Questions for all the pro Fine Gaelers?

SC024

So,

Now that Fianna Fail are gone, What exactly are Fine Gael/Labour going to do that Fianna Fail didn't?

Labour are in charge of of Public sector reform = As there biggest funding contributers are the trade union movement is this not more vested interests??

More Paddy's day junckets again?

Didn't cull the number of ministers either?

What do people think?

John_Mc

I'm very annoyed about the situation. I didn't vote labour for the very reason that they're in pockets with Jack O'Connor and co :mad:

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

SC024

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Im directing this at all the pro fine gaelers because this forum was full of them because before the election I was almost afraid to mention anyone but fine gael, also because they landed enough seats to make a run for a minority governement without labour

Another thing, what happened to the promises of reducing the number of tds?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Lawrence1895

In my opinion, nobody who supports FG should complain about people giving out to this party.

It was more than obvious, that they would win the election, so they now have to deal with all the hopes and wishes, people had in them.

People wanted a change, they truly deserve it, but as it stands now, changes needed are not coming.

Prices to high? They still are and nothing will change soon.

Jobs being created? Maybe they will, but for what price? They will be cut elsewhere by winding down semi state bodies.

Okay, everybody needs a chance, so does FG, but there should be at least some indications, that matters will turn to the good...for ordinary people, and not for the rich and wealthy, for the developers and bondholders, as they were blown sugar up their ar*** long enough :mad:

Mr.Micro

FFS FG/Labour have just taken office give them a chance to sort things out. I am sure they will not get everything right to please everybody but if the country gets out of this mess then all the better.

Lawrence1895

Mr.Micro wrote: »

FFS FG/Labour have just taken office give them a chance to sort things out. I am sure they will not get everything right to please everybody but if the country gets out of this mess then all the better.

I mentioned already, that the new government deserves a fair chance, no doubt about that.

But we should also keep in mind, that there are people, who (quite understandable) are a bit impatient, who want to see some change now and who are too deep in the dumps already, therefore don't have much time to wait for things to turn to the good.

On the other side, you hear in the media, that VAT will go up, that Welfare payments will be cut (some of them for a good reason though) and that there will be significant changes to the Health Insurance system.
For me, this leads to uncertainty and anxiety.

johngalway

SC024 wrote: »

More Paddy's day junckets again?

Didn't cull the number of ministers either?

And there was me thinking that the recession/crushing EU interest rates/toxic banks, were our problem. D'oh!

Is mise le key

Mr.Micro wrote:

FFS FG/Labour have just taken office give them a chance to sort things out.

Well lets just look at it from a raw factual perspective,

1. Before the election kenny was huffing & puffing (as was gilmore) that the banks would not be funded by the tax payer indefinetley, pushed a little further on this they said that Anglo would not get one more cent from them.

2. lenihan defers putting further billions into AIB & BOI leaving it for the incoming government.

3. Dukes announces a further €15B for Anglo needed.

Enda & Eamon's position now on all of the banks?

We have to wait for the results of the 'Stress tests' being carried out by Europe before we make a decision.

Translation,

As soon as the EU give the order for more money to be borrowed from the IMF to go into the banks they will do it.

All lieing little divils :rolleyes: and you say give them a chance!!!!!!

The quicker they fall & are outed for their lies & 'economic treason' the better, the only thing that changed with the apocalypse of FF was the party logo's, the politics are the very same.

Lawrence1895

Is mise le key wrote: »

Well lets just look at it from a raw factual perspective,

1. Before the election kenny was huffing & puffing (as was gilmore) that the banks would not be funded by the tax payer indefinetley, pushed a little further on this they said that Anglo would not get one more cent from them.

2. lenihan defers putting further billions into AIB & BOI leaving it for the incoming government.

3. Dukes announces a further €15B for Anglo needed.

Enda & Eamon's position now on all of the banks?

We have to wait for the results of the 'Stress tests' being carried out by Europe before we make a decision.

Translation,

As soon as the EU give the order for more money to be borrowed from the IMF to go into the banks they will do it.

FÚCKING lieing scum and you say give them a chance!!!!!!

The quicker they fall & are outed for their lies & 'economic treason' the better, the only thing that changed with the apocalypse of FF was the party logo's, the politics are the very same.

Saying 'give them a chance' was surely not a matter of appeasing FG, it's much more a realistic, though negative point of view.

I had Labour's Aodhan O'Riordain knocking at the door a few days before the election and I was asking him, why there are so many negative thoughts about a coalition between Labour and Sinn Fein...he said something like 'people are not ready for such a radical change yet'.

So now we all seem to pay the price once again? :mad:

Tim Robbins

SC024 wrote: »

Now that Fianna Fail are gone, What exactly are Fine Gael/Labour going to do that Fianna Fail didn't?

I'd be confident there won't be more ridiculous tax breaks for developers and that people will be accept some pain because it won't be dished out by the people who caused all our problems but by people who are trying to fix them.

Lawrence1895

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I'd be confident there won't be more ridiculous tax breaks for developers and that people will be accept some pain because it won't be dished out by the people who caused all our problems but by people who are trying to fix them.

I honestly hope you are right, especially with the first part of your post...though I doubt, that certain people will be able to suffer even more pain.

Ray Burkes Pension

I can't believe FG haven't undone 14 years of FF government in 3 days!
What a waste of a vote!

hallelujajordan

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

An alternative (and entirely reasonable) option was for FG to form a minority government with voting support from FF . . The two parties are much more politically aligned than FG/LAB and Kenny & Co. could have focused on carrying out the mandate provided to them by the electorate.

SC024

johngalway wrote: »

And there was me thinking that the recession/crushing EU interest rates/toxic banks, were our problem. D'oh!

I'm loving the sarcasm there man thanks,

Part of the problem, If we don't get costs down quick we're going to be needing IMF / EU money for a lot longer than we think...

Banks are bad enough but at some point in the not to distant future we'll be able to draw a line in the sand and say this is it, thats all they get. In other words we have to get to the bottom of the banks sooner or later.

The other equally sized hole is in borrowing for current spending, There's no end in sight for this borrowing... and both our new government parties have found a miracle pot of gold somewhere in that they've promised no social welfare cuts, no paye tax increases and they'll review the Universal social charge? where's all the money going to come from?

Mr.Micro

Is mise le key wrote: »

Well lets just look at it from a raw factual perspective,

1. Before the election kenny was huffing & puffing (as was gilmore) that the banks would not be funded by the tax payer indefinetley, pushed a little further on this they said that Anglo would not get one more cent from them.

2. lenihan defers putting further billions into AIB & BOI leaving it for the incoming government.

3. Dukes announces a further €15B for Anglo needed.

Enda & Eamon's position now on all of the banks?

We have to wait for the results of the 'Stress tests' being carried out by Europe before we make a decision.

Translation,

As soon as the EU give the order for more money to be borrowed from the IMF to go into the banks they will do it.

All lieing little divils :rolleyes: and you say give them a chance!!!!!!

The quicker they fall & are outed for their lies & 'economic treason' the better, the only thing that changed with the apocalypse of FF was the party logo's, the politics are the very same.

I would love to know what your solution is to a problem created by the vile FF Party and the new Government now has to follow an agenda, for the while at least, set out by the last incompetent Government. The money was taken from the EU/IMF, so it has to be paid back and all the agreements with it, so after a few days of a new Government one cannot expect all to to rosy. Patience.

SC024

In fairness when the IMF/EU came into ireland there was little else they could do at that point, We're hardly in a position to tell them to shove it as much and all as Gerry & Co makes that sound appealing. We need to get funding else where first or better yet get to a position where we are self sufficient
BTW I'm not trying to condone FF for getting us in to that position in any way but I think once the Debt Crisis flared up in greece last year there wasn't an awful lot that could have been done one way or the other to avoid the IMF/EU Funds

Mr.Micro

SC024 wrote: »

In fairness when the IMF/EU came into ireland there was little else they could do at that point, We're hardly in a position to tell them to shove it as much and all as Gerry & Co makes that sound appealing. We need to get funding else where first or better yet get to a position where we are self sufficient
BTW I'm not trying to condone FF for getting us in to that position in any way but I think once the Debt Crisis flared up in greece last year there wasn't an awful lot that could have been done one way or the other to avoid the IMF/EU Funds

I agree, the money guys are calling the shots and we have to accept that until and unless we can get a new better deal or pay off the loans. Neither will happen soon IMO. At the end of the day the new Government has a terribly difficult task ahead and hopefully there will be enough talent between the 2 parties to steer the country in a better direction?

Lawrence1895

SC024 wrote: »

In fairness when the IMF/EU came into ireland there was little else they could do at that point, We're hardly in a position to tell them to shove it as much and all as Gerry & Co makes that sound appealing. We need to get funding else where first or better yet get to a position where we are self sufficient
BTW I'm not trying to condone FF for getting us in to that position in any way but I think once the Debt Crisis flared up in greece last year there wasn't an awful lot that could have been done one way or the other to avoid the IMF/EU Funds

The first warning signs came much earlier than the trouble came up in Greece.

I was talking to family members and friends in Germany, and according to the media coverage over there, the banks were in trouble in 2007-2008 already, but they still gave mortgages to anyone and credits to every developer who knocked at their doors.
The then government did not see the first serious warning signs and Ireland went into the recession.

SC024

I don't get the fuss about renegotiating this bailout debt, yes if the opportunity arises by all means take it but as far as I'm concerned its only a side show. To me it's more important to get to a position where we don't need it... Ie Tax revenues matching or being greater than spending. True it won't be easy but if we get there the balls back in our court for negotiating because we've got the upper hand in that we don't need them if our books our balanced

SC024

Also that suggestin in thursdays papers from Glas Securitys for something along the lines of an irish version of freddie mac certainly looks interesting on the face of it

johngalway

SC024 wrote: »

I'm loving the sarcasm there man thanks,

Welcome! It was there precisely as you mentioned pretty irrelevant things as they were crimes against humanity carried out by anyone voting FG. They're insignificant in relation to what I mentioned. If Enda and Eamon wanted 555 junior ministers and to send them all off on Paddys day I'd be delighted, as long as they haul us out of this mess as well.

SC024 wrote: »

Part of the problem, If we don't get costs down quick we're going to be needing IMF / EU money for a lot longer than we think...

Yes, we know this. I didn't object to FF going away on Paddys day either, once there was the prospects of investment following them back. I've zero problem with US exploiting a national holiday which has turned into somewhat of a world event. I don't see where IMF money comes into Paddys day. Do you propose we sit on our hands until it runs out and turn ourselves into some version of isolationist state? Work the people, work the money.

SC024 wrote: »

Banks are bad enough but at some point in the not to distant future we'll be able to draw a line in the sand and say this is it, thats all they get. In other words we have to get to the bottom of the banks sooner or later.

I'm ALL for telling the banks that is quite enough money for you lot. But, not at the cost of crippling the country in a different way, as in destroying a very necessary banking sector. I'm all ears if you have a magic solution.

SC024 wrote: »

The other equally sized hole is in borrowing for current spending, There's no end in sight for this borrowing... and both our new government parties have found a miracle pot of gold somewhere in that they've promised no social welfare cuts, no paye tax increases and they'll review the Universal social charge? where's all the money going to come from?

That's what happens in coalitions. Pre election manifestos become watered down. Anyone who thought other wise before the election, as I have stated already, is an idiot. We will have to see where the money comes from. I would presume there will be a lot got from recovering wastage and increasing investment and bettering the jobs situation. Why not ask them?

enda_4

I think the first failure of Enda Kenny and FG\Lab was the token gesture cuts in government salaries. I agree totally with the theory that to tempt our "brightest and best" into the public arena there must be some rewards but to reduce the cost off goverment by only 6.6% when other areas are looking to be reduced by at least 10% is ridicolous!

Based on the previous earnings I think it equates to approx 350,000

Liam Byrne

SC024 wrote: »

I don't get the fuss about renegotiating this bailout debt, yes if the opportunity arises by all means take it but as far as I'm concerned its only a side show. To me it's more important to get to a position where we don't need it... Ie Tax revenues matching or being greater than spending.

And it's harder to match revenue to spending when part of that spending is a massive interest rate (50% of which is on loans that we didn't even incur).

Lower interest = lower outgoings = easier to take in what's going out; difficult, but easier.

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

An alternative (and entirely reasonable) option was for FG to form a minority government with voting support from FF

How is that "reasonable" considering that 82% of the country wanted FF nowhere near Government or decision-making based on their abysmal track record ?

raymon

hallelujajordan wrote: »

An alternative (and entirely reasonable) option was for FG to form a minority government with voting support from FF . . The two parties are much more politically aligned than FG/LAB and Kenny & Co. could have focused on carrying out the mandate provided to them by the electorate.

As you know this will never happen . FF are too dishonest and incompetent for any party to form an agreement with them .

They ruined the country already, why would anyone want these liars back in any kind of partnership ?

hallelujajordan

Liam Byrne wrote: »

How is that "reasonable" considering that 82% of the country wanted FF nowhere near Government or decision-making based on their abysmal track record ?

Great Argument . . By your logic 81% wanted labour nowhere near government and 64 % wanted FG nowhere near it . . there is a flaw in that logic :rolleyes:

raymon wrote: »

As you know this will never happen . FF are too dishonest and incompetent for any party to form an agreement with them .

They ruined the country already, why would anyone want these liars back in any kind of partnership ?

I'm not suggesting any partnership. agreement or coalition . . I'm suggesting a Tallaght strategy . . Martin may well have given Kenny a blank cheque to form a single party minority government and fully implement the FG manifesto. Many commentators suggested this as a realistic possibility but Kenny made no attempt to form a single party government.

raymon

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I'm not suggesting any partnership. agreement or coalition . . I'm suggesting a Tallaght strategy . . Martin may well have given Kenny a blank cheque to form a single party minority government and fully implement the FG manifesto. Many commentators suggested this as a realistic possibility but Kenny made no attempt to form a single party government.

The Tallaght strategy was an agreement. My post stands . FF are too dishonest and incompetent.

hallelujajordan

raymon wrote: »

The Tallaght strategy was an agreement. My post stands . FF are too dishonest and incompetent.

Actually No, it wasn't. It was a decision that Alan Dukes Fine Gael made unilaterally . .

raymon

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Actually No, it wasn't. It was a decision that Alan Dukes Fine Gael made unilaterally . .

I disagree. The government of the time accepted the assistance.

I do not believe that kenny would accept such assistance from such a discredited organisation.

hallelujajordan

raymon wrote: »

I disagree. The government of the time accepted the assistance.

I do not believe that kenny would accept such assistance from such a discredited organisation.

You can disagree all you like . . the reality is that Fine Gael decided to pursue a policy position and the government of the day benefitted from that. There was no agreement, deal or partnership.

But you raise an interesting point about Kenny. Only 14% of FG voters transferred to Labour. FG were given a strong mandate to try to form a single party government. I voted FG this time around and I would have much preferred to see them form a minority government so that they could pursue their manifesto. That might have required them relying on FF support but I personally would have preferred that option to Kenny's chosen path which has seen FG substantially dilute their manifesto

lifelongnoob

imo gaebour wont last full term...

both parties have already broke promises......... FF fecked up so bad that even gaebour aren't gonna be able to sort it.

so far its the same policies different party. And thats not why people voted for fine geal / labour.

people voted for a change of policy. so far nothing has changed except the number of seats each party have.

K-9

hallelujajordan wrote: »

You can disagree all you like . . the reality is that Fine Gael decided to pursue a policy position and the government of the day benefitted from that. There was no agreement, deal or partnership.

But you raise an interesting point about Kenny. Only 14% of FG voters transferred to Labour. FG were given a strong mandate to try to form a single party government. I voted FG this time around and I would have much preferred to see them form a minority government so that they could pursue their manifesto. That might have required them relying on FF support but I personally would have preferred that option to Kenny's chosen path which has seen FG substantially dilute their manifesto

14% doesn't sound much. I presume obviously FG candidates got the biggest share, did FF get more than Labour and how did Independents do?

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Martin may well have given Kenny a blank cheque to form a single party minority government and fully implement the FG manifesto. Many commentators suggested this as a realistic possibility but Kenny made no attempt to form a single party government.

Why should Martin have the right to "give" anyone anything ? He and his shower had years to do the right thing, and failed (some could say refused) to do so.

If Kenny had relied on FF support I would have been on RTE news as I went into the Dáil to reclaim my vote from FG & Kenny.

Brother Psychosis

the fact that FG failed to get a majority on their own says more about the electorates blinding loyalty to FF despite their obvious f**k ups than any confidence or lack thereof in FG. plus, while labour may be a bit 'out there,' its better than having SF in cabinet!

coalition with labour was the only realistic option, as a minority gov wouldnt have lasted, it would have been too unstable and the exact opposite of what the country needed.

hallelujajordan

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Why should Martin have the right to "give" anyone anything ? He and his shower had years to do the right thing, and failed (some could say refused) to do so.

It's not about Martin's right for god sake, its about what would have best enabled FG to carry out their own manifesto, rather than diluting it with Labours.

If Kenny had relied on FF support I would have been on RTE news as I went into the Dáil to reclaim my vote from FG & Kenny.

You have both no respect for democracy and an over-inflated impression of your own newsworthiness.

If you thought about it you would realise that FG would have been showing more respect for your vote had they at least tried to form a single party government.

thebman

hallelujajordan wrote: »

It's not about Martin's right for god sake, its about what would have best enabled FG to carry out their own manifesto, rather than diluting it with Labours.



You have both no respect for democracy and an over-inflated impression of your own newsworthiness.

If you thought about it you would realise that FG would have been showing more respect for your vote had they at least tried to form a single party government.

How could FG trust the word of FF that they would back them. Seriously? That was a position put forward by Micheal Martin because he knew FG couldn't go for it IMO.

raymon

hallelujajordan wrote: »

It's not about Martin's right for god sake, its about what would have best enabled FG to carry out their own manifesto, rather than diluting it with Labours.


You have both no respect for democracy and an over-inflated impression of your own newsworthiness.

If you thought about it you would realise that FG would have been showing more respect for your vote had they at least tried to form a single party government.

This post makes no sense at all .

How would accepting FF's help be good for FG ? FF are a discredited organisation of arrogant dishonest sleeveens . Even Michael Mc Grath blasted the "stroke" politics http://examiner.ie/ireland/ff-td-blasts-partys-stroke-politics-148747.html.

I have a question - do you still believe ( i remember from one of your more entertaining posts ) that Bertie should come back and sort it all out ???

raymon

thebman wrote: »

How could FG trust the word of FF that they would back them. Seriously? That was a position put forward by Micheal Martin because he knew FG couldn't go for it IMO.

I agree thebman- how could anyone trust Michael Martin . He shafted a lot of his most loyal FF deputies before the election and attempted to shaft a few more FFers for the senate elections . If he is shafting his own people , how can he be trusted to support FG .

I wouldnt trust him at all .

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

If you thought about it you would realise that FG would have been showing more respect for your vote had they at least tried to form a single party government.

Absolute rubbish!

I do not put "single party government" ahead of "getting rid of corruption and incompetence", and so FG accepting FF support would certainly not be representing me.

The above was the reason why The Greens got no vote from me this time around - they put getting into government ahead of being ethical and representing what those who voted for them wanted.

Unlike what your posts seem to say about yourself, I do not subscribe to "power at all costs" and therefore it is ridiculous to suggest that I am anti-democratic; those who are voted for should not just justify their actions based on the number of votes they got, but also on the reasons for those votes.

For the record, I would say the exact same had Kenny chosen to accept the support of Lowry; FG kicked him out because he was corrupt, so therefore he should stay out. Anyone who accepts his support in order to get hold of power is dirtying themselves with the same filthy brush.

hallelujajordan

raymon wrote: »

This post makes no sense at all .

How would accepting FF's help be good for FG ?

FG might have been able to form a single party government, might not have had to share the cabinet table with their left wing colleagues and might not have seen their policies diluted with some policies which they vehemently opposed (look up James Reillys comments on the Labour Health policy - now effectively government policy). They could possibly have done this at no cost. FF were not in a bargaining position and are not looking for anything other than time to rebuild.

How could that not be good for FG ?

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Absolute rubbish!

I do not put "single party government" ahead of "getting rid of corruption and incompetence", and so FG accepting FF support would certainly not be representing me.

Thankfully, their job is to represent everyone who voted for them, not just you. Only 14% of FG votes transferred to Labour. This tells me that the country gave them a very strong mandate to try to form a single party government (even if you didn't)

Liam Byrne wrote:

Unlike what your posts seem to say about yourself, I do not subscribe to "power at all costs" and therefore it is ridiculous to suggest that I am anti-democratic;

How do my posts say that about me. . I voted for FG in the most recent election, I believe the opposition benches is the right place for FF right now. . Lending voting support to enable FG to hold up a single party government does not give them power at all, nor is it about power. . It's about creating a government that can enact sensible policy.

Liam Byrne wrote:

those who are voted for should not just justify their actions based on the number of votes they got, but also on the reasons for those votes.

Nonsense. . . First, its impossible to measure; Second, the reason you vote for FG is likely to be very different to the reason i vote for them. They can't possibly represent all of our reasons. . .

raymon

hallelujajordan wrote: »

FG might have been able to form a single party government.

I still don't get your point . How would accepting the support of a party with a proven track record of dishonesty , incompetence and economic treason be a good thing ?

PDs and Greens fell for the "power at all costs" . They have now got flushed down the same septic drain as FF .

You never answered my question - do you still believe that bertie ahern should be brought back to sort out our economic woes .

hallelujajordan

raymon wrote: »

I still don't get your point . How would accepting the support of a party with a proven track record of dishonesty , incompetence and economic treason be a good thing ?

Because that support was potentially available at no cost. . If we were talking about a FF / FG coalition, I would accept your point but we are not. . FG had the opportunity to govern alone and fully implement their manifesto.

raymon wrote:

PDs and Greens fell for the "power at all costs" . They have now got flushed down the same septic drain as FF .

I don't think anyone votes for someone to be in opposition so I see things a little differently than you. I believe that every elected TD has an obligation to try to form a government. I don't believe its about power, I believe it is respecting your vote and your mandate

raymon wrote:

You never answered my question - do you still believe that bertie ahern should be brought back to sort out our economic woes .

No I do not, but lets bring those previous comments into context. . .

What I argued in the past was that Bertie Ahern was better equipped as a leader in a crisis situation than Brian Cowen and that having him front and centre sorting out the problems that he had a significant hand in creating might be an appropriate punishment.

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Nonsense. . . First, its impossible to measure; Second, the reason you vote for FG is likely to be very different to the reason i vote for them. They can't possibly represent all of our reasons. . .

Interesting.

You do have a point, but there's a limit on it.

Based on what you've said, if FG were elected on a premise that they would remove all stealth taxes, your post would imply that they would be entitled to say that they couldn't measure how much of that premise was the reason for their vote and they could renege on it ?

FG stated - correctly - on numerous occasions that FF were not fit to govern, and people reacted to that.

Accepting support from FF would (I can only suggest, but with strong anecdotal evidence) not be acceptable to the majority of people who wanted FF out, both those who wanted that last time out and the even more who wanted it this time out.

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

What I argued in the past was that Bertie Ahern was better equipped as a leader in a crisis situation than Brian Cowen and that having him front and centre sorting out the problems that he had a significant hand in creating might be an appropriate punishment.

That thought crossed my mind at one stage, but given that Ahern proved himself hopelessly incompetent and is deluded enough not to believe he was in any way at fault, there is no sense in that argument.

Remember this is the guy who claims that he wasn't warned, despite the high-profile furore around what he did say to those who warned him. Yet Ahern doesn't even blink at his own contradiction.

He's a deluded idiot who shouldn't be anywhere near any decision-making process.

hallelujajordan

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Based on what you've said, if FG were elected on a premise that they would remove all stealth taxes, your post would imply that they would be entitled to say that they couldn't measure how much of that premise was the reason for their vote and they could renege on it ?

Yes, they can and they will . . Infact, because they have watered down their manifesto in a joint PfG they will renege on much of their manifesto promises . . had they formed a single party government, regardless of who supported it, we could hold them accountable to their manifesto in a measurable way

Liam Byrne wrote:

Accepting support from FF would (I can only suggest, but with strong anecdotal evidence) not be acceptable to the majority of people who wanted FF out, both those who wanted that last time out and the even more who wanted it this time out.

I don't believe you have any evidence (anecdotal or otherwise) to support such a claim . . On the contrary I think the fact that only 14% of FG first preferences transferred to Labour shows a strong mandate to try to form a single party government . .

And by the way, the 'majority of people' would still have achieved their goal of getting FF out . . You are constatly and incorrectly blurring the line between FG single party government (with FF support) and FG-FF coalition.

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I don't believe you have any evidence (anecdotal or otherwise) to support such a claim . .

Anyone that I've spoken to would have been disgusted if FG had engaged FF. As I said, it's anecdotal and not completely representative of the country (the fact that enough of my own county-men voted for O'Dea means that some people have lower standards) but you have no basis on which to contradict me. You can disbelieve all you like, but you're wrong.

hallelujajordan wrote: »

And by the way, the 'majority of people' would still have achieved their goal of getting FF out . . You are constatly and incorrectly blurring the line between FG single party government (with FF support) and FG-FF coalition.

FF should be nowhere near any position of power. Having an FG government rely on their support - even if it's just a promise of support - is not acceptable.

And that's not even taking into account the fact that the word of FF is worth nothing.

hallelujajordan

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Anyone that I've spoken to would have been disgusted if FG had engaged FF. As I said, it's anecdotal and not completely representative of the country (the fact that enough of my own county-men voted for O'Dea means that some people have lower standards) but you have no basis on which to contradict me. You can disbelieve all you like, but you're wrong.

LOL . . I'm wrong because you have 'spoken to people' . . . How can I argue with that !!

Liam Byrne wrote:

FF should be nowhere near any position of power. Having an FG government rely on their support - even if it's just a promise of support - is not acceptable.

I accept your opinion . . that this would not have been acceptable . . now you need to accept that this is just your opinion . .

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

LOL . . I'm wrong because you have 'spoken to people' . . . How can I argue with that !!

I had already said that it was anecdotal, and you explicitly said that you didn't believe that I had any evidence anecdotal or otherwise

Please be consistent when refusing to accept that people have differing opinions to yours, especially as you are a self-confessed FF supporter who temporarily gave FG your vote, which colours your viewpoint significantly in terms of having a default preference for FF to have an influence.

Those of us with no such party allegiences vote based on a combination of what's promised and the credibility of those proposing, combined with their track record.

hallelujajordan

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I had already said that it was anecdotal, and you explicitly said that you didn't believe that I had any evidence anecdotal or otherwise

Please be consistent when refusing to accept that people have differing opinions to yours, especially as you are a self-confessed FF supporter who temporarily gave FG your vote, which colours your viewpoint significantly in terms of having a default preference for FF to have an influence.

Those of us with no such party allegiences vote based on a combination of what's promised and the credibility of those proposing, combined with their track record.

There is nothing anecdotal in your statement . .

Liam Byrne wrote:

You can disbelieve all you like, but you're wrong.

perhaps you missed out the words "I believe you are wrong" ?

And when did I refuse to accept that people have a different opinion to mine ? ???

hallelujajordan wrote:

I accept your opinion . . that this would not have been acceptable . .