Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Enda Kenny - Dangerous and Unsuitable for Office
Options
Comments
-
Laminations wrote: »The bits in bold create great dissonance for me. They are not compatible in my eyes. If you are the former you would leave the latter or not join in the first place.
And pmce theor behaviour was known how did the party deal with them? That reflects badly on the party and shows you what they stand for
Ive said it before on here, i may vote for FF in the future but its umrealistic to think theyll have changed that much by next election. Especially given the views of party members on here that relentlessly defend them no matter what. They remain a rotten party with a rotten base
Fair enough . . I want a better politician, not just a differant party. My point was just that another party does not guarantee things will improve. I want us all to make politicians be of the uptmost integrity, but we have to demand that from them . . Im concerned people will vote Anybody but FF and little will change . .0 -
Fair enough . . I want a better politician, not just a differant party. My point was just that another party does not guarantee things will improve. I want us all to make politicians be of the uptmost integrity, but we have to demand that from them . . Im concerned people will vote Anybody but FF and little will change . .
I agree with you. I was never arguing that i want a different party and a worse politician, i want both a different party and a better politician, and i think a different party would coincide with better politicians. Anyone who is good in FF still lacks morals because if they had any they'd have resigned and unfortunately morals are something i look for in my better politicians. Dont worry, i'm still going to cast a considered vote. I'm not going into the ballot box, covering the FF names and ticking anywhere else (even though FFers would like people to believe that about those who are disgusted by their performance)0 -
The problem with this thinking is that in Ireland, our politicians blindly adhere to the whip system so no matter how capable the local candidate may be, they're tied to the party.But are you saying if you had 3 candidates on front of you and the best candidate (who you felt was honest and looking out most for the interests of this country), you would basically not vote for them if they were aligned with FF ?
Thats my point . . Yes, its a strike against their name in your eyes, but it doesn't mean they aren't the most capable candidate.
And the ideologies of the party are vital. You mentioned Sinn Fein, who most of us wouldnt vote for if they had superman himself! The actions of the existing members of FF is more representative of what we, the electorate demanded, then the ideology that the party is supposed to represent.
Everything I am saying is about getting people to think properly about why they vote for somebody. What principles do you believe in? What sort of community do you want ?
Haughy, Lawlor , Bertie were big members of FF, but only because people voted for them and wanted them to play leading roles in the country. Because we associate FF with these members, does not mean the whole party is representative of its ideals. For that, its the electorates fault for sacrificing principles for populist figureheads who rode us all. .
I dont want the same FF in power in the next elections . . Certainly not . . But if I was told I would have a party with the mandate mentioned (that they are supposed to follow) and the greater good at its core, I would vote for them. If it happened to be FF, then so be it . .0 -
The problem with this thinking is that in Ireland, our politicians blindly adhere to the whip system so no matter how capable the local candidate may be, they're tied to the party.
I agree . .
Im not saying that do what I say and everthing will be rosey, but we need complete change in how we vote and how the system works (or is used). . In my "perfect" world, politicians would be compelled to make the right decisions for the greater good (even if that meant not agreeing with their own party's direction).
Of course this is wishful thinking, but we can start the process to getting this by demanding more ethical agenda's from the guys who knock at our door asking for our vote . . Not just that we need to vote for the right things for the country, not just ourselves . .
I know I am dreaming to a large degree, but if we could just start growing up as a society we really could have proper change for the greater, long term stability of this country . . I really believe we have it in our own hands to work back to prosperity, but that we need to change the way we vote (not just the party). .0 -
The problem with this thinking is that in Ireland, our politicians blindly adhere to the whip system so no matter how capable the local candidate may be, they're tied to the party.I agree . .
Im not saying that do what I say and everthing will be rosey, but we need complete change in how we vote and how the system works (or is used). . In my "perfect" world, politicians would be compelled to make the right decisions for the greater good (even if that meant not agreeing with their own party's direction).
Of course this is wishful thinking, but we can start the process to getting this by demanding more ethical agenda's from the guys who knock at our door asking for our vote . . Not just that we need to vote for the right things for the country, not just ourselves . .
I know I am dreaming to a large degree, but if we could just start growing up as a society we really could have proper change for the greater, long term stability of this country . . I really believe we have it in our own hands to work back to prosperity, but that we need to change the way we vote (not just the party). .
I'm sorry, but this is a load of nonsense.If it wasn't for the party whip no administration would ever accomplish anything. Any difficult decision that had to be taken would be shirked by gombeen men politicians looking to ensure they get re-elected by taking a populist line on every issue.It's what often happens with minority administrations dependent on independent support.Let's stay in reality here.
Anyway OP, threads on Kenny have been done before.E.g http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055827124
I think the general consensus is that he's useless.I think "dangerous" is a bit much though.0 -
Advertisement
-
trapsagenius wrote: »Any difficult decision that had to be taken would be shirked by gombeen men politicians looking to ensure they get re-elected by taking a populist line on every issue.
I love the way the word "populist" is suddenly a slur, when in actual fact it could also be viewed as simply representing the people.
And you're ignoring the converse completely.....when someone votes against something that's against their ethics or the wishes of the area they are supposed to represent.
Your view is dependent on having a bad politician; our view is dependent on having a good one, who knows when to make the call.
I reckon everyone should have at least 3 or 4 votes a year where they can go against the party whip, and that might make them use those chances wisely (and actually do something, rather than just being a member who washes his hands of issues saying "there's nothing I could do"......similar to a certain disgraced former minister who ran around Limerick claiming to support Shannon and then voted against it.....trapsagenius wrote: »I think the general consensus is that he's useless.I think "dangerous" is a bit much though.
Enda Kenny might be poor, but he's worth a million of O'Dea, and remember that FF voted confidence in O'Dea
And given most of the threads I've seen, where it's FF members/supporters trying to deflect from their incompetence that are the main ones commenting,
I doubt that is a genuine consensus.
Poor at times ? Definitely. Useless ? Far from it.0 -
Liam Byrne wrote: »I love the way the word "populist" is suddenly a slur, when in actual fact it could also be viewed as simply representing the people.
And you're ignoring the converse completely.....when someone votes against something that's against their ethics or the wishes of the area they are supposed to represent.
Your view is dependent on having a bad politician; our view is dependent on having a good one, who knows when to make the call.
I reckon everyone should have at least 3 or 4 votes a year where they can go against the party whip, and that might make them use those chances wisely (and actually do something, rather than just being a member who washes his hands of issues saying "there's nothing I could do"......similar to a certain disgraced former minister who ran around Limerick claiming to support Shannon and then voted against it.....
Well in an ideal world this would be all well and good but I can't ever see it functioning in reality.With regards the bit I put in bold-I believe that a TD should put the national interest ahead of the interest of his constituents, when the 2 conflict.If there was no party whip I believ parochialism would win out every time.The "3 or 4 votes a year" you mention isn't a bad idea, but it would be vehemently opposed by the top brass and policy-makers in every party.Liam Byrne wrote: »Enda Kenny might be poor, but he's worth a million of O'Dea, and remember that FF voted confidence in O'Dea
And given most of the threads I've seen, where it's FF members/supporters trying to deflect from their incompetence that are the main ones commenting,
I doubt that is a genuine consensus.
Poor at times ? Definitely. Useless ? Far from it.
Well I agree that the whole O'Dea affair was a disgrace, so saying that Kenny is worth a million of him isn't really saying much.And I do think he is useless.Let me ask you this question-Kenny has been a TD since 1975 and is the Father of the House-if he doesn't become Taoiseach after the next election, what will his legacy be? IMO,he won't have one.A poor reflection on 35 years in politics, even if much of it was spent in opposition.0 -
trapsagenius wrote: »Well in an ideal world this would be all well and good but I can't ever see it functioning in reality.With regards the bit I put in bold-I believe that a TD should put the national interest ahead of the interest of his constituents, when the 2 conflict.If there was no party whip I believ parochialism would win out every time.The "3 or 4 votes a year" you mention isn't a bad idea, but it would be vehemently opposed by the top brass and policy-makers in every party.
You do have a point about the whip system.
Then again the US system works somewhat although bills usually have a load of sweetners added for particular senators support that has absolutely nothing much to do with the core bill.trapsagenius wrote: »Well I agree that the whole O'Dea affair was a disgrace, so saying that Kenny is worth a million of him isn't really saying much.And I do think he is useless.Let me ask you this question-Kenny has been a TD since 1975 and is the Father of the House-if he doesn't become Taoiseach after the next election, what will his legacy be? IMO,he won't have one.A poor reflection on 35 years in politics, even if much of it was spent in opposition.
Do I remember correctly or was it you who argued with me that willie had not been found guilty of anything and thus should not resign?
I do remember that argument from one ff suporter on here.
Apologies if it was not you.
Speaking of legacies.
What do you think bertie's is and what will biffo's be ?
A sunken country, a glorious boom blown, politics dragged through the gutter maybe ?0 -
Do I remember correctly or was it you who argued with me that willie had not been found guilty of anything and thus should not resign?
I do remember that argument from one ff suporter on here.
Apologies if it was not you.
Speaking of legacies.
What do you think bertie's is and what will biffo's be ?
A sunken country, a glorious boom blown, politics dragged through the gutter maybe ?
Certainly wasn't me about Willie O'Dea.I was as appalled with that whole saga as everyone else.
Bertie's legacy-well, I've outlined my position on him several times ( I just know I'm going to be ripped to shreds again when I say this)-I liked the man and I still do.Whatever about people saying he mismanaged the boom, his contribution to peace in NI will never be forgotten.That's as good a legacy as any.Now when the Tribunal publishes its report I may have to revise my decision downwards, but until then I'm not changing.
Cowen's-pretty much all bad.0 -
trapsagenius wrote: »I'm sorry, but this is a load of nonsense.If it wasn't for the party whip no administration would ever accomplish anything. Any difficult decision that had to be taken would be shirked by gombeen men politicians looking to ensure they get re-elected by taking a populist line on every issue.It's what often happens with minority administrations dependent on independent support.Let's stay in reality here.
Ok. . Lets look at it from another view .. Do you think its right that many TDs vote for certain things simply because they are a part of a party ? More importantly, do you think it guarantees that the correct decision is usually made for Ireland Inc ? If not, then its worth exploring alternatives and this discussion is not simply nonsense . .
Everything in our political system is outdated and many people seem to have the view that if somethings the lessor of another evil or simply keeps things moving (rightly or wrongly), its just fine the way it is. Thats just not good enough . .0 -
Advertisement
-
Would individual TD's have voted for the PS cuts in the last budget?
Will individual TD's vote for the eventual social welfare cuts that are coming down the line? This also applies to FG/Lab TD's when they get into Government.
Of course they wouldn't.
But you can't deny that these decisions were and will be good for the country.
If individual TD's had a choice, there is not a hope in hell that they would leave themselves open to the accusation that they, and only they, were advocating cuts in social welfare.0 -
Would individual TD's have voted for the PS cuts in the last budget?
Will individual TD's vote for the eventual social welfare cuts that are coming down the line? This also applies to FG/Lab TD's when they get into Government.
Of course they wouldn't.
But you can't deny that these decisions were and will be good for the country.
If individual TD's had a choice, there is not a hope in hell that they would leave themselves open to the accusation that they, and only they, were advocating cuts in social welfare.
You assume this based on the current kind of TD we have and I agree with you regarding the decisions these individuals would currently make . .
But all along I have been saying that we need to vote for TDs who will vote for the greater good (even opposition party members agreeing with their counterparts). . It only sounds ridiculous because most people assume this is as good as it gets (in terms of getting TDs with complete integrity and who will make decisions for the greater good of the country even if it costs them). .
The only way to do this is by punishing the populist TD (not electing them in again) . . Make integrity and moral leadership vital to who you elect and eventually we would have the right TDs, doing the right things for the country . .
Ive said it before. I think we are all far to defeatest when it comes to these kind of debates . .People assume, this is just the way the world works so it cant get much better . . I remember when I was in college people used to think that trying to get peace in Northern Ireland was a lost cause . . If that can be achieved, its surely not to much to ask the Irish Electorate to grow up and vote for the right people for the right reasons . .0 -
You assume this based on the current kind of TD we have and I agree with you regarding the decisions these individuals would currently make . .
But all along I have been saying that we need to vote for TDs who will vote for the greater good (even opposition party members agreeing with their counterparts). .
Your naivety is appalling.People in Ireland often do not vote for "the greater good"they vote for personal good.And if it wasn't for the whip system, TDs would do the same.It only sounds ridiculous because most people assume this is as good as it gets (in terms of getting TDs with complete integrity and who will make decisions for the greater good of the country even if it costs them). .
No, it sounds ridiculous because your proposal would never actually work in the real world.Politicians want to get re-elected-it's a very good job after all.Who would people be more likely to reelect-a TD who cuts wages and welfare even if it was for the greater good, or a gombeen TD who fights tooth and nail against all the said changes?Let's keep a bit of realism in this debate.
The only way to do this is by punishing the populist TD (not electing them in again) . . Make integrity and moral leadership vital to who you elect and eventually we would have the right TDs, doing the right things for the country . .
More rubbish.The reason it's caused "populism" is because that's what it is-popular.People will not vote for a TD out of concern for the "greater good"-they will vote for one who is of more benefit to them.9 times out of 10 this will be the populist TD.Yes, it's a pain, but that's just the way it is.Sorry.
As I said earlier,if it wasn't for the whip system, nothing would be accomplished in politics in Ireland.It would be a victory for Parish Pump politics every time.0 -
trapsagenius wrote: »People will not vote for a TD out of concern for the "greater good"-they will vote for one who is of more benefit to them.9 times out of 10 this will be the populist TD.Yes, it's a pain, but that's just the way it is.Sorry.
That is remarkably condescending to people who do vote with the bigger picture in mind.
They say that every cloud has a silver lining, though, so if anything good comes out of this recession, I would hope that it will shock a lot of people into realising that the current system is neither; no personal gain (at least unless you're well-connected) and definitely no "greater good" when it comes to the millstones of Anglo and NAMA that the "populist" Ahern and McCreevy and Cowen foisted on us.trapsagenius wrote: »As I said earlier,if it wasn't for the whip system, nothing would be accomplished in politics in Ireland.It would be a victory for Parish Pump politics every time.
OF COURSE people will want to gain, but they should be able to trust their supposed representatives to look after the country.....and if putting money away for a rainy day and ensuring that key services are properly planned and regulated isn't "looking after the country", then there's no point in having a Dáil.
That mindset will ensure that nothing gets changed, while any TD who has ethics gets sidelined - not by the public, but by "the [BORG] party" - and maintain the mediocre, parish pump and soundbite, unaccountable TD.0 -
Liam Byrne wrote: »That is remarkably condescending to people who do vote with the bigger picture in mind.
They say that every cloud has a silver lining, though, so if anything good comes out of this recession, I would hope that it will shock a lot of people into realising that the current system is neither; no personal gain (at least unless you're well-connected) and definitely no "greater good" when it comes to the millstones of Anglo and NAMA that the "populist" Ahern and McCreevy and Cowen foisted on us.
Come on, do you really think people on social welfare or in the public sector would vote for a TD who is in favour of cutting their incomes?Turkeys don't vote for Christmas.And the PS workers and people would, IMO, be able to convince themselves it was for the greater good not to have their wages cut-most of the unions in Ireland today have unbelievable powers of self-delusion and people always think the cutbacks should be in area other than their own. Most TDs want to get re-elected, ergo I assume many of them would take a populist line without the party whip even if it ruined the country.
I don't know have you done it personally, but in a lot of threads on this forum, people are (often correctly) quick the criticise the parochialism in Irish politics.Without a whip system, as I stated previously, it would be a victory for parish pump politics 7 days a week (or however many days TDs actually go to work).Liam Byrne wrote: »
That mindset will ensure that nothing gets changed, while any TD who has ethics gets sidelined - not by the public, but by "the [BORG] party" - and maintain the mediocre, parish pump and soundbite, unaccountable TD.
But can you not see what I'm saying?Without a whip system I think there would be more of the "parish pump" politics.
What you and Drumpot are suggesting is fantastic in theory and would work in an ideal world where all politicians are solely out for the "greater good" but in the real world I cannot see such proposals functioning.Not everything on paper works well in practice-communism is a perfect example of this(not that I am trying to say either of you are communists, obviously).0 -
Liam Byrne wrote: »That is remarkably condescending to people who do vote with the bigger picture in mind.
it may be condescending, but it's the truth Liam.
Look at the past 4 General Elections.
A system where TD's are only concern themselves with the greater good, will never happen.
Out TD's are concerned with one thing only, getting elected.
They will always try to everything to every man to get re-elected.
Call it parish pump, or whatever you like, it will remain that way.
Why should a voter in rural Ireland, vote for a candidate that says he will only concern himself with the politics of the nation?
The next candidate on the list says he will campaign for the local community center, youth club, (insert local cause here)
which will get the majority of number 1's?
Idealism is fine, but it will always be just that, idealism.
The voters in the next GE are no more concerned with the greater good than they have been for the past 25 years. They will register a protest vote against the government, because someone has to pay.
But the decision for who will get their number 1, will still be decided on local concerns.0 -
It probably explains why I don't fit in.....
But can you both see why it means that the status-quo suits the useless politicians, and why it also means that we can never even hope for anywhere near the ideal, because anyone with ethics and a conscience will get sidelined by "the party" ?
If we don't aim for ideals, then we'll never even reach halfway0 -
They will always try to everything to every man to get re-elected.
Call it parish pump, or whatever you like, it will remain that way.
Why should a voter in rural Ireland, vote for a candidate that says he will only concern himself with the politics of the nation?
The next candidate on the list says he will campaign for the local community center, youth club, (insert local cause here)
which will get the majority of number 1's?
That hits the nail on the head, in fairness.Liam Byrne wrote: »It probably explains why I don't fit in.....
But can you both see why it means that the status-quo suits the useless politicians, and why it also means that we can never even hope for anywhere near the ideal, because anyone with ethics and a conscience will get sidelined by "the party" ?
If we don't aim for ideals, then we'll never even reach halfway
I can certainly see where you're coming from-as I said, your proposals are brilliant on paper.It's just such a system that would leave itself completely open to abuse by unscrupulous politicians solely concerned with getting re-elected.Idealism is always something to strive for, but at the moment unfortunately, getting rid of the whip system would just compound the parochialism so endemic in Irish politics.When we have 166 honest and responsible TDs I will give such a proposal thought, but until then, I cannot see it working.0 -
trapsagenius wrote: »When we have 166 honest and responsible TDs I will give such a proposal thought, but until then, I cannot see it working.
Chicken and egg scenario, then, because as long as there are politicians like Ahern, O'Dea, Cooper-Flynn, O'Donoghue, etc in place, and "leaders" who don't weed them out, then it'll be tough for even 1 honest and responsible TD to get in there to change things, let alone 166........0 -
Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 21860
Since I am having this very same conversation in the Red C results thread, ill post my views here.Ill never get why we must insist on a leader rather then a party. This includes the attacks against FF/Greens/Labour etc. We seem to look at the leader a lot of the time and use that as a basis of whether a party is credible or not.
Its sad, because FG have an awful lot of credible policies and TDs/Senators/MEPs. They are an excellent party in respect but we cant seem to see past Enda, whome may not be the best but is much further from the worst. I believe he is a more credible leader then Cowen who has shown to be offering nothing.
It was FG who were calling for Anglo to be shut down but FF were insisting it wont be. Then Europe says it should be and FF then call for it! Yet, nobody even looks at FG for it and dismisses the party as "Oh, Enda? Never". Yet Varadkar, Hayes, Creighton, Bruton and Waterford's Paudie Coffey, and Maurice Cummins are bringing together a string of political plans - education, economy, health and political reform being a selection. They have, IIRC, something on agriculture taking shape now from what I gather. But - all dismissed because of Enda.
So, what, do FG need to hire a good looking entertainer, who can talk with absolute ease and be impressive to get people to consider the real structure and political power behind the very man who put it together in the first place? Ludicrous.
Look at Labour - water politics. Have very little potential and offer very little bar throwing punches at the government and making speeches that will win over public service workers and the general public - hitting the right notes and winning them over with stuff they want to hear. There a slow party in terms of policies and plans. They seem to offer very little in terms of front bench.
Yet, Gilmore is the face of the party and a damn good speaker winning over the hearts and minds of the voters with "Whatever you want, Labour will give" approach. Hey presto, the party jumps in support and looks to get an overall majority by robbing the voters blind just like FF did. Just not corrupt or in bed with bankers - just in bed with public sector unions and making speeches that people want to hear even if its unrealistic.
SF need an overhaul. Doesn't matter what they come out with, they will never be considered by the large majority to be an alternative.
Personally, I would prefer the party that can offer real change. Real reform. Real and fair politics. Even if it meant being "stuck" with a leader who isn't the best at public engagements and winning over the hearts and minds with political bull****.
Seems like this country wants change - but not the right type of change. Same circle we will remain in, just a different shower.0 -
Advertisement
-
Sully, I agree totally. The leader shouldn't come into the debate for who you vote for.
As I said in another thread, if I based my vote on the leader I was most impressed by, I would have voted for a candidate that can't even get a Co Co seat.
I gave mine to FG, despite my feelings about the leader, simply because I thought the candidate had something to offer.
To be honest, I actually don't think the leader does come into mind when selecting a candidate. It comes down to good old honest, what will he do for my area.
(for "He" in this and previous posts, read "He/She")0 -
Liam Byrne wrote: »Chicken and egg scenario, then, because as long as there are politicians like Ahern, O'Dea, Cooper-Flynn, O'Donoghue, etc in place, and "leaders" who don't weed them out, then it'll be tough for even 1 honest and responsible TD to get in there to change things, let alone 166........
Do you honestly see this ever happening, not even in our lifetime, but ever?
Our system is certainly not perfect, but it's the system we're going to have for the forseeable future.
Even if FG try to change it, it will require a referendum. The people like to have their politions from the locality and one of "Their Own".
I really can't see this changing.0 -
Do you honestly see this ever happening, not even in our lifetime, but ever?
Unfortunately, no. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't demand it, though.
Our politicians - and their self-interested system - have failed us 100%.
I live in hope, though......maybe someday ethics and fairness will take precedence over untamed capitalism and "massive profit at any cost".0 -
Enda Kenny again proved how incapable he is to run the country by stating, in the Dáil yesterday, that Irish banks held €7 billion in Greek bonds, a figure that would have had huge implications for their tier one capital requirements as well as for the cost of Irish borrowing, when the actual figure was a mere €40 million.
Such mistakes prove how inept Kenny is, he claims he is able to run the country, however I wouldnt trust his to run a sweet shop!
you think hes bad ?
imagine if we had a fat lipped obese moron with no balls and a shed load of vested interest friends in charge instead - now that would be ba... oh wait0 -
Enda Kenny again proved how incapable he is to run the country by stating, in the Dáil yesterday, that Irish banks held €7 billion in Greek bonds, a figure that would have had huge implications for their tier one capital requirements as well as for the cost of Irish borrowing, when the actual figure was a mere €40 million.
Such mistakes prove how inept Kenny is, he claims he is able to run the country, however I wouldnt trust his to run a sweet shop!
Indo sources have the figure at €6.3bn which would make FG estimate of €7bn much closer than your €40m.0 -
trapsagenius wrote: »Your naivety is appalling.People in Ireland often do not vote for "the greater good"they vote for personal good.And if it wasn't for the whip system, TDs would do the same.
No, it sounds ridiculous because your proposal would never actually work in the real world.Politicians want to get re-elected-it's a very good job after all.Who would people be more likely to reelect-a TD who cuts wages and welfare even if it was for the greater good, or a gombeen TD who fights tooth and nail against all the said changes?Let's keep a bit of realism in this debate.
More rubbish.The reason it's caused "populism" is because that's what it is-popular.People will not vote for a TD out of concern for the "greater good"-they will vote for one who is of more benefit to them.9 times out of 10 this will be the populist TD.Yes, it's a pain, but that's just the way it is.Sorry.
As I said earlier,if it wasn't for the whip system, nothing would be accomplished in politics in Ireland.It would be a victory for Parish Pump politics every time.
What a crock of **** . . Seriously, with people like you voting we will only ever be stuck in the past with the same imoral politicans we have consistently voted in . .
yeh Im naieve because I believe that if we really want change we can achieve it ? Your just narrow minded if you believe that "this is as good as it gets" is an acceptable argument . .
Seriously, its people like you with your assumptive negative attitude, that prevent real change . . Sure why just dont we all accept this is it . . This is the best we can ever get, so why bother trying to educate people, to encourage a superior political system . . Look how good the whip system has done so far . . yep, decisions have been made quickly . . Lets ignore the fact that the wrong decisions have been made, particularly in extremely important issues . . But the whip system made sure things got through quickly so its a good system . . Lets not even explore alternative ways of doing things . . :rolleyes:
People can change .. If the people in the North can work for and achieve peace, then its not beyond the realms of possibility that we can actually get TD's voted in by an educated electorate . .0 -
Liam Byrne wrote: »Unfortunately, no. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't demand it, though.
Our politicians - and their self-interested system - have failed us 100%.
I live in hope, though......maybe someday ethics and fairness will take precedence over untamed capitalism and "massive profit at any cost".
Exactly . . when you stop demanding better quality of politician, you will end up with exactly what we have (or even worse) . .
My points are all about progression, about change for the good . . I can only see positives from trying to encourage change for the good . .
I see people say we need a new party but we dont . We just need a new kind of politician. I have considered trying to set up some sort of organization whose goal is to encourage people to ask more questions of their politicians. To discourage voting based on what your man can get for your local GAA club or if they are a "good auld skin".
Of course the cynics would question its intentions/motivations which is why any contributions would be publically posted regularly. . Make everything transparent so it has the publics trust . . It would only support/endorse politicians (not party's) who tow the line of its principles . .
If it has nothing to gain by being popular (money/position of power) it could remain impartial and all about educating our electorate into making more prudent decisions when voting . .
Hey, it might be completely impossible to start up such an organisation but at least Im thinking about alternatives as opposed to simply accepting the way things are . .0 -
What a crock of **** . . Seriously, with people like you voting we will only ever be stuck in the past with the same imoral politicans we have consistently voted in . .
yeh Im naieve because I believe that if we really want change we can achieve it ? Your just narrow minded if you believe that "this is as good as it gets" is an acceptable argument . .
Seriously, its people like you with your assumptive negative attitude, that prevent real change . . Sure why just dont we all accept this is it . . This is the best we can ever get, so why bother trying to educate people, to encourage a superior political system . . Look how good the whip system has done so far . . yep, decisions have been made quickly . . Lets ignore the fact that the wrong decisions have been made, particularly in extremely important issues . . But the whip system made sure things got through quickly so its a good system . . Lets not even explore alternative ways of doing things . . :rolleyes:
People can change .. If the people in the North can work for and achieve peace, then its not beyond the realms of possibility that we can actually get TD's voted in by an educated electorate . .
Why don't you actually deal with the points Danman and I have made, instead of just asserting your argument the whole time?
Anyway...What a crock of **** . . Seriously, with people like you voting we will only ever be stuck in the past with the same imoral politicans we have consistently voted in . .
Who's being pessimistic now?Well we might be stuck with the same politicians, but we mightn't as well.You just never know.But with your proposal it will be far easier for the immoral politicians to get elected.They will be able to promise the sun, moon and stars to everyone and will actually be able to implement these policies-even if it is at the greater expense of the country.Can you not understand this?
yeh Im naieve because I believe that if we really want change we can achieve it ? Your just narrow minded if you believe that "this is as good as it gets" is an acceptable argument . .
No your naive because you refuse to accept that your proposals would not work in reality.I never said this was as good as it gets.I even said your proposals would work in an ideal world.But implementing your proposals in reality is a different matter entirely.They would be disastrous, for the reasons I have already stated.
Seriously, its people like you with your assumptive negative attitude, that prevent real change . . Sure why just dont we all accept this is it . . This is the best we can ever get, so why bother trying to educate people, to encourage a superior political system
Your proposals don't encourage a "superior political system".They encourage gombeenism and populism.Look how good the whip system has done so far . . yep, decisions have been made quickly . . Lets ignore the fact that the wrong decisions have been made, particularly in extremely important issues . . But the whip system made sure things got through quickly so its a good system . . Lets not even explore alternative ways of doing things . . :rolleyes:
Yes, wrong decisions have been made.I am not disputing this.I am simply saying more wrong decisions would be taken under your proposed non-whip system.
"Extremely important issues"-A good example of these would be the cutbacks in the last election.Do you really believe that without a whip system that a TD looking to get re-elected would have voted for such cuts, even though they were for the greater good of the country, without the whip system?Please actually answer this question.
And btw, I'm all for alternatives-it's just your alternative would not work.You try and change for the better-you don't just change for changes sake.People can change .. If the people in the North can work for and achieve peace, then its not beyond the realms of possibility that we can actually get TD's voted in by an educated electorate . .
Not really a fair comparison.Peace in NI benefits everyone living there.A political system without a whip system in Ireland only benefits local issues and gombeenism.0 -
trapsagenius wrote: »But with your proposal it will be far easier for the immoral politicians to get elected.They will be able to promise the sun, moon and stars to everyone.....
You mean like FF promised zero-tolerance, and The Greens promised to get the U.S. out of Shannon and to save Tara and not to go into bed with FF ?
Jeez, if either had even tried to implement those I'd be happy!0 -
Advertisement
-
Yep cause Irelands safer in Gilmores hands?
Sorry whats his stance on the croakpark deal? Private property? Religion? The IRA? Soviet Union?0
Advertisement