Dublin Bay South By-Election

Good loser

I would challange anyone to understand or repeat what SF's policies on housing are. To me they are gobbledygook.

Any party that opposes water charges and property tax - not to mention carbon tax and wants to spend billions on social/affordable/cost rental etc etc housing are hypocrites of the first order.

For those out there who want the good old days of 30's and 50's housing returned to, remember that, nowadays, social welfare and health take huge bites out of the budget each year, which wasn't the case back then.

I merely disagreed with 'Brussels' point that the housing problem was relatively easily solved, if people had goodwill, by pointing out that money (and resources) was the constraint rather than lack of will.

PhilOssophy

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Eoghan Murphy took the third of four seats in DBS.

My bad, I thought he topped the poll.

Larbre34 wrote: »

Umm, poll.

Yes, first thing I noticed this morning with a fresh head

Brussels Sprout

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I think it is inevitable that SF will end up leading the next Government, unless there are major shifts between now and then. It will almost certainly take the shine off them, when they are faced with the reality of limited budgets and making do.

They will definitely lose support when they enter government. Two reasons especiallly jump out:

1. They are still the main party of protest, which partly explains a lot of their contrarian positions. As soon as they become the stablishment themselves they will lose supporters
2. As a party who have never been in government, in this country, they can be all things to all people, especially if they espouse a bunch of populist positions. When they end up forming a coalition government they will need to let go of some of their positions immediately and beyond that in order to pass budgets they will need to make more difficult & unpopular decisions. All of these will cost them support

Good loser wrote: »

I merely disagreed with 'Brussels' point that the housing problem was relatively easily solved, if people had goodwill, by pointing out that money (and resources) was the constraint rather than lack of will.

For the record, I didn't say it was easily solved. I said "all they have to do is...". That doesn't mean that it's easy.

It's analogous to an oil tanker going in the wrong direction. In order to get it back on track all you have to do is turn it around. That's not an easy task but unless you do it you're not going to solve the issue. Right now FF/FG are trying to turn that oil tanker by firing up the engines to make it go faster but have decided that using the rudder to steer it is off limits.

Brussels Sprout

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

They will definitely lose support when they enter government. Two reasons especiallly jump out:

1. They are still the main party of protest, which partly explains a lot of their contrarian positions. As soon as they become the stablishment themselves they will lose supporters
2. As a party who have never been in government, in this country, they can be all things to all people, especially if they espouse a bunch of populist positions. When they end up forming a coalition government they will need to let go of some of their positions immediately and beyond that in order to pass budgets they will need to make more difficult & unpopular decisions. All of these will cost them support

It's going to be fascinating watching. We're living through something of a boring, bureaucratic government at the moment (and there's a lot to be said for that), but when SF lead a Government, I think we are going to be witnesses to chaos and intrigue that hasn't been seen here since the Haughey era. I don't mean corruption or anything like that, but a political soap-opera.

Manoeuvering an anti-establishment party into the machinery of state is any journalist's wet dream. Who will be the first in the front bench to defect, betray, and plot? Exciting times ahead. It almost makes me want to vote for them. Almost.

AndrewJRenko

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

It's going to be fascinating watching. We're living through something of a boring, bureaucratic government at the moment (and there's a lot to be said for that), but when SF lead a Government, I think we are going to be witnesses to chaos and intrigue that hasn't been seen here since the Haughey era. I don't mean corruption or anything like that, but a political soap-opera.

Manoeuvering an anti-establishment party into the machinery of state is any journalist's wet dream. Who will be the first in the front bench to defect, betray, and plot? Exciting times ahead. It almost makes me want to vote for them. Almost.

The other factor will be their zero experience in Government. Almost every past Government had some "elder lemons" who had been around the block a few times before. The SF party will have zero experience in Government, zero experience dealing with the "permanent government', zero experience dealing with other governments.

It will indeed be one hell of a soap opera.

Blut2

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

It's going to be fascinating watching. We're living through something of a boring, bureaucratic government at the moment (and there's a lot to be said for that), but when SF lead a Government, I think we are going to be witnesses to chaos and intrigue that hasn't been seen here since the Haughey era. I don't mean corruption or anything like that, but a political soap-opera.

Manoeuvering an anti-establishment party into the machinery of state is any journalist's wet dream. Who will be the first in the front bench to defect, betray, and plot? Exciting times ahead. It almost makes me want to vote for them. Almost.

Hopefully SF will be in coalition with some of the more mainstream left-wing parties like Labour, the Greens and the SocDems. If those parties have a decent number of TDs at the time they should keep SF from doing anything too crazy. And they'll bring some previous government experience to the table. An SF one-party government, or even worse SF and PBP, would be where things would really go of the rails I'd say.

ThunbergsAreGo

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

It's going to be fascinating watching. We're living through something of a boring, bureaucratic government at the moment (and there's a lot to be said for that), but when SF lead a Government, I think we are going to be witnesses to chaos and intrigue that hasn't been seen here since the Haughey era. I don't mean corruption or anything like that, but a political soap-opera.

Manoeuvering an anti-establishment party into the machinery of state is any journalist's wet dream. Who will be the first in the front bench to defect, betray, and plot? Exciting times ahead. It almost makes me want to vote for them. Almost.

I dunno.

I reckon regardless of who is in power there will be little difference.

retalivity

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

I dunno.

I reckon regardless of who is in power there will be little difference.

Can you imagine head-the-balls like Dessie Ellis, David Cullinane or Violet-Anne Wynne in charge of ministries? Would be some competition among them to see if they could run Eoghan Murphy, Simon Harris or Norma Foley close in ineptitude.

ThunbergsAreGo

retalivity wrote: »

Can you imagine head-the-balls like Dessie Ellis, David Cullinane or Violet-Anne Wynne in charge of ministries? Would be some competition among them to see if they could run Eoghan Murphy, Simon Harris or Norma Foley close in ineptitude.

They wont be though, they wont have a majority

L1011

Blut2 wrote: »

Hopefully SF will be in coalition with some of the more mainstream left-wing parties like Labour, the Greens and the SocDems. If those parties have a decent number of TDs at the time they should keep SF from doing anything too crazy. And they'll bring some previous government experience to the table. An SF one-party government, or even worse SF and PBP, would be where things would really go of the rails I'd say.

The problem there is while those parties will dilute the crazy; there won't be many ex-Ministers left outside of FF and FG by then

Shortall in the SocDems will have her seat if she runs and was briefly a Junior.

Howlin (full) Kelly (full), O Riordain (Junior) and Nash (Super Junior) from Labour if they run and are re-elected

Whichever of the Green Ministers retain their seat

Naughten (full) and Canney (junior) as independents

A further SF surge with proper candidate selection and transfer management could wipe out nearly all of those; and some have baggage that SF have attacked so extensively it would be difficult to handle the u-turn to work with them.

PhilOssophy

To be honest, I am tired of career protest politicians sitting in the opposition benches bleating about how everything is wrong and earning more than they could ever dream of with their level of education.

Maybe we need to see how Mr "Up the RA" gets on as Minister for Health. Or Pearse in Finance when he realises where wealth is generated in this country as it is.

Lets see where the money comes out of, and if indeed it is as simple as taxing corporations and the wealthy (in their mind, those earning over 60k, paying for everything they own, getting nothing for nothing) to pay their many promises on everything for everyone.

expectationlost

this election is about one seat, where it will probably stay in the same party

Blut2

Blut2 wrote: »

Hopefully SF will be in coalition with some of the more mainstream left-wing parties like Labour, the Greens and the SocDems. If those parties have a decent number of TDs at the time they should keep SF from doing anything too crazy. And they'll bring some previous government experience to the table. An SF one-party government, or even worse SF and PBP, would be where things would really go of the rails I'd say.

I don't mind if they go in with Labour, no offence to any Labour Party supporters but that party is already hobbling towards the grave.

My main concern is what happens after Sinn Fein inevitably fails to meet expectations of the most vulnerable people in society? We can look to the legacy of Mitterand in France -- the great expectation after having unified the Left, the crushing disappointment, and the ensuing disaster for French socialism.

I hope the genuine Irish Left will be wiser than to participate in any coalition with SF. Let them take Labour and the Soc Dems, I wish them the best of luck, adieu!

Sorry, that's off topic. But in a way it's not, because SF's performance in DBS, of all places, is a good measure of appetite for change

RandomViewer

Blut2 wrote: »

Hopefully SF will be in coalition with some of the more mainstream left-wing parties like Labour, the Greens and the SocDems. If those parties have a decent number of TDs at the time they should keep SF from doing anything too crazy. And they'll bring some previous government experience to the table. An SF one-party government, or even worse SF and PBP, would be where things would really go of the rails I'd say.

Greens are not Left, truth be told nearly every member of the Green party would be the sort of person you'd have found joining the church 40 years ago,

PommieBast

RandomViewer wrote: »

Greens are not Left, truth be told nearly every member of the Green party would be the sort of person you'd have found joining the church 40 years ago,

Not sure the same can be said of Green voters though..

Sam Russell

RandomViewer wrote: »

Greens are not Left, truth be told nearly every member of the Green party would be the sort of person you'd have found joining the church 40 years ago,

I think that is not true.

Many are very much left wing I would have thought, and would certainly consider themselves social democrats.

They are not populists - that is true, and many of the current 'left' parties are just populists - being against LPT (property is wealth and should be taxed - fundamental left wing policy), and being against water charges (again a usage charge to pay for infrastructure - they are not against electricity or gas charges).

They recognise that money has to be found to pay for their proposals, and are not in the 'free money' wing of the PBP, SF, or other 'left wing' parties. They are very much in favour of financial responsibility with regard to the environment - which is becoming ever more urgent. Now - is that left wing?

RandomViewer

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think that is not true.

Many are very much left wing I would have thought, and would certainly consider themselves social democrats.

They are not populists - that is true, and many of the current 'left' parties are just populists - being against LPT (property is wealth and should be taxed - fundamental left wing policy), and being against water charges (again a usage charge to pay for infrastructure - they are not against electricity or gas charges).

They recognise that money has to be found to pay for their proposals, and are not in the 'free money' wing of the PBP, SF, or other 'left wing' parties. They are very much in favour of financial responsibility with regard to the environment - which is becoming ever more urgent. Now - is that left wing?

You seem to be avoiding my assertion that many Green party representative are of a mindset which formerly manifested itself in the church " do as I say not as I do"

PhilOssophy

RandomViewer wrote: »

You seem to be avoiding my assertion that many Green party representative are of a mindset which formerly manifested itself in the church " do as I say not as I do"

I agree. Its like the Green Party is the latest fad cult for them. There's a certain element of virtue signallers in the Green Party, that is absolutely undeniable. Remember the time they flew that enormous balloon of Donald Trump over from the UK (by Hazel Chu's own admission) for some protest they were holding?

I'm sure for every one of them who live a green life and espouse the values of such, there's another who is all over social media saying that they are vegan and cyclists and a friend of the earth, and yet hop on planes everywhere without a seconds thought. I know a few of these myself.

blackwhite

Blut2 wrote: »

Hopefully SF will be in coalition with some of the more mainstream left-wing parties like Labour, the Greens and the SocDems. If those parties have a decent number of TDs at the time they should keep SF from doing anything too crazy. And they'll bring some previous government experience to the table. An SF one-party government, or even worse SF and PBP, would be where things would really go of the rails I'd say.

The first step of going into a coalition is negotiating a PfG with prospective coalition partners.

PBP can barely agree amongst themselves on where to go to lunch without the threat of a split - the concept of having to compromise on anything in order to a agree a coalition would be beyond them.

blackwhite

blackwhite wrote: »

PBP can barely agree amongst themselves on where to go to lunch without the threat of a split - the concept of having to compromise on anything in order to a agree a coalition would be beyond them.

They argue a lot, that's true, but their arguments have a theoretical basis grounded in core ethical beliefs.

Our system rewards parties whose debates revolve around seeking power. Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil have no theoretical underpinning. They are in the business of getting elected, no more than that.

The Left has real ideas That's their downfall.

Larbre34

Green Party voters in Ireland, are everyone.

At the moment, we are in the third Green tide, the first of which was around the late 80s/early 90s.

What happens is, thanks to our PR-STV, every so often, voters for actual parties send a preference to Green candidates. As time goes on, those preferences get a wee bit higher, because as time passes, the voter forgets the damage that voting Green does, both to their pockets and to the delivery of homes and businesses and energy and roads and stuff and so they throw them a preference to feel better about themselves. Then, whoops, quite by accident, all that largesse adds up to 12 seats!

And then the next election comes around and all that is fresh in people's minds and so the tide goes out again.

The Greens policy is to try and penalise people for just about everything, to empty pockets, reduce choice and to inflict shame. Whereas the actual parties have the good sense to incentivise positive environmental behaviour and put a green hue on all their policies rather than bashing people over the head with a big green bat.

And so in the 2024 locals and Europeans and the 2025 General election, thats precisley what I expect to happen again.

blackwhite

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

They argue a lot, that's true, but their arguments have a theoretical basis grounded in core ethical beliefs.

Our system rewards parties whose debates revolve around seeking power. Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil have no theoretical underpinning. They are in the business of getting elected, no more than that.

The Left has real ideas That's their downfall.

Nonsense. Any serious party should be focused on being able to get as much of their policies implemented as possible. FF, FG, Labour - and lately the Greens and SF, all realise that you can only implement policies if you get into power.

Both FF and FG have broad centrist ideoligies, with FF having typically leaned centre-left and FG leaning centre-right. But both parties (and the same can be said for Labour) have always realised that getting some of your wish-list and compromising on other elements is better than refusing to compromise and getting nothing.

SF have, IMO, veered far too much into populism in chasing votes, but ultimately it's the same pragmatism underpinning them as well. You can't implement your core policies by shouting on the sidelines, and they've made it clear that their aim is to get into power.

Much of the Irish left are blind slaves to their ideology, and see any sort of compromise on any issue (minor or major) as a betrayal.
They'd much rather achieve nothing but be able to pat each other on the back for remaining ideologically pure.

Brussels Sprout

Larbre34 wrote: »

What happens is, thanks to our PR-STV, every so often, voters for actual parties send a preference to Green candidates. As time goes on, those preferences get a wee bit higher, because as time passes, the voter forgets the damage that voting Green does, both to their pockets and to the delivery of homes and businesses and energy and roads and stuff and so they throw them a preference to feel better about themselves. Then, whoops, quite by accident, all that largesse adds up to 12 seats!

Wow. Condescending much? It's also flat out wrong. The Greens got the fourth highest number of first preference votes in the last election and ended up with the fourth highest number of seats.

You make it sound like if people need to rely on lower preference votes to get elected then they are somehow illegitimate, despite the fact that probably 80% of the TDs required transfers to get elected. That included many ministers, for example:

• Leo Varadkar (5th count),
• Paschal Donohue (9th count - didn't reach the quota),
• Simon Harris (15th count - didn't reach the quota),
• Michael McGrath (8th count - didn't reach the quota)
• Stephen Donnelly (15th count - didn't reach the quota)

(all members of "actual parties")

L1011

The recent, clearly SF led narrative that you are somehow less legitimate if you don't get in on the first count is going to come back and bite them hard if they, as looks almost guaranteed, end up getting a significant number of second seats - as those will often end up being one early and one late, or both late in the count.

Sam Russell

L1011 wrote: »

The recent, clearly SF led narrative that you are somehow less legitimate if you don't get in on the first count is going to come back and bite them hard if they, as looks almost guaranteed, end up getting a significant number of second seats - as those will often end up being one early and one late, or both late in the count.

A TD that gets elected on the first count, or elected as not having reached the quota is just as much a TD. That is how STV works. To claim otherwise is to not understand this.

SF also claimed they won the GE by getting the most seats, but they still ended up in opposition, having only got a quarter of the first preferences.

Trying to game the STV/multi seat system is tricky and has caught out many that have tried - too many candidates and split the vote and too few and miss out.

El Tarangu

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

They argue a lot, that's true, but their arguments have a theoretical basis grounded in core ethical beliefs.

...
The Left has real ideas That's their downfall.

Is this the case, though? As another poster pointed out, all of the hard-left parties in Ireland are in favour of reducing or abolishing property taxes. While this is the anathema of left wing ideology, it is something that is quite popular among voters.

breezy1985

El Tarangu wrote: »

Is this the case, though? As another poster pointed out, all of the hard-left parties in Ireland are in favour of reducing or abolishing property taxes. While this is the anathema of left wing ideology, it is something that is quite popular among voters.

From what I can remember in the last GE Labour were the only party brave enough to say they would not lower taxes. Everyone everyone went for populism

AndrewJRenko

blackwhite wrote: »

The first step of going into a coalition is negotiating a PfG with prospective coalition partners.

PBP can barely agree amongst themselves on where to go to lunch without the threat of a split - the concept of having to compromise on anything in order to a agree a coalition would be beyond them.

At a guess, PBP will play SF at SF's own game - they'll stay out of Govt on their left flank, snapping and snapping for the duration about any practical compromises, and claiming the mantle of the 'true left' just as SF did to Labour.

Good loser

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

They will definitely lose support when they enter government. Two reasons especiallly jump out:

For the record, I didn't say it was easily solved. I said "all they have to do is...". That doesn't mean that it's easy.

It's analogous to an oil tanker going in the wrong direction. In order to get it back on track all you have to do is turn it around. That's not an easy task but unless you do it you're not going to solve the issue. Right now FF/FG are trying to turn that oil tanker by firing up the engines to make it go faster but have decided that using the rudder to steer it is off limits.

There's no difference between the two highlighted positions.
Your tanker analogy does not correspond. When you say 'all you have to do is turn it around' the clear implication is that this is a simple manoeuvre.

Annasopra

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

At a guess, PBP will play SF at SF's own game - they'll stay out of Govt on their left flank, snapping and snapping for the duration about any practical compromises, and claiming the mantle of the 'true left' just as SF did to Labour.

Honestly I am beginning to think at the next election that all the small left parties will be crushed by SF dominance. SF will want 2nd seats where Labour, Soc Dems, PBP, Solidarity, Greens have seats and you may end with almost no left opposition at all. The current group of TDs from PBP, Solidarity, Greens, Soc Dems snd less so labour all benefited from SFs surpluses. If SF run many 2nd candidates there wont be spare surpluses. My thinking is that PBP/Sol, Labour, Soc Dems will all get 3ish seats and Greens 0. So it would be optimstic to think PBP could play that game.