Gay Mitchell Disastrous Presidential Election

Alibaba

Why did Gay Mitchell really do so bad in the Presidential election considering his party , Fine Gael is the largest party in the State and the got such a huge vote in the general election. All I can think of is whats left of Fianna Fail must be rubbing their hands together with glee.

padma

i'd say its because those who voted in fine gael in the last election are dissapointed by there performance so far

mikemac

If they selected Mairead McGuinness they would have done better.
At least third place

Poor Enda and Phil Hogan will be busy on the golf course for the next year trying to recover all the money they have lost

Alibaba

I take your points Padma and Mikemac but still there's a huge Fine Gael vote out there but Gay Mitchell to get less than 8% - something disastrously wrong there somewhere.

schween

Maybe because it's not about the party, it's about the person. The presidential election is like a personality contest. He's painful to listen to and I think he just put so many people off FG.

Nodin

schween wrote: »

Maybe because it's not about the party, it's about the person. The presidential election is like a personality contest. He's painful to listen to and I think he just put so many people off FG.

Yes, but where were the FG people is the question. Theres no way the average vote of the FG party over the last 25 years is/was 6%.

caddy2

his attitude was crap, bet fine gael are sorry not they didnt put pat cox up for election of president.
anyone think we will have a deju vu, when fine gaels nominee did very bad in the presidential elections back in the 80s or 90s, didnt the leader of fine gael resign a few months after, was it alan dukes? any chance enda might do the same (heres hoping!!)

Jeboa Safari

padma wrote: »

i'd say its because those who voted in fine gael in the last election are dissapointed by there performance so far

Don't think so, in the last polls FG were on 35%, Labour only half that and behind SF.

Fentdog84

Because he's an asshole with some kind of chip on his shoulder. I dont think it was anything anti Fine gael. The other candidates seemed more presidential.

WalterMitty

poor gay, he was raised in a brown paper bag in inchicore with only apple cores to eat but still managed to become a TD and MEP.

juuge

On RTE's six-one news yesterday evening one could clearly see Gay's wife telling him to smile at the official count results in Dublin Castle. The guy was probably the most unsuited candidate to be president.

johngalway

He was a terrible candidate, with the right qualifications for the job. It's nothing got to do with FG being in Government, if that was the case then Michael D wouldn't have won.

Wolfe Tone

I met Fergus O Dowd last night... Seemed a it down over Mitchells annihilation.

leonidas83

he made a number of errors, going all out to have a go at McGuinness and losing sight of his own presidential campaign. Not being vocal enough abot the right issues in debates, instead trying to score points over the other election candidates and having a go at the presentators. He even had a go at one of his colleagues in government in the campaign over something trivial and entirely irrelevant during the campaign.

Overall he is an idiot who thinks that because he had it somewhat tough in his early childhood, this makes identifiable with the electorate. Most people just saw through his BS

Alibaba

I thought myself he was a terrible candidate. Didn't seem to connect at all with the public. Fine Gael made a huge cock up in his selection. I think Fine Gael thought just because they waltzed into Government last Spring that the Presidency would be a cakewalk for them and it didn't matter who they picked. Also smells of some infighting within Fine Gael.

Godofhellfire

What is the relevance of this? What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this? We're not getting a chance to hear what the presidency is about! What is the relevance of you asking a question about a man who is not here? We're not getting a chance to hear what the presidency is about! What is the relevance of you asking a question about a man who is not here?

I'm just waiting on a remixed song to come out!

Alibaba

Godofhellfire wrote: »

What is the relevance of this? What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this?What is the relevance of this? We're not getting a chance to hear what the presidency is about! What is the relevance of you asking a question about a man who is not here? We're not getting a chance to hear what the presidency is about! What is the relevance of you asking a question about a man who is not here?

I'm just waiting on a remixed song to come out!

Is that you Gay ??

sink

I probably would have given Pat Cox my first preference, instead I gave Gay Mitchell my fifth preference, ahead of McGuiness and Dana, but behind Gallagher and Davis. He was a poor candidate for many reasons but mainly he was socially conservative, was a poor debater and he lacked personality. It had nothing to do with fine gael.

PennyLane88

i just got a bad vibe off him - he came across as sly and a lying twat. Plus the constant comments he made about MMG did him absolutely no favours.

Just pure tactless really.

Dirk Gently

I like to look at it as a rejection of conservatism. Although Mitchell and Dana were the most whiny of the candidates too so maybe it was a rejection of emotional moany gits. I think a more progressive FG candidate would have got a much bigger vote so wouldn't necessarily equate Mitchells result to FG.

ThisRegard

padma wrote: »

i'd say its because those who voted in fine gael in the last election are dissapointed by there performance so far

Doubt it, it was a personality led election and he just didn't come across very well. Party politics didn't really come into it bar maybe for MMG.

partyguinness

TBH he was prob the best qualified all things being equal....but he comes across as a whinny miserable asshole with a huge chip on his shoulder.

Makes me wonder...how does a working class hero like Gay Mitchell with a strong Dub accent end up in Fine Gael.....not exactly a natural home....perhaps he rose above his station which might explain the chip on the shoulder. For me, he just does not come across as a very nice guy. Plus wanting to amend the Constitution to insert a special place for the British monarch was hardly going to be the best choice as a President in a Republic.

He will never be a true blue shirt no matter how hard he tries..just does not have the pedigree....poor old Gay.:(

Sunnyisland

Posted this on another thread


If Gay mitchell had concerned himself more about how to get the people to vote for him and why, Instead of telling us the public why we shouldn't vote for MMG he would have done a better job of being elected, Also he came across as a very cross & unhappy man with a very condescending attitude.Imo.

Dr Galen

Can I just remind people that this is Politics Forum, and as such we look for a bit less of the simple and crass namecalling, that might be ok elsewhere.

Cheers

DrG

K-9

Fine Gael have some divisive characters and Cox wouldn't have got much more of a vote, Mairead McGuinness was the candidate to go for.

The FG vote drifted to Gallagher, some of that would have been ex FF supporters but many FG'ers that just don't particularly like him. Even despite the Gallagher stuff, more FG'ers voted for him than Mitchell! :eek:

nesf

I imagine there were a lot of people like me who voted FG in the last election who looked at Mitchell and went "um, I've no wish to support a conservative candidate."

PARKHEAD67

Alibaba wrote: »

Why did Gay Mitchell really do so bad in the Presidential election considering his party , Fine Gael is the largest party in the State and the got such a huge vote in the general election. All I can think of is whats left of Fianna Fail must be rubbing their hands together with glee.

Because he has absoloutely no personality whatsoever.People cant relate to a sad, down in the dumps multi- millionaire(which he is).But why should fianna fail be the alternative to fine gael and vice versa? What is it with voters in this country?

K-9

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Because he has absoloutely no personality whatsoever.People cant relate to a sad, down in the dumps multi- millionaire(which he is).But why should fianna fail be the alternative to fine gael and vice versa? What is it with voters in this country?

It's an age divide thing, the soft FF and FG voters will look to the 2 mainstream parties as choices. The encouraging thing was Gallagher's vote went to Higgins.

What it means as regards General elections? God knows! SF are attracting first preference support but still struggle for preferences and the floating voter, in particular! That'll hold them back to small gains.

FF will take encouragement as well though! People don't see a FF history as a bad thing, his vote held up after those revelations, any hint of corruption does damage votes!

K-9

nesf wrote: »

I imagine there were a lot of people like me who voted FG in the last election who looked at Mitchell and went "um, I've no wish to support a conservative candidate."

FG had a socially reforming agenda under Garrett, wonder where that went?

syklops

padma wrote: »

i'd say its because those who voted in fine gael in the last election are dissapointed by there performance so far

I disagree. I think its more that by voting something other than FF, the irish electorate have broken the habit of 'party say, party do'. This is a very healthy sign. The electorate _may_ be maturing.

Or not.

jimmycrackcorm

I've said it already in other threads but as far as this presidental election went, hardcore voters voted on party lines, the rest voted on the creditibility of the person.

Still, I don't even understand how Gay Mitchell was suggested as a candidate let alone picked. My theory is that FG recognized that the presidency essentially doesn't matter but they felt obliged to put up someone regardless.

books4sale

So there we go....

Mitchell couldn't even be bothered to turn up for the inauguration, I think this backs most people's view of his bad attitude...point proven!

It's also disrespectful to those who gave him a vote.

xsao

caddy2 wrote: »

his attitude was crap, bet fine gael are sorry not they didnt put pat cox up for election of president.
anyone think we will have a deju vu, when fine gaels nominee did very bad in the presidential elections back in the 80s or 90s, didnt the leader of fine gael resign a few months after, was it alan dukes? any chance enda might do the same (heres hoping!!)

Gay Mitchell showed how unsuited he was for President by not turning up at count centre yesterday for final declaration. He has no respect for the Office of President or for the system of election. He was in this for himself alone. Shame on him and Mary Davis. They disgust me.

mark17

I think F.G. need to address their policy of personal attacks to make political gains. This tactic is outdated and has the reverse impact. Mitchell consistently attacked McGuinness, it got pathetic, and McGuinness got double the vote Mitchell got. Then Shatter done the same thing in relation to the eight attorney generals and the amendment was defeated. That type of arrogance, the old "we are right and everybody else is wrong" attitude that I thought we got rid of with the demise of F.F. It's time F.G. woke up.
Mitchell vindicated the public perception of him, by not attending at Dublin Castle, as totally unsuitable for the presidency. I think his seat in Europe will be in doubt in the next euro election also.

Jimoslimos

partyguinness wrote: »

Plus wanting to amend the Constitution to insert a special place for the British monarch was hardly going to be the best choice as a President in a Republic.

Not quite the same, but in a similar vein didn't Gallagher suggest perhaps changing the national anthem? That had absolutely no effect on him and didn't appear to alienate the core FF vote. Probably no correlation but his figures skyrocketed from that point.

He started off poorly and never recovered. Couldn't seem to mount any sort of coherent campaign. Whatever your views on McGuinness, he made a tactical blunder in attacking him. McGuinness voters would be highly unlikely to switch to FG, and even the floating ones would have gone elsewhere.

When he stayed quiet, he was perceived as dull, but when he tried to put some emotion into his speeches he came across as whiney. Prime example was the rant at Kenny where up until then it had been one of his better performances.

In fact most of his incisive comments were actually directed at Gallagher not McGuinness, particularly in regards to his FF links and accounting practises - however these seemed to be lost in the crossfire. Mistiming, I feel was his greatest flaw.

nesf

K-9 wrote: »

FG had a socially reforming agenda under Garrett, wonder where that went?

It still has it to an extent with some of the front bench but there is still a conservative wing to FG unfortunately.

Dampsquid

Anyone know why Mitchell wasn't eliminated at the same time as norris?

tfitzgerald

To me he came across a very arrogant , and his attacks on MMG really annoyed me it was like as if he was fixated on him and cared about nothing else also it was very bad form not to turn up at the count centre yesterday IMHO

thebman

nesf wrote: »

It still has it to an extent with some of the front bench but there is still a conservative wing to FG unfortunately.

Much like FF, the best thing that could happen FG is if it split along those lines IMO.

ted1

I think he fought a political campaign, when in reality voters don't care or know about politics. They'd rather put them all in the aras and vote them out on live tv.
Politics in this country is dead. Jedward , westlife, Roy keane etc could all win an election without having a single opinion.

goat2

Nodin wrote: »

Yes, but where were the FG people is the question. Theres no way the average vote of the FG party over the last 25 years is/was 6%.

not one fine gael canvasser asked me or my family for our support, also he kept speaking badly of martain mcginness, he seemed to be more worried about mcginness getting votes, than asking the general public for their votes, that kind of bickering lost vots for him, he sold himself badly

vampire of kilmainham

WalterMitty wrote: »

poor gay, he was raised in a brown paper bag in inchicore with only apple cores to eat but still managed to become a TD and MEP.

whats wrong with being raised in inchicore are you up on your high horse there looking down on everyone i dont like gay mitchell but i will say fair play to him he worked building busess in spa rd inchicore and went to college at night to educate himself so good luck to him for making it and how would you know if he only had apple cores to eat rember everyone's sh1te smells the same

goat2

WalterMitty wrote: »

poor gay, he was raised in a brown paper bag in inchicore with only apple cores to eat but still managed to become a TD and MEP.

i dont agree with people thinking that if we had not much growing up that we would not do well, while in fact the opposite is true, as people work harder to make life good for their family and children so that they have a better life, and i can tell you i know families where there was little or nothing growing up, and these people did far better than those who got it cushy.

Corkblowin

What it showed to me was how Enda had the insight to realise there was no one in his party who could win, which is why he tried to get Pat Cox on board. He couldn't have made his displeasure at the nomination any more plain.

Mitchell wasn't the man for the job ( his snub to the president elect showed a lack of class) and I don't blame the FG big guns for not coming out. There was no way their intervention could have got him into second even - it was embarrassing enough as it was.

NIMAN

Listened to him on the news tonight, saying that he did badly because the public didn't want a party related candidate.

Is he delusional? HE has zero personality, ran a terrible campaign which seemed to rely on attacking MMG 24/7 and came across as a smug git.

Time to waken up Gay. You were the problem. And nothing else.

swampgas

Corkblowin wrote: »

What it showed to me was how Enda had the insight to realise there was no one in his party who could win, which is why he tried to get Pat Cox on board. He couldn't have made his displeasure at the nomination any more plain.

Mitchell wasn't the man for the job ( his snub to the president elect showed a lack of class) and I don't blame the FG big guns for not coming out. There was no way their intervention could have got him into second even - it was embarrassing enough as it was.

Agree with this. There certainly didn't seem to be any great enthusiasm from FG to run any kind of campaign, and Mitchell himself didn't really seem that interested. It might have been easier all round if FG had simply backed MDH!

kraggy

nesf wrote: »

I imagine there were a lot of people like me who voted FG in the last election who looked at Mitchell and went "um, I've no wish to support a conservative candidate."

nesf wrote: »

It still has it to an extent with some of the front bench but there is still a conservative wing to FG unfortunately.

As far as I can see, there is much more than a conservative "wing" in Fine Gael.

They are almost wholly conservative from what I can make out. Even their youngest TD does not believe in equal marriage rights for all, never mind the older members of the party.

Nodin

Mitchell 'explaining' matters. Watch the clip from the 9 news all the way through for the charm and charisma we've come to expect.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1030/mitchellg.html

Nodin

kraggy wrote: »

As far as I can see, there is much more than a conservative "wing" in Fine Gael.

They are almost wholly conservative from what I can make out. Even their youngest TD does not believe in equal marriage rights for all, never mind the older members of the party.

They were, at one stage in the 1980's, considered far more socially liberal than FF, though for obvious reasons thats not precisely an achievment.

K-9

Nodin wrote: »

They were, at one stage in the 1980's, considered far more socially liberal than FF, though for obvious reasons thats not precisely an achievment.

Well, they always had the Flanagan wing, I'd have said reforming and willing to put divorce and abortion referenda to the people.

I look at the party now and wonder where did that wing go? Enda Kenny, Mitchell, Lucinda.....................Garrett would be proud!

PARKHEAD67

swampgas wrote: »

Agree with this. There certainly didn't seem to be any great enthusiasm from FG to run any kind of campaign, and Mitchell himself didn't really seem that interested. It might have been easier all round if FG had simply backed MDH!

Mitchell would be a good death noticer:D on the radio. He screams of useless apathy.Anyway.....Jayzez.Hes one grumpy oul who*e.