Fine Gael at record high

Lockstep

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/1121/poll.html

Fine Gael has reached its highest ever level of support in the latest opinion poll.

The Red C poll in tomorrow's Sunday Business Post also shows that three quarters of voters favour increased taxes on the well off rather than cuts in child benefit, pensions, and health and education funding.

Fianna Fáil support is down by two points since last month to 23%, while Fine Gael gain one point to 36% - their best ever result in a Sunday Business Post poll.
Labour drop two to 17%, the Greens gain two to 5%, Sinn Féin at 10% are up one, while Independents and others are unchanged at 9%.

When asked about the Budget, 76% said the Government should increase taxes on those earning over €100,000 a year, while 56% prioritise public sector pay cuts.

44% say the Government should avoid cutting health and education spending, while 48% oppose cuts in child benefit and pensions.

Red C conducted the poll on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, among 1,000 voters nationwide.

Am fairly surpised to see the Greens bouncing up a bit, no surprise to see Fine Gael doing so well.

dlofnep

Bad news for Ireland.

Liam Byrne

dlofnep wrote: »

Bad news for Ireland.

Apart from the obvious fact that you'd be biased, any chance of explaining why there might be any additional reason for you to think the above ?

Considering the bollox that FF have made of everything, ANYONE would be an improvement.

Whether FG are as good as we need/deserve is another thing, especially given their stance on O'Donoghue and some of the other fiascos, but they'd definitely be an improvement.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

dlofnep

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Apart from the obvious fact that you'd be biased, any chance of explaining why there might be any additional reason for you to think the above ?

Aren't we all slightly biased when it comes to politics? I mean, it's all subjective decision making at the end of the day.

Firstly, their leader lacks any backbone - which was evident in regards to the John O'Donoghue case. The country needs a strong leader, and Enda Kenny just isn't the man for the job. Not to mention, it might not look good to have a leader of a country who has been condemned for racist comments.

Secondly, I disagree wholeheartedly with Fine Gael's economics. This country does not need a right-winged, neo-liberal party to resolve the current mess. It needs real economic change, and Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael are just two sides of the same coin at this point.

The party is far too conservative, and through speaking to FG activists - I found them way too conservative on a social level, especially in regards to gay rights. You can a look at the results from their own youth wing's poll in regards to gay marriage with the majority stating that gay marriage should never be legalised. : http://www.yfg.ie/pollBooth.php?op=results&pollID=47&mode=&order=&thold= - And while Enda might say the party supports gay rights, at a grassroots level, the opposite is true from my experience.

On an international level - Fine Gael appears to want to erode our neutrality. I believe that our neutrality is an important core aspect of this state when it comes to international disputes. Irish people are respected around the world, because of our neutrality.

I don't believe that Fine Gael are a credible alternative. We've seen this nonsense before, where Fianna Fáil have slipped up and Fine Gael have used opportunistic tactics to get into Government, only to change absolutely nothing. All the issues we see today, with mass unemployment and such was tackled by Fine Gael in the 80's, and they failed.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Liam Byrne

dlofnep wrote: »

Aren't we all slightly biased when it comes to politics? I mean, it's all subjective decision making at the end of the day.

Actually, no.....I've no party affiliation whatsoever.

dlofnep wrote: »

Firstly, their leader lacks any backbone - which was evident in regards to the John O'Donoghue case. The country needs a strong leader, and Enda Kenny just isn't the man for the job. Not to mention, it might not look good to have a leader of a country who has been condemned for racist comments.

What racist comments ?

And given his stance on O'Donoghue, I take it that you' don't actually want FF in Government either ?

dlofnep wrote: »

Secondly, I disagree wholeheartedly with Fine Gael's economics. This country does not need a right-winged, neo-liberal party to resolve the current mess. It needs real economic change, and Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael are just two sides of the same coin at this point.

Hard to tell. FF got us into it, and part of me would like to see them take responsibility and get us out of it. The fact is, though, getting us into it showed they're ****e and the decisions made since - from investing in Anglo without researching it to caving on AIB - shows that they're not the ones who can get us out.

Bottom line is that FG will be undoubtedly better (most recent FF actions seem to be goading FG and Labour to stand up to them to kick them out, so that they can wash their hands of the mess) but I'd agree that I don't know if FG are good enough.

dlofnep wrote: »

On an international level - Fine Gael appears to want to erode our neutrality. I believe that our neutrality is an important core aspect of this state when it comes to international disputes. Irish people are respected around the world, because of our neutrality.

Our neutrality is non-existent, and FF have put paid to this fable since 2001 by letting America use Shannon.......I didn't see any Iraqi planes land there, did you ?

dlofnep wrote: »

I don't believe that Fine Gael are a credible alternative. We've seen this nonsense before, where Fianna Fáil have slipped up and Fine Gael have used opportunistic tactics to get into Government, only to change absolutely nothing. All the issues we see today, with mass unemployment and such was tackled by Fine Gael in the 80's, and they failed.

I don't believe they are the best and I think Irish politics needs to be 100% reformed, clearing out all the old crap and starting fresh with proper thinking - long-term, beyond the next election or seat-retention exercise or local thinking - but at the moment FG are our best option.

As for "the issues we see today", I can't help thinking that FG did sort them out, laying the seeds for the fabled "Celtic Tiger", but that greed and power got the better of those at the top and they forgot that they were meant to be looking after OUR interests and not their well-paid powerful buddies.

Pride Fighter

dlofnep wrote: »

Bad news for Ireland.

To see the neo-liberals/christian democrats/fascists whatever they call themselves in power is a bad day for Ireland indeed.

deadhead13

The Greens gain 2%.

mike65

dlofnep tell us which combo of parties would be better than FF/Green or FG +Lab

lugha

dlofnep wrote: »

Not to mention, it might not look good to have a leader of a country who has been condemned for racist comments.

The party is far too conservative, and through speaking to FG activists - I found them way too conservative on a social level, especially in regards to gay rights. You can a look at the results from their own youth wing's poll in regards to gay marriage with the majority stating that gay marriage should never be legalised. : http://www.yfg.ie/pollBooth.php?op=r...&order=&thold= - And while Enda might say the party supports gay rights, at a grassroots level, the opposite is true from my experience.

Well we have a minister for justice who in the past uttered some less than supportive views about the gay community and I hear no one dragging that up. What Kenny said a few years ago was nothing more than a stupid throw away remark but I suppose at least it has more substance as a criticism than the usual moronic one's wheeled out about his image or lack of charisma.

dlofnep wrote: »

Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael are just two sides of the same coin at this point.

Broadly true but the electorate have a truckload of left wing parties to choose from but in the main decline (with the exception if labour who I don't think would be a million miles from the big two in government)

dlofnep wrote: »

On an international level - Fine Gael appears to want to erode our neutrality. I believe that our neutrality is an important core aspect of this state when it comes to international disputes. Irish people are respected around the world, because of our neutrality.

Ah yes, our neutrality. It wouldn't do to puncture our cosy little naive world where we can pretend that guns and bombs and stuff are horrible, horrible things and we should all just be friends and be nice to each other. We have been happy, even proud (as opposed to deeply embarrassed) in the past to let others see off fascism and communism and the like but eventually we will have to start behaving like a grown up country and realize that force is sometimes necessary to protect your way of life.

dlofnep

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I don't believe we have a man for the job - but if you were to ask me who would be the better realistic candidate out of what's going to be available, then - Eamon Gilmore would be a much better choice. At least he showed backbone on the O'Donoghue fiasco.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

That's your democratic right to do so. I wouldn't, and I don't truly believe that right-wing economics is compatible with Ireland, or any country in the world for that matter.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It's an observation, through my experience with dealing with a number of international communities through the political spectrum. They have endlessly praised Ireland for not interfering in their affairs.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It's like Muhammad Ali said - "I got nothing against no Viet Cong." And that is personified with Ireland. We stay out of their business, they stay out of ours. If you want to go meddling in other people's affairs, then your kids can face the consequences, not mine.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

A left wing alliance between Labour and Sinn Féin would be a credible alternative.

imme

dlofnep wrote: »

A left wing alliance between Labour and Sinn Féin would be a credible alternative.

Thanks for that, you gave me a good laugh.
Is this some kind of fantasy.

dlofnep

lugha wrote: »

Well we have a minister for justice who in the past uttered some less than supportive views about the gay community and I hear no one dragging that up.

Bring it up, and we'll discuss it. I was responding to why I felt Fine Gael wasn't a credible alternative. I don't feel that Fianna Fáil are suitable either, so it would be slightly outside the scope to bring it up, would it not?

lugha wrote: »

What Kenny said a few years ago was nothing more than a stupid throw away remark but I suppose at least it has more substance as a criticism than the usual moronic one's wheeled out about his image or lack of charisma.

The fact that he said it as a political representative leads me to believe that if he says it under that pretense, I can only imagine what he might say behind closed doors. I don't feel that someone who uses words like "******" should be suitable for the role of An Taoiseach.

lugha wrote: »

Broadly true but the electorate have a truckload of left wing parties to choose from but in the main decline (with the exception if labour who I don't think would be a million miles from the big two in government)

They do, and I agree with you that Labour is ticking towards the centre than true left, but a left alliance would cover that.

lugha wrote: »

Ah yes, our neutrality. It wouldn't do to puncture our cosy little naive world where we can pretend that guns and bombs and stuff are horrible, horrible things and we should all just be friends and be nice to each other. We have been happy, even proud (as opposed to deeply embarrassed) in the past to let others see off fascism and communism and the like but eventually we will have to start behaving like a grown up country and realize that force is sometimes necessary to protect your way of life.

Look, where true intervention is required - I can see your argument. But not the likes of Iraq. If Ireland wasn't neutral, it would probably be kissing the arse of the USA, and we've seen what happens next. The reality of the matter is, Ireland doesn't have a strong enough defense force to dissolve it's neutrality. If we wanted to dissolve it, we would have to start pumping ALOT more funding into our defense forces, which isn't economically viable. But the repercussions of meddling in other cultural affairs wouldn't be wise.

dlofnep

imme wrote: »

Thanks for that, you gave me a good laugh.
Is this some kind of fantasy.

You see, it's these kind of snide, condescending remarks that annoy me. I am asked to provide an alternative, and I have given my opinion. Left-wing governments around the world have operated time and time again. Considering Fianna Fáil are a waste of space, and I don't believe Fine Gael to be a credible alternative based on my above post - It should be very obvious what the options were.

You don't have to agree with my choice of an alternative, but you can be maturer in your response.

dlofnep

Liam Byrne wrote: »

What racist comments ?

Sorry Liam, trying to respond to about 101 comments here. Link is here if you want a read: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/sep/15/world.race

Liam Byrne wrote: »

And given his stance on O'Donoghue, I take it that you' don't actually want FF in Government either ?

No, I don't

Liam Byrne

dlofnep wrote: »

Look, where true intervention is required - I can see your argument. But not the likes of Iraq. If Ireland wasn't neutral, it would probably be kissing the arse of the USA, and we've seen what happens next.

I'm confused.....you're OK where proper intervention is required, recognise that Iraq isn't one of those, and still claim that we're not kissing the arse of the USA ?

I'd argue that the fact that we let them (ab)use Shannon, and refused to examine the planes in accordance with international law, means that FF did lick their arses!

dlofnep

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I'm confused.....you're OK where proper intervention is required, recognise that Iraq isn't one of those, and still claim that we're not kissing the arse of the USA ?

No, I didn't say I was OK with it - I said I understand their position. I outlined why we remaining neutral was of benefit to Ireland. One from an economic standpoint, and one from an international persona standpoint.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I'd argue that the fact that we let them (ab)use Shannon, and refused to examine the planes in accordance with international law, means that FF did lick their arses!

No arguments from me there, I protested against those Shannon flights.

imme

dlofnep wrote: »

You see, it's these kind of snide, condescending remarks that annoy me. I am asked to provide an alternative, and I have given my opinion. Left-wing governments around the world have operated time and time again. Considering Fianna Fáil are a waste of space, and I don't believe Fine Gael to be a credible alternative based on my above post - It should be very obvious what the options were.

You don't have to agree with my choice of an alternative, but you can be maturer in your response.

Yeah it's your opinion, fair enough. I just don't see it as being in anyway possible or workable. Maybe it's the fact you went for established parties and not for idea of a left-wing government is what prompted what you see as my 'snide' comment, as you see it.

imme

dlofnep wrote: »

Sorry Liam, trying to respond to about 101 comments here. Link is here if you want a read: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/sep/15/world.race

What are you trying to achieve by bringing up this old point, it has been brought up before you know. Do you believe Kenny is racist?

dlofnep

imme wrote: »

Yeah it's your opinion, fair enough. I just don't see it as being in anyway possible or workable.

But Fine Gael / Labour is more compatible? Their politics is, or at least used to be polar opposite. Sinn Féin and Labour have much more in common when you break it down to the basic essentials.

imme wrote: »

Maybe it's the fact you went for established parties and not for idea of a left-wing government is what prompted what you see as my 'snide' comment, as you see it.

No, it was your assumption that someone's opinion that differs to yours is laughable. If you don't want my opinion, don't ask.

dlofnep

imme wrote: »

What are you trying to achieve by bringing up this old point, it has been brought up before you know. Do you believe Kenny is racist?

I don't believe he is KKK racist, but I do believe that him and certain elements within his party are slightly xenophobic. I don't feel that his comments were appropriate as an elected representative, and it is perfectly reasonable to bring up issues such as this when examining someone's character.

P. Breathnach

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

So you are claiming that "don't know" or "no opinion" counts as being on your preferred side of the argument?

I don't know about that.

imme

dlofnep wrote: »

But Fine Gael / Labour is more compatible? Their politics is, or at least used to be polar opposite. Sinn Féin and Labour have much more in common when you break it down to the basic essentials.



No, it was your assumption that someone's opinion that differs to yours is laughable. If you don't want my opinion, don't ask.

FG & Labour have worked as a coalition before, primarily because of numbers. FG with their 'Just Society' era in the '60's became the FG of Fitzgerald of the '80's, things change. There's nothing to stop Labour & SF from coalesing, except the numbers are insurmountable.

I'm all for people having different opinions, that's what keeps the world a turning. I didn't ask for your opinion, btw, but I'm sure you know that.

lugha

dlofnep wrote: »

The fact that he said it as a political representative leads me to believe that if he says it under that pretense, I can only imagine what he might say behind closed doors. I don't feel that someone who uses words like "******" should be suitable for the role of An Taoiseach.

Leaving aside the utter psychosis surrounding our attitude to the N word, where we cannot even write it less in summons up some evil spirit (I expect folk in an couple of generations time with be somewhat bemused at us) I find it somewhat amusing that you propose that Sinn Fein might be part of a future government while having reservations about Enda Kenny’s use of language. I am reminded of Billy Connolly’s anecdote about Rose-Mary West’s disapproval of Fred watching his shows. “The garden was full of dead bodies, but she doesn’t approve of my bad language”

dlofnep wrote: »

They do, and I agree with you that Labour is ticking towards the centre than true left, but a left alliance would cover that.

I think you are getting your cause and consequence reversed here. Labour are moving right because the were getting no joy (or enough support) on the left. Look at the political journey taken by the likes of Rabbitte or even Gilmore from the likes of SF/ workers party via DL and now to a centralist Labour. Give it a bit of time and they will be resurrecting the PDs.

imme

dlofnep wrote: »

I don't believe he is KKK racist, but I do believe that him and certain elements within his party are slightly xenophobic. I don't feel that his comments were appropriate as an elected representative, and it is perfectly reasonable to bring up issues such as this when examining someone's character.

can one be slightly xenophobic? it's an either or, surely?
were Bertie's comments about economy/suicide appropriate, are Adam's comments about IRA murders appropriate. Is the thread about FG riding high in the opinion polls or Kenny's character?

dlofnep

lugha wrote: »

Leaving aside the utter psychosis surrounding our attitude to the N word, where we cannot even write it less in summons up some evil spirit (I expect folk in an couple of generations time with be somewhat bemused at us) I find it somewhat amusing that you propose that Sinn Fein might be part of a future government while having reservations about Enda Kenny’s use of language. I am reminded of Billy Connolly’s anecdote about Rose-Mary West’s disapproval of Fred watching his shows. “The garden was full of dead bodies, but she doesn’t approve of my bad language”

No, you make a valid point.. But his racist remarks aren't the only reason I feel his is not right for the position and I think I have made that very clear.

lugha wrote: »

I think you are getting your cause and consequence reversed here. Labour are moving right because the were getting no joy (or enough support) on the left. Look at the political journey taken by the likes of Rabbitte or even Gilmore from the likes of SF/ workers party via DL and now to a centralist Labour. Give it a bit of time and they will be resurrecting the PDs.

Well, maybe they are - But I guess, that's up for the Labour movement to examine that. I'm not a voter of Labour. But I certainly agree that they have moved more centre, but there is certainly still a strong left grass roots movement within Labour.

dlofnep

imme wrote: »

can one be slightly xenophobic? it's an either or, surely?

Of course someone can be slightly xenophobic. You don't believe different levels of Xenophobia exist?

nesf

dlofnep wrote: »

A left wing alliance between Labour and Sinn Féin would be a credible alternative.

Um, a combination that would total 27% of the vote, as measured by that poll is not in anyway a credible alternative since it couldn't come close to holding a majority in the Dáil. You might wish for the two parties to have enough seats to do so and that's fair enough but right now such a combination simply isn't a credible alternative since a credible alternative would by definition need to be capable of forming a Government.

Lockstep

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Difficult one to prove but I thought it was common knowledge that we were fairly respected in this regard, especially in relation to peacekeeping. Irish soldiers are highly respected for this and an asset in fractious regions like Lebanon as we come in with no baggage or suspicion due to affiliations.

Take it with a pinch of salt if you wish though.

kenco

Interesting result but nothing more. A poll of this nature at this time is nearly irrelvant. Unfortunately we are very unlikely to see an election in the short term. Even if we did given our PR system it would not equate to say 75 or so seats.

jank

Can we get onto the topic at hand?

Very interesting poll. This really cements that there has been a fundamental shift to FG from FF by many voters. Some FF voters have also swung to Labour and Sinn Fein. This is very bad news by FF considering the nightmare budget is due to be delievered in 2 weeks. Expect a few more points shaved off FF and for them to hover around the 20's or maybe even go under it. These votes should go to Labour.

Also interesting is the lack of a breakthrough of labour. The media keep on going on about gilmore and the great job he is doing but that is not transcending any more. The people want to see solutions and all the see is Labour pandering to the PS workers. When they see a union gob****e on tv they think labour! Its clear that the people of ireland realise that pay cuts must happen for state spending be brought under control.

These numbers though will mean that the next government will be a FG - Labour government but if FG can break the magic 40 mark a overall majority might be on the cards or at least very close to it with the odd independent thrown in.

FF is looking at a FG 2002 esque meltdown that could take a generation to fix.
Nevermind the fact that 2 or 3 incumbent FF TDs will not get elected on a mid 20's polling in whatever constituency. These TDs will be not looking at the opposition but trying to stab the other FFer in the back to retain his seat. It is going to be very nasty out there when a GE is called.

The big fear though is that they become the 3rd party. Labour on the left, FG on the right. It happened in the UK could it happen here?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

dlofnep

nesf wrote: »

Um, a combination that would total 27% of the vote, as measured by that poll is not in anyway a credible alternative since it couldn't come close to holding a majority in the Dáil. You might wish for the two parties to have enough seats to do so and that's fair enough but right now such a combination simply isn't a credible alternative since a credible alternative would by definition need to be capable of forming a Government.

A fair point. Obviously with the current holdings, it isn't possible. I was referring to a credible alternative from a theoretical standpoint.

imme

dlofnep wrote: »

A fair point. Obviously with the current holdings, it isn't possible. I was referring to a credible alternative from a theoretical standpoint.

I don't know that SF & Labour are that compatible from a policy point of view. Labour is quite broad politically, are they even a left-wing party in the European context.

irish_bob

imme wrote: »

I don't know that SF & Labour are that compatible from a policy point of view. Labour is quite broad politically, are they even a left-wing party in the European context.

labour have shifted sharply to the left since gilmore took over

imme

irish_bob wrote: »

labour have shifted sharply to the left since gilmore took over

?how has this manifested itself. (maybe another thread needed for that).
The wonderful Kevin Myers? wrote recently that in effect the old Workers Party has taken over Labour. The current and previous leaders are old WP men. The Deputy Leader under Quinn was old WP too. Anyway none of this seems to have done any good for their numbers. Even with Labour & WP together their numbers are lesser than the parts put together.

Moriarty

Probably off topic in this thread, but it's a bugbear of mine..

RTE wrote:

When asked about the Budget, 76% said the Government should increase taxes on those earning over €100,000 a year

I guess it's just coincidence that probably significantly fewer than 24% would earn over €100,000..

RTE wrote:

while 56% prioritise public sector pay cuts.

.. and I guess it's also just coincidence that ~85% of the labour force don't work in the public sector.


What have we specifically learnt from keeping the polling companies in business this week? Nothing of value.

What could we possibly deduce from the figures? That people want cuts which don't affect them. Shocking.

On the other hand, it's a good demonstration of why the "public mood" is to be studiously ignored when you're coming up to a budget.

brianthebard

nesf wrote: »

Um, a combination that would total 27% of the vote, as measured by that poll is not in anyway a credible alternative since it couldn't come close to holding a majority in the Dáil. You might wish for the two parties to have enough seats to do so and that's fair enough but right now such a combination simply isn't a credible alternative since a credible alternative would by definition need to be capable of forming a Government.

While I agree that SF and Labour probably don't have enough support to go into government without any other partners, simply adding the figures from the poll together isn't accurate either, since it doesn't reflect what would actually happen in an election. One can assume with some certainty that a large percentage of SF voters would give Labour a preference and perhaps vice versa as well.

nesf

brianthebard wrote: »

While I agree that SF and Labour probably don't have enough support to go into government without any other partners, simply adding the figures from the poll together isn't accurate either, since it doesn't reflect what would actually happen in an election. One can assume with some certainty that a large percentage of SF voters would give Labour a preference and perhaps vice versa as well.

Indeed. However if one is strictly talking about viable alternative Governments then one would have to put together some group that look like they'd have enough seats from poll numbers. Actual seats will vary because a nationwide poll says little about actual seats won unless you break it down by constituency etc.

My point was simply that given present polling it's extremely unlikely that SF/Labour would be a viable combination, versus FG/Labour which looks really strong at the moment.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Liam Byrne

brianthebard wrote: »

One can assume with some certainty that a large percentage of SF voters would give Labour a preference and perhaps vice versa as well.

I don't know enough about SF voters to either agree or disagree with the first part, but I'd reckon it's a big jump to come to the "vice versa" conclusion.

Anyway, the thread is about FG's jump and the fact that Labour haven't - despite Gilmore's decent-enough performance - capitalised on FF's monumental ****-ups.

Sand

I'd agree - I dont think you can assume that Labour voters would transfer to SF. One of the main problems hampering a SF breakthrough is a lack of transfers due to their "baggage". Even the likes of Toirese Ferris or whateverhernameis cited it to explain their last electoral failure.

eoinbn

Moriarty wrote: »

What could we possibly deduce from the figures? That people want cuts which don't affect them. Shocking.

On the other hand, it's a good demonstration of why the "public mood" is to be studiously ignored when you're coming up to a budget.

What we can tell is that people are in for one huge wakeup call! This whole debate about whether we should tax OR cut- it's a complete waste of time! Everyone is going to pay more taxes, and there will be cuts, massive ones.

dlofnep

Sand wrote: »

I'd agree - I dont think you can assume that Labour voters would transfer to SF. One of the main problems hampering a SF breakthrough is a lack of transfers due to their "baggage". Even the likes of Toirese Ferris or whateverhernameis cited it to explain their last electoral failure.

I think it certainly does account for votes, you're 100% right - But the further the peace process progresses, the less this will matter IMO. It might take 10-15 years, but it will happen.

nesf

dlofnep wrote: »

I think it certainly does account for votes, you're 100% right - But the further the peace process progresses, the less this will matter IMO. It might take 10-15 years, but it will happen.

Yeah but SF won't remain fixed over this period and will continue to evolve both in terms of political and economic policy. The SF of 15-20 years time might be unrecognisable from the SF of today similar to how the Labour of today is quite different compared to that of the late 80s and so on.

dlofnep

nesf wrote: »

Yeah but SF won't remain fixed over this period and will continue to evolve both in terms of political and economic policy. The SF of 15-20 years time might be unrecognisable from the SF of today similar to how the Labour of today is quite different compared to that of the late 80s and so on.

I'm not sure how true that is. I don't see any major changes with SF from now to 20 years time. It will still remain a left-wing, working-class orientated party - dedicated to furthering the goal of an 32 county Irish Republic (albeit through peaceful means).

Sorry if we're taking this thread slightly out of scope at the mo

Liam Byrne

dlofnep wrote: »

I think it certainly does account for votes, you're 100% right - But the further the peace process progresses, the less this will matter IMO. It might take 10-15 years, but it will happen.

I'd disagree.......the mindset of not condemning atrocities and crimes is still there, and that needs to be sorted out before they can be even remotely considered acceptable.

Like FF not condemning Ahern's or O'Donoghue's actions, this will be remembered by those who are not predisposed to voting for them.

But that's a topic for another thread, other than to say that I'm actually surprised that FG have bounced this much because FG were nowhere near vocal enough in condemning FF's cowboys, and therefore I would have viewed that they tainted themselves in the process and damaged their standing.

nesf

dlofnep wrote: »

I'm not sure how true that is. I don't see any major changes with SF from now to 20 years time. It will still remain a left-wing, working-class orientated party - dedicated to furthering the goal of an 32 county Irish Republic (albeit through peaceful means).

Sorry if we're taking this thread slightly out of scope at the mo

Will it? Honestly (as an outsider) I think the party has moved away from the goal of a 32 county republic and more towards representing working class areas as a prime goal/headline of their politics. But yeah off topic, perhaps start a thread on the question?

brianthebard

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I don't know enough about SF voters to either agree or disagree with the first part, but I'd reckon it's a big jump to come to the "vice versa" conclusion.

I said perhaps vice versa in fairness-it would really be a case by case basis for the electorate but I do believe there are transfers available to SF. While I don't think SF and Labour are going to merge any time soon there is clearly an overlap in policy and if they continue to push working class representation as nesf suggests they will be able to pick up more transfers as time goes on.

dlofnep

nesf wrote: »

I think the party has moved away from the goal of a 32 county republic

It certainly hasn't, it's still as relevant as it ever was. Alot of ongoing campaigns surrounding the issue, and more upcoming campaigns. It still remains the only 32-county party in Ireland and that will always ensure that a 32 county Republic is a prime objective.