AGC wrote: » That is the case currently I thought? The President does not wear any symbols or be seen to promote certain causes over another?
eastwest wrote: » NI Riada's snide remark about freeman's relationship with the pyramid seller guy were nasty. She's not a nice person.
Hurrache wrote: » You're the one hung up on it and adding words into statements that were never there to change the meaning. You're basically arguing against anyone who says they won't vote for someone based on a public stance.
marieholmfan wrote: » Every American fortune is built on slavery and genocide if we go back far enough.
C__MC wrote: » Was there a election when mc aleese when for a 2nd term?
Subcomandante Marcos wrote: » I posted this in another forum, but it's relevant. Joan playing the victim. "people are criticising me for taking money from a man I've known for 40 years, wah wah wah". People are criticising her because she took 130,000 from a man who is one of the people at the head of a multinational pyramid scheme that is literally ruining millions of peoples lives, driving people to suicide, destroying families, marriages and relationships, and she runs a fecking charity which aims to support people who are suicidal or bereaved by suicide. It's pricks like him that will keep her opening more offices.
marieholmfan wrote: » It is called synergy. You have obviously never studied business!!
FrancieBrady wrote: » No, what I am saying it ridiculous to set out trying to find someone whose 'private beliefs' chime with everyone in the country. That is silly and isn't going to happen. If you think he will advocate for hunting as President (I don't think that) then that is a good reason not to vote for him. If, like the 700,00 people who believe hunting is a neccesary part of managing the countryside he is has a private view, that really is none of our business. Just as the incumbent's private views aren't.
Danzy wrote: » They aren't friends they have a job to do and pointing out stuff like that is part of that.
seamus wrote: » No. It's been traditional thus far that a president seeking election for a second term stands unopposed (why bother trying to oust them?). This is the first time it's happened, mainly because four shysters and a political party have realised that they can squeeze some publicity out of it.
VinLieger wrote: » Are you actually trying to defend a pyramid scheme?
Try_harder wrote: » Dev was challenged for his 2nd term
Hurrache wrote: » Last time Franice as you're trying to drag me into one of your infamous circular arguments that everyone on threads like this are unfortunately all too familiar with by purposely not reading simple text. My kids understand these points - his views are not private. - bizarrely you're the one who talked about advocating for hunting when president, not me. - bizarrely again you're the one talking about a president who's views which match everyone in Ireland, not me. It's really yourself you need to debate these issues with.
8j1w94vbmnlt05 wrote: » Why would anyone bother voting in this election?
marieholmfan wrote: » Freeman 1 Higgins 2 shows that as a country we care about mental health. My only reason not to vote that way is it might put one of the dragons in. The fear is that by not voting Michael D number 1 someone else might win it.
marieholmfan wrote: » The whole pyramid scheme nonsense , like the iona nonsense is an attempt to throw mud at the best candidate(possibly excepting Michael D). Who cares? Nobody cares. The remark about synergy was a joke and not a subtle one either.
FrancieBrady wrote: » His view on hunting is public
FrancieBrady wrote: » It was you who said that having these views means he 'shouldn't be within an asses roar of representing the people of Ireland's.'
Hurrache wrote: » No, it's a 'private view'. Oh wait, what am I doing, I've been temporary sucking into the "FrancieBrady Method" vortex.
FrancieBrady wrote: » More abuse, more attempts to pretend you said something different. Carry on H, carry on.
FrancieBrady wrote: » shouldn't be within an asses roar of representing the people of Ireland's.
Hurrache wrote: » Yes, I did say that, and I never once denied saying it.
FrancieBrady wrote: » If you genuinely believe he would advocate for hunting as President then by all means don't vote for him. I wouldn't vote for Freeman because I think she would advocate for her seriously weird religious views. But saying they are 'unfit to represent the Irish people' because they have a private view on something is ridiculous. You won't find anyone in the country that has a set of views that somebody else somewhere doesn't feel is representative of them.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Yes, of course they will. But you will not find a candidate whose entire private views will fit with everyone else's. So you have to decide if they will keep them private or not. If they do, so what then? Are you saying that candidates have to hold the same views as you?
Try_harder wrote: » Giving her Seanad money to American Pieta House looked suspect
gmisk wrote: » The polls have Michael D on 70%. The competition is really only for 3rd place IMO. I have no idea why you would consider Joan Freeman the best candidate. While the fact she founded Pieta house is hugely impressive, I dont see anything that would suggest she would be a good president....plus Mattie McGrath is backing her...talk about the kiss of death! I hadnt seen her talk much before but I doubt too many people would have been won over by her yesterday, in fact I thought she came off worse than some of the others (Duffy and Ni Riada).
