Fine Gael TDs running away from Varadkar whilst blaming the voters

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121932758#Comment_121932758

Are you Iranian by any chance? You've started a few niche threads about internal Iranian politics them and even in this post you manage to bring up the Revolution there. There's nothing wrong with that - you're just not going to get too much traction on an Irish site discussing those matters.

Tony EH

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121934458#Comment_121934458

That may be the case, but it's brought into EVERYTHING by some people and yes, it gets bloody boring.

If Kinsale was completely flooded in the morning, you'd have posters blaming immigrants.

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121936681#Comment_121936681

No.

No hopers should get no votes - because they are no hopers - and no hopers are no hopers for a reason - they stand for issues no one is interested in at any level.

dulpit

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121936681#Comment_121936681

The benefit of PR-STV is that you give your number 1 to your preferred candidate. There's no need or point in transferring around between no-hopers for no apparent reason...

zell12

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121936980#Comment_121936980

But if your preferred candidate is the pre-vote popular choice anyway, that means your vote does not get transferred, unless there is a surplus. At least the no-hoper candidates get confidence to run again..

RoTelly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121932703#Comment_121932703

Your thinking of those that did not move over to FG, FG's core vote, I am think of the contingent of FF voters who have yet to return to the fold of FF, its unlike that those voters will move to SF. I imagine FG vote will be down at 10% come the next poll.

dulpit

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121937151#Comment_121937151

If you want the no hoper to run, then vote for them as your first preference because they are your first preference. Not because you know they won't get elected and your vote will bounce around.

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121937329#Comment_121937329

Why? The beauty of our system is that you can do exactly this and have your vote belong to multiple candidates at different times.

Obviously if you feel very strongly about a particular candidate then, yes, you should vote for them. If not then I don't see any danger in giving your #1 preference to someone who you'd like to encourage but know will be eliminated early knowing full well that your vote will then transfer to the more popular candidate who you may also slightly prefer, at that point. That way both candidates get the use of your vote (at different points in time).

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121937557#Comment_121937557

Why would anyone vote for a no hoper in the hope they get eliminated.

That is how Thatcher got to be leader of the Tories.

She was the no hope candidate against Heath - getting enough votes and so forcing an election. It was expected that she would get just enough votes to cause an open contest, but she won outright. That left the rest of the British electorate with no hope for a generation.

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121937764#Comment_121937764

Who said anything about "hoping" that they get eliminated?

In this scenario you're basically lending them your vote in the expectation that they get eliminated. In the extraordinarily unlikely scenario that they got elected then you're not going to be disappointed since this is someone that you actually liked and rated anyway (even if they weren't your absolute favourite).

I've done this sort of thing with my vote in many elections. My ballot always ended up transferring to my actual favourite candidate in the end (unless they had already been elected - in which case they didn't need my vote to get elected anyway).

Not really sure of the relevance of the Thatcher story since that was a completely different kind of election, with a different kind of system, a different electorate, a different number of "seats", in a different country in a different era.

Downlinz

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121936280#Comment_121936280

At the end of the day the abortion referendum which Aontu splintered over was passed overwhelmingly by the public and I'm not sure if the ordinary person on the street could name a member of Aontu other than Peadar Tóibín if pressured. They might like them as a protest vote on immigration but I'm not sure very many in the country would be on board with their mix of conservative and nationalist policies.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121934324#Comment_121934324

How do you make out that immigration is destroying communities? That is absolute nonsense.

People in rural Ireland have been complaining for decades about depopulation. Now, as soon as they get a few people to move there, they are complaining about communities being destroyed.

It is a very Irish trait to be against everything.

Headshot

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121945932#Comment_121945932

I'm surprised i'm even going to dignify this with an answer as I just find it hard to believe this is a genuine post.

The governments immigration agenda has been an absolute blight on Communities across Ireland. We have the only hotel in Roscrea gone to asylum seekers, a hotel which was the hub for Roscrea residents.

Hotels in communities across Ireland which rely on tourism gone. Our tourism sector has vanished from some towns and as a result other business that rely on this tourism have closed up shops

Health Care concerns, Communities cannot make an appointment with doctors due to influx of asylum seekers

Lack of school positions as asylum seekers getting priority

Security concerns as there's not enough Gardai for the increase in population.

The list is endless.

All these services were in a poor state under FG/Varadkar before the influx of asylum seekers but this government and their policies have just made everything so much worse

Sam Russell

Of course if those opposed to immigrants did not burn down the places, and stopped protesting outside places rumoured to be sites for immigrants, then the problem would be manageable.

This is not a new problem - it is twenty or so years since direct provision was introduced.

There was a woman from Nigeria IIRC who was over nine years appealing against deportation putting a succession of fake papers to support her case through a large number of court cases. She was backed by a plethora of refugee support charities. She eventually was ejected.

Why can we not have a set timetable for IP immigrants - say a maximum of 90 days from start to finish?

Remember, these are self selecting and many present themselves with no passports. Georgia provides a large percentage of applicants, but Georgia is an EU applicant state. There should be a quick system for rooting out the prima-facia cases that will fail.