So Michael D IS running again!

Eric Cartman

I think anyone thinking freeman or Lana is finishing above Casey is kidding themselves, very uninspiring, Lana wont go above 7% shinner core vote

McMurphy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Are you one of the 'yoots' Johnny, as you seem to be voting for the crack/craic?

Spotted a quick worthwhile punt early on with this one Francie, the moment Leo made his opinion known, I thought to myself this is going to be go down like marmite with the electorate.

I Also think the sheen has been eroded from Higgins halo (who I was indifferent to, until he went for a 2nd term)

Meh, if Casey wins outright, I'll be up 1400E or so.
2nd place I'll be up 600e or so.

Keeping it interesting for me regardless.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I would criticise Higgins for that, if he meant only IRA violence, but I would suspect, knowing his politics and him personally, that he would apply it to all the violence.

I was opposed to all the violence that happened and still am to this day.

I have looked and I cannot find anywhere that he condemned the British in the same way that he condemned the IRA.

Michael D. Higgins is on record that a SF candidate is unsuitable to be President. Do you agree?

"Mr Higgins said that he, personally, was "absolutely and unequivocally opposed to the campaign of violence carried out by the IRA" and highlighted his "political opposition" and "personal revulsion" at that violence."

He was absolutely and unequivocally opposed to the campaign of violence carried out by the IRA. That statement stands on its own, no prevarication of the British made us do it, or that all violence is equal, or other such nonsense.

robbiezero

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Spotted a quick worthwhile punt early on with this one Francie, the moment Leo made his opinion known, I thought to myself this is going to be go down like marmite with the electorate.

I Also think the sheen has been eroded from Higgins halo (who I was indifferent to, until he went for a 2nd term)

Meh, if Casey wins outright, I'll be up 1400E or so.
2nd place I'll be up 600e or so.

Keeping it interesting for me regardless.

You could ensure yourself a nice little profit on the second place at the moment on Betfair. Can lay for 1.6 now on Casey w/o

mickdw

What happened the casey thread?
Closed with last comment by Francie

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I have looked and I cannot find anywhere that he condemned the British in the same way that he condemned the IRA.

Michael D. Higgins is on record that a SF candidate is unsuitable to be President. Do you agree?

"Mr Higgins said that he, personally, was "absolutely and unequivocally opposed to the campaign of violence carried out by the IRA" and highlighted his "political opposition" and "personal revulsion" at that violence."

He was absolutely and unequivocally opposed to the campaign of violence carried out by the IRA. That statement stands on its own, no prevarication of the British made us do it, or that all violence is equal, or other such nonsense.

I was at the conference where Michael D. said this, a deep and intelligent address which I as a republican could agree with.

MICHAEL D HIGGINS wrote:

Everyone's take on history must be open to critique, and that Britain, like Ireland, had to closely examine its past.
"When we decide to address the issue of violence, let us speak of the violence of empire, the violence of state, the violence of insurrection
"Let's do it all - this is the challenge that people are not rising to.
"Having spent decades revising nationalism, where is the evidence that there is as much energy put into addressing the issue of empire?
"As empires came to establishing their stamp on neighbouring countries, what was the consequences of that?""

I think his reflections, unlike the meaningless Peace and Reconciliation guff mostly engaged in by his predecessor Mary McAleese (while also inadvertently revealing her true feelings,) are a testament to the man's contribution to the debate. And you cheapen that contribution by cherrypicking something that suits your by now, boring 'blame one side' narrative.
I think Liadh Ni Riada almost exactly echoed the above sentiment twice now in the debates. Perhaps not as eloquently though but then Michael D wasn't being badgered.

And I thought that the SF candidate made clear that she believed that the presidency was above party. As Higgins did when he left Labour on taking up the job.

Silentcorner

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

So, looking at the odds on MichaelD, is the race getting closer, or not?

I'll give you a hint: it is not. In the same period that Casey came in from 200/1 to 20/1, MichaelD came in from 1/33 to 1/50.

1/50 suggests that the bookie thinks there is a 98% chance MichaelD will win.

The questions for Casey are: 1. can he climb from last place where he was in the polls to somwhat higher in the rankings, and 2. can he claw his way to 12.5% to get his expenses back. Magic 8-ball says 1. Most likely and 2. Don't count on it.

Ya it is getting closer, closer to the finish line, that is all any of us know. The odds reflect that.

The question for the rest of the political establishment and Irish media is the size of Peter Casey's vote...that is the story of this election, the mere suggestion of which has raised the ire of the self appointed intellects it seems!!

VinLieger

Silentcorner wrote: »

Ya it is getting closer, closer to the finish line, that is all any of us know. The odds reflect that.

The question for the rest of the political establishment and Irish media is the size of Peter Casey's vote...that is the story of this election, the mere suggestion of which has raised the ire of the self appointed intellects it seems!!

Odds should never be used as comparable to real polling as they are affected by multiple other factors than peoples declared intentions, like how many people are placing money onto not only in this case Peter Casey but the other candidates too.

Silentcorner

VinLieger wrote: »

Odds should never be used as comparable to real polling as they are affected by multiple other factors than peoples declared intentions, like how many people are placing money onto not only in this case Peter Casey but the other candidates too.

I couldn't agree more...we'd normally be comparing polls, which ain't always reliable either...but guess what...there are none...go figure!

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I was at the conference where Michael D. said this, a deep and intelligent address which I as a republican could agree with. I think his reflections, unlike the meaningless Peace and Reconciliation guff mostly engaged in by his predecessor Mary McAleese (while also inadvertently revealing her true feelings,) are a testament to the man's contribution to the debate. And you cheapen that contribution by cherrypicking something that suits your by now, boring 'blame one side' narrative.
I think Liadh Ni Riada almost exactly echoed the above sentiment twice now in the debates. Perhaps not as eloquently though but then Michael D wasn't being badgered.

And I thought that the SF candidate made clear that she believed that the presidency was above party. As Higgins did when he left Labour on taking up the job.

You didn't answer the questions I asked, you merely deflected them elsewhere. I will just have to take that as the answer.

Rhineshark

Silentcorner wrote: »

Ya it is getting closer, closer to the finish line, that is all any of us know. The odds reflect that.

The question for the rest of the political establishment and Irish media is the size of Peter Casey's vote...that is the story of this election, the mere suggestion of which has raised the ire of the self appointed intellects it seems!!

And damn right it should.

Travellers aside a moment, in the middle of probably the most complex negotiation this country has ever had, an X amount of people want to vote an Irexiter for President.

Yay. Even if he doesn't have any power, it's a tad of a mixed message.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

You didn't answer the questions I asked, you merely deflected them elsewhere. I will just have to take that as the answer.

Provide the quote where Higgins 'is on record that a SF candidate is unsuitable to be President'

If he is on record saying that, it will be easy to quote it.

pixelburp

Wait, what? With all the traveller kerfuffle, that little nugget somehow passed me by: Casey believes in Ireland leaving the EU? Just when I thought his candidature couldn't get more ludicrous.

mrbrianj

pixelburp wrote: »

Wait, what? With all the traveller kerfuffle, that little nugget somehow passed me by: Casey believes in Ireland leaving the EU? Just when I thought his candidature couldn't get more ludicrous.

And align with NATO and pay our 2% to them:eek:

Rhineshark

pixelburp wrote: »

Wait, what? With all the traveller kerrfuffle, that little nugget somehow passed me by: Casey believes in Ireland leaving the EU? Just when I thought his candidature couldn't get more ludicrous.

Yeah, I have no idea why no-one's questioned him on it as far as I can tell.

https://amp.independent.ie/business/brexit/peter-casey-we-need-an-urgent-national-debate-on-irexit-from-a-massivelyflawed-eu-35980674.html

Given Hermann Kelly's specific notion is to set up party and then run people for the EU elections, I am a bit suspicious at his saying he'll resign for the EU elections so they can be held at the same time or whatever the daft excuse was too.

Silentcorner

Rhineshark wrote: »

And damn right it should.

Travellers aside a moment, in the middle of probably the most complex negotiation this country has ever had, an X amount of people want to vote an Irexiter for President.

Yay. Even if he doesn't have any power, it's a tad of a mixed message.

Ya, Peter Caseys vote, whatever he gets, has nothing to do with his views on Brexit but you know that....this election has not been about Brexit...that is not the fault of Peter Casey.

Beechwoodspark

taxi man just told me

He
Everyone in his family
And all his friends

Are voting for Casey tomorrow.

Be some craic If he won

Rhineshark

Silentcorner wrote: »

Ya, Peter Caseys vote, whatever he gets, has nothing to do with his views on Brexit but you know that....this election has not been about Brexit...that is not the fault of Peter Casey.

Yeah, I know that, because apparently questioning candidates properly is not something we do in Ireland, but we do not need this "says whatever is top of his head" guy saying stupid stuff about irexiting and undermining us.

Plumbthedepths

He has expressed his opinion on several topics, refreshing that he is willing to say what he thinks as opposed to trying to appease. All are moot as if he becomes President he has no power to push for any of these aspirations of his . Equally I don't understand why MDH escaped his admiration for Castro, Ortega and others.

Loafing Oaf

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

He has expressed his opinion on several topics, refreshing that he is willing to say what he thinks .

Or maybe what he thinks will get people to vote for him...

Plumbthedepths

Loafing Oaf wrote:

Or maybe what he thinks will get people to vote for him...

He strikes me as a person who speaks off the cuff, that's my opinion. To-date he has not made me change that opinion. The rest in particular MDH ( 40 years in politics i suppose) are calculated in their answers.

Loafing Oaf

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

He strikes me as a person who speaks off the cuff, that's my opinion. To-date he has not made me change that opinion. The rest in particular MDH ( 40 years in politics i suppose) are calculated in their answers.

You reckon his comments on travelers were made off the top of his head?

CloughCasey1

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

You reckon his comments on travelers were made off the top of his head?

The comments he said are off the top of everybody's head...but he had the balls to say it.

Plumbthedepths

Loafing Oaf wrote:

You reckon his comments on travelers were made off the top of his head?

In my opinion yes, unless you believe he set the question .

Adamcp898

How little we know about any of the candidates, up to and including their reasons for wanting the Presidency, isn't surprising once you keep reminding yourself to frame every single little detail within the boundaries of just how few the responsibilities of the Office are.

Keep in mind the biggest 'scandal' anyone could offer in the months leading up to this was the incumbent's promise that he'd only do 7 years with good behaviour and not sit out the full 14 year sentence.

A few weeks ago the PAC, in a bout of extremely unusual 'resourcefulness', decided to inform the country that the expenditure of the Aras hadn't been audited in 4 years. I mean perhaps if it wasn't the Comptroller and Auditor General who was handing over this money as a matter of routine function, and perhaps if Michael D had been off on extended 'state visits' to the Bahamas for lengthy periods with the phone off the hook, we'd have been more inclined to grab our pitch forks. Nevertheless, that was the only 'talking point' that could be drummed up for the first debates of the campaign proper.

Well, that's not completely true, there was another but perhaps all the candidates retain the services of RTE's legal team and so thought best to give it a wide berth.

Where would we have been these last 10-14 days without the old gunslinger Peter Casey if he hadn't came out firing (or did it just go off by accident?) and said that thing that he said about the group that may or may not be a group at all? It'd all have been terribly boring and no one in this thread would've been able to show off their astute knowledge in reporting fractions and probability.

There is literally no meaningful discussion around the candidates about anything because the Office doesn't do anything. Yet even with the low entry requirements of dress smart, keep eye contact with your audience when addressing them, and talk clearly for 3 sentences without correcting yourself, we still have a run-away winner in a six horse race.

The local Councillors of this country ought to have a lot to answer for if this is what they consider 'Presidential'. But we also need to look at the purpose of the position if this is the standard of candidate it attracts and this is the level of vetting we do of them.

FrancieBrady

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

You reckon his comments on travelers were made off the top of his head?

And his trip to Tipp was not planned?
Or the weekend break to consider his position when he was taking it off anyway? Yates had a dig at him last night about it.

nc6000

The usual piece on a ballot box being brought by helicopter to an island the day before the vote is up soon on RTE Six One News.

richiepurgas

nc6000 wrote: »

The usual piece on a ballot box being brought by helicopter to an island the day before the vote is up soon on RTE Six One News.

An exit poll tonight on that island's vote ?;)

Loafing Oaf

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

In my opinion yes, unless you believe he set the question .

He brought it up unprompted when asked about the homelessness crisis. Also, how likely is it that a super-wealthy Irish-american would be casually aware of that situation in Tipperary. I'm fairly up to speed with current affairs but I'd never heard about it before...

hotmail.com

RTE are doing an exit poll. I heard they are releasing it at 10 pm tomorrow night. Maybe on the Late Late Show?

RTE finally coming into this century by releasing the exit poll once the polls have closed rather than the following morning.