RIP Martin McGuinness

Snickers Man wrote: »

That's basically what I said.

Along with your conjecture that there will only be a few hundred at the funeral and then trying to turn it into a pissing contest with Hume.

Classy stuff.

Jayop wrote: »

Why would he? Why would he choose to stand for a seat that they'll never sit in when he had more important work to do in the assembly. You're assuming because he choose not to that he wouldn't get elected. Maybe your right but it's conjecture because you don't know that

ROFLMAO. He stood in the SAME election to the SAME body on the SAME abstentionist ticket just in a different constituency. So if he was happy to contest a "seat that he'll never sit in" in Mid Ulster why would he not test his popularity in his home town?

Jayop wrote: »

I have no doubt that Humes funeral will be bigger. He's the greatest Irishman in the last hundred years by my money

I do so hate to agree with you but on this occasion.....:D

Jayop wrote: »

so I'm not about to get into a pissing contest over that, but If you think only a few hundreds will be at this funeral then you haven't seen the vigils held last night all around the country and further afield.

I have no intention of getting into a "pissing contest", I just want to bring some perspective to the general esteem in which McGuinness was held. That's all.

Jayop wrote: »

Along with your conjecture that there will only be a few hundred at the funeral and then trying to turn it into a pissing contest with Hume.

Classy stuff.

Even in death he can do no right.

Snickers Man wrote: »

I have no intention of getting into a "pissing contest", I just want to bring some perspective to the general esteem in which McGuinness was held. That's all.

Why the rather disgustingly squeamish point then?
It could have been made without that.

SF have electoral challenges like everyone else has.

This post that was on Facebook reminded me if a few people in this thread.

Jayop wrote: »

Along with your conjecture that there will only be a few hundred at the funeral and then trying to turn it into a pissing contest with Hume.

Classy stuff.

I didn't say there would only be a few hundred at the funeral. I was making reference to press reports such as this one(below) from the Journal which is still in my Facebook feed that hundreds were attending the removal of his coffin.

I have no doubt there will be thousands at his funeral (I won't be). Nor am I making it into a pissing contest. I just think that the people of Derry know who the real peace maker was. That's all.

TheJournal.ie
17 hrs ·
Hundreds turn out in Derry as coffin of Martin McGuinness taken to his home in the city.

Coffin of Martin McGuinness carried to his home in Derry
thejournal.ie

Actually you're right and I was wrong there. Brainfart. However he was elected to mid user while Hume was sitting in Foyle. He got returned to the same seat he held which sounds like standard practice. Why would you leave a seat you hold to campaign for one you'd have to win from another party. Makes no sense.

Snickers Man wrote: »

I didn't say there would only be a few hundred at the funeral. I was making reference to press reports such as this one(below) from the Journal which is still in my Facebook feed that hundreds were attending the removal of his coffin.

I have no doubt there will be thousands at his funeral (I won't be). Nor am I making it into a pissing contest. I just think that the people of Derry know who the real peace maker was. That's all.

And jfk had a big funeral but my granny didn't. Completely irrelevant ****e trying to make it a pissing contest.

Keyboards at the ready lads.

Snickers Man wrote: »

I didn't say there would only be a few hundred at the funeral. I was making reference to press reports such as this one(below) from the Journal which is still in my Facebook feed that hundreds were attending the removal of his coffin.

I have no doubt there will be thousands at his funeral (I won't be). Nor am I making it into a pissing contest. I just think that the people of Derry know who the real peace maker was. That's all.

Was there only one 'real' peacemaker?
From my understanding John Hume could only talk about peace, because he wasn't involved in the conflict/war he couldn't 'make' peace.
He played his role and played it admirably, even though his party more or less left him on a solo run.
I think he is held in high esteem for what he did. But he did not 'make' peace.

https://twitter.com/SJAMcBride/status/844183989095223296

Jayop wrote: »

. Why would you leave a seat you hold to campaign for one you'd have to win from another party. Makes no sense.

A little pink pussycat wearing an easter lily would win a Westminster election in Mid Ulster for Sinn Fein. Just look at the results of recent elections there. But the "hero of the armed struggle" and "internationally renowned peacemaker" couldn't win one in his home town for the same party!

You do know that the purpose of an election is to win as many seats as possible? Yet Sinn Fein knew that their biggest beast, apart perhaps from Adams who at least got elected once in HIS home town, wasn't popular enough in his native city to win that one. Even after Hume retired (just to dial down on the whole "pissing contest" meme).

Says something about McGuinness' standing among those who knew him best, doesn't it?

That's probably the most pathetic this over read the last few days tbh

Dyr

Interesting that our bould hero above thinks that any Sinn Fein candidate is going to be able to win the votes of the unionists that are voting SDLP just to keep the Shinners out in Foyle

I seem to recall the unionists parties refused to run an agreed candidate last time around just to keep Durkans bum in the seat.

bigbrotherfan

Although the comments on this thread have been varied, it is incredible how many posts there have been in such a short space of time. It shows the reaction there has been to the passing of the man.

Bambi wrote: »

Interesting that our bould hero above thinks that any Sinn Fein candidate is going to be able to win the votes of the unionists that are voting SDLP just to keep the Shinners out in Foyle

I seem to recall the unionists parties refused to run an agreed candidate last time around just to keep Durkans bum in the seat.

Unionists feckers will probably pack the church for Hume's funeral just to show 'em!

Bambi wrote: »

Interesting that our bould hero above thinks that any Sinn Fein candidate is going to be able to win the votes of the unionists that are voting SDLP just to keep the Shinners out in Foyle
.

There's that penetrating analysis I asked for a few posts back.

Bull**** detectors (and deflectors) are up. Right backatcha.

Dyr

Snickers Man wrote: »

There's that penetrating analysis I asked for a few posts back.

Bull**** detectors (and deflectors) are up. Right backatcha.

Ask all you like, those are just the facts. You can try counter but well, it's not going to work out for ye is it?

Bambi wrote: »

Ask all you like, those are just the facts. You can try counter but well, it's not going to work out for ye is it?

Facts? Facts, you say???

The Sinn Fein line, which they have been parroting for at least 30 years since they started contesting elections in the north, is that any time they lose to another nationalist or "non-sectarian" rival (SDLP, PBP etc) it must be because the dastardly unionists are voting tactically against them.

Because that's the way elections work up north. :rolleyes::rolleyes: Standard swings and transfers between parties regardless of ethnic or sectarian bias. Yeah right!

Somebody wants an example of "conjecture"? There it is, right there.

Snickers Man wrote: »

Facts? Facts, you say???

The Sinn Fein line, which they have been parroting for at least 30 years since they started contesting elections in the north, is that any time they lose to another nationalist or "non-sectarian" rival (SDLP, PBP etc) it must be because the dastardly unionists are voting tactically against them.

Because that's the way elections work up north. :rolleyes::rolleyes: Standard swings and transfers between parties regardless of ethnic or sectarian bias. Yeah right!

Somebody wants an example of "conjecture"? There it is, right there.

What am I missing here. I just had a look at the election he stood in in 2016.
He topped the poll and got elected with 5037 votes and 12.7% of 1st preferences.

Alf Stewart.

Snickers Man wrote: »

Facts? Facts, you say???

The Sinn Fein line, which they have been parroting for at least 30 years since they started contesting elections in the north, is that any time they lose to another nationalist or "non-sectarian" rival (SDLP, PBP etc) it must be because the dastardly unionists are voting tactically against them.

Because that's the way elections work up north. :rolleyes::rolleyes: Standard swings and transfers between parties regardless of ethnic or sectarian bias. Yeah right!

Somebody wants an example of "conjecture"? There it is, right there.

It is actually.

Unionists call for it

Unionists were tonight urged to thwart Sinn Féin‘s chances of winning extra seats during next week‘s Northern Ireland Assembly Election.

As parties counted down to next Wednesday‘s crucial Assembly Election, Sinn Féin refused to comment on Ulster Unionist Sir Reg Empey‘s call on supporters to use their votes tactically.

As too do nationalists.

Nationalist SDLP leader Mark Durkan has appealed during the campaign to supporters to give their later preferences to pro-Good Friday Agreement parties and has sought transfers from other parties, including unionists.

I have voted UUP in the past, after SF and SDLP to keep the dupers out.

link

Tactical voting is well practised in some contentious constituencies.

more here

A HARDLINE loyalist magazine with links to the UDA has said unionists should play the "numbers game" by voting tactically for the SDLP to keep out Sinn Féin.

An editorial in the December issue of The Loyalist, produced by the Ulster Political Research Group, states: "We need the SDLP to flourish (to a certain extent) to waylay the inexorable rise of the Sinn Féin machine."

Are you sure you know what you're talking about?

Alf Stewart. wrote: »

Are you sure you know what you're talking about?

I think we are about to find out.

citytillidie

2 funerals in one day at the same church will leave a big black mark on this little City of ours.

Two big characters will be missed for very different reasons but hey i guess people have never heard of you can't speak good of the dead don't speak at all about them.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What am I missing here. I just had a look at the election he stood in in 2016.
He topped the poll and got elected with 5037 votes and 12.7% of 1st preferences.

I have made it quite clear I was talking about Westminster elections where Derry (Foyle) votes as one constituency. Jayop certainly got that point, hence his/her wondering why they would bother standing for a seat they would abstain from filling anyway. Only Westminster continues to be so shunned by successful SF candidates today.

You are probably talking about the Assembly or local elections in which Derry is a multiseat constituency (six then/five now) with people elected by PR.

When there is only one choice to make, they wouldn't have made it McGuinness. He knew that. They didn't make it McLoughlin, Anderson or O'Hara either.

Alf Stewart. wrote: »

It is actually.

Unionists call for it

As too do nationalists.

I have voted UUP in the past, after SF and SDLP to keep the dupers out.

And some people in "the mainland" vote for Screaming Lord Sutch and the Official Monster Raving Loony Party. But at least the main parties there don't patronise their electorate by ever saying such fruitcakes ever cost them a vital election.

Yes the UUP leader "called for" Unionists to vote tactically at the last election. How many did? What was the response? He got his backside handed to him, even given that many in the Unionist community were disgusted by the DUP's antics in the cash-for-ash scandal. The DUP's vote dropped but it didn't go to Nesbitt. And now he's gone.

What lesson do you think his successor will take from his debacle?

Reality is quite simple to gauge in PR elections. You can SEE where the transfers come from once the votes are counted. Yes, there are people who transfer from UUP to SDLP and vice versa. But then there were always people who transferred from Paisley to SF in euro elections. NOT MANY in either case, but they were there. Like I said, the local Norn Iron equivalent of the OMRLP.

"Calls" for tactical voting are often made but they are just posturing by cynics claiming that the North has moved beyond simple sectarian headcount. It hasn't. Even the so-called Republicans, who in theory regard the artificial distinction between "catholic protestant and dissenter" as an alien colonialist tool for dividing and ruling the Irish working class of all faiths and none, have not been averse to playing the Catholic headcount card of late. Remember Gerry Kelly getting into trouble for his overtly sectarian analysis only a few years ago?

This jibe that the SDLP only get elected because of Unionist tactical voting is a long-standing Sinn Fein trope. And it's bull****. Quite apart from not being a very "republican" (small r) argument in the first place.

Alf Stewart. wrote: »

Are you sure you know what you're talking about?

Don't you EVER doubt it!