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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Mary McAleese - Third term???......NO THANKS!!!!

  • 03-08-2011 10:59pm
    #1
    Irishlad11
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25 ✭


    This idea keeps popping up with people I talk to and some people on this

    Changing the constitution so that one person can take a third term as President is ridiculous!!!

    I know that the current list of presidential candidates are uninteresting to some people and that President McAleese is very popular and well respected, but nobody should be head of state for 21 years, its like bordering on dictatorship :eek:.

    Anyone else out there share the same opinion????


Comments

  • #2
    Fergus_Nash
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 228 ✭✭Fergus_Nash


    Well it could hardly be bordering on dictatorship to be fair given that the Irish President really has no great power over government decisions:)


  • #3
    caomhino
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 50 ✭✭caomhino


    Well, i'd agree that 21 years is too long for one person, but if i thought Gay Mitchell was going to get it, i might reconsider pretty quickly !


  • #4
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    You need to talk to different people?


  • #5
    Irishlad11
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25 ✭Irishlad11


    Fergus_Nash wrote: »
    Well it could hardly be bordering on dictatorship to be fair given that the Irish President really has no great power over government decisions:)

    Nah.....I just mean that 21 years is like the amount of time that some dictators in other countries are in power.........21 years is far too long for just one person to be president


  • #6
    im invisible
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,372 ✭✭✭im invisible


    they could hold the referendum on the same day as the presidential election...


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    LeixlipRed
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,081 ✭✭✭LeixlipRed


    Another 7 years of junkets. How many perms can one women have before she goes bald? The fallacy that the woman is well respected always gets me as well. Same women who invited UVF bigots to a reception earlier this year? Right so!


  • #8
    Callan57
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,160 ✭✭✭Callan57


    If Dana is the alternative ...........


  • #9
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Irishlad11 wrote: »
    I know that the current list of presidential candidates are uninteresting to some people and that President McAleese is very popular and well respected, but nobody should be head of state for 21 years, its like bordering on dictatorship :eek:.

    :confused:If she kept getting re-elected it would be a demonstration of democracy at work surely. Denying the peopel the ability to vote for who they want by limiting the amount of terms seems silly to me.


  • #10
    Jesus Wept
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,243 ✭✭✭✭Jesus Wept


    Terms should be shortened.


  • #11
    LeixlipRed
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,081 ✭✭✭LeixlipRed


    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    :confused:If she kept getting re-elected it would be a demonstration of democracy at work surely. Denying the peopel the ability to vote for who they want by limiting the amount of terms seems silly to me.

    Every wannabe dictator would definitely agree with you on that anyway.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Fergus_Nash
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 228 ✭✭Fergus_Nash


    Quick question: was there an election in 2004 to re-elect Mary McAleese? For some reason I think there wasn't even though it doesn't make sense. I was 12 at the time so my mind was taken up with other things sports related:D


  • #13
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    LeixlipRed wrote: »
    Every wannabe dictator would definitely agree with you on that anyway.

    Yeah the absolute power of being president of Ireland is the ideal position to take over from.

    Fergus_Nash wrote: »
    Quick question: was there an election in 2004 to re-elect Mary McAleese? For some reason I think there wasn't even though it doesn't make sense. I was 12 at the time so my mind was taken up with other things sports related:D

    She ran unopposed.


  • #14
    No1J
    Closed Accounts Posts: 783 ✭✭✭No1J


    If she could run again it would be a one horse race, couldn't get odds on her.


  • #15
    KeithAFC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,239 ✭✭✭✭KeithAFC


    She is only around for the peace process.


  • #16
    Teclo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 496 ✭✭Teclo


    I'm surprised that the previous Mary hasn't been asked to come back, sure doesn't she still have some time to serve? Maybe we could have alternating Marys. :D


  • #17
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    If Mary Robinson ran again and won, would that be a case of Aras Aris? ;)




    Coat on!


  • #18
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Fergus_Nash wrote: »
    Quick question: was there an election in 2004 to re-elect Mary McAleese? For some reason I think there wasn't even though it doesn't make sense. I was 12 at the time so my mind was taken up with other things sports related:D

    She was the only candidate and was deemed elected without a vote.


  • #19
    Fergus_Nash
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 228 ✭✭Fergus_Nash


    Victor wrote: »
    She was the only candidate and was deemed elected without a vote.

    Thanks:)


  • #20
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,537 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    Victor wrote: »
    She was the only candidate and was deemed elected without a vote.

    amazing that not one of the 4 million odd other people in the country were interested...


  • #21
    SeanW
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,173 ✭✭✭SeanW


    Irishlad11 wrote: »
    This idea keeps popping up with people I talk to and some people on this

    Changing the constitution so that one person can take a third term as President is ridiculous!!!

    I know that the current list of presidential candidates are uninteresting to some people and that President McAleese is very popular and well respected, but nobody should be head of state for 21 years, its like bordering on dictatorship :eek:.

    Anyone else out there share the same opinion????
    No! Given the "choices" on offer to replace her, I'd be satisfied with a 3rd term for Mary McM. Besides, it's not like the President actually does anything over and above being a glorified ambassador, the only real power they have is to act as guardians of the Constitution by referring to the Supreme Court any legislation he/she feels violates the Constitution. A power which was invoked a grand total twice in the past 10 years IIRC. I'm satisfied (for the most part) with how she has done both.
    LeixlipRed wrote: »
    Another 7 years of junkets. How many perms can one women have before she goes bald? The fallacy that the woman is well respected always gets me as well. Same women who invited UVF bigots to a reception earlier this year? Right so!
    She's from Northern Ireland and she's been working to build bridges between communities.

    Peter Robinson etc have to do business every day with the likes of Martin McGuinness, a former IRA terrorist leader. They probably don't like each other, but they're working together to accomplish something, and so long as they do that, the fact that they probably aren't best friends in the after-hours is irrelevant. Probably the same reason that the President (who has an interest in the Peace Process) "invited UVF bigots" to a reception - probably not because she likes them so much but because she felt it would accomplish something. I wouldn't fault her for that.

    At this point I'd almost prefer to scrap the Presidency altogether.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    The Waltzing Consumer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,949 ✭✭✭The Waltzing Consumer


    LeixlipRed wrote: »
    Another 7 years of junkets. How many perms can one women have before she goes bald? The fallacy that the woman is well respected always gets me as well. Same women who invited UVF bigots to a reception earlier this year? Right so!

    You can always tell how invalid and wrong a point is based on how quickly someone resorts to taking cheap shots at appearance. Usually happens with female politicians very quickly and says a lot about the guy who is slinging that insult.

    As for your "uvf bigots" point, I am pretty happy the president does not hang on to bigotry, bar stool politics and bitterness. Her and her husband have made a great contribution to a lasting peace in Northern Ireland.


Advertisement