nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

So Michael D IS running again!

realdanbreen

So when Michael D was campaigning for president and said it would be a one off term he was lying?
Many voted for him because he was only going for one term and wasn't trying to hog the job for 14 years.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Hurrache

marieholmfan wrote: »

I remember when the Queen of England was driven into a militarised and occupied Dublin and condescended to say a couple of words in Irish McAleese responded with 'WOW' very Presidential ; I don't think.
Does anyone recall Michael D having to apologise for the hurt caused by his remarks as McAleese had to in 2005.

As for Robinson she humiliated our nation by treating the Presidency as just another CV filler. Going off to be High Commissioner for Refugees ; alas for the poor refugees. Though psychopaths are uninterested in the harm they do to others ; so no doubt she sleeps soundly.

What?

richiepurgas

In a very non-scientific exercise I did today, I asked 5 people to name all six candidates. Only one of the five could.

marieholmfan

blanch152 wrote: »

Should have been clearer. I meant before Hillery, Robinson and McAleese.

Nonentities like Douglas Hyde and Eamon de Valera? What are you on about? What pray tell were Mrs McAleese's 'achievements'. What were Paddy Hilary's (though I am not suggesting that he was actively malign).

I remember when the Queen of England was driven into a militarised and occupied Dublin and condescended to say a couple of words in Irish McAleese responded with 'WOW' very Presidential ; I don't think.
Does anyone recall Michael D having to apologise for the hurt caused by his remarks as McAleese had to in 2005.

As for Robinson she humiliated our nation by treating the Presidency as just another CV filler. Going off to be High Commissioner for Refugees ; alas for the poor refugees. Though psychopaths are uninterested in the harm they do to others ; so no doubt she sleeps soundly.

[Deleted User]

seamus wrote: »

Freeman is honest, but completely unaware of it, unaware of what she's walking herself into. Endearing perhaps, but a bit like Prince Philip, not exactly the kind of person you want to send off on international junkets as a representative.

She stands out from the very weak crowd of pretenders to the title- I think she'll do better than you think- she'll certainly beat Dana's 2.89% of the vote

[Deleted User]

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Okay, but isn't much of the problem here that Mary Robinson blazed the trail, broke the mould etc. and after her there has been very little scope to do anything innovative with the office. Higgins has been doing very similar things, meeting LGBT groups etc., but they barely cause a ripple in the press any more.

You don't want the Irish Presidency becoming some sort of reality TV side show either though. In the past, political parties chose those people who they thought the Irish Public would warm to and would feel could be a good President.

Now it's all about "Have helicopter & social media profile, will travel to get my nomination"

That's why I'm not voting for any of the former Dragons-Den crowd- I can't see any of them holding the position of Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.

Loafing Oaf

blanch152 wrote: »

Should have been clearer. I meant before Hillery, Robinson and McAleese.

Okay, but isn't much of the problem here that Mary Robinson blazed the trail, broke the mould etc. and after her there has been very little scope to do anything innovative with the office. Higgins has been doing very similar things, meeting LGBT groups etc., but they barely cause a ripple in the press any more.

blanch152

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

And the distinction between "being a nonentity" and being "unseen and unheard" is?

Should have been clearer. I meant before Hillery, Robinson and McAleese.

Loafing Oaf

blanch152 wrote: »

Higgins has been a nonentity of a President,

Previous Presidents were unseen and unheard.

And the distinction between "being a nonentity" and being "unseen and unheard" is?

blanch152

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Don't know what your beef is with Mary Mac, but I'm pretty sure it's not widely shared.

Mary Mac Aleese was one of our best Presidents, with Mary Robinson and Patrick Hillery up there as well. Hard to choose between them because they excelled in different ways and different fields.

Higgins has been a nonentity of a President, only making headlines with stupid comments on Castro etc.

Previous Presidents were unseen and unheard.

Edgware

The fun is just beginning. Remember Norris and his support for his ex lover
The Irish media are just waiting to drag as many of candidates down to join them in the gutter

humberklog

I heard Freeman a few times now and find her a bit odd.
Just caught a recording of her official launch there and a chat with Philip Gaucher: all I'm left with in my ear is Wellness, Wellness! WELLNESS.
When I hear Wellness used as a catch all mental health phrase these days I really hear "Buy this". That's probably unfortunately cynical of me but I can't help it...now where's me colouring pens and €25 colouring book...

Cork Boy 53

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Don't know what your beef is with Mary Mac, but I'm pretty sure it's not widely shared.

I can`t understand it either. Almost seems like a personal grudge for some reason.

Rhineshark

marieholmfan wrote: »

That's what'll happen alright.

What has her "being attractive" got to do with anything? Even if you mean "very attractive".

We're electing a president, not the next face of Mabelline.

marieholmfan

brightspark wrote: »

If you believe that, then you might as well vote Michael back into office

That's what'll happen alright.

brightspark

marieholmfan wrote: »

Almost everyone is an excellent President unless they mess it up .

If you believe that, then you might as well vote Michael back into office

Loafing Oaf

marieholmfan wrote: »

the sulphurous stagnation of the McAleese years.

marieholmfan wrote: »

Almost everyone is an excellent President unless they mess it up (like McAleese and to a lesser like Robinson.

Don't know what your beef is with Mary Mac, but I'm pretty sure it's not widely shared.

FrancieBrady

marieholmfan wrote: »

Almost everyone is an excellent President unless they mess it up (like McAleese and to a lesser like Robinson who may have damaged the office by leaving in the way that she did , obviously she was doing a good job until then).

Saying Freeman would be an excellent President is not a criticism of Michael D!

Pieta house, suicide prevention , mental health - JF as President would necessarily draw attention to these matters.
Sortition : she is almost a sortition type candidate.
Not a politician , not a dodgy businessman.
Attractive - I mean very attractive and when have we last been able to say that?

Proven honesty with regards to the salary.

Is she better than Michael D? Maybe. Maybe not.

You are an 'excellent president' as long as you don't mess it up???

That makes no sense whatsoever. Some presidents are better than others, that is a fact of our history and everyone else's.

marieholmfan

seamus wrote: »

Freeman is honest, but completely unaware of it, unaware of what she's walking herself into. Endearing perhaps, but a bit like Prince Philip, not exactly the kind of person you want to send off on international junkets as a representative.

Reasonable point.

seamus

marieholmfan wrote: »

Not necessary for the President to withstand a grilling ; essential that they don't need to be grilled.

It is necessary for a president to understand the subtleties of politicking. To know when you need to speak with your political filter on, and when you'll get away with being frank and open.

In an ideal world one would never need to engage the political filter, but we know this is not the ideal world.

Freeman doesn't have the savvy for this. She's honest to the point of naivety. Probably something of a foil to David Norris.

Norris is honest and frank, but aware of it, unashamed of it. That's what destroyed him last time.

Freeman is honest, but completely unaware of it, unaware of what she's walking herself into. Endearing perhaps, but a bit like Prince Philip, not exactly the kind of person you want to send off on international junkets as a representative.

marieholmfan

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Not seeing any attributes in this candidate that would make her an 'excellent' president tbh.

Almost everyone is an excellent President unless they mess it up (like McAleese and to a lesser like Robinson who may have damaged the office by leaving in the way that she did , obviously she was doing a good job until then).

Saying Freeman would be an excellent President is not a criticism of Michael D!

Pieta house, suicide prevention , mental health - JF as President would necessarily draw attention to these matters.
Sortition : she is almost a sortition type candidate.
Not a politician , not a dodgy businessman.
Attractive - I mean very attractive and when have we last been able to say that?

Proven honesty with regards to the salary.

Is she better than Michael D? Maybe. Maybe not.

FrancieBrady

marieholmfan wrote: »

They aren't worth worrying about. Her niece campaigned for a no vote her daughters campaigned for a yes vote. Happened in lots of families.

When you run a suicide prevention charity that pays you €80,000 a year and publishes annual audited accounts, you live in a four bedroom semi D in Lucan, your husband is a postman etc. You will probably not be used to tough questions.

Not necessary for the President to withstand a grilling ; essential that they don't need to be grilled.

I have always felt we really missed out with Adi Roche. Joan Freeman would be an excellent President. An even fresher breath of air than Miggledy after the sulphurous stagnation of the McAleese years.

Not seeing any attributes in this candidate that would make her an 'excellent' president tbh.

marieholmfan

B0jangles wrote: »

It's like none of these things even occur to her as worth thinking about until someone else brings them up, so she always seems to be producing explanations on the spot, and honestly, she's not even very good at doing that much.

They aren't worth worrying about. Her niece campaigned for a no vote her daughters campaigned for a yes vote. Happened in lots of families.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

She got one quick question at the end to express a 'vision', the rest of it was explaining and defending.
Very definitely not a good vibe imo.

When you run a suicide prevention charity that pays you €80,000 a year and publishes annual audited accounts, you live in a four bedroom semi D in Lucan, your husband is a postman etc. You will probably not be used to tough questions.

Not necessary for the President to withstand a grilling ; essential that they don't need to be grilled.

I have always felt we really missed out with Adi Roche. Joan Freeman would be an excellent President. An even fresher breath of air than Miggledy after the sulphurous stagnation of the McAleese years.

B0jangles

Freeman was mentioned in passing by Marian Finucane on her show yesterday; Marian herself said something along the lines of

'an ex-boyfriend heard she was going to run for the presidency and offered a loan just because of that long-ago romance, isn't that sweet, aren't people heartless for thinking there's more to it that that?'

Didn't think it was worth mentioning that the lovely, open-handed romantic chap just coincidentally happens to be very senior person in a very questionable company that has been accused of operating as a pyramid scheme. I doubt the marketing potential of being closely linked with the president of Ireland ever even crossed his mind!

edit: for the record, I don't think Freeman is up to anything herself, but I do think she has so far shown extremely poor judgement when it comes to presenting herself as a candidate - see the Iona/Steen memory-lapse, this business with the loan, and now the questions over the donation of her salary.

It's like none of these things even occur to her as worth thinking about until someone else brings them up, so she always seems to be producing explanations on the spot, and honestly, she's not even very good at doing that much.

FrancieBrady

marieholmfan wrote: »

That isn't the vibe I got Francie. Not at all. Of course innocent people are often annoyed to be accused of being guilty. Michael D has had a lifetime to build up a thick skin about these things.

She got one quick question at the end to express a 'vision', the rest of it was explaining and defending.
Very definitely not a good vibe imo.

Rhineshark

Hurrache wrote: »

Is she portraying herself as being naive, or is she actually that naive, when it comes to her funding? There's the funding, her salary donation, and her claims that she never heard of Iona, believe at the time she was cured at a shrine, all make her look like someone I wouldn't want representing me as class president.

It's a different charity, that's not Pieta.

Sort of. Freeman set up Pieta in Ireland but then also set up Solace House in the US (NY) for the Irish diaspora. It is also a suicide prevention group.

It would probably have played better to make the donation of her Irish official salary to the Irish charity though.

I'm neutral on Solace House so far but also very aware of what American religious charity atmosphere can be like.

marieholmfan

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The overwhelming feeling after her Sean O Rourke interview is defensiveness.
That is not a good vibe so early in the campaign.

That isn't the vibe I got Francie. Not at all. Of course innocent people are often annoyed to be accused of being guilty. Michael D has had a lifetime to build up a thick skin about these things.

FrancieBrady

The overwhelming feeling after her Sean O Rourke interview is defensiveness.
That is not a good vibe so early in the campaign.

Hurrache

marieholmfan wrote: »

She is far far better than any of the alternatives other than Michael D.

Doesn't make her a good candidate, just less worse.

marieholmfan

Hurrache wrote: »

Is she portraying herself as being naive, or is she actually that naive, when it comes to her funding? There's the funding, her salary donation, and her claims that she never heard of Iona, believe at the time she was cured at a shrine, all make her look like someone I wouldn't want representing me as class president.

She is far far better than any of the alternatives other than Michael D.

What is your issue with the salary donation?

Hurrache

Is she portraying herself as being naive, or is she actually that naive, when it comes to her funding? There's the funding, her salary donation, and her claims that she never heard of Iona, believe at the time she was cured at a shrine, all make her look like someone I wouldn't want representing me as class president.

marieholmfan wrote: »

The Seanad salary was donated to Solace house which is an American version of Pieta house.

It's a different charity, that's not Pieta.