Should elected reps show they are listening making sure David Norris is a candidate

sparkling sea

Thousands of people want David Norris as a presidential candidate, so if political parties really represent all of their constituents, shouldnt they make sure the people get as much choice as possible.

I think its total hypocrisy - to hide behind 1937 rules by refusing to use surplus votes and disallow such a popular candidate from entering the real race. Nothing has really changed hear, noone seems to be exhibiting courage in any of the main parties, it saddens the heart really.

Sunnyisland

They are listening, listening to the thousands that DONT want him.He cant even get his name on the ballot paper yet MMG gets the support straight away,He had a chance and he himself blew it and last night did not help his case one bit, Let him chill out for a while and maybe he can come back another day, maybe.

anymore

sparkling sea wrote: »

Thousands of people want David Norris as a presidential candidate, so if political parties really represent all of their constituents, shouldnt they make sure the people get as much choice as possible.

I think its total hypocrisy - to hide behind 1937 rules by refusing to use surplus votes and disallow such a popular candidate from entering the real race. Nothing has really changed hear, noone seems to be exhibiting courage in any of the main parties, it saddens the heart really.

Norris has been very happy to use the 1937 rules to get an easy ride into the Senate and draw his € 70,000 plus expenses plus pension for part time work - not to mention all the junkets. So why are the 1937 rules such a problem now ? After all according toi his Letter to the Israeli court he has been ' mentioned as a candidate for " 15 to 20 years "
( The 15 to 20 years is taken Norris from the Ryan Tubrify interview - it really was 14 years, but why let facts get in the way ?)
So why didnt he spend the last " 15 to 20 years" canvassing to have the rulkes changed ? Is it possible because he was so certain of getting a nomination that he didnt particularily want to have every Johnny come lately getting in to the election ?

N8

Is this a purposeful troll attracting thread?


This supposed media majority is either a put up to either completely expose and forever consign Norris to the bin or a push for the acceptance in a general form of underage homosexual sex.

The guy wrote a letter to help get a comfortable result for a child rapist.
Same said rapist according to Norris’s interviews previous was his then present time lover – some how this has missed the media – why???

Why?



Norris himself has defended older men grooming younger children toward homosexuality and stated that he wished he had been abused homosexually as a child.

Yes he actually said this and has to date not refuted this public statement.
Perhaps not in his ‘not immodest’ return to the presidential trial he will refute it to garner some more of the sheeple vote.

The reason he hasn’t wider support and is been shunned by the LGBT movement is that the sexuality of children here in Ireland is taboo, and that most if not all of that community find it not so much immoral but abhorrent.


Pity it isn’t at a UN and media level seen as the same (but that’s for another day).



Norris is not a popular candidate he is a popular point of conversation – the fact that 10,000 idiots exist in Ireland is no news in a country that re-voted ff to government. Too many folk believe the media hype and excuses - they are so involved in the escape of day to day reality tv to engage in real day to day life.

The x Factor generation.


Norris is a charade public representative – what are his views on real life issues for Irish folk struggling to pay their bills? Our moral and ethical issues? Health care provision? Elite takeover of the nation? Water provision? Institution of EU laws for the rural community? Corporate tax rates?


Past all the slagging of describing him as a dirty old man, dirty old queen and ham actor Norris is truly a sham public representative, without moral and ethical compass past his own situation of homosexuality and his one social win.


The fact he is putting himself forward again confirms the fact he knows no shame, has not taken stock of his position and has no idea of the reality of the issue of child sex.


Not only should Norris not be a presidential candidate - he should be forced from Senatorship.

anymore

N8 wrote: »

Is this a purposeful troll attracting thread?


This supposed media majority is either a put up to either completely expose and forever consign Norris to the bin or a push for the acceptance in a general form of underage homosexual sex.

The guy wrote a letter to help get a comfortable result for a child rapist.
Same said rapist according to Norris’s interviews previous was his then present time lover – some how this has missed the media – why???

Why?


Norris himself has defended older men grooming younger children toward homosexuality and stated that he wished he had been abused homosexually as a child.

Yes he actually said this and has to date not refuted this public statement.
Perhaps not in his ‘not immodest’ return to the presidential trial he will refute it to garner some more of the sheeple vote.

The reason he hasn’t wider support and is been shunned by the LGBT movement is that the sexuality of children here in Ireland is taboo, and that most if not all of that community find it not so much immoral but abhorrent.


Pity it isn’t at a UN and media level seen as the same (but that’s for another day).



Norris is not a popular candidate he is a popular point of conversation – the fact that 10,000 idiots exist in Ireland is no news in a country that re-voted ff to government. Too many folk believe the media hype and excuses - they are so involved in the escape of day to day reality tv to engage in real day to day life.

The x Factor generation.


Norris is a charade public representative – what are his views on real life issues for Irish folk struggling to pay their bills? Our moral and ethical issues? Health care provision? Elite takeover of the nation? Water provision? Institution of EU laws for the rural community? Corporate tax rates?


Past all the slagging of describing him as a dirty old man, dirty old queen and ham actor Norris is truly a sham public representative, without moral and ethical compass past his own situation of homosexuality and his one social win.


The fact he is putting himself forward again confirms the fact he knows no shame, has not taken stock of his position and has no idea of the reality of the issue of child sex.


Not only should Norris not be a presidential candidate - he should be forced from Senatorship.

I have to say one of the most unsatifactory aspects of the interview with Tubridy were the questions that were not asked ! It appears for all the talk about democracy and accountability, our State broadcaster is still willing to intervene in elections in a vry partisan manner.

Liam Byrne

N8 wrote: »

Norris himself has defended older men grooming younger children toward homosexuality and stated that he wished he had been abused homosexually as a child.

To be fair, a lot of males would think that way (minus the homosexual bit) in terms of Mrs Robinson or whatever.

The difference is that most people have the cop-on and maturity to keep it to themselves and view it as a fantasy that, once you're past adolesence, just comes across as creepy and abusive - particularly from a male.

Definitely a viewpoint that is unacceptable coming from anyone over the age of 15, apart from some pissed idiot in a pub trying a ball-hop.

sparkling sea

realies wrote: »

They are listening, listening to the thousands that DONT want him.He cant even get his name on the ballot paper yet MMG gets the support straight away,He had a chance and he himself blew it and last night did not help his case one bit, Let him chill out for a while and maybe he can come back another day, maybe.

Yes I would agree there are thousands who dont want him to be President, but there is no denying that most of the candidates have arroused little or no interest. There are probably more people like me, who would want him on the ballot then there is for any other candidate. This doesn't mean that he is my preferred candidate but I would like to see as many candidates as possible on the ballot and I think politicans should do what they are paid too and reflect the wishes of all the people and not just the ones who don't agree with David Norris.

Sure the people who don't want Mr Norris wont vote for him - and if they are in the majority they have nothing to fear, why would some people want to silence the wishes of others.

I thought he was excellent last night on the Late Late but as I said do have another preferred candidate.

woodoo

N8 wrote: »

Is this a purposeful troll attracting thread?


Norris himself has defended older men grooming younger children toward homosexuality and stated that he wished he had been abused homosexually as a child.

You call this a troll attracting thread. Yet you use language like that above. He most certainly did not use those words. Quote the man don't paraphrase for your own ends.

Coillte_Bhoy

realies wrote: »

They are listening, listening to the thousands that DONT want him.He cant even get his name on the ballot paper yet MMG gets the support straight away,He had a chance and he himself blew it and last night did not help his case one bit, Let him chill out for a while and maybe he can come back another day, maybe.

MMG only needed 3 extra members so i dont quite get your point

Coillte_Bhoy

N8 wrote: »

Is this a purposeful troll attracting thread?


Norris himself has defended older men grooming younger children toward homosexuality and stated that he wished he had been abused homosexually as a child.

he has stated nothing of the sort. Thats completely false and i think you know it.

N8 wrote: »

Norris is not a popular candidate he is a popular point of conversation – the fact that 10,000 idiots exist in Ireland is no news in a country that re-voted ff to government. Too many folk believe the media hype and excuses - they are so involved in the escape of day to day reality tv to engage in real day to day life.

What hype and excuses?

No support? Then why he is polling respectably in opinion polls?

N8 wrote: »

Norris is a charade public representative – what are his views on real life issues for Irish folk struggling to pay their bills? Our moral and ethical issues? Health care provision? Elite takeover of the nation? Water provision? Institution of EU laws for the rural community? Corporate tax rates?

If you dont know, then reflects more on you than anyone else. Educate yourself maybe?

N8 wrote: »

Past all the slagging of describing him as a dirty old man, dirty old queen and ham actor Norris is truly a sham public representative, without moral and ethical compass past his own situation of homosexuality and his one social win.

Ah now you're showing your true colours

N8 wrote: »

The fact he is putting himself forward again confirms the fact he knows no shame, has not taken stock of his position and has no idea of the reality of the issue of child sex.


Not only should Norris not be a presidential candidate - he should be forced from Senatorship.

He has been quite vocal on the issue of child abuse. As for your ridiculous last point how do you propose that be achieved?

Coillte_Bhoy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

To be fair, a lot of males would think that way (minus the homosexual bit) in terms of Mrs Robinson or whatever.

The difference is that most people have the cop-on and maturity to keep it to themselves and view it as a fantasy that, once you're past adolesence, just comes across as creepy and abusive - particularly from a male.

Definitely a viewpoint that is unacceptable coming from anyone over the age of 15, apart from some pissed idiot in a pub trying a ball-hop.

He was merely telling it how it was when he was a young gay man in this backward so called republic. I dont really see the problem, he is at least being honest

Liam Byrne

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

He was merely telling it how it was when he was a young gay man in this backward so called republic. I dont really see the problem, he is at least being honest

Doesn't matter - what he suggested was 100% illegal, and given the child abuse scandals that this country - and more importantly the victims - have endured, it was his own death-knell, and rightly so.

sparkling sea

N8 wrote: »

Norris himself has defended older men grooming younger children toward homosexuality and stated that he wished he had been abused homosexually as a child.

Yes he actually said this and has to date not refuted this public statement.
Perhaps not in his ‘not immodest’ return to the presidential trial he will refute it to garner some more of the sheeple vote.

Where is your proof - its easy to state a lie as truth - if its true prove it - you'll be the first who can!!!

Although Norris wouldn't be my choice what you have stated is a nonsense and unless you can back up your statement, you should really retract it.

David Norris is in fact a leading civil rights campaigner and has been a leading voice in the call for constitutional rights for children. His points about the age of consent regarding teenagers of the same age but under 17 are considered to be totally valid and equitable and are backed by the Law Reform Commission. Charging a 16 year old boy with rape when he has sex with his 16 year girlfriend or boyfriend who readily consented and its a case of young love is unjust IMO too - legislation around the age of consent does need to be reframed in reality.

Coillte_Bhoy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Doesn't matter - what he suggested was 100% illegal, and given the child abuse scandals that this country - and more importantly the victims - have endured, it was his own death-knell, and rightly so.

It was illegal? so was homosexuality until not too long ago.

sparkling sea

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Doesn't matter - it was his own death-knell, and rightly so.

But that doesn't appear to be the case now does it? Thousands of people have yet again signed a petition seeking his candidacy. The audience appeared to love him on the Late Late. News papers are suggesting that he does indeed have a chance of winning if he gets the nomination - but the old boys networks will not allow him to go forward because of this.

Again why cant the wishes of all the people be reflected in the choice of candidate, the due rights of the minority will only be observed if this happens and this is a fundemental principle of our democracy

Sunnyisland

Coillte Bhoy wrote: »

MMG only needed 3 extra members so i don't quite get your point

My point being, That MMG name was only out in the media and he had the extra 3 votes by today,While David norris is still after weeks of canvassing still trying to get nominated .

Liam Byrne

sparkling sea wrote: »

But that doesn't appear to be the case now does it? Thousands of people have yet again signed a petition seeking his candidacy. The audience appeared to love him on the Late Late. News papers are suggesting that he does indeed have a chance of winning if he gets the nomination - but the old boys networks will not allow him to go forward because of this.

Again why cant the wishes of all the people be reflected in the choice of candidate, the due rights of the minority will only be observed if this happens and this is a fundemental principle of our democracy

So I take it you'd be OK with Bertie Ahern being nominated too ?

Coillte_Bhoy

realies wrote: »

My point being, That MMG name was only out in the media and he had the extra 3 votes by today,While David norris is still after weeks of canvassing still trying to get nominated .

I would imagine those 3 extra votes were in the bag before SF made the announcement. Norris hasnt been canvassing for the past number of weeks

Coillte_Bhoy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

So I take it you'd be OK with Bertie Ahern being nominated too ?

Thats a ridiculous comparison to make. Ahern has no public support and would barely register in an opinion poll.

mikemac

sparkling sea wrote: »

But that doesn't appear to be the case now does it? Thousands of people have yet again signed a petition seeking his candidacy. The audience appeared to love him on the Late Late. News papers are suggesting that he does indeed have a chance of winning if he gets the nomination - but the old boys networks will not allow him to go forward because of this.

Again why cant the wishes of all the people be reflected in the choice of candidate, the due rights of the minority will only be observed if this happens and this is a fundemental principle of our democracy

Dana returned from America and managed to get on the ballot
So did Derek Nally who had a very low profile. Well at least I never heard of him before

So it's definitely possible for non party candidates to do it

Yet Norris has a higher profile then the two of them combined and decades in Leinster House to work on contacts and could not manage it
His own fault.

Old boys network you say? He was part of the old boys network collecting his salary for a seat for Trinity which few citizens even get a choice in voting for.

And be careful putting "wishes of all the people" in your post, sorry OP but you don't speak for me

Liam Byrne

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Thats a ridiculous comparison to make. Ahern has no public support and would barely register in an opinion poll.

Irrelevant.

Your statement was

Again why cant the wishes of all the people be reflected in the choice of candidate, the due rights of the minority will only be observed if this happens and this is a fundemental principle of our democracy

Despite my hope that lots of people can see sense in relation to Ahern, the "due rights of the minority" need to be observed, right ?

Or have you a numerical limit on your "minority" ?

Sunnyisland

Coillte Bhoy wrote: »

I would imagine those 3 extra votes were in the bag before SF made the announcement. Norris hasn't been canvassing for the past number of weeks

Maybe norris himself has kept quite but there certainly has been a strong "underground" of people out there working on his behalf to get him to renter and no doubt sounding out councils and others to nominate him,which imo might have worked had not MMG jumped in.

Coillte_Bhoy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Irrelevant.

Why?

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Your statement was



Despite my hope that lots of people can see sense in relation to Ahern, the "due rights of the minority" need to be observed, right ?

Or have you a numerical limit on your "minority" ?

Not my statement

Liam Byrne

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Not my statement

Sorry - the statement that I was referring to when you challenged my stance in relation to it by claiming the comparison was irrelevant.

That aside, do you still think I'm wrong now that I highlighted what was being said in support of Norris being nominated ?

sparkling sea

Liam Byrne wrote: »

So I take it you'd be OK with Bertie Ahern being nominated too ?

I don't care who is nominated to be honest, as long as the person has some backing from the people and they have not been found guilty of a serious offence (MMG would be even worse for me but if people want him:eek:) thats democracy

I have one vote which I will use, but thats all I am entitled too. I would hate Bertie Ahern to win but if by some (legal) miracle he was the winner of the Presidential election, then the people would have spoken. End off

Its the wishes of the majority with due regard to the rights of the minority - that our democracy is based on and I just want everyones rights to be upheld as far as they possible can.

Allowing David Norris to go forward is just upholding the founding fundmental principles in their true form

Liam Byrne

sparkling sea wrote: »

I don't care who is nominated to be honest, as long as the person has some backing from the people and they have not been found guilty of a serious offence (MMG would be even worse for me but if people want him:eek:) thats democracy

I have one vote which I will use, but thats all I am entitled too. I would hate Bertie Ahern to win but if by some (legal) miracle he was the winner of the Presidential election, then the people would have spoken. End off

Fair enough. And I'm with you re Ahern & McGuinness.

The bottom line is that much of Norris's support don't seem to accept that there is logic and reason behind objecting to him.

And given that the Irish electorate has previously elected Ahern & FF, I don't trust (a lot of) them to think through the choice properly.

Then again, I've said many times that I don't "fit in" in this country, and should probably move on to different pastures where "the best of a bad lot" isn't the only available option.

tayto lover

People who think that D. Norris should be allowed enter the race because there are very poor candidates have a very poor reason indeed.

Norris dirtied his copybook and because of that he should not be allowed to run.

If any elected representative nominates him they will not receive a vote from me again if they run in any election where i have one.

sparkling sea

tayto lover wrote: »

People who think that D. Norris should be allowed enter the race because there are very poor candidates have a very poor reason indeed.

Norris dirtied his copybook and because of that he should not be allowed to run.

If any elected representative nominates him they will not receive a vote from me again if they run in any election where i have one.

Blackmail nice

tayto lover

sparkling sea wrote: »

Blackmail nice

Not blackmail at all its fact. Anyone connected to criminality and supported by an elected representative would not get my vote.

sparkling sea

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Fair enough. And I'm with you re Ahern & McGuinness.

The bottom line is that much of Norris's support don't seem to accept that there is logic and reason behind objecting to him.

And given that the Irish electorate has previously elected Ahern & FF, I don't trust (a lot of) them to think through the choice properly.

Then again, I've said many times that I don't "fit in" in this country, and should probably move on to different pastures where "the best of a bad lot" isn't the only available option.

I take your point and I even agree with alot of what you say - but everyone is entitled to come to their own conclusion and use their vote the way they want to.

You might find that alot of people agree with you, but the people who shout the loudest often think people won't argue with them because they agree with them, when really people don't argue with them because they cant bear to listen to them.

Their are alot of disillusioned people in Ireland and we have had a very low voter turnout rate for years - people do not feel they ever get a real say.
New less corrupt political process is the order of the day and hopefully it will blow in like a gale force wind if we all just keep pushing for it.

mikemac

tayto lover wrote: »

If any elected representative nominates him they will not receive a vote from me again if they run in any election where i have one.

sparkling sea wrote: »

Blackmail nice

How is it blackmail OP?

Everyone does this for every election. You look at what your candidate did for what's important to you and decide if you are going to back them or not. It could be any issue at all, not even this one.

sparkling sea

tayto lover wrote: »

Not blackmail at all its fact. Anyone connected to criminality and supported by an elected representative would not get my vote.

Not being smart but at the minute you live in the Irish political landscape, until it changes are you not going to vote in some elections ?

sparkling sea

mikemac wrote: »

And be careful putting "wishes of all the people" in your post, sorry OP but you don't speak for me

Ok I will indeed be careful - the wish of all people who feel that everyone is entitled to have choice - and I am not claiming to speak for you or anyone one else, I stating a principle of democracy - this is what the wishes of all the people are based on

anymore

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

he has stated nothing of the sort. Thats completely false and i think you know it.




What hype and excuses?

No support? Then why he is polling respectably in opinion polls?



If you dont know, then reflects more on you than anyone else. Educate yourself maybe?




Ah now you're showing your true colours




He has been quite vocal on the issue of child abuse. As for your ridiculous last point how do you propose that be achieved?

What exactly constitutes child abuse ? If an older adult grooms and encourages a 14 year old into a sexual realtionship, then is that child abuse ? As a parent I think it is, but apparently there are those who argue that it is not. There are those it seems who would like to define child sex abuse as being when an adult sexaully abuses a child without its consent.
So without some kind of agreed basis or understand of what is child sex abuse, then it is difficult to have any meaning discussion of the issue.

gumtree

I am very happy Martin Pacelli McGuinness has walked this in 2 days with no complaining.

David Norris has been a drama queen from day one and still cant get through.

He knows he hasnt a chance and he is hoping for protests to let him in without votes.

Dont see anyone else complaining about getting the votes.

tayto lover

sparkling sea wrote: »

Not being smart but at the minute you live in the Irish political landscape, until it changes are you not going to vote in some elections ?

That may well be. I will stick with my principles though.

anymore

sparkling sea wrote: »

Not being smart but at the minute you live in the Irish political landscape, until it changes are you not going to vote in some elections ?

What does this post mean ?

tayto lover

anymore wrote: »

What does this post mean ?

I believe he is suggesting that they are all crooked.

anymore

tayto lover wrote: »

I believe he is suggesting that they are all crooked.

I agree with you about not voting for any politician nominating him - we had enough crap rammed down our throats about Bertie Ahern from the like of RTE, the SINdo, Eoin Harris etc, etc. We dont need the same again about another chancier.

sparkling sea

anymore wrote: »

What exactly constitutes child abuse ? If an older adult grooms and encourages a 14 year old into a sexual realtionship, then is that child abuse ? As a parent I think it is, but apparently there are those who argue that it is not. There are those it seems who would like to define child sex abuse as being when an adult sexaully abuses a child without its consent.
So without some kind of agreed basis or understand of what is child sex abuse, then it is difficult to have any meaning discussion of the issue.

Yes but there is most definitely a definitive and legal definition and the Sexual Offences Act clarifies it . Yes an adult grooming a 14 year old is of course child abuse - David Norris has fought for the rights of children all his life.

Unless you are actually going to deal with all the facts related to this issue it is as you say impossible to have a reasonable, acurrate and factual discussion and we are just left with emotive and inaccurate statements.

People here may not realise but Ireland differs from every other country in the world when it comes to sentencing practice for all crimes.

Where as the crime committed is the dominant factor in other countries here and only here the culpability of the offender is equally dominant. Further there is an automatic right to 25% reduction of sentence so 1 year is really on 9 months in Ireland - that is our . This may help some people to understand why so many of our politicans wrote sentencing lenancy letters for so many years. And many continue to do so.

I think the letter was a mistake but just because a person makes a mistake doesn't mean they themselves are a mistake

sparkling sea

tayto lover wrote: »

I believe he is suggesting that they are all crooked.

Yep I was, but I am suppose this is not true, I just think its nearly impossible to tell

gumtree

Why did Ezra Hawi cheat on David Norris

anymore

sparkling sea wrote: »

Yes but there is most definitely a definitive and legal definition and the Sexual Offences Act clarifies it . Yes an adult grooming a 14 year old is of course child abuse - David Norris has fought for the rights of children all his life.

Unless you are actually going to deal with all the facts related to this issue it is as you say impossible to have a reasonable, acurrate and factual discussion and we are just left with emotive and inaccurate statements.

People here may not realise but Ireland differs from every other country in the world when it comes to sentencing practice for all crimes.

Where as the crime committed is the dominant factor in other countries here and only here the culpability of the offender is equally dominant. Further there is an automatic right to 25% reduction of sentence so 1 year is really on 9 months in Ireland - that is our . This may help some people to understand why so many of our politicans wrote sentencing lenancy letters for so many years. And many continue to do so.

I think the letter was a mistake but just because a person makes a mistake doesn't mean they themselves are a mistake

Can you tell me if Norris was involved with any organisation which supported the organisation known as The Paedophile Information Exchange ?

tayto lover

sparkling sea wrote: »

Yes but there is most definitely a definitive and legal definition and the Sexual Offences Act clarifies it . Yes an adult grooming a 14 year old is of course child abuse - David Norris has fought for the rights of children all his life.

Unless you are actually going to deal with all the facts related to this issue it is as you say impossible to have a reasonable, acurrate and factual discussion and we are just left with emotive and inaccurate statements.

People here may not realise but Ireland differs from every other country in the world when it comes to sentencing practice for all crimes.

Where as the crime committed is the dominant factor in other countries here and only here the culpability of the offender is equally dominant. Further there is an automatic right to 25% reduction of sentence so 1 year is really on 9 months in Ireland - that is our . This may help some people to understand why so many of our politicans wrote sentencing lenancy letters for so many years. And many continue to do so.

I think the letter was a mistake but just because a person makes a mistake doesn't mean they themselves are a mistake

I was told that sex offenders do not get any remission in their prison sentence. Are you sure they do ?

Coillte_Bhoy

anymore wrote: »

What exactly constitutes child abuse ? If an older adult grooms and encourages a 14 year old into a sexual realtionship, then is that child abuse ? As a parent I think it is,

absolutley agree, but i thats not what Norris' position is/was

anymore

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

absolutley agree, but i thats not what Norris' position is/was

Maybe we should ask Ryan Tubridy ?

sparkling sea

tayto lover wrote: »

I was told that sex offenders do not get any remission in their prison sentence. Are you sure they do ?

Yes

sparkling sea

anymore wrote: »

Can you tell me if Norris was involved with any organisation which supported the organisation known as The Paedophile Information Exchange ?

As far as I know he wasn'and I cant so far find any information that suggests he was and it would be totally out of character.

I can't give your a definitve answer until I check this out properly though. You'll have to give me a couple of days OK

Coillte_Bhoy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Sorry - the statement that I was referring to when you challenged my stance in relation to it by claiming the comparison was irrelevant.

That aside, do you still think I'm wrong now that I highlighted what was being said in support of Norris being nominated ?

Yes

Liam Byrne

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Yes

Interesting......so what is the critical mass of the minority that switches someone from "a ridiculous comparison to make [where someone] would barely register in an opinion poll" to someone whose nomination is "required" in order to comply with proper democracy ?

If you took out those who are blindly supporting Norris because he's gay, ignoring his unacceptable actions, then I would suggest that the support for Norris is negligible.

Then again, I could be wrong, based on the fact that people still vote for people like O'Dea, Ahern & Healy-Rae and Callely, and others still support the catholic church.

Fingers crossed that either someone half-worthwhile will enter the race yet, or else that the best-of-a-bad-lot Higgins will be elected due to people who might have just abstained coming out to vote in order to ensure that Norris & McGuinness are kept out.

MadsL

If you took out those who are blindly supporting Norris because he's gay, ignoring his unacceptable actions, then I would suggest that the support for Norris is negligible.

Then again, I could be wrong

You are.