i can honestly say that he's charismatic, and You can warm to him very quickley.

He's also quite funny if you talking to him 1on1

jmayo

Bob Z wrote: »

You are probably right about him being a nice if you meet him in person but you have to be able to reach people through the medium of tv and i dont think he can

Yeah Bertie was able to reach people, and as we are now finding out good he was, aren't we ?
Actually Gift Grub did more for his popularity than any image consultants.

Frankie Lee wrote: »

I met him in person when he was canvassing for the European elections a few years ago, I found him incredibly dull but I suppose you could say that about 90% of politicians.
He never strikes me as a good intellect or a charismatic leader.

But does Biffo strike you as being charismatic or having a good intellect.
It is a political leader we are looking for not a blooming religious leader.
I think this whole charismatic thing is overblown and inherited from the states where image over substance always seems to be the most important.
Obama is supposedly charismatic, but all he did in election is keeping talking about bringing change, and it will soon be time to see if he can walk the walk.
Actually I would say Bill Clinton would have been way more charismatic, just ask the ladies.

I thiink having your best man in Finance at this time is a very good move.
Bruton comes across as assured and knows what he is talking about.
Lest anyone forget one attribute of a good leader is team building and putting the right people in the right positions to make the most of their abilities.

Can anyone say that about Biffo ?

I actaully find this thread gas, we are discussing Kenny and his supposed failings, whilst the man in charge of government came out and gave his backing toegether with a glowing reference to someone that affectively screwed the taxpayers (and saw nothing wrong with it) and had to resign a day later.
Only in Ireland.

bmaxi

jmayo wrote: »

I actaully find this thread gas, we are discussing Kenny and his supposed failings, whilst the man in charge of government came out and gave his backing toegether with a glowing reference to someone that affectively screwed the taxpayers (and saw nothing wrong with it) and had to resign a day later.
Only in Ireland.

Actually, I think Kenny is rapidly becoming Fine Gael's Neil Kinnock, who if you remember, famously snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in 1992. There are parallels to be drawn, in the U.K. the Government had won three terms, the Prime Minister had been replaced and there were mass protests on the streets over taxation. The Government had lost several by-elections and were languishing in the polls but Labour still managed to lose it.
The Courts including the Supreme Court, do not always reflect the judgment of the people, indeed some would say they never do and to suggest that issues of sovereignty be decided by political appointees could be seen as placing more and more power in the hands of our political masters. I wonder would Lisbon have been rejected by the Supreme Court.
So, whatever his intention, I think Kenny made a big mistake and F.G. could yet pay for it, I'm sure the likes of Declan Ganley will remind him of it.
I do echo your sentiments on Biffo though.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Sully wrote: »

Enda is a grand leader and while he comes across a bit "rigid" (probably not the right word im looking for) he actually is a very down to earth and nice guy. Met him a few times and he is completely different to when he speaks on TV etc. A lot of the party and voters are generally happy with him.

As for Richard, even if he was to replace Enda, we would loose a damn fine Finance Minister.

Think FG have came a long way and offer a lot to voters as a good alternative. Despite how Enda may act or appear.

I've heard similar stories and fully believe what you're saying. However,it's not just "rigidness". He just comes across as a pathetic loser on TV. Bertie Ahern came across so much better in the leaders debate before the last GE. Whereas previously John Bruton destroyed him. I know so many people who won't vote Fine Gael solely because of Kenny being the party leader. That's a good point about the finance minister alright.

Bob Z

jmayo wrote: »

I actaully find this thread gas, we are discussing Kenny and his supposed failings, whilst the man in charge of government came out and gave his backing toegether with a glowing reference to someone that affectively screwed the taxpayers (and saw nothing wrong with it) and had to resign a day later.
Only in Ireland.

Yes but you need a good opposition to capitalize on the Goverment unpopularity.

oscarBravo

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

He just comes across as a pathetic loser on TV. Bertie Ahern came across so much better in the leaders debate before the last GE. Whereas previously John Bruton destroyed him. I know so many people who won't vote Fine Gael solely because of Kenny being the party leader.

Which goes to show that people are piss-poor judges of character.

But hey, if people want someone who comes across well on TV rather than someone who can actually do the job, that's their prerogative. They do say that democracies get the government they deserve.

bmaxi

oscarBravo wrote: »

Which goes to show that people are piss-poor judges of character.

But hey, if people want someone who comes across well on TV rather than someone who can actually do the job, that's their prerogative. They do say that democracies get the government they deserve.

99% of the people who will vote in the next General Election will not have met Enda Kenny. It is difficult to judge the character and pedigree of someone you haven't met so people will only have his media image to go on. Unfortunately for Kenny, his media image is not up to much.

oscarBravo

bmaxi wrote: »

...people will only have his media image to go on.

How many of them will bother to sum their impression of him from print media as well as broadcast? How many are listening to what he says, rather than how he says it?

It's not a good reflection on society that its leaders are chosen in, effectively, an X-Factor style contest.

bmaxi

oscarBravo wrote: »

How many of them will bother to sum their impression of him from print media as well as broadcast? How many are listening to what he says, rather than how he says it?

It's not a good reflection on society that its leaders are chosen in, effectively, an X-Factor style contest.

Like it or not, unless somebody has a compelling message to impart, that's the way it is. It's not a new phenomenon. It is widely accepted that John F Kennedy won the U.S. Presidency for the way he came over to the public on TV. Public debates by politicians were fairly new at the time and his debating skills were no better than Richard Nixon's. His managerial skills, as history has shown, were pretty poor but he had charm and charisma and that carried the audience and also sustained his popularity throughout his term.
Barack Obama is similar, I've heard Obama speak several times but I've yet to hear him say anything remotely interesting.

Frankie Lee

He doesn't come across well in the print media either, especially with some of the terrible ideas they have come up with in the past few years(e.g boot camp, the populist tripe about the public sector at the moment).

Also that racist joke a few years ago was a bad start as opposition leader.

Any decent opposition leader would have had won the GE last year but didn't because the general public do not perceive as someone with the ability to be a good Taoiseach.

However if there is an election any time in the near future it is impossible to foresee how FG could not win.

nacho libre

The funny thing is losing the last election was probably the best thing that could have happened to Fine Gael and Enda Kenny. Well, some will gladly be prepared to take the hit for the reins of power i suppose. I suspect though the majority of Irish people would associate the country's woes with Fine Gael if they had attained power at the last election. the talk would be something like this: "we should have listened to Fianna Fail, Fine Gael don't know what they are at, they've run the country into the ground"
I doubt very much Richard Bruton would have such a high rating as he presently does. Which would be grossly unfair but public perception often is just that.

ninty9er

Sully wrote: »

As for Richard, even if he was to replace Enda, we would loose a damn fine Finance Minister.

I initially thought that, but Labour always gets finance as a sweetener in a FG/Labour coalition.

ninty9er

Frankie Lee wrote: »

Any decent opposition leader would have had won the GE last year but didn't because the general public do not perceive as someone with the ability to be a good Taoiseach.

There's a well known saying in political circles that goes "oppositions rarely win elections, governments lose them"

Particularly Irish people aren't by nature risk takers, and if the government hasn't lost it, no matter how good an opposition is, it may come close, but it won't win.

Bottle_of_Smoke

oscarBravo wrote: »

How many of them will bother to sum their impression of him from print media as well as broadcast? How many are listening to what he says, rather than how he says it?

It's not a good reflection on society that its leaders are chosen in, effectively, an X-Factor style contest.

Not being a good reflection unfortunately doesn't make it an inaccurate one.

Bob Z

bmaxi wrote: »

Like it or not, unless somebody has a compelling message to impart, that's the way it is. It's not a new phenomenon. It is widely accepted that John F Kennedy won the U.S. Presidency for the way he came over to the public on TV. Public debates by politicians were fairly new at the time and his debating skills were no better than Richard Nixon's. His managerial skills, as history has shown, were pretty poor but he had charm and charisma and that carried the audience and also sustained his popularity throughout his term.
Barack Obama is similar, I've heard Obama speak several times but I've yet to hear him say anything remotely interesting.

Yes didnt the people who listened to the nixon vs debate on tv say kennedy won whereas the people who listened to it on the radio say nixon won

nesf

bmaxi wrote: »

Has Enda Kenny, with Fine Gael riding high in the polls, shot himself and his party in the foot by suggesting some future changes in the Constitution be decided by the Supreme Court?

Actually, this is the first thing he did that made him look like a potential leader in my eyes. It's not populist, it makes sense to address an obvious problem in our system and it may hopefully lead to referendums on issues that can be less technical and more intelligible to the general public. Anyone who wants decisions on legalise being made by anyone but legal people need their heads checked tbh. More broadly speaking, I don't think any of the rabid "democrats" of the No to Lisbon campaign were going to be FG voters anyway.

Frankie Lee

Also meeting up with David Cameron yesterday was another mistake and shows how Fine Gael has always been in bed with the Tories which the majority of Irish people would not agree with come election time.

oscarBravo

Frankie Lee wrote: »

Also meeting up with David Cameron yesterday was another mistake and shows how Fine Gael has always been in bed with the Tories which the majority of Irish people would not agree with come election time.

He met the leader of a political party in another country?

The evil bastard.

Frankie Lee

No it just continues Fine Gaels long standing association with an unpopular right wing party from another country whom the general Irish public would not support.

It reminds me of the embarressment caused when John Bruton gave Charles Windsor a very warm welcome.

oscarBravo

Frankie Lee wrote: »

No it just continues Fine Gaels long standing association with an unpopular right wing party from another country whom the general Irish public would not support.

That "unpopular right wing party" is quite likely to form the next government over there. Which begs the question: unpopular with whom, precisely?

It reminds me of the embarressment caused when John Bruton gave Charles Windsor a very warm welcome.

I don't recall being embarrassed by that.

jmayo

Frankie Lee wrote: »

No it just continues Fine Gaels long standing association with an unpopular right wing party from another country whom the general Irish public would not support.

It reminds me of the embarressment caused when John Bruton gave Charles Windsor a very warm welcome.

Frankie will you ever move into this, the 21st century please.
Have you seen New Labour recently, gone are the days when they were cloth peak caps and socialists.
Conservative party is not that right wing nor that unpopular anymore.
BTW Cameron is probably going to be the next leader of UK so helps to have at least met him.
Maybe you should watch one of those evil foreign channels like the BBC News sometime.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Frankie Lee

jmayo wrote: »

Frankie will you ever move into this, the 21st century please.
Have you seen New Labour recently, gone are the days when they were cloth peak caps and socialists.
Conservative party is not that right wing nor that unpopular anymore.
BTW Cameron is probably going to be the next leader of UK so helps to have at least met him.
Maybe you should watch one of those evil foreign channels like the BBC News sometime.

Just because New Labour are right wing it doesn't mean the Conservatives are not, my point was that it is a not good for Kennys PR to be seen with the tories because the average Irish person does not like the Tories and what they have always standed for.
There is little or no difference in policy between FG and FF, the same way there is no difference in policy between NL and the Conservatives, the only thing that matters is public perception.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

bmaxi

nesf wrote: »

Actually, this is the first thing he did that made him look like a potential leader in my eyes. It's not populist, it makes sense to address an obvious problem in our system and it may hopefully lead to referendums on issues that can be less technical and more intelligible to the general public. Anyone who wants decisions on legalise being made by anyone but legal people need their heads checked tbh. More broadly speaking, I don't think any of the rabid "democrats" of the No to Lisbon campaign were going to be FG voters anyway.

He may have had very good reasons for suggesting it and I, for one, would be very much in favour of "dumbing down" official language but the main issue is to do with public perception. Coming on the back of the Lisbon defeat it may be seen by the public as pique and could alienate he and his party from the electorate.

nesf

bmaxi wrote: »

He may have had very good reasons for suggesting it and I, for one, would be very much in favour of "dumbing down" official language but the main issue is to do with public perception.

You can't dumb down treaties between countries though without making them less precise which is a problem. Not everything can be stately simply enough to make sense to someone on the street which presents us with the awkward problem of having a system where we ask the people to make decisions on things that they can't fully understand or grasp. Democracy is only useful when voters can make informed decisions. Something like abortion is simple and straightforward and the average guy on the street can form an opinion on it, you can't make an international treaty between a large group of countries that simple, no matter how much you dumb down the official language. The length of the document alone makes that impossible given that people won't go to the trouble of reading it before voting on it.

old boy

no matter how good he is in the flesh, it how he comes across to the populance that matters, to me as a floating voter e.k. is dry, boring and at times makes me cringe.

He's not a leader.

bmaxi

nesf wrote: »

You can't dumb down treaties between countries though without making them less precise which is a problem. Not everything can be stately simply enough to make sense to someone on the street which presents us with the awkward problem of having a system where we ask the people to make decisions on things that they can't fully understand or grasp. Democracy is only useful when voters can make informed decisions. Something like abortion is simple and straightforward and the average guy on the street can form an opinion on it, you can't make an international treaty between a large group of countries that simple, no matter how much you dumb down the official language. The length of the document alone makes that impossible given that people won't go to the trouble of reading it before voting on it.

Officialspeak, like lawyerspeak, is maintained, IMO, for the purpose of confusion. I agree absolutely that Joe Soap will not be able to understand it. With regard to Lisbon, many eminent minds admitted that they were confused by it. Because of this the people were confused and voted it down. The Irish constitution says that the people are sovereign, not the politicians, it is, therefore, the duty of the Government to explain where explanation is necessary. Fianna Fail, in their arrogance, couldn't be bothered to do this until it was too late and the seeds of doubt had been sown.
In the Czech Republic, during the week, the Courts decided that Lisbon was not contrary to Czech law. It emerged later on that not all details of the treaty were submitted to them. One has to ask, how did this happen? Could the Government cherry pick those parts it wanted to submit to the Supreme Court? How would we know?
Successive Governments, over the last forty years, including those formed by Kenny's own party, have bred mistrust among the people and I think this latest will be seen by most as an attempt to undermine the constitution.

The Raven.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Donegalfella, I am surprised at this statement. To admire a leader just because they stand for ‘something’ is somewhat baffling.

I lived in England and suffered under Thatcherism. I can’t let this go without comment. Yes indeed Thatcher stood for something. Her divisive economic policies created a culture of greed and selfishness, and resulted in poverty, social disquiet, industrial strife and high unemployment.

Frankie Lee

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Do you admire Hugo Chavez?

nesf

bmaxi wrote: »

Officialspeak, like lawyerspeak, is maintained, IMO, for the purpose of confusion.

Legalise is essentially jargon, similar to any professional field. Engineering documents are indecipherable to the average guy on the street but that doesn't mean that the jargon's only purpose is to obfuscate. The normal layman's vocabulary is simply not sufficiently precise for a lot of the concepts that are dealt with in specialised fields, be it law, medicine or whatever. Yes, jargon can be used to obfuscate things but that's not its primary use or why it's maintained.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

sdanseo

Kenny cannot be allowed to become Taoiseach, he'd make a mockery of us. He lacks the charisma nessecary.

...and Cowen is as bad.

Bring back Bertie. For all his alleged undertable deals, he wasn't a half-bad leader.

Bob Z

nesf wrote: »

You can't dumb down treaties between countries though without making them less precise which is a problem. Not everything can be stately simply enough to make sense to someone on the street which presents us with the awkward problem of having a system where we ask the people to make decisions on things that they can't fully understand or grasp. Democracy is only useful when voters can make informed decisions. Something like abortion is simple and straightforward and the average guy on the street can form an opinion on it.

But cant we get that wrong too? Didnt we have a referundum on abortion one time where people thought they were voting against but because of its wording it turned out they were actually voting for it?

Frankie Lee

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

How can you admire someone with such a defeatist attitude.

thebman

I think FG and Kenny's main problem is they come out with a weird statement about some policy they'd introduce and you don't know how they ever thought it was a good idea.

That kind of thing is really damaging to a party trying to sway votes when voters have the attitude of there is no alternative.

I think Kenny would probably be fine in power as I don't think the stupid decisions would be implemented if they got it.

As another poster mentioned, the other main members of FG seem very capable even if Kenny can come across as not being leader material at times. This suggests he is doing something right.

I think FG should work that angle more.

Personally I can't justify voting for FF in the next election and I'm from Brian Cowen's constituency. The man seems indent on destroying any chance we have for economic recovery. Regardless of what he does for the area, if there are no jobs, what is the point of the new shopping centre or hospital I can't afford to be treated by?

sdonn_1 wrote: »

Kenny cannot be allowed to become Taoiseach, he'd make a mockery of us. He lacks the charisma nessecary.

...and Cowen is as bad.

Bring back Bertie. For all his alleged undertable deals, he wasn't a half-bad leader.

I honestly cannot understand that logic. Just because things were good when Bertie was in power?

The man rode on the success of others and got out just before the bubble burst. He is just lucky. As for charisma, if Brian Cowen was in a position to declare tax cuts for all tomorrow, you'd probably be saying he had charisma. This isn't the same country it was when Bertie was in charge and bringing him back, wouldn't achieve or fix the economy. The hole was dug in Bertie's time and he got out before FF had to lie in it.

jmayo

sdonn_1 wrote: »

Kenny cannot be allowed to become Taoiseach, he'd make a mockery of us. He lacks the charisma nessecary.

...and Cowen is as bad.

Bring back Bertie. For all his alleged undertable deals, he wasn't a half-bad leader.

Ah yes lets bring back bertie after all he only presided over the administration that had Biffo as finance minister that allowed our economy be based on residential construction and retail.
Do you really think the man that gave into the unions everytime there was a wage demand, that flung money at every problem, that blew loads of OUR money on stadiums that never were, on prison sites, on e-voting machines that couldn't be proven to function correctly, should be our leader now that we have no money at all.

This does not even mention the fact he was walking around Dublin with bags full of cash of different currencies, and that put corrupt politicans into some of the hghest ministries in the government, that signed blank cheques for his former leader.
Take out his work on Northen Ireland, we see very little achievements for all the money spent and we will be paying for the legacy of his regime for the next 40 years.