New political parties doomed?

Idbatterim

right lads, this is something I have been thinking about for a long time. Are any new political parties here doomed, as they have no existing track record? look at Renua, the Social Democrats, at the height of public anger and people seeking alterntives, they achieved very little.

The way Irish people work, "hes a likable fella, he got the pot hole filled. Ill vote for him" Renua had the idea of a flat tax system, anything that isnt simple in the extreme will bamboozle the typical Irish voter. Would they be better off with going for a simple message the next time, like "USC abolition"? would that be received better?

also one party need to solve the outrageous cost of housing for workers. Costs nothing, simply dont make dual aspect a requirement any longer. Smaller apartments. higher density, lift height restrictions. Say 40 sq m for a one bed etc. Costs nothing, problem solved! Or we have the current situation , only the reasonably to well paying or the the other extreme are being housed or people moving miles away from where they want to be, to put a roof over their head! The situation where nothing is being built at affordable prices is a disgrace!

Other than starting a new party, does anyone think something could be achieved in an easier way, say by say a fb page effective paid ads or new online newspaper, like the journal, where people passionate on relevant subjects, would contribute their own articles for free? with paid exposure to highlight to the masses, the shambles that govern us here on all levels? would that be an easier way to try to bring about / force change?

Good loser

No,no,no. Simply won't work.

Impossible to get away from localism in this small country.

Many Govt policies are contradictory - for instance all this crack about the 'vulture funds'.
If all these non payers were turned out of their houses it would release many houses onto the market reducing the prices and causing those houses to be occupied by people that do pay.

Plus having the side effect of reducing variable interest rates.

Also VAT should be deleted on new houses (through the mechanism of a refund to the first buyer - and to be clawed back on a sliding scale from a second purchaser if resold within 6/10 years.
Also more development land (esp in Dublin and Cork) should be continually rezoned until the price of sites is reduced to desired levels.

CrabRevolution

Idbatterim wrote: »

right lads, this is something I have been thinking about for a long time. Are any new political parties here doomed, as they have no existing track record? look at Renua, the Social Democrats, at the height of public anger and people seeking alterntives, they achieved very little.

The way Irish people work, "hes a likable fella, he got the pot hole filled. Ill vote for him" Renua had the idea of a flat tax system, anything that isnt simple in the extreme will bamboozle the typical Irish voter. Would they be better off with going for a simple message the next time, like "USC abolition"? would that be received better?

also one party need to solve the outrageous cost of housing for workers. Costs nothing, simply dont make dual aspect a requirement any longer. Smaller apartments. higher density, lift height restrictions. Say 40 sq m for a one bed etc. Costs nothing, problem solved! Or we have the current situation , only the reasonably to well paying or the the other extreme are being housed or people moving miles away from where they want to be, to put a roof over their head! The situation where nothing is being built at affordable prices is a disgrace!

Other than starting a new party, does anyone think something could be achieved in an easier way, say by say a fb page effective paid ads or new online newspaper, like the journal, where people passionate on relevant subjects, would contribute their own articles for free? with paid exposure to highlight to the masses, the shambles that govern us here on all levels? would that be an easier way to try to bring about / force change?

Are you saying that the only reason it's not a popular idea is because the public don't understand it?

Could it be that it's not a popular idea because the public do understand it, but think it's a bad idea?

James Brown

When we've government backing of virtually tax free vulture funds profiting off the crash and subsequent homes in arrears and hard die supporters, genuinely or not, willing defend or dismiss it, we've little hope in such people willing to put the country first and call out these parties.

We are all guilty of self interest but there needs to be a degree of thinking of the country's well being.
Despite the rethoric and spin from Fianna Fail and Fine Gael, they are very short sighted. It's always about what will make money for them and theirs that takes priority.
While we have a grass roots willing to ignore or accept the fraud, cronyism and mismanagement of tax to support it, a new party has little hope of gaining much traction. A party out for country first would increase quality of life and tax value for all. Government supporting party backers isn't working.
It's about point scoring and looking after your voter base. I genuinely believe people don't mind paying for quality. We don't get quality for tax money. We get greasy deals for vested interests with the false promise of a fraudulent trickle down lie.

We got fix the economy first then tackle the working poor, health, housing. Then it was these things take time. Then it was downplaying the crises.
So we've people buying this rethoric as long as they're doing okay and unbelievably blaming 'De left' for any policies that adversely affect them.
In short, we need these people to understand genuinely trying to put the country on track doesn't stop at enabling previously toxic banks and vulture funds who profit off public misery go about business virtually tax feee while individual members of the public are put forward as the problem. It makes great spin but it's nonsense.

johnnyskeleton

SF didnt have any sitting TDs until 1997, theyre now the third biggest party in the State.

Other small parties like social democrats and independent groupings have made an impact as well.

A few things are required. You have to have the established candidates with local presence, you need to have policies that appeal to voters, you need a track record of publicised views on issues. All these things take time and money.

Also, its hard to distinguish a new party from the others. Pretty much every party in dail eireann is some form of social democratic party. Its hard to win over supporters based on ideology when you are basically offering the same thing.

People are also not as dumb as you believe them to be. They know that politics is compromise, that politicians are human and will be blamed for virtually everything. People put up with the government partys handling of X because they know that the other parties would not fare any better.

The whole country first thing is an empty phrase really. People dont really mean it. They mean "that segment of the country with whom I most readily allign myself" and thus infer the general idea of the country from their own specific individual circumstances.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

When we've government backing of virtually tax free vulture funds profiting off the crash and subsequent homes in arrears and hard die supporters, genuinely or not, willing defend or dismiss it, we've little hope in such people willing to put the country first and call out these parties.

We are all guilty of self interest but there needs to be a degree of thinking of the country's well being.
Despite the rethoric and spin from Fianna Fail and Fine Gael, they are very short sighted. It's always about what will make money for them and theirs that takes priority.
While we have a grass roots willing to ignore or accept the fraud, cronyism and mismanagement of tax to support it, a new party has little hope of gaining much traction. A party out for country first would increase quality of life and tax value for all. Government supporting party backers isn't working.
It's about point scoring and looking after your voter base. I genuinely believe people don't mind paying for quality. We don't get quality for tax money. We get greasy deals for vested interests with the false promise of a fraudulent trickle down lie.

We got fix the economy first then tackle the working poor, health, housing. Then it was these things take time. Then it was downplaying the crises.
So we've people buying this rethoric as long as they're doing okay and unbelievably blaming 'De left' for any policies that adversely affect them.
In short, we need these people to understand genuinely trying to put the country on track doesn't stop at enabling previously toxic banks and vulture funds who profit off public misery go about business virtually tax feee while individual members of the public are put forward as the problem. It makes great spin but it's nonsense.

This analysis in bold is trite and with little merit.

It is standard rhetoric from the protesting parties that has little reflection in reality. We haven't seen a single sensible suggestion from the protesting parties that would help improve things in this country.

Even when we have a half-decent suggestion, such as SF's proposal for a wealth tax, we have them playing to the populist solution by excluding farms and family homes, making the tax pointless.

I am getting fed up hearing the same old tired rhetoric from the protesting parties when it is absolutely clear that the country is improving under the last two governments.

If there are to be new parties, one on the left that looks after the 20% real poor who are renting or living in social housing and imposes significant taxation on home ownership and makes people pay their full mortgages would be very welcome.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

This analysis in bold is trite and with little merit.

It is standard rhetoric from the protesting parties that has little reflection in reality. We haven't seen a single sensible suggestion from the protesting parties that would help improve things in this country.

Even when we have a half-decent suggestion, such as SF's proposal for a wealth tax, we have them playing to the populist solution by excluding farms and family homes, making the tax pointless.

I am getting fed up hearing the same old tired rhetoric from the protesting parties when it is absolutely clear that the country is improving under the last two governments.

If there are to be new parties, one on the left that looks after the 20% real poor who are renting or living in social housing and imposes significant taxation on home ownership and makes people pay their full mortgages would be very welcome.

The merit lies with 'we look after our own' FG philosophy. I won't post links we all know to Reilly clinic allocations, Enda's IMMA appointment debacle, Irish Water boarding, Noonan's inappropriate behaviour etc. etc...

Protesting parties? A dismissive term for political entities doing their job.
While we have party loyal people despite scandals and cronyism, we'll never have a decent chance for change.

Another crash sooner rather than later might work while FG bull**** is still fresh in the minds of voters.
Forget the left, a genuine party who put the country first is what's needed. Making it all about ideology is missing the point, although to be fair with rotating inept and selfish FF/FG governments it's understandable to think the left would be the only possibility for an honest government for all society.

Ajsoprano

My suggestions would be unemployed being trained in skills that companies want maybe apprenticeships being rolled out for it type jobs if they reckon we can be at the forefront of that or any skillbased form of employment instead of jobbridge seetec skillsteam type stuff.

Allowing high rise in Dublin and not pandering to lads that have a load of land up the backroads.

Putting money into an underground system in Dublin.

A new police ran by new people.

A new school policy where instead of religion class we have a “not being a scrounger anti social ****e class”

I think a heavy tax if you have more houses than children apart from your own. I think it’s fair enough if you have two houses if you want each of your children to have a house but in a time of shortage one person shouldn’t be allowed have ten houses and charge a premium for each one in rent.
On the other hand if you avail of social housing and are still in it when your kids move out that’s your ow fault it shouldn’t be a house for life to leave your kids.

I would end the propping up of the farmers subsidies. If they can’t make a living off the land they should go up to Dublin and get a job. I would keep a lot of this land for farming if we ever had an emergency maybe roll out wind or solar farms on them now.

You may say how will we pay for it all but I think it’s pay for itself.

0byme75341jo28

The Soc Dems are gaining a lot of traction within universities. If they can keep going for 10-15 years they could perhaps be somewhat successful (on the order of 5-10 TDs).

Irish people simply want to maintain the status quo. Hence why we're stuck with FF/FG flip-flop nonsense constantly.

manonboard

Ive been on the look out for a new party to represent my values.

Went to a few People Before Profit meetings etc. A couple of SocDems.

Whilst i agree with many intentions behind them (if they words are true).

They offer nothing but the same emotional immature and black/white thinking that most unskilled/unwise people do. It's all Jail the bankers, get rid of the evil guys.. It's scary, because its the same mentality that i see in dysfunctional/abusive/reactionary relationships that i do alot of work with.

There are so little implementation level detail in new parties discussions that they are child like wishes. Posting constantly about "Leo rich boy is bad".. it's class room style bullying, and they want me to trust them with my country and people?

The established parties offer similar dynamics, but appear less child like to me. Definitely major issues still present but if a new party cannot show me that they have better control of their own reactionary minds than the established ones, why would anyone vote for them. The can never even explain to me how they will ensure that they themselves do not become corrupt. It's all nonsensical 'I'm an honest person' which shows no understanding for how conditions affect a person and everyone has their limits.

If they don't have a basic understanding of people, they cannot possibly be good leaders.

Sweg

Hi all,

Over the last few years, I've become more and more interested in American politics.

I understand the American spectrum, liberals, conservatives, libertarians, etc. etc.
But I'm not sure what the spectrum is here in Ireland, and where the various Irish parties stand along the spectrum.

How different is the "European spectrum" compared to the American spectrum?
And where does each party stand on these?

Thanks for any information you guys have,
Sweg.

johnnyskeleton

Mod note:

While not identical these are similar topics.

Sweg

Which current political party would be the closest to a conservative/republican mindset?

With ideas similar to the following:

- Less government intervention / dependency (less social welfare)
- Encouraging entrepenuership
- Nationalistic
- Anti mass immigration (only allow those who bring value to the country)
- Anti abortion
- Etc.

recedite

CrabRevolution wrote: »

Are you saying that the only reason it's not a popular idea is because the public don't understand it?

Could it be that it's not a popular idea because the public do understand it, but think it's a bad idea?

The thing about "flat rate tax" is that there are two levels of understanding about it. At the basic level, it means the rich would pay less tax than they do now. That's the part that "the people" reject.

At a more advanced level, I would envision that it would be combined with some form of Negative Taxation or Universal Basic Income, such that people on lower incomes are net receivers of money from the tax system, while still having some incentive to get out of bed in the morning. Its all about incentivising people to work and/or use their talents, whether they are rich or poor. That's the part that most people don't understand.

recedite

Sweg wrote: »

Which current political party would be the closest to a conservative/republican mindset?

With ideas similar to the following:

- Less government intervention / dependency (less social welfare)
- Encouraging entrepenuership
- Nationalistic
- Anti mass immigration (only allow those who bring value to the country)
- Anti abortion
- Etc.

I'd imagine Renua would be closest, but as already pointed out, there does not seem to be much appetite in Ireland at the moment for that sort of politics.
For historical reasons, patriotism/nationalism seems to be mostly tied in to leftist politics in Ireland, which is not the case in most other countries.

Sweg

recedite wrote: »

The thing about "flat rate tax" is that there are two levels of understanding about it. At the basic level, it means the rich would pay less tax than they do now. That's the part that "the people" reject.

At a more advanced level, I would envision that it would be combined with some form of Negative Taxation or Universal Basic Income, such that people on lower incomes are net receivers of money from the tax system, while still having some incentive to get out of bed in the morning. Its all about incentivising people to work and/or use their talents, whether they are rich or poor. That's the part that most people don't understand.

The Universal Basic Income would have to be so low that there is still an incentive to get out of bed in the morning.

Why is there a need for UBI?

People should only get paid if they provide a service to somebody who is willing to pay an agreed price.

Sweg

recedite wrote: »

I'd imagine Renua would be closest, but as already pointed out, there does not seem to be much appetite in Ireland at the moment for that sort of politics.
For historical reasons, patriotism/nationalism seems to be mostly tied in to leftist politics in Ireland, which is not the case in most other countries.

I see, what do you think the current appetite is for? Is there any appetite at all?

recedite

Sweg wrote: »

The Universal Basic Income would have to be so low that there is still an incentive to get out of bed in the morning.

Why is there a need for UBI?

I agree it should be low enough just to provide a safety net. The main point is you would be allowed, even encouraged, to supplement it with paid work (unlike the dole, in which you would be fined if caught working).

We don't want to see anyone starving to death on the street though, so there has to be some form of basic income for everyone. Even those who are pathologically lazy.

recedite

Sweg wrote: »

I see, what do you think the current appetite is for? Is there any appetite at all?

I'd say there are roughly two strands; the "social democrat" vote which used to go to FF but now mostly tends to go to FG. The party actually called "Social Democrats" turned out to be too leftist to capture the social democrat vote. And most people seem to trust FG with the economy.

Then there is the leftist, populist, "tax the rich", "no water charges" vote, which is going increasingly to SF instead of to Labour.

Then there is FF, wandering around dazed and confused, but not dead, like a swatted wasp.

Creol1

I think there was a real opportunity for change when the crisis was at its worst around 2010/11. The FF Government of the time was almost universally despised in a way that the succeeding governments, despite all the controversies and austerity, haven't been, creating a big vacuum; Fine Gael was ineffectual and Labour was riding high. Crucially, Labour was the only party that had opposed the bank guarantee, the original sin of the economic crisis.

Unfortunately, Gilmore dropped the ball and the Gilmore gale blew out over the course of the 2011 election campaign, in a large part because Noonan accused Labour of being an "high tax" party and Labour ran scared and denied this. Of course, a genuinely social-democratic party has to support high taxes; Labour should have owned this and defended the necessity of paying higher taxes to fund proper infrastructure and a functioning healthcare system, etc., but they didn't and went into bed with FG after finishing a distant second, meaning the opportunity to move beyond "Civil War politics" was lost.

Without the LP to lead it, opposition to the bank bailout and austerity became hopelessly fractured. Although SF did grow, there was always going to be a limit to their potential support base because of their ugly past and because they define themselves in terms of national identity and economic justice is just a means to an end in their eyes. And don't even get me started on the hopeless Trotskyists.

What we are left with is the same two-and-an-half party system of "Civil War politics" except that SF replaced the LP as the "half party".

I don't see any potential for a new party to emerge at this stage. I expect Renua will slowly and painfully die and the SDs will probably merge with the LP, from whom they are practically indistinguishable.

Sweg wrote: »

Hi all,

Over the last few years, I've become more and more interested in American politics.

I understand the American spectrum, liberals, conservatives, libertarians, etc. etc.
But I'm not sure what the spectrum is here in Ireland, and where the various Irish parties stand along the spectrum.

How different is the "European spectrum" compared to the American spectrum?
And where does each party stand on these?

Thanks for any information you guys have,
Sweg.

The first thing I would say is to note the difference in lexicon between US and European politics. In the US, "liberal" and "left-wing" are used interchangeably. In Europe, "liberal" would have the same meaning in terms of social issues such as same-sex marriage, but a very different meaning in terms of economics. I once saw an headline in the US media about "free trade agreement scuppered by liberal Senators", which is the exact opposite of what you would read in the UK or Ireland, where liberalism is associated with free markets and free trade.

Europeans would tend to use the word "liberal" where perhaps Americans would use the word "libertarian". In turn, the word "libertarian" isn't used as frequently and probably has more extreme connotations than in the US.

The two main parties in Ireland are Fianna Fáil (FF) and Fine Gael (FG); FF is rural-based and populist rather than ideological, but its policy positions on specific issues would generally be centrist/centre-left. FF is the most socially conservative of the main parties. FG is more centre-right on economic issues and is a fairly broad church on social issues, with differing views on issues like abortion.

Sinn Féin is nationalist and while it tends to adopt a centre-left stance on economic issues and a liberal stance on social issues, these positions are ultimately subservient to nationalist objectives. There are a range of smaller parties, mostly left-wing.

In terms of placing the centre of gravity in Irish politics on the political spectum, I would say the centre of gravity is to the left of the US and to the right of most EU countries.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The merit lies with 'we look after our own' FG philosophy. I won't post links we all know to Reilly clinic allocations, Enda's IMMA appointment debacle, Irish Water boarding, Noonan's inappropriate behaviour etc. etc...

These are small beer compared to the major issues facing the country such as getting people jobs, getting them homes, and improving their lives.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Protesting parties? A dismissive term for political entities doing their job.
While we have party loyal people despite scandals and cronyism, we'll never have a decent chance for change.

What job are they doing? They whinge and protest about every positive thing that happens and rarely if ever produce a sensible alternative. I am not interested in the crying and weeping that comes from the likes of Paul Murphy or Mary Lou McDonald or any other of the careerist whingers. If they would actually put forward some positive proposals then I might listen. The chances of that happening are zero unfortunately.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Another crash sooner rather than later might work while FG bull**** is still fresh in the minds of voters.
Forget the left, a genuine party who put the country first is what's needed. Making it all about ideology is missing the point, although to be fair with rotating inept and selfish FF/FG governments it's understandable to think the left would be the only possibility for an honest government for all society.

Here we go again. A typical left-wing proposal for a crash so that left-wing parties can profit from misery. I don't wish another crash on the Irish people, but it is interesting that left-wingers do.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

Here we go again. A typical left-wing proposal for a crash so that left-wing parties can profit from misery. I don't wish another crash on the Irish people, but it is interesting that left-wingers do.

It would make a change all the same seeing as our crash, (and that of Greece that you so often pointed to in the past), to name but two, were under center right governments where their friends profited.

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

It would make a change all the same seeing as our crash, (and that of Greece that you so often pointed to in the past), to name but two, were under center right governments where their friends profited.

Why are people wishing for a crash?

I have no problem with people explaining in economic terms why we might be headed for a crash, and I reserve the right to disagree with them. However, when I see people actually wishing for hardship for the Irish people, just so that their favoured political party(s) can benefit from misery and suffering, I am both astonished and disgusted.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

Why are people wishing for a crash?

I have no problem with people explaining in economic terms why we might be headed for a crash, and I reserve the right to disagree with them. However, when I see people actually wishing for hardship for the Irish people, just so that their favoured political party(s) can benefit from misery and suffering, I am both astonished and disgusted.

I, nor I doubt many others are wishing for a crash.
Perhaps rather than having a dig at parties of the left take a look at where on the electorate spectrum the parties that caused the crash were.

You must be really both astonished and disgusted with them and the misery and suffering they caused.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

These are small beer compared to the major issues facing the country such as getting people jobs, getting them homes, and improving their lives.





What job are they doing? They whinge and protest about every positive thing that happens and rarely if ever produce a sensible alternative. I am not interested in the crying and weeping that comes from the likes of Paul Murphy or Mary Lou McDonald or any other of the careerist whingers. If they would actually put forward some positive proposals then I might listen. The chances of that happening are zero unfortunately.





Here we go again. A typical left-wing proposal for a crash so that left-wing parties can profit from misery. I don't wish another crash on the Irish people, but it is interesting that left-wingers do.

That's the attitude excuses the squandering of billions.

Well at least you accept an alternative is needed.
I'd be very happy with an honest right wing party.

All we need know is for people to vote on policy and record over 'better the devil you know'.
FG/FF may have partially viable and in some areas, fair manifestos but mostly to be taken with a pinch of salt. Then we've the rampant cronyism of course.

Mind, it'll be tough to find an alternative to FG/FF if you speak in generalisations about 'whingers' and the like.

The SD's have been a disappointment but you never know.

piplip87

New parties don't and will not flourish in Ireland. There are a few examples for this.

PBP. Murphy and co want to implement a far left agenda. They will rise taxes and they will make sure we exit the EU, they are most popular in disadvantaged areas, this is by design because by telling poor people that their woes are always somebody else's fault and they will fix it is always going to garner votes in these areas. As employment rises their poll numbers fall, as its grand looking for state funded everything when unemployed until you start working and see where your money goes. Extreme socialism like they propose has not worked anywhere on earth.


Renua- Very much to the right. Irish people will never go that far to the right. Lucinda would firmly place the Church back in the day to day running.

Irish people do not like extremes. They will vote for FF and FG as they can be left on some issues and right wing on others. The growth of SF is not down to Irish people becoming more Republican but SF is coming more into the centre.

Gravelly

Good loser wrote: »

Many Govt policies are contradictory - for instance all this crack about the 'vulture funds'.
If all these non payers were turned out of their houses it would release many houses onto the market reducing the prices and causing those houses to be occupied by people that do pay.

It actually wouldn't increase the housing stock one iota as the people "turned out" would still need to be housed (unless you suggest having them liquidated or something) and presumably housed on the public purse. No thanks. Mass evictions would leave the housing crisis worse off than it is now, much better to try to keep those people in their houses, and get them to pay the maximum they can afford, while increasing the housing stock.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

That's the attitude excuses the squandering of billions.

.

These are the things you have listed that you equate to the squandering of billions:

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The merit lies with 'we look after our own' FG philosophy. I won't post links we all know to Reilly clinic allocations, Enda's IMMA appointment debacle, Irish Water boarding, Noonan's inappropriate behaviour etc. etc...

That list doesn't anywhere add up to anything approaching billions. Given you are talking about a handful of people appointed to boards and a couple of local clinics, you would be hard pressed to even add up to a couple of hundred thousand.

There are far more pressing issues with bigger price tags.

Zubeneschamali

Idbatterim wrote: »

right lads, this is something I have been thinking about for a long time. Are any new political parties here doomed, as they have no existing track record? look at Renua, the Social Democrats, at the height of public anger and people seeking alterntives, they achieved very little.

Renua were FG but with even less abortion.

Social Democrats were Labour but not like the Labour you don't like anymore.

Neither of these are a "New" party.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

These are the things you have listed that you equate to the squandering of billions:



That list doesn't anywhere add up to anything approaching billions. Given you are talking about a handful of people appointed to boards and a couple of local clinics, you would be hard pressed to even add up to a couple of hundred thousand.

There are far more pressing issues with bigger price tags.

You are way off.

That's the attitude excuses the squandering of billions.

"Atitude".
If you excuse cronyism and mismanagement of tax monies (it explains support for FF/FG) at what point does it become an issue? That attitude has us turning a blind eye and it does equate to billions when you factor in poor policy.

As regards the big issues...any idea when they'll be tackled in a not for private profit/public loss manner?
With that attitude it will indeed be difficult for any decent non crony party to succeed.
Some voters are happy with things as is it seems and deluded enough to blame parties who have never been in government or imaginary bogeymen from the left.
It's a tired go to.
As I've said an honest right wing party who put the country first would be most welcome.
Blaming the Phantom left is pathetic to excuse the not fit for purpose good ol' boys.

Idbatterim

A few things are required. You have to have the established candidates with local presence, you need to have policies that appeal to voters, you need a track record of publicised views on issues. All these things take time and money.

ok, so this as you say would take large amounts of effort. Do you think that with good policies, that you could ditch all of it, engage and market mostly on social media? I have also been thinking, a "celebrity" personality could gain the party a lot of exposure...

Say for example someone comes along and offers what the others dont at the moment. Reduce the ridiculous marginal rate, sort out the joke infrastructure, allow afforable housing to be built for working people, by simply reducing cost of building. no more endless welfare increases (that arent targetted to those actually worthy and needing of it). More money for law and order. I wouldnt care whether he was local or if I had ever met him etc. I havent met the current failures that represent us in the Dail!

basically forget targetting the OAP, every other party bends over backwards for them... My ideal party would be going out to now help the people working, keeping this country going, that are breaking their necks to keep a roof over there head, rent, save for a house etc. All due to the "man" i.e. government, being complicit and willing rising property prices etc...

recedite

Idbatterim wrote: »

Do you think that with good policies, that you could ditch all of it, engage and market mostly on social media?...

The emergence of the 5 star movement in Italy with its youthful leader going from zero to hero in few short years is proof that it can happen.

Whether it turns out to be just a flash in the pan is another thing but it does show that an alternative party, using alternative methods, can force their way to the fore and demand their time to shine.
If they can deliver, they could be in it for the long haul. The movement may even spread to other countries.

Establishment parties tend set the ground rules for these things, which rules are apparently set in stone, but only until the day those parties are overturned and turfed out.