Peter Casey's beliefs of Travellers' ethnicity Part II

FrancieBrady

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Give over Francie, Casey was never going to unseat the incumbent. Unlikely anyone was.
Casey didnt suffer a defeat. He has come out if it with the most gained.

Because as a resut of an election no one really wanted or gave much of a šhit about, we now have someone mandated to deal with issues that were heresy for too long to even discuss in "polite conversation". Thats the part that hurts the most for the anti-Casey lobby.

Maybe it was a protest vote, but with local and national elections coming up, things got a bit interesting. SF, FG and Mickey Martin should ve worried.

Would Casey have made a good president?
I dont think so, he's a bit giddy and flakey for me. The most presedential IMO was Gavin Duffy. And look where he polled, not that i gave him anything.

Nobody is saying he didn't gain.

He got 23% of the vote.

But that was 23% of 46% of the electorate, which is 10% of those who can effect change in this country.

Roger Hassenforder

Briella Tender Shark wrote: »

Nah, it's not spin really.

How many people turned around and said one of the following things:

I wasn't going to vote, but Casey "saying it how it is" is getting my vote now.

I was going to vote for X, but now Casey is getting my number 1.

So how the jump from 2% to 23%
Something resonated with the electorate

givyjoe

Briella Tender Shark wrote: »

Nah, it's not spin really.

How many people turned around and said one of the following things:

I wasn't going to vote, but Casey "saying it how it is" is getting my vote now.

I was going to vote for X, but now Casey is getting my number 1.

It's disingenuous to suggest that the 23% of the vote he did receive indicates that 23% of the total population support him.

People were fairly apathetic to the election, and those who were motivated by Casey went out and voted for him, anyone who didn't care in the first place, and weren't swayed by his nonsense, continued not to vote.

Except I didn't say that. I'm merely calling the absolute horse**** logic being deployed by Francie.

On your last point, unerifiable nonsense. My group of mates, 6 of us in a group chat, none of us voted. If we had of, would all have voted Casey. All for a simple reason, in all of the bullsh1tting from the candidates for the job (that doesn't need to/shouldn't exist) he was the only one who said ANYTHING of any meaning.

sydthebeat

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Already have. Contrary to belief I don't spin the figures just to make my favourite candidate look better.

MDH won an election overwhelmingly by getting the biggest majority of those who took the time to vote.

And Peter Casey came a very strong second at 23% and reflected views which you are now trying to belittle.

As I have said already, any political party being 23% in a general election would be king makers.

So you are very right to be worried.

However belittling that vote or claiming its from racism or ignorance is a very very stupid and dangerous thing to do. That road leads to trump.

What needs to happen is that the views that lead to that 23% vote need to be either listened to and acted on, or the inconsistencies in communication (see Leo varadkers comments) need to be well and truely clarified

FrancieBrady

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

So how the jump from 2% to 23%
Something resonated with the electorate

Yes, something did. We know there is a percentage in the country who have a bias and prejudice against ALL travellers and who would like measures deployed against all travellers unilaterally.

Some may be surprised that is 10%, I wasn't, I had guessed it was a bit higher, in the 13-14% percentile, actually.

7aubzxk43m2sni

givyjoe wrote: »

Except I didn't say that. I'm merely calling the absolute horse**** logic being deployed by Francie.

On your last point, unerifiable nonsense. My group of mates, 6 of us in a group chat, none of us voted. If we had of, would all have voted Casey. All for a simple reason, in all of the bullsh1tting from the candidates for the job (that doesn't need to/shouldn't exist) he was the only one who said ANYTHING of any meaning.

Great that you're here talking sh1te but you couldn't be arsed going out to vote. Keep fighting the good fight

FrancieBrady

sydthebeat wrote: »

And Peter Casey came a very strong second at 23% and reflected views which you are now trying to belittle.

As I have said already, any political party being 23% in a general election would be king makers.

So you are very right to be worried.

However belittling that vote or claiming its from racism or ignorance is a very very stupid and dangerous thing to do. That road leads to trump.

What needs to happen is that the views that lead to that 23% vote need to be either listened to and acted on, or the inconsistencies in communication (see Leo varadkers comments) need to be well and truely clarified

Please stop fooling yourself that this is anything like a GE. It really shows a basic lack of understanding of our democracy.

Jackman25

givyjoe wrote: »

That thread is utterly pathetic.

Ah its hilarious. What a complete tool that lad is.

Repeat in your best Liam Neeson from Taken voice.

You are being targeted, you are being targeted by users outside of Ireland. You will continue to be targeted if you do not take action against them.

FrancieBrady

givyjoe wrote: »

Except I didn't say that. I'm merely calling the absolute horse**** logic being deployed by Francie.

On your last point, unerifiable nonsense. My group of mates, 6 of us in a group chat, none of us voted. If we had of, would all have voted Casey. All for a simple reason, in all of the bullsh1tting from the candidates for the job (that doesn't need to/shouldn't exist) he was the only one who said ANYTHING of any meaning.

You listened to the debates but STILL didn't vote?????

I rest my case, your honour. :rolleyes::eek::eek:

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

How is it spin?


If you want it to be about who would make the best president, Casey lost heavily, as the winner romped home outpolling everyone by 3 votes to 1. A record margin.

If this was as claimed as a 'protest' vote, it therefore had nothing to do with electing a president.

10% of the electorate turned out for this protest.

No spin, just a cold clinical look at the figures versus the claims about what this was.

It was less that 10% of the electorate that protested against water charges.

Yet you deemed those protests a success.

givyjoe

Briella Tender Shark wrote: »

Great that you're here talking sh1te but you couldn't be arsed going out to vote. Keep fighting the good fight

Ha, the irony. Yourself and Francie have come up with some golden turds this morning.

75% of the population as Francie highlighted, couldn't be arsed voting. What's that go to do with having an opinion on travellers or what Casey said about them?
Are only those who voted allowed to have an opinion?

Jackman25

givyjoe wrote: »

Except I didn't say that. I'm merely calling the absolute horse**** logic being deployed by Francie.

On your last point, unerifiable nonsense. My group of mates, 6 of us in a group chat, none of us voted. If we had of, would all have voted Casey. All for a simple reason, in all of the bullsh1tting from the candidates for the job (that doesn't need to/shouldn't exist) he was the only one who said ANYTHING of any meaning.

The vast majority of the entire electorate agreed with Caseys comments, but 23% agreed enough with him to give him their first preference to be President.

Now the above statement is spoof as I have no basis really on which to make such a statement. But unlike Francie, I recognize that.

givyjoe

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You listened to the debates but STILL didn't vote?????

I rest my case, your honour. :rolleyes::eek::eek:

:eek::eek::eek::eek: Is pretty much how everyone reacts to your ramblings.

KrustyUCC

FF reviews policies on Travellers amid Casey storm fallout

Fianna Fáil will review the party's policy on the Traveller community after a robust internal debate on the outcome of the presidential election.

During a parliamentary party meeting, TDs and senators agreed to establish a committee which would examine Fianna Fáil's stance on Travellers.

An RTÉ exit poll showed one in three Fianna Fáil supporters voted for Peter Casey, who made inflammatory comments about Travellers' ethnic status during the campaign.

One source said there was an "undercurrent throughout the debate" that Mr Casey struck a cord with the public and Fianna Fáil voters.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/ff-reviews-policies-on-travellers-amid-casey-storm-fallout-37500998.html

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

It was less that 10% of the electorate that protested against water charges.

Yet you deemed those protests a success.

Did I?

I had very little to say about the water issue, maybe you can link me to where I said that?

sydthebeat

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Please stop fooling yourself that this is anything like a GE. It really shows a basic lack of understanding of our democracy.

Your claim that NONE of the 54% of the electorate that didn't vote would never have voted for casey shows a truely remarkable lack of understanding of democracy.

FrancieBrady

givyjoe wrote: »

:eek::eek::eek::eek: Is pretty much how everyone reacts to your ramblings.

Ramblings? At least I voted.

How dare you criticise anyone's opinion on here if you couldn't get off your arse and vote.

Joke. No interest in interacting with somebody who didn't vote after listening to the issues.

FrancieBrady

sydthebeat wrote: »

Your claim that NONE of the 54% of the electorate that didn't vote would never have voted for casey shows a truely remarkable lack of understanding of democracy.

I didn't claim that anywhere.
54% where not bothered ENOUGH either by the choice of president or what Casey said.
I have, like you no idea how they would have voted in relation to Casey, if you are claiming that Casey's vote was a 'protest' vote.
They certainly weren't motivated enough to want him as President.

givyjoe

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Ramblings? At least I voted.

How dare you criticise anyone's opinion on here if you couldn't get off your arse and vote.

Joke. No interest in interacting with somebody who didn't vote after listening to the issues.

Wind your neck in. How dare I?! More laughable nonsense.No interest in someone poking holes in your 'logic' and taking the easy way out.

If there was an option to vote for 'none of the above' I would have been there in a heartbeat. Why should I go out an vote for someone to be in a position, that I believe shouldn't exist in the first place.

FrancieBrady

Jackman25 wrote: »

The vast majority of the entire electorate agreed with Caseys comments, but 23% agreed enough with him to give him their first preference to be President.

Now the above statement is spoof as I have no basis really on which to make such a statement. But unlike Francie, I recognize that.

It is not 'spoofing' to quote the factual figures, which is what i did.

23% of 46% of the electorate wanted Casey as President. Which is 10% of the Total electorate.

If it was a 'protest' vote, which is a sidebar to the election, then what we know is that 10% of the electorate where motivated/concerned enough to make a protest vote.

Roger Hassenforder

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Nobody is saying he didn't gain.

He got 23% of the vote.

But that was 23% of 46% of the electorate, which is 10% of those who can effect change in this country.

He went from fcuk all to 23% of those that bothered to vote.

I tweeted him twice: first was to scold him about hitting the golf ball into the see, the second asking him not to drop out after the MSM and establishment healing opprobrium on him.


I think he went into this race, knowing he hadnt a hope, but to test the waters for a crack at seat in Donegal. And 23% of those that voted liked the cut of his jib. He has a mandate, like it or not.

SF did something similar, possibly with more ambitionand higher expectations, only to see it explode in their face.

MDH went is as the popular incumbent, it would have taken someone/something special to unseat him. We didnt get either, but we got something else.

Blazer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It is not 'spoofing' to quote the factual figures, which is what i did.

23% of 46% of the electorate wanted Casey as President. Which is 10% of the Total electorate.

If it was a 'protest' vote, which is a sidebar to the election, then what we know is that 10% of the electorate where motivated/concerned enough to make a protest vote.

Keep spinning that bull**** ...no one is falling for it.
Sooner or later there’s going to be a big crackdown on welfare and we all know this will have huge effects on travellers.
They might even have to get jobs!!!!!!
Or just step up the amount of houses they rob. Which will bring its own issues.

sydthebeat

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I didn't claim that anywhere.
54% where not bothered ENOUGH either by the choice of president or what Casey said.
I have, like you no idea how they would have voted in relation to Casey, if you are claiming that Casey's vote was a 'protest' vote.
They certainly weren't motivated enough to want him as President.

Im claiming your posts are full of spin and belittlement... Which they are. You use the 10% figure as a stick to fight against the vote yet by that logic 74% of the country don't want MDH as president.

Belittle the vote all you want, but we've already seen people in the political sphere sit up and take notice.... The shinners will have to do likewise if they have any goals of increasing their popularity

Omackeral

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Which doesn't fit the narrative that there was a 'huge' mobiliasation of a 'protest vote'.

Going from 2% to 23% in a week absolutely indicates a huge mobilisation of a protest vote. That's just not even up for debate. For someone so hell bent on quoting numbers, you would think that would be obvious to you... actually, you know it is and I know you know it is.

FrancieBrady

givyjoe wrote: »

Wind your neck in. How dare I?! More laughable nonsense.No interest in someone poking holes in your 'logic' and taking the easy way out.

If there was an option to vote for 'none of the above' I would have been there in a heartbeat. Why should I go out an vote for someone to be in a position, that I believe shouldn't exist in the first place.

Go learn something about how this democracy works.

You voted for the winner. Very simple.

Not voting gives you no right to complain in my opinion.

Plumbthedepths

We can take from all this that pretty much everyone knew Casey would not win , but a light has been shown on a cohort in society that wanted it left in the shadows. Even FF are taking note of the 23 per cent vote for Casey and re-examining their traveller policy. Oh and considering their ability to twist things their is at least one expert level twister player here, who thankfully I realised how to put on ignore.

Omackeral

Edward M wrote: »

Well you are very concerned it seems.

Rattled, I believe is the word. Another -ite I thought of for his little lapdog smashing the thanks button at literally every post he splutters out. Paras-ite.

CrankyHaus

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/state-policy-towards-travellers-dodges-employment-question-1.3688569?mode=amp

This is very interesting.
While the article is careful to tip toe around the usual sacred cows it is the first I have ever seen in the Irish Times that identifies problems in the Traveller community as a result of the culture therein and criticises the decades old failed state policy of ignoring this.

This may mark a significant change in the dialogue and policy on this issue and Peter Casey deserves credit for highlighting the issue and shifting the overton window.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Already have. Contrary to belief I don't spin the figures just to make my favourite candidate look better.

MDH won an election overwhelmingly by getting the biggest majority of those who took the time to vote.

I’d love to see what your spin was after the last general election with regards to Sinn Fein and how you measured their percentage.

By my calculations Sinn Fein were dismissed by more than 91% of the electorate in 2011. Not even 9% voted for them

Omackeral

sydthebeat wrote: »

Francies understanding of proportion is questionable at best.

Common sense would just extrapolate pro rata.

Is Francie Pro Ra? Ta!