Fine Gael TD sues Dublin Hotel after falling off swing

James Brown

is_that_so wrote: »

Well then it'll be be back to FF. No currency in all that protest stuff on the left any more. As bad as this insurance issue is it'll be housing, health, taxes and all the usual things in an election.

And they're playing a blinder :rolleyes:
Housing, as it reaches more people, will be a very big issue in the next election. Main thing for Leo is his crowd make as much as they can before it's FF chance again.

Loafing Oaf

is_that_so wrote: »

Well then it'll be be back to FF.

No law that says anyone has to vote for either FF or FG. If someone finds both deeply unsatisfactory they need to be looking for another option.

is_that_so

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

No law that says anyone has to vote for either FF or FG. If someone finds both deeply unsatisfactory they need to be looking for another option.

No other party is showing any sign of coming out of the pack. SF are going backwards and all the rest are in single figures. It will be one or the other in the next government. We're no longer collectively angry with them, just a bit irate.

is_that_so

Matt Barrett wrote: »

And they're playing a blinder :rolleyes:
Housing, as it reaches more people, will be a very big issue in the next election. Main thing for Leo is his crowd make as much as they can before it's FF chance again.

Yeah, lots of missteps on this. In that context it suits them for an election to go out till next summer as it might be a smaller issue. Doubtful but possible.

James Brown

is_that_so wrote: »

Yeah, lots of missteps on this. In that context it suits them for an election to go out till next summer as it might be a smaller issue. Doubtful but possible.

Impossible. They're breaking records year on year. Unless they change policy on social and affordable very quickly there won't be even shovels in the ground next election.

is_that_so wrote: »

No other party is showing any sign of coming out of the pack. SF are going backwards and all the rest are in single figures. It will be one or the other in the next government. We're no longer collectively angry with them, just a bit irate.

Are you codding?
FG have raised FF's profile, which was the plan IMO, to keep any third option from becoming viable. Dirt the pair of them.
They'll succeed as they always do by giving the illusion of an option as folks drift from one to the other, but people are genuinely very f***ed off with FG, don't doubt it. The swing fraud is merely a comment on their arrogance and entitlement.

is_that_so

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Are you codding?
FG have raised FF's profile, which was the plan IMO, to keep any third option from becoming viable. Dirt the pair of them.
They'll succeed as they always do by giving the illusion of an option as folks drift from one to the other, but people are genuinely very f***ed off with FG, don't doubt it. The swing fraud is merely a comment on their arrogance and entitlement.

It's what they both do but most voters understand they are generally the only viable options each time.

Stop moaning ffs

It’s depressing how completely stuck we are when it comes to these two.

The evil of two lessers. No real leadership and absolutely no social conscious whatsoever. In any of them.

It’s so grim.

James Brown

is_that_so wrote: »

It's what they both do but most voters understand they are generally the only viable options each time.

Yeah but that's getting to be tired PR and people are copping on as they struggle and we're told 'economy!'.
Record breaking numbers of children homeless, hospital over run and the character hit that is swing gate, they're a popular option but the law and order party of fiscal conservatism they ain't.

is_that_so

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

It’s depressing how completely stuck we are when it comes to these two.

The evil of two lessers. No real leadership and absolutely no social conscious whatsoever. In any of them.

It’s so grim.

What does attract people to them is their attention to the big picture and seemingly being for everyone. Usually that means convincing enough of the middle classes to vote them back in. Other parties can't match that.

is_that_so

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Yeah but that's getting to be tired PR and people are copping on as they struggle and we're told 'economy!'.
Record breaking numbers of children homeless, hospital over run and the character hit that is swing gate, they're a popular option but the law and order party of fiscal conservatism they ain't.

There are genuinely no obvious alternatives. The homeless issue will eventually go away and health in crisis will be the same in elections in the 2040s and even the 2100s!

James Brown

is_that_so wrote: »

What does attract people to them is their attention to the big picture and seemingly being for everyone. Usually that means convincing enough of the middle classes to vote them back in. Other parties can't match that.

If FG had any ethics and didn't partner with FF, we'd have some form of second/third viable option IMO. They rigged the game. They actually succeed in making FF preferable to themselves. I think FF will have the upper hand next election but I really hope the SD's and Indies come in strong. FG got their shot and once again blew it with their arrogance.

Loafing Oaf

is_that_so wrote: »

No other party is showing any sign of coming out of the pack. SF are going backwards and all the rest are in single figures. It will be one or the other in the next government. We're no longer collectively angry with them, just a bit irate.

is_that_so wrote: »

It's what they both do but most voters understand they are generally the only viable options each time.

It's this mentality that prevents anything from changing in Irish politics. Any party can 'be viable' or 'emerge from the pack' if enough people vote for them. The PR-STV system allows the voter to give their first preference to whichever party is closest to them ideologically, be that Renua or Irexit or whoever. And if you wish you can give a lower preference to whichever of FF or FG you regard as the lesser of two evils. Any voter who claims to despise both FF and FG but only ever votes for one or other deserves everything they get, or don't get, IMO.

AbdulAbhaile

is_that_so wrote: »

Auguste Comte wrote: »

You might be right there but don't fool yourself, plenty of voters who gave FG a 1,2 will be voting ABFG whenever the GE does roll around.

Anyone but the Fraud and Greed party.

Well then it'll be be back to FF. No currency in all that protest stuff on the left any more. As bad as this insurance issue is it'll be housing, health, taxes and all the usual things in an election.

As disgusting as I find insurance scammers and even more so the fact that Fine Gael seems to be happy to be represented by them, you are right. I'm a fg voter but they have lost my vote because of the abismal performance of their health and housing ministers.

Owning a home is beyond so many young people and future generations of children and parents are being shafted with the "least worst" option of a children's hospital. It's my view that they deserve the best option but that's not what they are getting. That's why I am not going to vote fg again.

This bailey store really just shows the contempt that FG and their leadership have for the ordinary tax payer, its the equivalent of a company manager scamming the workers and getting to keep their position. Wallace and the pension money would spring to mind.

ChikiChiki

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

is_that_so wrote: »

Well then it'll be be back to FF.

No law that says anyone has to vote for either FF or FG. If someone finds both deeply unsatisfactory they need to be looking for another option.

The mother votes FF in local and general each time because they do a great job with the Christmas lights every year according to her.

That's what we are dealing with. Not the brightest voters in all reality.

Anyway for now I'm gone Soc Dems. Catherine Murphys work on exposing another FG shambles in IW and Siteserv has her guaranteed my support. I cannot understand how they are not doing better. Perhaps they need to go back to basics and get candidates on trailers giving speeches in market squares across the country to wake people up!

Stop moaning ffs

is_that_so wrote: »

What does attract people to them is their attention to the big picture and seemingly being for everyone. Usually that means convincing enough of the middle classes to vote them back in. Other parties can't match that.

Big picture?

Both parties have failed dramatically the last twenty years. Staggeringly massive failures. We’ve lurched from disaster to disaster with little respite.

It’s astonishing people have always been stuck with one of the other on repeat.
I can see that changing dramatically this coming GE. FG are going to be decimated

Stop moaning ffs

is_that_so wrote: »

There are genuinely no obvious alternatives. The homeless issue will eventually go away and health in crisis will be the same in elections in the 2040s and even the 2100s!

Ok you’re in la la land.
The homeless crisis will just go away?

No. It’s going to a acellerate at an increasing speed. Are you even from here??)

James Brown

ChikiChiki wrote: »

The mother votes FF in local and general each time because they do a great job with the Christmas lights every year according to her.

That's what we are dealing with. Not the brightest voters in all reality.

Yep, the Ma use to vote for this Councillor because....his father was a Councillor who did a favour for her mother back in the black and white days...no joke.

Boggles

ChikiChiki wrote: »

The mother votes FF in local and general each time because they do a great job with the Christmas lights every year according to her.

That's what we are dealing with. Not the brightest voters in all reality.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Yep, the Ma use to vote for this Councillor because....his father was a Councillor who did a favour for her mother back in the black and white days...no joke.

Are those reasons any more arbitrary then voting for someone who has no intention of fulfilling any campaign promises?

is_that_so

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

It's this mentality that prevents anything from changing in Irish politics. Any party can 'be viable' or 'emerge from the pack' if enough people vote for them. The PR-STV system allows the voter to give their first preference to whichever party is closest to them ideologically, be that Renua or Irexit or whoever. And if you wish you can give a lower preference to whichever of FF or FG you regard as the lesser of two evils. Any voter who claims to despise both FF and FG but only ever votes for one or other deserves everything they get, or don't get, IMO.

If they look like they will represent voters they will get votes, if they are of a niche view they probably won't. Many voters are centrist by inclination and FF/FG dominate this ground. They are also very good at reinventing themselves and borrowing or stealing ideas from other parties. The scenario here is no different to most other democracies - that of a duopoly.

Plumbthedepths

ChikiChiki wrote:

Anyway for now I'm gone Soc Dems. Catherine Murphys work on exposing another FG shambles in IW and Siteserv has her guaranteed my support. I cannot understand how they are not doing better. Perhaps they need to go back to basics and get candidates on trailers giving speeches in market squares across the country to wake people up!

The SD didn't do themselves any favours with the asylum seeker chancer they allowed to run for them in the locals.

is_that_so

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Ok you’re in la la land.
The homeless crisis will just go away?

No. It’s going to a acellerate at an increasing speed. Are you even from here??)

You seem to be willing it to continue to prove a point! In terms of public housing being built it will recede and cease to be as much of a crisis. The crisis is actually at council level but government is easier to blame.

ChikiChiki

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

ChikiChiki wrote:

Anyway for now I'm gone Soc Dems. Catherine Murphys work on exposing another FG shambles in IW and Siteserv has her guaranteed my support. I cannot understand how they are not doing better. Perhaps they need to go back to basics and get candidates on trailers giving speeches in market squares across the country to wake people up!

The SD didn't do themselves any favours with the asylum seeker chancer they allowed to run for them in the locals.

Agreed, that was a disappointing misstep.

However they to have a lot of candidates who want to see real change and are disillusioned with the big two parties.

They are the best of the rest. The country needs a non civil war party in power.

is_that_so

Boggles wrote: »

Are those reasons any more arbitrary then voting for someone who has no intention of fulfilling any campaign promises?

I'm with Pat Rabitte on the oul election promises! Don't banjax the country or bankrupt me is usually good enough to give them a chance of re-election.

Jupiter Mulligan

banie01 wrote: »

Madigan has already refused to answer any questions relating to Bailey and incident on the basis of Solicitor/Client privilege.

The strong inference from that is that she acted as a legal advisor in this situation.

If she had not, she could certainly have declared same without prejudice to any other existing instructions.

People fawn all over journalists (aka members of the journalistic "profession" - don't make me laugh!) for refusing to reveal their sources, but when a Officer of the Court correctly cites client/solicitor privilege they're instantly guilty as charged!

An interesting example of the double standards prevalent in contemporary Irish thinking - especially on social media!

James Brown

Boggles wrote: »

Are those reasons any more arbitrary then voting for someone who has no intention of fulfilling any campaign promises?

Well at least we know Fine Gael have previous on that. I'd rather gamble on a new face every time.

James Brown

is_that_so wrote: »

You seem to be willing it to continue to prove a point! In terms of public housing being built it will recede and cease to be as much of a crisis. The crisis is actually at council level but government is easier to blame.

Councils are part of the problem but the Minister for Housing is where the buck stops or are we spinning the whole government are mere figure heads yarn?

Jupiter Mulligan wrote: »

People fawn all over journalists (aka members of the journalistic "profession" - don't make me laugh!) for refusing to reveal their sources, but when a Officer of the Court correctly cites client/solicitor privilege they're instantly guilty as charged!

An interesting example of the double standards prevalent in contemporary Irish thinking - especially on social media!

Whereas Leo is hiding the information for reasons best known to himself.

Cordell

I think we should go back to the start: a TD, by her own admission, can't use a swing without supervision and instructions, hence she's totally unfit for the job so she should be sacked.

Suckit

Cordell wrote: »

I think we should go back to the start: a TD, by her own admission, can't use a swing without supervision and instructions, hence she's totally unfit for the job so she should be sacked.

Go over the reports at the time it broke, and maybe even read the SOR transcript again.
Now that it has been acknowledged it was a fraudulent claim, it puts a new light on some of the things said.

banie01

Jupiter Mulligan wrote: »

People fawn all over journalists (aka members of the journalistic "profession" - don't make me laugh!) for refusing to reveal their sources, but when a Officer of the Court correctly cites client/solicitor privilege they're instantly guilty as charged!

An interesting example of the double standards prevalent in contemporary Irish thinking - especially on social media!

Madigan cited privilege in response to a direct question regarding her involvement in the matter.
It quite plainly follows that as she "took" instruction that she is the solicitor who advised Bailey she had an open and shut case.

If Madigan had not been Bailey's legal representative, the simple Expedient of answering No, would have ended speculation about her involvement.
That proceedings opened in 2016, and Madigan did not step down from her firm until late 2017, is also a quite telling indicator of the source of the advice provided to Bailey.

What's even more telling, is the absolute lack of effort made by any FG spinbots other than those present to offer an alternative explanation or to extricate Madigan in any manner.
In fact, the absolute radio silence on the involvement of a sitting Minister in the attempt to perpetrate a fraud is quite telling in and of itself.
As if, if noone says anything the shítstorm will blow over and noone will remember to ask what about Madigan!

Jupiter Mulligan

banie01 wrote: »

Madigan cited privilege in response to a direct question regarding her involvement in the matter.
It quite plainly follows that as she "took" instruction that she is the solicitor who advised Bailey she had an open and shut case.

If Madigan had not been Bailey's legal representative, the simple Expedient of answering No, would have ended speculation about her involvement.
That proceedings opened in 2016, and Madigan did not step down from her firm until late 2017, is also a quite telling indicator of the source of the advice provided to Bailey.

What's even more telling, is the absolute lack of effort made by any FG spinbots other than those present to offer an alternative explanation or to extricate Madigan in any manner.
In fact, the absolute radio silence on the involvement of a sitting Minister in the attempt to perpetrate a fraud is quite telling in and of itself.
As if, if noone says anything the shítstorm will blow over and noone will remember to ask what about Madigan!

Your mind-reading abilities combined with your uncanny ability to add two and two together and get five mark you out as a poster not worth following. So I am taking the necessary action.