Ganley concedes

namloc1980

Says the Yes campaign was 'masterful' - now on RTE

PaulieD

Good man Deco. "Il come along to the RDS next October 3rd with the Yes for Job posters and see how we are doing."

namloc1980

PaulieD wrote: »

Good man Deco. "Il come along to the RDS next October 3rd with the Yes for Job posters and see how we are doing."

"We have not succeeded but we did tell the truth" LOL fair play Declan

turgon

He also said he was "proud of his campaign" and that "he told the truth." He said he admired the Yes campaign politically but did not agree with it.

Basically he was about one sentence away from saying "Im the the biggest hypocrite you will ever see in Irish Politics, vote for me in the next General Election please!"

Euro_Kraut

Why is he conceding? There must be load of wheelie bins of votes miscounted around the country.

Hippo

'Told the truth'. What a joke.

OldJay

namloc1980 wrote: »

"We have not succeeded but we did tell the truth"

Did he really say that?
Makes the campaign all the more worthwhile with comedic quotes such as that if so.

Iwasfrozen

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

Why is he conceding? There must be load of wheelie bins of votes miscounted around the country.

Not enough to change the outcome, face it.

Euro_Kraut

Justind wrote: »

Did he really say that?
Makes the campaign all the more worthwhile with comedic quotes such as that if so.

He also called Brain Cowen 'a masterful politician'. He is soo odd.

dvpower

Ganley: "Maybe, in a weird way, this is the best thing for everyone"

wylo

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

He also called Brain Cowen 'a masterful politician'. He is soo odd.

he didnt mean it in a positive light,

Euro_Kraut

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Not enough to change the outcome, face it.

That didn't stop he calling a for recount in Connaught-Ulster on the basis of what one elderly women thought she saw at the count center.

turgon

dvpower wrote: »

Ganley: "Maybe, in a weird way, this is the best thing for everyone"

If he pisses off then Yes, it will be a great thing for everyone.

PaulieD

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

He also called Brain Cowen 'a masterful politician'. He is soo odd.

Hes playing the game. We havent seen the last of Mr Ganley.

cornbb

That man is foul. He is still like a bad smell, and manages to sound sinister and cynical even after losing.

OldJay

wylo wrote: »

he didnt mean it in a positive light,

Its still something he aspired to be . . . until Dana came along

PaulieD

cornbb wrote: »

That man is foul. He is still like a bad smell, and manages to sound sinister and cynical even after losing.

He really gets you europhiles riled up, doesnt he. A heavily backed eurosceptic party would get 10-15% in a general election.

namloc1980

Justind wrote: »

Did he really say that?
Makes the campaign all the more worthwhile with comedic quotes such as that if so.

Yeah those were his exact words.....I rewinded it on Sky+ a few times to make sure my ears actually heard what he said.

dresden8

Originally Posted by Euro_Kraut
He also called Brain Cowen 'a masterful politician'. He is soo odd.

wylo wrote: »

he didnt mean it in a positive light,

He also said that this shows why Fianna Fail is the natural party of government i.e. he gets those gobsh1tes in Fine Gael to do the running and FF will get all the credit. Cowen is now a winner, having previously been a perennial loser.

The only good thing Cowen did was keep a lid on Pr1ck Roche.

namloc1980

Cóir guy said that their posters were the winners of the poster competition....the biggest load of bo!!ocks competition that is

Reginald P. DuM

I hope Ganley crawls back under the rock from which he appeared. He sounds like he would be a very good pimp. Cowan didn't back away from the debate cos he thuought he'd lose. he did it cos if he did he'd be giving credence to Ganley's ideas.

Never trust a man who is so bouyant after a defeat.

turgon

namloc1980 wrote: »

Cóir guy said that their posters were the winners of the poster competition....the biggest load of bo!!ocks competition that is

Well, the winner of the competition for "poster most likely to make one vote yes" :pac:

namloc1980

turgon wrote: »

Well, the winner of the competition for "poster most likely to make one vote yes" :pac:

He also spouted more rubbish about that 95% of ppl would vote no. Also stood over the €1.84 minimum wage claim saying it was 100% true...going on about Gama workers ......eh hello Gama is a Turkish company and as far as I know Turkey is not in the EU.

wylo

Considering how "passionate" he was a few weeks ago over the lies of the yes side, he seems to be acting now as if the whole thing was a game, "well played by FF", laughing about the whole thing, at Mary Lou accepted defeat with genuine grace.

OldJay

wylo wrote: »

Mary Lou accepted defeat with genuine grace.

No she didn't. She continued with the party politics/alarmism by wafting on about Brian Cowen's job now being safe. In other words, she furthered proof of what her true colours on this constitutional issue were all along.
What an amateur.

cornbb

My Yes vote was inspired by despair, according to Ganley. F*ck off Declan, my yes vote was inspired by reality.

jacool

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

That didn't stop he calling a for recount in Connaught-Ulster on the basis of what one elderly women thought she saw at the count center.

Sorry to have to correct you here, but I wouldn't like you going around without the facts! What was seen at the centre by "one elderly women" (your mistake again here, I'm just quoting you) was votes being put in the wrong place. Ironically it was 3000 independent votes mis-placed in Ganley's pile.
I await your clever reply saying that he probably organised that too.
I have to go out at 1 so please be quick. There's a good boy/girl.

We also say "him" not "he".

jacool

Reginald P. DuM wrote: »

I hope Ganley crawls back under the rock from which he appeared. He sounds like he would be a very good pimp. Cowan didn't back away from the debate cos he thuought he'd lose. he did it cos if he did he'd be giving credence to Ganley's ideas.

Never trust a man who is so bouyant after a defeat.

Hope he didn't upset you by not being a bad loser!
And why would be be a very good pimp? Are you an expert in such matters?

TelePaul

jacool wrote: »

Sorry to have to correct you here, but I wouldn't like you going around without the facts! What was seen at the centre by "one elderly women" (your mistake again here, I'm just quoting you) was votes being put in the wrong place. Ironically it was 3000 independent votes mis-placed in Ganley's pile.
I await your clever reply saying that he probably organised that too.
I have to go out at 1 so please be quick. There's a good boy/girl.

We also say "him" not "he".

Do you want some cheese with your 'whine'

Fuhrer

Justind wrote: »

No she didn't. She continued with the party politics/alarmism by wafting on about Brian Cowen's job now being safe. In other words, she furthered proof of what her true colours on this constitutional issue were all along.
What an amateur.

Sarcasm there buuuuuuuuuuudddy.

Robbo

What odds him appearing in Galway East in a General election?

cornbb

Robbo wrote: »

What odds him appearing in Galway East in a General election?

I wouldn't rule it out. Unlikely that he'd run though I think, and getting elected seems highly unlikely. He can only talk about one thing - the EU - and he couldn't even get elected as an MEP. In Michael O'Leary's words, he wants to be Dana and can't even manage that.

I reckon he'll turn his attention to trying to block Lisbon elsewhere in Europe.

ei.sdraob

cornbb wrote: »

he wants to be Dana and can't even manage that.

I reckon he'll turn his attention to trying to block Lisbon elsewhere in Europe.

him?

you mean his US Militaty overlords and neocon buddies...

Oafley Jones

PaulieD wrote: »

He really gets you europhiles riled up, doesnt he. A heavily backed eurosceptic party would get 10-15% in a general election.

Remember how well the heavily backed eurosceptic Libertas candidates did in European elections - an election i think you'd agree which is far better at gauging how the Irish stand on the European issue.

Euro_Kraut

Robbo wrote: »

What odds him appearing in Galway East in a General election?

I think he will run but will not be elected. He is not involved in the community there. His own polling station voted 70% YES.

Stark

Next point of call, Czech republic. "Ooh, l33t rejection Mr. Klaus". "Mmm, yes it was, wasn't it".

jacool

TelePaul wrote: »

Do you want some cheese with your 'whine'

Not really, just correcting something incorrect that's all.
Glad to see you have to laugh at your attempt at a joke.
Get out of the house and hug another YES voter - there's loads of you out there!

free-man

ei.sdraob wrote: »

him?

you mean his US Militaty overlords and neocon buddies...

That tin foil hat really doesn't suit you

Conspiracy forums are over here =======>

ei.sdraob

free-man wrote: »

That tin foil hat really doesn't suit you

Conspiracy forums are over here =======>

yeh :rolleyes:

Jip

jacool wrote: »

Get out of the house and hug another YES voter - there's loads of you out there!

Shouldn't be too hard, as there's about twice as many as
yourself, although most of the other No crowd will probably be a little more gracious.

Carstuck

cornbb wrote: »

That man is foul. He is still like a bad smell, and manages to sound sinister and cynical even after losing.

He actually admitted that he didn't win, unlike Cowen last year. I say if he was in the campaign earlier he might have had a chance, after all he did manage to overthrow 3 main parties last year, which is an achievement in itself. If everyone hates him so much why did they believe him last time?

jacool

Jip wrote: »

Shouldn't be too hard, as there's about twice as many as
yourself, although most of the other No crowd will probably be a little more gracious.

Its got nothing to do with being gracious. I merely pointed out a factual inaccuracy, seeing as this was what the YES vote were saying about the NO campaigns lies (and I am not defending those!). I was very gracious in victory last time round, so I feel quite balanced about the whole thing now! As I've said elsewhere it'll take 10 years for the fall out to do exactly that.

OldJay

free-man wrote: »

That tin foil hat really doesn't suit you

Conspiracy forums are over here =======>

Ganley is a defence contractor with the US military and has contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
Are you denying this?

Irish and Proud

namloc1980 wrote: »

"We have not succeeded but we did tell the truth" LOL fair play Declan

...and the YES side was fair and honest! :rolleyes:

I am a democrat and there is no way I can say this referendum was fair - especially looking at newspapers and corporate advertisements. The Metro however, was fair and balanced - credit has to be given there. Back to the point, God only knows how much money the YES camp got, while they apply their usual double standards in accusing Declan Ganley. It is also interesting that most big business (including multi-nationals) were all for Lisbon - I wonder why? :rolleyes:

The YES advertisement which appeared on the Hearld AM (one day before polling) was a blatant example of the money that the Yes camp had. To me, it seems that democracy in this country is dead - money is what speaks, not the people's wishes!

Well, if money is the language that big business and politicians understand, then that is the language we as ordinary people should use. We should not listen anymore to the media telling us what to buy or wear etc, and instead, get what we want, when we want it, and at the price we want. We can't do such for everything, but we can certainly do so as much as possible. That's the attitude I have when I'm shopping! By not playing the game big business wants us to play, we erode their control and eventually win back our democracy!

We can say No to Lisbon no more, but we can say No to big business and their mechanisms of control!

BTW I was originally from a FF background, but now I say:

No to FF
No to FG
No to Lab
No to GP

Get them out!!!

I'm voting Socialist the next time - they have to be better than the above four political parties!

Stark

Irish and Proud wrote:

We should not listen anymore to the media telling us what to buy or wear etc, and instead, get what we want, when we want it, and at the price we want. We can't do such for everything, but we can certainly do so as much as possible. That's the attitude I have when I'm shopping!

Aren't you a good little shop around consumer.

http://xkcd.com/610/ tbh.

seamus

Irish and Proud wrote: »

I am a democrat and there is no way I can say this referendum was fair - especially looking at newspapers and corporate advertisements.

How does corporate backing of a particular stance make a referendum unfair? Corporations don't get to vote, individuals do.

Back to the point, God only knows how much money the YES camp got, while they apply their usual double standards in accusing Declan Ganley.

The political parties will be required to declare the source of all their funding, as they do every year. Libertas on the other hand have never declared the source of their funding, despite insisting that the other political parties declare theirs. When asked to reveal the source of their funding, Declan Ganley hid behind the fact that he was not required to declare this information. I wouldn't defend Declan Ganley in relation to double standards. You're onto a loser there.

It is also interesting that most big business (including multi-nationals) were all for Lisbon - I wonder why?

Ireland occupies a useful point for multi-nationals. We are an open economy with low corporate taxation with a perfect geographical location right between the US and EU. Companies can base here and benefit from low taxation, and by basing here they have free access to EU markets, while at the same time are within spitting distance of the USA. A stable EU provides greater consumer confidence within that free market and therefore more stable profits for companies trading in the EU. Why wouldn't they support a Yes vote when a No vote leaves the EU in a less certain position?

We should not listen anymore to the media telling us what to buy or wear etc, and instead, get what we want, when we want it, and at the price we want.

You're trying to start a revolution against nothing, really. Nobody has your hand tied behind your back, forcing you (or anyone else) to buy the things you see advertised. "Big business" is big because people choose to buy their products. You can argue about media brainwashng, but that's the human being for you. In any case, the individual always has a choice, and that is the very essence of democracy. The ideals behind capitalism are in fact one of the purer forms of democracy - everyone chooses to consume what they want and how they want, and the choices of the people determine what's available in the market. Pure socialism by contrast creates virtual constructs which make decisions on behalf of the people and requires adherence to certain policies in particular areas.

meglome

Irish and Proud wrote: »

...and the YES side was fair and honest! :rolleyes:

Fairer and honester* certainly (* may not be a real word)

Irish and Proud wrote: »

I am a democrat and there is no way I can say this referendum was fair - especially looking at newspapers and corporate advertisements. The Metro however, was fair and balanced - credit has to be given there. Back to the point, God only knows how much money the YES camp got, while they apply their usual double standards in accusing Declan Ganley. It is also interesting that most big business (including multi-nationals) were all for Lisbon - I wonder why? :rolleyes:

Yeah the poor No campaign with their majority of the posters around my way. Where did these small groups get all that money?
I don't want to speak for you but isn't the No campaign line normally that there isn't anything in the treaty that does anything for the recession or jobs, so what are the multi-nationals getting out of it?

Irish and Proud wrote: »

The YES advertisement which appeared on the Hearld AM (one day before polling) was a blatant example of the money that the Yes camp had. To me, it seems that democracy in this country is dead - money is what speaks, not the people's wishes!

Ban all the ads I say. How do you think the No campaign would spread all that bull then?

Irish and Proud wrote: »

Well, if money is the language that big business and politicians understand, then that is the language we as ordinary people should use. We should not listen anymore to the media telling us what to buy or wear etc, and instead, get what we want, when we want it, and at the price we want. We can't do such for everything, but we can certainly do so as much as possible. That's the attitude I have when I'm shopping! By not playing the game big business wants us to play, we erode their control and eventually win back our democracy!

You could, I suppose, just read the treaty's.

Irish and Proud wrote: »

We can say No to Lisbon no more, but we can say No to big business and their mechanisms of control!

Can I assume you're going to create the jobs instead?

Irish and Proud wrote: »

BTW I was originally from a FF background,...

Ah so it's you that's responsible for the situation we're in. No one else seems to be admitting it.

Irish and Proud wrote: »

No to FF
No to FG
No to Lab
No to GP

Get them out!!!

I'm voting Socialist the next time - they have to be better than the above four political parties!

You really think that voting socialist instead of Fianna Fail will fix anything. Dear god I fear for us all.

Irish and Proud

meglome wrote: »

Fairer and honester* certainly (* may not be a real word)

Well, time will tell if Lisbon is implemented!

meglome wrote: »

Yeah the poor No campaign with their majority of the posters around my way. Where did these small groups get all that money?
I don't want to speak for you but isn't the No campaign line normally that there isn't anything in the treaty that does anything for the recession or jobs, so what are the multi-nationals getting out of it?

Well, in most areas I've seen, the good majority of posters were those of the YES campaign. Also, did you see the cover Advert on the Hearld AM - on the 1st Oct? Regarding multi-nationals, do you think they really care about Ireland? A more centralised EU would make it far easier for the multi-nationals to lobby for things that favour their interests - once elected, who do you think mainstream politicians serve: people or business? Look at our society will you!

meglome wrote: »

Ban all the ads I say. How do you think the No campaign would spread all that bull then?

And neither would the YES campaign with all their aggressive adverts!

meglome wrote: »

You could, I suppose, just read the treaty's.

I heard that the wording is rather vague - like what is a "terrorist threat"? Who would define a "terrorist threat"? Who would interpret this treaty document? I myself have been very busy so I didn't have time to read the document. The question might be, what do many pro-Lisbon people (who seem to have loads of time on these forums) be doing during the day?

meglome wrote: »

Can I assume you're going to create the jobs instead?

Maybe, people should start thinking outside the box - many seemed brainwashed by the current economic system! To give you a clue, our current global economic system is a system of control - a system that allows an elite few to prosper at the expense of ordinary people and those of the third world. Our world is broken and corrupt - we need a new world order that is fair and democratic!

meglome wrote: »

Ah so it's you that's responsible for the situation we're in. No one else seems to be admitting it.

I said I was from a FF background - a background in which people traditionally voted for FF. It was FF that created the mess! It was FF that abused our trust, and I for one will not trust them again unless there is a complete overhaul (including the ousting of all dynasties) of the party - something I guess is quite unlikely.

meglome wrote: »

You really think that voting socialist instead of Fianna Fail will fix anything. Dear god I fear for us all.

Well, at least they respect democracy! As a democrat, how the hell could I vote for undemocratic parties like FF, FG, Lab and GP? SF - I'm still not sure what they're about, so I'm going for the Socialist Party - it's all there is at the moment!

In any case, we need a new mainstream democratic party!

For now, I'm voting Socialist!

ei.sdraob

Irish and Proud wrote: »

In any case, we need a new mainstream democratic party!

For now, I'm voting Socialist!

once the commies get a foothold

they would never leave peacefully and would damage the country into hell

case in point:

* Cuba
* North Korea

voting in people who only pay lip service to democracy is madness, go read a book on the history of the 20th century to see what happens

cornbb

Carstuck wrote: »

He actually admitted that he didn't win, unlike Cowen last year. I say if he was in the campaign earlier he might have had a chance, after all he did manage to overthrow 3 main parties last year, which is an achievement in itself. If everyone hates him so much why did they believe him last time?

I think the No side won the first time despite Ganley's support, not because of it. Well, maybe they believed the posters he paid for, but I don't believe the man was ever popular himself. "Overthrowing" parties is a total misnomer - when Ganley himself (and not his no-to-lisbon platform) went up against the electorate, he failed miserably.

Cowen admitted that he didn't win the first time around - it took him a while to go off and secure guarantees, prepare for round 2 etc. Cowen is neither a masterful politician nor a popular man, so if you are comparing Ganley to him you are not exactly setting your sights very high.

Scofflaw

cornbb wrote: »

I think the No side won the first time despite Ganley's support, not because of it. Well, maybe they believed the posters he paid for, but I don't believe the man was ever popular himself. "Overthrowing" parties is a total misnomer - when Ganley himself (and not his no-to-lisbon platform) went up against the electorate, he failed miserably.

Cowen admitted that he didn't win the first time around - it took him a while to go off and secure guarantees, prepare for round 2 etc. Cowen is neither a masterful politician nor a popular man, so if you are comparing Ganley to him you are not exactly setting your sights very high.

I wonder about this, myself - my feeling is that while people may not have trusted Ganley himself, he certainly lent momentum to the No campaign, and an air of excitement and purpose that's often lacking. A fairground barker role, if you like - you may not trust him, and you're certainly not going to vote him onto the local council, but he does get you into the circus tent.

I also wonder about the extent to which he was instrumental behind the scenes in coordinating the No campaigns - for a very minimal value of "coordinating".

cordially,
Scofflaw