I want to vote FG but my only option is a someone I don't like!!

baldres

The only FG candidate in my constit. is Terence Flanagan....who the hell am I supposed to vote for then???

caseyann

baldres wrote: »

The only FG candidate in my constit. is Terence Flanagan....who the hell am I supposed to vote for then???

Vote for who does the most and helps your community the most?

Dont worry about their party name.

meglome

caseyann wrote: »

Vote for who does the most and helps your community the most?

Dont worry about their party name.

Yeah that had nothing to do with the poopie we're in. nothing at all. 'Our' guy 'fixed' the potholes etc etc.


There must a half decent independent you can vote for.

telekon

caseyann wrote: »

Vote for who does the most and helps your community the most?

Dont worry about their party name.

Ughh...isn't that exactly the type of thing we're trying to move away from?!?

We have councillors for a reason...

Vote for party regardless of candidate. they all just tow the party line anyway at the end of the day. so choose amongst the best manifesto's laid out by the parties...

Bottle_of_Smoke

If you want FG in vote for him even if he's an idiot. He's going to follow the party whip on everything so its in effect a vote for the Kenny et al administration

mikemac

OP, vote for him but come next election join the party and get somebody better at the selection committee.
Maybe even yourself? Or they might want a running mate and you can vote for that candidate

In a large organization, there are always going to be a few useless ones.
Edit, I would include our local FG TD in that also. He's so anonymous he's almost invisible

CiaranC

caseyann wrote: »

Vote for who does the most and helps your community the most?

Dont worry about their party name.

**** ITS NOT A LOCAL ELECTION ****
**** ITS NOT A LOCAL ELECTION ******** ITS NOT A LOCAL ELECTION ******** ITS NOT A LOCAL ELECTION ******** ITS NOT A LOCAL ELECTION ******** ITS NOT A LOCAL ELECTION ******** ITS NOT A LOCAL ELECTION ******** ITS NOT A LOCAL ELECTION ******** ITS NOT A LOCAL ELECTION ******** ITS NOT A LOCAL ELECTION ****

Eliot Rosewater

Could we please refrain from calling politicians "twats"? It doesn't serve any purpose other than to reduce the standard in Politics. This is meant to be a serious-ish forum.

/mod.

Reilly616

This is a General Election to elect one house of National Legislature. Whether or not you personally like the individuals doesn't really matter unless they're likely to get a Government position, or they're independent. Just focus on the policies when it comes to backbenchers.

Tragedy

Don't vote for a bad candidate for a 'good' party.

When you vote a bad candidate in for a 'good' party, you are in effect worsening the party, promoting someone without talent, vision, good sense or whatever and giving them a voice and a say in the party you support. How is that a good thing? And don't bother arguing that they won't be heard, I'm sure people said the same thing about Cowen, Coughlan, O'Cuiv etc once upon a time.

Vote for a good candidate, because a good candidate will do some good even in a bad party or a party you disagree with. He'll increase the talentpool, not dilute it.

Saruman

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Could we please refrain from calling politicians "twats"? It doesn't serve any purpose other than to reduce the standard in Politics. This is meant to be a serious-ish forum.

/mod.

Does that include Enda Kenny?

Brussels Sprout

I find myself in the same boat except that I have three of them in my constituency:

Simon Coveney: Elected on back of father's name-seems to be inept
Deirdre Clune: see above
Jerry Buttimer: Loudmouth populist with the second highest expenses bill in the Seanad

Liam Byrne

Do you like your doctor/dentist/heart surgeon?

Or do you choose him because he can do his job?

johngalway

baldres wrote: »

The only FG candidate in my constit. is Terence Flanagan....who the hell am I supposed to vote for then???

I know nothing about that particular candidate. Is there a particular reason you don't like the candidate?

You need to decide which is more important to you, liking the policies of the party or disliking the candidate? And what is achieved by acting one way or the other.

telekon

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

I find myself in the same boat except that I have three of them in my constituency:

Simon Coveney: Elected on back of father's name-seems to be inept
Deirdre Clune: see above
Jerry Buttimer: Loudmouth populist with the second highest expenses bill in the Seanad

I know exactly how you feel!! (same constituency)

I'm voting for an Independent (Dave McCarthy) whos got a manifesto on political reform which is all very positive. However, I dont believe he'll get in, realistically, so my transfers will go to FG...this time. I will judge them in 5 years rather than now.

I know what you mean about these candidates, especially Clune and Buttimer. However, a FG govt with like minded reform based Independents is the ideal outcome imho.

Brussels Sprout

telekon wrote: »

I know exactly how you feel!! (same constituency)

I'm voting for an Independent (Dave McCarthy) whos got a manifesto on political reform which is all very positive. However, I dont believe he'll get in, realistically, so my transfers will go to FG...this time. I will judge them in 5 years rather than now.

I know what you mean about these candidates, especially Clune and Buttimer. However, a FG govt with like minded reform based Independents is the ideal outcome imho.

I didn't mention it in my post but I also intend to vote for McCarthy. Realistically though despite the boards poll he's probably going to be eliminated early enough so my numbers 2-4 will go to the above. I just have to figure out which when I dislike the least and work from there.

telekon

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

I didn't mention it in my post but I also intend to vote for McCarthy. Realistically though despite the boards poll he's probably going to be eliminated early enough so my numbers 2-4 will go to the above. I just have to figure out which when I dislike the least and work from there.

I'm going (if it helps):

2. Coveney
3. Buttimer
4. Clune (really can't abide her but have to stay true to my theory)

irishh_bob

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Do you like your doctor/dentist/heart surgeon?

Or do you choose him because he can do his job?

since when do you get to choose what doctor you see in this country

Liam Byrne

irishh_bob wrote: »

since when do you get to choose what doctor you see in this country

OK - so out of the 3 listed you decided to choose one......but in an effort to keep the thread on track I'll ignore the fact that our family chose our doctor and our dentist and ask you the question...

Even if you COULDN'T choose him, which matters most : that (a) you like him or (b) he's competent and able to do his job ?

Tragedy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

OK - so out of the 3 listed you decided to choose one......but in an effort to keep the thread on track I'll ignore the fact that our family chose our doctor and our dentist and ask you the question...

Even if you COULDN'T choose him, which matters most : that (a) you like him or (b) he's competent and able to do his job ?

I think it's a mix of both, just like with politicians and attempting to make people choose A or B without offering C is disingenuous.

Liam Byrne

Tragedy wrote: »

I think it's a mix of both, just like with politicians and attempting to make people choose A or B without offering C is disingenuous.

Option C - liking someone who's competent - is actually a "nice to have", it's by no means an essential.

People are going on and on about how we need people who CAN do the job, etc, and given the mess FF have created, that's primarily what's required.

Tragedy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Option C - liking someone who's competent - is actually a "nice to have", it's by no means an essential.

People are going on and on about how we need people who CAN do the job, etc, and given the mess FF have created, that's primarily what's required.

You're describing a civil servant, not a politician. I suggest you educate yourself on the difference before trying to tell other people what a politician is/should be.

I would also suggest that you don't know much about Doctors as you seem to suggest there is zero human element to their job, again I would suggest you educate yourself on that further before attempting to use them to illuminate a point you're trying to make.

Liam Byrne

Tragedy wrote: »

You're describing a civil servant, not a politician. I suggest you educate yourself on the difference before trying to tell other people what a politician is/should be.

A politician IS a civil servant.

Tragedy wrote: »

I would also suggest that you don't know much about Doctors as you seem to suggest there is zero human element to their job, again I would suggest you educate yourself on that further before attempting to use them to illuminate a point you're trying to make.

I suggested absolutely no such thing, and I suggest you retract that or get reported. DO NOT PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH, particularly when they are false.

I said that if the ONLY choice - AS THE OP ASKED ABOUT - were between someone you like and someone competent, then there's only one logical choice.

So next time you want to "suggest" something, get your own house in order first and stop projecting your own bias and agenda.

Tragedy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

A politician IS a civil servant.

Elected Politicians may be considered Public Servants, they aren't considered Civil Servants.
Sorry.
Suggesting politicians are part of the civil service is quite odd.

I'll have to use the UK definition of a civil servant as we don't seem to have a Government published webpage on it, but the gist is the same.

Civil Servants are those who are employed by the Crown, excluding those employed by the Monarch herself. The Civil Service therefore excludes those who are employed by Parliament and those employed by other public bodies.

I suggested absolutely no such thing, and I suggest you retract that or get reported. DO NOT PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH, particularly when they are false.

Do you like your doctor/dentist/heart surgeon?

Or do you choose him because he can do his job?

That quite clearly suggested that how a doctor deals with patient, bedside manner, developing patient relationships etc isn't part of his job.

One of the most important abilities for a doctor is to be liked by his patients, if possible(i.e. for a surgeon it's implausible and pointless, but even a consultant needs to instil trust, confidence and respect in a patient).

I'm not saying we don't need competent politicians, I'm disagreeing that the sole competency needs to be some esoteric speciality. A politicians job is more than that, it's why he's meant to have a strong civil service to rely on(as is the case in most countries).

Out of curiousity I looked up the PMs/Finance Ministers of some of the largest EU countries to try find out what their career/knowledge was in before getting into politics:

David Cameron: Career Politician
George Osborne: Career Politician

Nicolas Sarkozy: Briefly worked as a Lawyer
Christine Lagarde: Lawyer

Angela Merkel: Physical Chemist
Wolfgang Schäuble: Lawyer, worked briefly in a tax office

Silvio Berlusconi: Business Magnate
Giulio Tremonti: Law Professor

José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero: Teaching assistant in Law
Elena Salgado: Seems to be a career politician

Does that honestly seem all that different to Irelands?

Liam Byrne

Tragedy wrote: »

That quite clearly suggested that how a doctor deals with patient, bedside manner, developing patient relationships etc isn't part of his job.

It did not, but rather than argue with you I'll let a mod decide.

Tragedy wrote: »

One of the most important abilities for a doctor is to be liked by his patients, if possible(i.e. for a surgeon it's implausible and pointless, but even a consultant needs to instil trust, confidence and respect in a patient).

The MOST IMPORTANT ability is that he be capable. And in the context of the thread, the option of being BOTH is NOT AVAILABLE to the OP.

If I had suggested that third option it would have been off-topic because that option is unavailable to the OP.

Tim Robbins

caseyann wrote: »

Vote for who does the most and helps your community the most?

Dont worry about their party name.

Oh so you're a pot hole voter...

you'll enjoy this :-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyDBIymdADA

Tragedy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

The MOST IMPORTANT ability is that he be capable. And in the context of the thread, the option of being BOTH is NOT AVAILABLE to the OP.

If I had suggested that third option it would have been off-topic because that option is unavailable to the OP.

Oh, so we can only suggest unrealistic scenarios with two choices so the OP will swing towards the opinion we want him to?

OP: If you're trapped in a car, petrol tank ruptured and spilling onto the road liable at any second to go up in flames engulfing you in an inferno, with your legs trapped under the steering column requiring specialist firefighting equipment and several minutes to cut you free, whilst also hemorrhaging blood from a cut artery that will likely lead to your death within minutes if not treated, do you;
A)Choose firefighters to cut you free, knowing that the bleed will kill you anyway
or
B)Choose paramedics to treat your bleed, knowing the car will catch fire and immolate you before the firefighters can cut you free?

Well OP? Which would you prefer? Remember there is no third choice

I answered the OP with my opinion(where in the OP does it state there's only two scenarios or two options? Also, how is a third option offtopic for the OP, but talking about doctors not offtopic?), I don't see where any of this other ontopic/offtopic OPTION NOT ALLOWED stuff comes into it.

Liam Byrne

Tragedy wrote: »

Oh, so we can only suggest unrealistic scenarios with two choices so the OP will swing towards the opinion we want him to?

Sheesh! Did you even read the thread title ?

I want to vote FG but my only option is a someone I don't like!!

I didn't narrow the choices, the OP did.

Tragedy wrote: »

Well OP? Which would you prefer? Remember there is no third choice

Tragedy wrote: »

I answered the OP with my opinion, you seemed to try make him have the same opinion as you(where in the OP does it state there's only two scenarios or two options? Also, how is a third option offtopic for the OP, but talking about doctors not offtopic?).

I want to vote FG but my only option is a someone I don't like!!

The doctors is a direct analogy - one which I had to leave out the 3rd option in order to not patronise the OP by suggesting an option which they themselves had said does not exist.

If anything, the only genuine alternative for the OP is to not go to the doctor (i.e. not vote) but I wasn't going to suggest that either, because it's not helpful.

Tragedy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Sheesh! Did you even read the thread title ?



I didn't narrow the choices, the OP did.







The doctors is a direct analogy - one which I had to leave out the 3rd option in order to not patronise the OP by suggesting an option which they themselves had said does not exist.

Only means one Liam, sorry to break it to you

Who the hell am I meant to vote for gives..9 other options in his constituency(10 candidates, he's already removed the option of Flanagan), the option of spoiling and the option of not voting at all. Wow, up to 11 options already!

Liam Byrne

Tragedy wrote: »

Only means one Liam, sorry to break it to you

Pathetic!

The OP asked what they should do because they don't like the FG candidate. They want to vote for them, but they don't like them.

Therefore the "only option" / choice that the OP asked about is whether to vote for them or not.

If you want to ignore what they asked about and toddle off on your own agenda, then fire away.

Black Swan

REMINDER...
Some posters are getting a bit too personal in their replies. Please focus on the content of posts, and not each other (per charter).

goz83

To the OP. In local elections, you can vote for someone else if you don't like the candidate of the party you support. However, this is a general election focusing on national issues and you should vote by the party you believe in and not just the single candidates.

Too many people vote for the candidate they like. I found the you tube video on page 2 very informative, but it did seem to be anti FF. The video is here if you didn't catch it. I am an ex FF supporter and I will personally be voting FG. I am also in your constituency and will be voting for Terence Flanagan. I actually think he is a nice guy and is very open to suggestions I put forward for small business and education. Some might call it "vote grooming" but when none of the other candidates I contacted bothered to respond, my mind was made up. My opinion was also sought on the business and enterprise plans of FG and I believe it was very genuine to seek the opinion of a person in business, struggling under FF policies and banking restrictions. I think it is just a shame that only 1 FG candidate is running in Dublin North-East. My second vote goes to the Green candidate, because I believe in a greener economy and many FG policies are actually (as John Gormley said) "cut and paste" Green policies. Labour lost my number 2 vote because of all the changing and sniping they did on the campaign.

th3 s1aught3r

caseyann wrote: »

Vote for who does the most and helps your community the most?

Dont worry about their party name.

This is why nothing will ever change :mad:

caseyann

th3 s1aught3r wrote: »

This is why nothing will ever change :mad:

Is it? no the reason nothing will change, is because people keep voting in the same party and now seems like going to vote in same party with different name,who sat back and didn't contest anything FF did but lavished in their wages and only when they saw **** hitting the fan,they started to cover their own asses.