People like SF candidates but won't vote for SF

FTA69

TuringBot47 wrote: »

It's just a rebranding, putting women as the face of Sinn Fein.
Window dressing to try and deflect from past atrocities and criminality.

Yeah the silly women who are just pawns and window dressing, it's not like they were long time senior elected members of the party who were widely tipped for years to be the next leader or anything.

FTA69

road_high wrote: »

Quite violent as well. Angry, lower class, under educated males are the SF I think of when I see SF. Wannabe Conor McGregor types. They even had one running for them until last week. Pierce Doherty is of a similar ilk too.

And now we segue nicely from sexism into plain old snobbery.

road_high

FTA69 wrote: »

And now we segue nicely from sexism into plain old snobbery.

Call it what you will I don’t care- just calling SF how I see them and being honest (something that is alien to SF evidently). I admire people from any class that work, aspire and contribute- basically the antithesis of SF and their cheerleaders.

facehugger99

facehugger99 wrote: »

I won't even go into the lunacy of their economic policies because it's really beside the point.

I don't disagree on much bar this.


I'm sorry but when did SF tank the economy in 2008? When have they allowed a housing crisis develop? Children's Hospital Overrun, Broadband overrun? etc etc


The parties of FFG have consistently tanked the economy or overspend public funds. I hate that they get a free pass based on a nebulous "the other side are economically incompetent" when they have been proved untrustworthy repeatedly.

mariaalice

I am not sure if it a reflection of everywhere but locally there supporters are a mix of Republicans, chip on their shoulder types who seem to think they are going to get one over on the government/establishment and those with issues, the type the believe gossip about Micheal D Higgins, plus the type who believes they are in a movement as opposed to political party.

This kind of thing puts people off.

On the other hand, it's a very democratic party and they do have one or two very good candidates.

FrancieBrady

mariaalice wrote: »

I am not sure if it a reflection of everywhere but locally there supporters are a mix of Republicans, chip on their shoulder types who seem to think they are going to get one over on the government/establishment and those with issues, the type the believe gossip about Micheal D Higgins, plus the type who believes they are in a movement as opposed to political party.

This kind of thing puts people off.

On the other hand, it's a very democratic party and they do have one or two very good candidates.

FG 23% FF 25% SF 21%

What's 'putting people off' FF and FG?

Just interested in your take on them?

Whelo79

I didn't know boards was populated with so many economists and financial accountants who can expertly confirm that SF's policies are not financially viable and would bankrupt the state in a matter of months!

Even though SF are the only opposition party to have their policies independently audited and verified as prudent in advance of publication, and have dinner so in advance of the last number of general elections.

Tax the rich, tax the banks, give to the ordinary average worker a break from the stranglehold around their neck. I don't see the issue. It sure as hell beats letting the banks pay no corporate tax for the next 20 years and allowing developers and vulture funds get even richer through state funded rental schemes as opposed to state funded housing development.

What is the worst that can happen? 18-24-30 months down the line 'IF' the SF policies are completely unimplementable (which I severely doubt) votes of no confidence well rain in and another general election will be called.

What we are doing currently is the equivalent of bouncing back and forth between the same two restaurants every day and constantly being let down by the food we are provided with, while the service gets worse on each visit. However we refuse to eat in the restaurant across the road because the owners of the other two restaurants keep telling us not to eat there, it's dangerous, you'll get sick from their food, they don't know how to cook properly.

mariaalice

FrancieBrady wrote: »

FG 23% FF 25% SF 21%

What's 'putting people off' FF and FG?

Just interested in your take on them?

Don't believe the poles.

marieholmfan

mariaalice wrote: »

Don't believe the poles.

They can only vote in local elections!

facehugger99

is_that_so wrote: »

€30K a year is about the level of people SF might expect to attract. Can't comment on who this guy is but he does offer up some numbers on workers and salary levels and that could be a huge chunk of people. Bear in mind that USC on €30K is about €650 a year and that it takes in €4bn overall.

https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/opinion-64-of-workers-in-ireland-earn-less-than-the-average-salary-4562071-Apr2019/

The top 25% of earners in this country pay almost 80% of the income taxes.

People should let that sink in for a moment.

75% of the population are paying less than 20% of what it takes to provide for all out state-funded services.

SF's 'populist' idea is to reduce this amount even more. Presumably the shortfall will be made up of extra taxes on 'da rich' i.e. those already paying 4/5's of the pot.

The tax-base needs to be broadened not narrowed.

Their second 'big idea' on the economics front is to reduce the pension age.

Now even the dogs in the street know we are facing into a pensions time-bomb, with an aging population and falling birthrates.

To propose reducing the pension age is at best moronic, but more likely, a deeply cynical to move to harvest a few votes.

FrancieBrady

mariaalice wrote: »

Don't believe the poles.

Whether they are accurate or not.
Neither FF or FG will get much past those percentages.

What is putting the other 75% 'off' in your opinion?

marieholmfan

facehugger99 wrote: »

The top 25% of earners in this country pay almost 80% of the income taxes.

People should let that sink in for a moment.

75% of the population are paying less than 20% of what it takes to provide for all out state-funded services.

SF's 'populist' idea is to reduce this amount even more. Presumably the shortfall will be made up of extra taxes on 'da rich' i.e. those already paying 4/5's of the pot.

The tax-base needs to be broadened not narrowed.

Their second 'big idea' on the economics front is to reduce the pension age.

Now even the dogs in the street know we are facing into a pensions time-bomb, with an aging population and falling birthrates.

To propose reducing the pension age is at best moronic, but more likely, a deeply cynical to move to harvest a few votes.

We could look at higher taxes by section.


Aircraft leasing , medicine , the law.


Bring in Gulags to terrorise the rich.


Bring in a rendition policy for tax evaders who move to Monaco.


I suspect a couple of billionaire's bodies rotting on a gibbet (legally of course after appropriate enabling legislation) would have a salutary effect on would be tax evaders.

mariaalice

The point is once they move fare enough away from the armed republican era, to really move forward they would have to move away from a supporter who are malcontents who want to give the establishment a kicking, there is an awful lot of them particularly at local government level.

There issue is how to broaden there appeal.

FTA69

road_high wrote: »

Call it what you will I don’t care- just calling SF how I see them and being honest (something that is alien to SF evidently). I admire people from any class that work, aspire and contribute- basically the antithesis of SF and their cheerleaders.

Nah mate you’re just engaging in snooty and high-handed dismissals of working class people. I was a member of SF for years and everyone I was in it with was a normal working person.

facehugger99

Deleted User wrote: »

The parties of FFG have consistently tanked the economy or overspend public funds. I hate that they get a free pass based on a nebulous "the other side are economically incompetent" when they have been proved untrustworthy repeatedly.

I am no fan of how the economy has been managed by successive FF and FG led Governments.

A lot of this is down to the electorate. I'm quite convinced that any party which tried to manage the economy in a prudent manner, would be turfed out of Government at the earliest opportunity with populist charlatans triumphantly carried into the Dail.

As a voter, I'm left with a choice between 'least-worst' options. it's a complete logical fallacy to suggest that because things were bad under FF and FG, they couldn't be worse with SF in power - of course things could have been worse.

SF's proposals to deal with the economy tanking back in 2010/2011 would have wrecked this country for generations if we had followed it.

marieholmfan

mariaalice wrote: »

The point is once they move fare enough away from the armed republican era, to really move forward they would have to move away from a supporter who are malcontents who want to give the establishment a kicking, there is an awful lot of them particularly at local government level.

There issue is how to broaden there appeal.

Promise to punish the guilty.

Embrace the whiff of cordite.
The dead are only the dead and as they recede into history the tedious virtue signalling around baby Nivruti Ismailia and Paul Maxwell and all the other children killed by the IRA fades into irrelevance compared with a council house and the destruction of the drugs gangs.

paw patrol

I don't like the set up of SF . I feel too many behind the scenes control the party and when an elected rep steps out of line or voices an opinion Like Peader Toibin there is no quarter given . excommunication .

There is no room for manoeuvre within the party - they all parrot the party line

also the nonsense of TD only taking the industrial wage with the remainder of my tax money going to the pay for God knows what.

Too much of a cult and my TD would have little freedom beyond what Mary Lou fancies.

not for me

Granny15

road_high wrote: »

Call it what you will I don’t care- just calling SF how I see them and being honest (something that is alien to SF evidently). I admire people from any class that work, aspire and contribute- basically the antithesis of SF and their cheerleaders.

Says the man posting on an internet forum during work hours.

FrancieBrady

paw patrol wrote: »

I don't like the set up of SF . I feel too many behind the scenes control the party and when an elected rep steps out of line or voices an opinion Like Peader Toibin there is no quarter given . excommunication .

Lucinda Creighton?
Peter Fitzpatrick?
Des O'Malley?
Mary Harney?
etc
etc
etc

facehugger99

Whelo79 wrote: »

Tax the rich, tax the banks, give to the ordinary average worker a break from the stranglehold around their neck. I don't see the issue.

Yes, it's truly astonishing that nobody else thought of doing it.:rolleyes:

Unfortunately, as your post proves, there is a percentage of the electorate who like their economic policies bite-sized and simple. if it can be scrawled on a placard or bellowed through a megaphone, so much the better.

Economics is a little more fuzzy that that and requires people to engage their brains a bit. I would like to see economics taught as a core module in secondary school TBH. Too many people without a clue casting votes that affect us all IMO.

Whelo79

paw patrol wrote: »

I don't like the set up of SF . I feel too many behind the scenes control the party and when an elected rep steps out of line or voices an opinion Like Peader Toibin there is no quarter given . excommunication .

There is no room for manoeuvre within the party - they all parrot the party line

also the nonsense of TD only taking the industrial wage with the remainder of my tax money going to the pay for God knows what.

Too much of a cult and my TD would have little freedom beyond what Mary Lou fancies.

not for me

But that's what party politics is all about? For every party. Ever hear the phrase 'toe the party line', or wonder what the party 'whip' is responsible for doing? If you have an inkling of a different opinion to the parties started opinion you get whipped back into line.

If you want room for maneuver and your own 'independent' ideas, you run as an independent.

facehugger99

facehugger99 wrote: »

I am no fan of how the economy has been managed by successive FF and FG led Governments.

A lot of this is down to the electorate. I'm quite convinced that any party which tried to manage the economy in a prudent manner, would be turfed out of Government at the earliest opportunity with populist charlatans triumphantly carried into the Dail.

As a voter, I'm left with a choice between 'least-worst' options. it's a complete logical fallacy to suggest that because things were bad under FF and FG, they couldn't be worse with SF in power - of course things could have been worse.

SF's proposals to deal with the economy tanking back in 2010/2011 would have wrecked this country for generations if we had followed it.

FF did tank the economy and will take generations to recover, in a true sense. FG papered over the cracks, while securing the benefits for their top earners.


Again, FFG will promise the world and drive us into the earth.

Proven worse Vs all others are worse without proof (include all left leaning parties on this too)

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

Economics is a little more fuzzy that that and requires people to engage their brains a bit.

It all got a bit fuzzy in 2008 and not a Shinner about the place.

Granny15

It really amazes me - the economic realists out in droves on internet forums pushing their right wing agenda while the supposed Left wing types are busy working for the man. Are these right wing types on here honestly coming on during working hours and posting hundreds if not thousands of posts and saying its the Left that are lazy. The arrogance and blatant hypocricy is stunning.

Whelo79

facehugger99 wrote: »

Yes, it's truly astonishing that nobody else thought of doing it.:rolleyes:

Unfortunately, as your post proves, there is a percentage of the electorate who like their economic policies bite-sized and simple. if it can be scrawled on a placard or bellowed through a megaphone, so much the better.

Economics is a little more fuzzy that that and requires people to engage their brains a bit. I would like to see economics taught as a core module in secondary school TBH. Too many people without a clue casting votes that affect us all IMO.

Bite sized and fit on a placard like #LookForward as is the FG slogan for this election. 'Ah don't look back at all the **** ups we made, the promises we broke etc etc, let's concentrate on the future, we'll do better this time, we promise (wink,wink)'

What it shows is that there are people looking for an alternative, a change of priorities, policies, attitudes. A government that serves all it's people and not just itself and a certain cohort. FF/FG provide no alternative currently. IF SF were to **** it all up (which again, I seriously doubt) another election would be called and they would be gone the way of Labour and the Greens.

quokula

Granny15 wrote: »

It really amazes me - the economic realists out in droves on internet forums pushing their right wing agenda while the supposed Left wing types are busy working for the man. Are these right wing types on here honestly coming on during working hours and posting hundreds if not thousands of posts and saying its the Left that are lazy. The arrogance and blatant hypocricy is stunning.

The thing is that there are plenty of left wing options in Ireland without resorting to a party as shady as Sinn Fein.

Ff and fg want you all to believe the best Ireland can offer the coming generations is renting forever and retiring closer to 70 than 60.

They were the ones who found money for banks and nama but not for your pensions. Remember the pension reserve fund. The banks got that.

At this stage I think alot of people would prefer the country go bankrupt trying to give them housing and the ability to retire. Renting in retirement is a sure way to poverty and even homelessness. How many of today's 25-35 year olds will never have a pension fund and rent for ever under ff and fg? I'd vote for sf just to shake it up if I were in their shoes.

Granny15

quokula wrote: »

The thing is that there are plenty of left wing options in Ireland without resorting to a party as shady as Sinn Fein.

You've dodged the question/statement. What are all you right wing types doing on an internet forum during working hours if you are so hard working?

Elmer Blooker

paw patrol wrote: »

I don't like the set up of SF . I feel too many behind the scenes control the party ......

Don't believe EVERYTHING you hear on RTE.

runswithascript

So the Irish Times poll from yesterday tells a story different to the title of this thread. Strange Mary Lou is excluded to the debate tonight considering this. I assume that the noises SF is making on things like housing and free college fees is resonating with voters.