Does McGuinness have any chance given the Indo's campaign against him?

Peep O'Day

Monty Burnz wrote: »

The problem with this is that your definition of innocent and someone else's definition of innocent might be very different. Can we at least agree that he was certainly involved in participating in, planning or ordering the killing of some people? Or are we going to maintain the notion that he was in charge of the IRA creche?

I can assure you that I wouldn't have voted for him either, if that's any good to you.

Is that because he was a "terrorist" or have you any other reason?

Monty Burnz

Peep O'Day wrote: »

Is that because he was a "terrorist" or have you any other reason?

I don't like his hairstyle...:rolleyes:

Wider Road

Wider Road wrote: »

Einhard wrote: »

Wider Road wrote: »

Kathleen is not a mans name, it's Bernard Lynch that's the story, remember!!
The Mail on Sunday first reported the story & then had a follow up with Bernard's employment by the current govt.
We owe the media & especially The Mail On Sunday a great thank you for this story.
It tells us about a murder in 1975 & a conviction in 76. Why Monty says that Bernard Lynch would only serve a couple of years in jail under the GFA is beyond me, considering it came into effect in 1999, (I think).
The media has done us a service here.

Wasn't his conviction overturned?

Not because of innocence.
Read the story again & reply.
Why has Kathleen (wife) & Ciaran (brother) no comment to make on the matter of murder?
Their silence is deafening!!
Bernard is now employed by the current govt!!
Are you happy with that?

(Has anyone read the story?)

golfball37

There was an ad running on newstalk yesterday about buying the Sunday Independent. Its selling point was that it was the only paper that devoted all its columnists to the real issue irking the people of Ireland.

The unsuitability of MMcG to be head of state.

Certainly suggests the Sindo is trying to set the agenda, the front page says 66% think Miriam was right ffs.

As the mod said the thread has descended into pros and cons when the reality is the OP is correct. If the OP is correct I want to know has anyone any genuine reasons as to the motivation of a paper that played a part in fuelling the ruin of this country financially?

4 weeks in a row now they have dedicated 8 plus pages to MMcG. I honstly don't think people are that exercised about it? He is no threat at 13-16% so I really don't see the point?

CDfm

golfball37 wrote: »

4 weeks in a row now they have dedicated 8 plus pages to MMcG. I honstly don't think people are that exercised about it? He is no threat at 13-16% so I really don't see the point?

Higgins is talking about poll volitility and the election is far from over.

The Indo probably sees itself in the position of the Fourth Estate and is covering the story.

I am not surprised at the coverage as a mainstream presidential election is something far different to a General Election.

CDfm

golfball37 wrote: »

4 weeks in a row now they have dedicated 8 plus pages to MMcG. I honstly don't think people are that exercised about it? He is no threat at 13-16% so I really don't see the point?

Higgins is talking about poll volitility and the election is far from over.

The Indo probably sees itself in the position of the Fourth Estate and is covering the story. Free press as the cornerstone of democracy.

I am not surprised at the coverage as a mainstream presidential election is something far different to a General Election.

Any difficult unanswered questions were going to be asked. That does not make it a campaign , but MMG is a story and probably the biggest one.

Norris is done as is Dana.

So MMG is infinitely more controvercial than either.

Godge

The Minstrel wrote: »

As the paper of record, the Irish Times tends to present a generally balanced view on things. The Independent, on the other hand, tends not to.

Can McGuinness (or, indeed, any candidate) stand a chance in an election if the most widely circulated newspaper (the Irish Independent) is campaigning against him? For example, today, the website of the Independent ran some lead articles in opposition to MMcG while the Times didn't feature him in their headlines.

2 of the Indo articles were written by Belfast Telegraph columnists - the Independent and Belfast Telegraph are owned by the same group, and, hence, often use the same journalists. Do boardsies think this is why their coverage is so one-sided?

The Minstrel wrote: »

Ah come on now. Look at the Irish Times coverage v Irish Independent. Is the question raised in the original post re Belfast Telegraph valid?

I suppose you could object to the Belfast Telegraph link if you had a problem with people holding positions up there becoming involved in issues and elections "down here".

Monty Burnz

CDfm wrote: »

Norris is done as is Dana.

So MMG is infinitely more controvercial than either.

You can add Mitchell and Davis too, so the real stories from here on in will be about Higgins, MMG and Gallagher. Higgins seems squeaky clean, but I wouldn't be surprised if Gallagher had some FFailure-style skeletons in the closet.

CDfm

Monty Burnz wrote: »

You can add Mitchell and Davis too, so the real stories from here on in will be about Higgins, MMG and Gallagher. Higgins seems squeaky clean, but I wouldn't be surprised if Gallagher had some FFailure-style skeletons in the closet.

The Indo historically was a FG paper.

Off topic I know but Hiiggins would need to have done something really bad to surpass the scandals so far.

The view I take is that the office of Presidents most important discretionary power is that of disolving the Dail should the Taoiseach loose his majority.

I do not think that Higgins is that impartial that if the government fell appart before term that he would send Enda back to try and form a minority administration.

So it is important to see where the Indo will look next.

Godge

The Minstrel wrote: »

. It reinforces the point that the Independent is the true arbiter of elections in Ireland.

To make that statement, you really have to solve the chicken and egg problem. Which comes first?

Do the Indo put out their feelers for what way the wind is blowing in an election (they can study the opinion polls in greater detail than the general public) and jump on a bandwagon and claim it as their own? Sometimes this can be done early - dumping FF at the last election was a no-brainer. Sometimes it can only be done late - the last-minute front-page in 2007 for FF. But they are only following what the people want.

Or do they have the intellectual capacity to lead the debate and influence the outcome?

Are they a leader or a follower? If they were just a rag (as you insist they are), they would be a follower, following the mob as it crashed and swung around, but rarely leading or influencing the mob.

Turning back to McGuinness, I think he has got a fairly easy ride in general from the media, considering who he is and what he has done.

blahfckingblah

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Are you not a SF supporter, and have never voted for SF before, by any chance?

oh please, you'd think to listen to you that its impossible for someone to change their voting pattern and its all just a big SF conspiracy. There is a larger number of floating voters since the country went to hell.

I personally have voted Sinn Fein in the past and will continue to in the future until (heres the catch) they no longer represent my views (or the majority of them). I don't expect Martin McGuinness to be elected and i never really did to be honest so I supose you could say mines a form of protest vote, but I think his nomination was a stroke of genius by Sinn Fein.

Monty Burnz

blahfckingblah wrote: »

oh please, you'd think to listen to you that its impossible for someone to change their voting pattern and its all just a big SF conspiracy. There is a larger number of floating voters since the country went to hell.

I personally have voted Sinn Fein in the past and will continue to in the future until (heres the catch) they no longer represent my views (or the majority of them). I don't expect Martin McGuinness to be elected and i never really did to be honest so I supose you could say mines a form of protest vote, but I think his nomination was a stroke of genius by Sinn Fein.

It's funny though, at election times Boards is always flooded by first-time SF voters. It's not a grand conspiracy at all, it's just basic social media manipulation.

Are you claiming you haven't noticed the trend? It doesn't have any bearing on MMG as a candidate.

Wolfe Tone

Monty you also have to bear in mind that a lot of SF voters dont and wont post on threads because of the aggro and pontificating... I get a good deal of messages from people saying they agree with me, but they don't like to say as much on the thread

CDfm

blahfckingblah wrote: »

There is a larger number of floating voters since the country went to hell.

True and the sheer number is evident with Mitchell's poor showing.

I don't expect Martin McGuinness to be elected and i never really did to be honest so I supose you could say mines a form of protest vote, but I think his nomination was a stroke of genius by Sinn Fein.

I think it has backfired a bit in that they are subject to closer scrutiny and that is not a bad thing.

That the government do not get the same scrutiny by the Indo and held to account in respect of how they are failing to ascert their authority is something that is also evident.

The IT reads like a civil service support group newsletter and I do not read it.

blahfckingblah

Monty Burnz wrote: »

It's funny though, at election times Boards is always flooded by first-time SF voters. It's not a grand conspiracy at all, it's just basic social media manipulation.

Are you claiming you haven't noticed the trend? It doesn't have any bearing on MMG as a candidate.

I noticed a few people on here with the sole purpose of opposing martin mcguinness aswell, I don't think they are sent here by FG/Labour/FF etc., if half of the new people here were they would make more convicing points

Monty Burnz

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Monty you also have to bear in mind that a lot of SF voters dont and wont post on threads because of the aggro and pontificating... I get a good deal of messages from people saying they agree with me, but they don't like to say as much on the thread

Indeed, and I'm sure that plenty of people who disagree with you also don't bother posting because, as regular as clockwork, the usual 10 or 15 SF heads all come along and recommend each other's posts and attack the guy who disagrees. You might recall I've been on the end of that more than once...

CDfm

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Monty you also have to bear in mind that a lot of SF voters dont and wont post on threads because of the aggro and pontificating... I get a good deal of messages from people saying they agree with me, but they don't like to say as much on the thread

I dont always agree with you but always like seeing you post.

Wolfe Tone

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Indeed, and I'm sure that plenty of people who disagree with you also don't bother posting because, as regular as clockwork, the usual 10 or 15 SF heads all come along and recommend each other's posts and attack the guy who disagrees. You might recall I've been on the end of that more than once...

Thats hardly fair, regularly enough I'm fighting my own corner, with maybe realises and nodin

blahfckingblah

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Indeed, and I'm sure that plenty of people who disagree with you also don't bother posting because, as regular as clockwork, the usual 10 or 15 SF heads all come along and recommend each other's posts and attack the guy who disagrees. You might recall I've been on the end of that more than once...

Yep I agree but along with them come their opposites, like matter and anti matter. I could give names on both sides but I don't want a) an infraction or b) the torrent of abuse this angsty crew of new members enjoy dishing out. Generally these people don't stay long and don't tend to make informed posts whilst here.

Monty Burnz

blahfckingblah wrote: »

Yep I agree but along with them come their opposites, like matter and anti matter. I could give names on both sides but I don't want a) an infraction or b) the torrent of abuse this angsty crew of new members enjoy dishing out. Generally these people don't stay long and don't tend to make informed posts whilst here.

Point taken. I guess we'd better get back on topic.

CDfm

blahfckingblah wrote: »

I noticed a few people on here with the sole purpose of opposing martin mcguinness aswell, I don't think they are sent here by FG/Labour/FF etc., if half of the new people here were they would make more convicing points

+1

Its no fun arguing with the political party people and sock puppets.

jank

The media's handling of this presidential election has been nothing more then revolting and an utter disgrace. There seems to be a free for on all but a select few candidates. Some suffering more than others. We have had the Dana "sex" allegation. The Michael D "sex" allegation. The Noris "sex letters". The usual whaling of McG. We have had the self proclaimed "woman of Ireland" call one of the candidates a murderer and asking him about his conscience with god. Then asks all other candidates to take pot shots at him to his suitability. I think miriam thinks this is X factor! The people will decide on his suitability. Not them, not you or RTE. I think the red girly dress gave it away. That debate was about her not the candidates. Akin to turning up to a wedding in a scarlet dress like Liz Hurley. This dumbo of a woman is earning 300k + of your and our tax money? I wouldn't pay her to present a childs xmas panto.

Then we have the mail basically make up a story on Michael D. A pure he said, she said story. Where has the Irish media gone? Dana has got a real stinking deal in this election. You may not like her because of her beliefs but at least keep your respect and dignity. I always thought Irish people were decent. Sadly there is no dignity in the Irish media any more.

My heart actually sinks when I have to thrall through the swathes of crap posted online and whats written in the papers and said on TV and radio. Even more so when usually intelligent posters here on boards.ie sink to the levels of the gutter media.
The Irish just LOVE to knock ourselves down. NEGATIVE! NEGATIVE! NEGATIVE! That is all we are given. Bast this, bash that, Anti this, anti that.

I have always wanted to return to ireland in the next 4 years or so. This election makes me want to think twice, if this is the society I am going to return to. Why would I want to return to such a lowly sad inward looking society that the media is creating for us. Why do we have to bash everything, what has created this low self esteem for ourselves. This should have been an election of hope, looking to the future, A new republic that should be fitting for the men of 1916. Instead we are going to vote for the "least bad option". A default option as you will.

I said it before on this board. There is no changing Ireland. The last election gave me hope. Out with FF in with FG and Labour....for now... I always said the next election would be the key. I can see it now though. FF nua rises to power and the gombeen men will be back. Sure why not, when they have just got Sean Gallagher elected as president.

A week after this election is over it will be back to the usual hum drum of news mostly bad news, we cant have good news now can we! That would set a very dangerous precedent for the Denis O'Brien and O'Reillys of this world. Unless of course some ol' wan doing well in X factor. The same old posters will come out of the woodwork. Blaming someone for this, some other party for that, saying that nothing will change. Well guess what, the wool is being pulled over your eyes right now, it was pulled over your eyes back in the boom and the media is mostly to blame for this.

As I said, There is no changing Ireland!

Liam Byrne

What's that in there? A claim about a Michael D sex allegation ?

Was I fast asleep for that one ? Or is it made up ?

Peep O'Day

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I don't like his hairstyle...:rolleyes:

Would it be possible to get a serious answer from you? I am fascinated with people's differing beliefs between the old IRA and the PIRA

The Minstrel

Godge wrote: »

To make that statement, you really have to solve the chicken and egg problem. Which comes first?

Do the Indo put out their feelers for what way the wind is blowing in an election (they can study the opinion polls in greater detail than the general public) and jump on a bandwagon and claim it as their own? Sometimes this can be done early - dumping FF at the last election was a no-brainer. Sometimes it can only be done late - the last-minute front-page in 2007 for FF. But they are only following what the people want.

Or do they have the intellectual capacity to lead the debate and influence the outcome?

Are they a leader or a follower? If they were just a rag (as you insist they are), they would be a follower, following the mob as it crashed and swung around, but rarely leading or influencing the mob.

I don't think intellectual capacity has anything to do with it. The Sun for instance has a carefully coreographed political bias but is presented in the most dumbed-down accessible way.

Monty Burnz wrote: »

It's funny though, at election times Boards is always flooded by first-time SF voters. It's not a grand conspiracy at all, it's just basic social media manipulation.

Are you claiming you haven't noticed the trend? It doesn't have any bearing on MMG as a candidate.

I disagree. I don't think the presidential election is follwing a party political divide. I don't believe it's a first time SF thing as you keep saying. Traditionally SF have lacked penetration in the Republic due to the perceived poor standard of candidates compared to the likes of McGuinness (among other reasons). Many of the McGuinness voters in this election, however, will be supporters of him but not necessarily of SF - similary with Michael D and Labour or Sean Gallagher and Fianna Fail. I think he's always been a popular figure down here, and everyone loved the Paisley-McGuinness chuckle brothers double act.

And Monty, please lay off with the smiley faces. That's the sort of stuff that changes threads like this from normal debate into raging Celtic v Rangers fights - or is that the intention?

CDfm

Liam Byrne wrote: »

What's that in there? A claim about a Michael D sex allegation ?

Was I fast asleep for that one ? Or is it made up ?

He married an actress and they have been married for around 40 years.:eek:

A Higgins sex allegation thats a must.

Monty Burnz

The Minstrel wrote: »

And Monty, please lay off with the smiley faces. That's the sort of stuff that changes threads like this from normal debate into raging Celtic v Rangers fights - or is that the intention?

It's well known that nothing enrages an SF supporter like a smile. :rolleyes:

CDfm

Peep O'Day wrote: »

Would it be possible to get a serious answer from you? I am fascinated with people's differing beliefs between the old IRA and the PIRA

Official Sinn Fein became Sinn Fein the Workers Party Democratic Left and merged with the Labour Party.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2010/1018/1224281343708.html

Eamonn Gilmore has a stickie past , so it seems.

Higgins was always Labour.

Ladjacket

I have no political allegiance when it comes to voting. In the last election I voted FF and then SF as I believed the two candidates I voted for were the best standing in the constituency (Donegal NE). Just stating that fact so I am not blasted as a SF sympathiser!

My view point on MMcG is maybe a tad naive but if I was living in Derry in the 70s when British rule was rife, and my friends were getting murdered, I would probably feel the need to do the same back to them. Perhaps this is completely the wrong attitude to have, but at that time the possibility of a British judicial system bringing British soliders as well as loyalist paramilitary groups to task for the murder of republicans/nationalists/catholics may have seen quite slim.

So I try to put myself in the shoes of MMcG for example, and people I know are getting killed - how would I respond? I guess we all have the luxury these days of having a judicial system where fair trials etc are guaranteed but was that applicable in the 70s?

I am not excusing what MMcG did or did not do, but I also believe that everyone deserves a second chance, McG has been a dedicated member of the peace process in the north for a long time now and in my view is a better candidate for the presidency than everyone else stanind, with perhaps the exception of Sean Gallagher.

Finally, I find the attitude of a lot of people south of the border towards those who live in Ulster nothing short of disgusting. On numerous times in the past, I have been asked am I British because I am from Donegal! The same reflection is in the media as well, how dare this masked terrorist come down from Belfast to even attempt to win the race for Presidency?! A lot of people in and around the capital especially seem to forget that whilst innocent people were killed on both sides of the conflict in the troubles in the north, they were still Irishmen and Irishwomen. Just because it happened north of the border does not make it any less important.

Paparazzo

Another bloody McGuinness thread. The McGuinness supporters are like cult members.