So Michael D IS running again!

blanch152 · 16-10-2018 5:48pm

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Like I've posted before, last time out Higgins got 2.5 times as many transfers.

So even if Higgins got 30% and Gallagher 40%, and even if 6.5% of the votes are untransferable, a 2.5:1 spit would be 17.5% : 7%, Higgins scrapes through.

It's like 1990 where Brian Lenihan was 5% ahead and still lost. Except Gallagher isn't 5% ahead.

You are correct and that makes things very unlikely.

I hadn't even gone that far down, I was only trying to work out what needed to happen to make a second count possible. Some serious movement in polls and turnout required to even bring that into play.

The only possible thing that would make it interesting would be if Michael D. caught a cold or something and couldn't make public appearances. That might give the age thing some credibility. Otherwise, can't see anything bar the drastic that would change it.

Edgware · 16-10-2018 6:53pm

VinLieger wrote: »

It wont affect Ni Riada's numbers but its still not a good look for the party as a whole. Yes probably every party has similar things in texts or emails somewhere about other party's members but having it in public isnt ideal, especially for SF who are usually pretty locked down when it comes to stuff like this.

Poor candidate choice by SF. Usual scumbag behaviour by SF supporters no surprise

Rhineshark · 16-10-2018 7:19pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I think he's saving us from the alternatives.

RTE planted the heckler.
What's the odds that by chance, of all the people who applied for tickets or were 'randomly' invited, one would be her, the 'comedian' who tried to run?
Poor move by RTE. Tacky and cheap. Haven't the dragons cheapened it enough already?

How did we get from here to debating only the likelihood of her being offered a ticket without addressing the bit in bold? The likelihood of RTE randomly offering her a ticket is indeed low but it's by no means even the most obvious explanation.

How likely is it that a protest candidate who wasn't nominated would buy tickets for a presidential debate?

A lot more likely than the average member of the public tbh. She was a spoofer so she's not going to have injured pride keeping her away and she's obviously interested. Her real name isn't "Bunty", and it doesn't remotely surprise me that no-one picked up her real name or her husband's name or whatever. She wanted to go make a fuss and did before being ejected as was to be expected.

Given the bunch running, there really wasn't any need for RTE to deliberately disrupt their own show and also look like eejits, especially after last time.

Not everything is a conspiracy.

James Brown · 16-10-2018 7:32pm

Rhineshark wrote: »

How did we get from here to debating only the likelihood of her being offered a ticket without addressing the bit in bold? The likelihood of RTE randomly offering her a ticket is indeed low but it's by no means even the most obvious explanation.

How likely is it that a protest candidate who wasn't nominated would buy tickets for a presidential debate?

A lot more likely than the average member of the public tbh. She was a spoofer so she's not going to have injured pride keeping her away and she's obviously interested. Her real name isn't "Bunty", and it doesn't remotely surprise me that no-one picked up her real name or her husband's name or whatever. She wanted to go make a fuss and did before being ejected as was to be expected.

Given the bunch running, there really wasn't any need for RTE to deliberately disrupt their own show and also look like eejits, especially after last time.

Not everything is a conspiracy.

I disagree. No conspiracy theory, not that grand, just television.

She said that audience members were asked to submit questions to ask the candidates, and she did the same. Although it wasn’t guaranteed that each audience member would get to ask a question, when candidates were “waffling on”, she decided that they wouldn’t reach her question and wanted to leave.

A few members of the audience said that Burke’s presence in the studio “seemed staged”.
http://www.thejournal.ie/norma-burke-claire-byrne-show-interruption-4289485-Oct2018/

She was dressed in character:

“I went into the packed studio dressed as Bunty at the very last moment, but if anyone from RTE prevented me from gaining entry I would have stood my ground and strongly questioned them on that basis.
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/presidential-election-2018/it-was-just-so-ridiculous-i-couldnt-take-it-heckler-who-interrupted-rt-presidential-debate-37424749.html

There's no way she got to fill out a question and hand it in arriving at the very last moment. Also she seemed to be under the impression it would be asked. So she, in full outfit, wig, must have been there well before airing. The idea that the producers weren't aware is not credible.

I'd say the plan was to get her to ask a question and she went off script.

Rhineshark · 16-10-2018 7:40pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I disagree. No conspiracy theory, not that grand, just television.

No, what you're suggesting is a conspiracy theory. It's not illegal but it would be damaging to RTE's reputation if true, therefore, in your theory, producers and the studio conspired to get Bundy there to yell one comment and be chucked out to...what, exactly? Attract viewers for a yell off screen and an ad break? It doesn't actually work as "television", therefore it is unlikely it was done because television.

Why do you think it so unlikely that she bought a ticket like a normal person (who goes to presidential debates)?

James Brown · 16-10-2018 7:47pm

Rhineshark wrote: »

No, what you're suggesting is a conspiracy theory. It's not illegal but it would be damaging to RTE's reputation if true, therefore, in your theory, producers and the studio conspired to get Bundy there to yell one comment and be chucked out to...what, exactly? Attract viewers for a yell off screen and an ad break? It doesn't actually work as "television", therefore it is unlikely it was done because television.

Why do you think it so unlikely that she bought a ticket like a normal person (who goes to presidential debates)?

Likely not to yell. Stir things up for entertainment purposes.

Loafing Oaf · 16-10-2018 8:02pm

Rhineshark wrote: »

it would be damaging to RTE's reputation if true, therefore, in your theory, producers and the studio conspired to get Bundy there

As in Ted? That wouldn't great PR alright...

Atoms for Peace · 16-10-2018 8:37pm

Just like smeagol was corrupted by the power of the ring into the grotesque gollum in lotr, so to has Mickey D been corrupted by the trappings of power and wealth into an arrogant self righteous creature.

Hurrache · 16-10-2018 9:06pm

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

Just like smeagol was corrupted by the power of the ring into the grotesque gollum in lotr, so to has Mickey D been corrupted by the trappings of power and wealth into an arrogant self righteous creature.

So instead of sound bites, tell us how? And don't start with the 'he did one term' chestnut.

Loafing Oaf · 16-10-2018 9:10pm

Hurrache wrote: »

So instead of sound bites, tell us how? And don't start with the 'he did one term' chestnut.

Plus what power exactly? There should be an inverse of the old "absolute power corrupts absolutely" dictum to be applied to positions like the Irish presidency.

Atoms for Peace · 16-10-2018 9:11pm

Hurrache wrote: »

So instead of sound bites, tell us how? And don't start with the 'he did one term' chestnut.

Watch any interview he's given in the last year, he reeks of self importance.

Hurrache · 16-10-2018 9:25pm

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

Watch any interview he's given in the last year, he reeks of self importance.

I take it you've only ever watched interviews of him within the last year?

As the other poster asked, what power corrupted him?

rovertom · 16-10-2018 9:49pm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Given that he's currently polling at 70% he'd have been mad to have stepped aside.

Which real candidates would we have got?

Frances Fitzgerald - Damaged goods

Hard to think of anyone in FF who is old enough to end their political career proper and who isn't entirely toxic.

Fergus Finlay wanted a run at it seven years ago but Labour wouldn't back him. Hard to think of anyone else in Labour.

SF did run a candidate. Had a hard job finding a reasonably suitable non-toxic candidate.

Any 'celebrity' type candidates could have got a run by the same route the Dragoons did.

So who?

He got the job on the promise of him not becoming the resident bedridden president - making it clear he would exit after one term. He was being so sly and yet nobody seems to care.

I have not put any detailed thought into who candidates could be should Michael D not be there however If there is anyone on this thread suggesting that there are not better people in the country than what we've got here, that is laughable.
There a brilliant people all over the country but they will need a party behind them. As the main parties backed Michael D, we lost the possibility of well backed candidates joining the race.
I don't believe it has to be a super well known politician, just backed by major party that isn't SF.

FrancieBrady · 16-10-2018 9:52pm

rovertom wrote: »

He got the job on the promise of him not becoming the resident bedridden president - making it clear he would exit after one term. He was being so sly and yet nobody seems to care.

He was asked in an almost offhand way would he run again. At the time he said he wouldn't. He changed his mind. It wasn't a promise or an oath, just a statement of how he felt at the time.
It hasn't even come up in the campaign, it is a non issue.

Itssoeasy · 16-10-2018 10:30pm

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Plus what power exactly? There should be an inverse of the old "absolute power corrupts absolutely" dictum to be applied to positions like the Irish presidency.

Yeah if you are someone who wants and craves power then becoming president of Ireland isn't the right track.

Hurrache · 16-10-2018 10:30pm

rovertom wrote: »

He got the job on the promise of him not becoming the resident bedridden president - making it clear he would exit after one term. He was being so sly and yet nobody seems to care.

I have not put any detailed thought into who candidates could be should Michael D not be there

You're pretty screwed if you expect any of your political representatives never to change their mind.

rovertom · 16-10-2018 10:48pm

Hurrache wrote: »

You're pretty screwed if you expect any of your political representatives never to change their mind.

This wasn't just a change of mind. Its was a clear strategy employed to help get him in there cause there were genuine queries even back then that he was too old. He knew if he got in, he was going to sit it out for the 14 years.
And it was a very clear statement at the time that he wouldn't be seeking a second term.

FrancieBrady · 16-10-2018 11:06pm

Gallagher on the Tonight Show.

FrancieBrady · 16-10-2018 11:16pm

Matt Cooper says 'Poll out tomorrow that has Gallagher down to 12%'

Anyone see it? Link?

Rhineshark · 17-10-2018 12:08am

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Matt Cooper says 'Poll out tomorrow that has Gallagher down to 12%'

Anyone see it? Link?

Doubt there is a link if it's not out until tomorrow.

Be interesting to see who gains from it. Freeman (3% mid-Sept to 6% Oct) is the only candidate that strengthened their opinion share (bar Higgins 67-70%) last time.

Higgins - 70% (67-70)
Gallagher - 12 (15-14)
Ni Riada - 6 (7-5)
Freeman - 6 (3-6)
Duffy - 5 (6-4)
Casey - 1 (1-1)

Speculative prediction for the poll based on the Gallagher suggestion :P

FrancieBrady · 17-10-2018 12:10am

Rhineshark wrote: »

Doubt there is a link if it's not out until tomorrow.

Be interesting to see who gains from it. Freeman (3% mid-Sept to 6% Oct) is the only candidate that strengthened their opinion share (bar Higgins 67-70%) last time.

Higgins - 70% (67-70)
Gallagher - 12 (15-14)
Ni Riada - 6 (7-5)
Freeman - 6 (3-6)
Duffy - 5 (6-4)
Casey - 1 (1-1)

Speculative prediction for the poll based on the Gallagher suggestion :P

It's in the IT apparently. They mentioned it in the review of the papers. Must have been a misquote by Yates as he said Gallagher on 12 and Ni Riada on 11%.

Loafing Oaf · 17-10-2018 12:33am

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Matt Cooper says 'Poll out tomorrow that has Gallagher down to 12%'

Anyone see it? Link?

Figures drawn from that impeccable source, politics.ie:p:

Higgins 66%
Gallagher 12%
Ni Riada 11%
Freeman 5%
Duffy 4%
Casey 2%

Hurrache · 17-10-2018 12:33am

Here's the front page, Na Riada pulled in some numbers, caught Gallagher.
https://twitter.com/TonightVMT/status/1052335811692249088?s=09

Hotblack Desiato · 17-10-2018 12:50am

rovertom wrote: »

I have not put any detailed thought into who candidates could be should Michael D not be there however If there is anyone on this thread suggesting that there are not better people in the country than what we've got here, that is laughable.

"I know I'm right, I just can't explain how" is a bit of an odd discussion tactic.

There a brilliant people all over the country but they will need a party behind them. As the main parties backed Michael D, we lost the possibility of well backed candidates joining the race.

The post you are replying to explained why the parties backing Higgins don't have a better candidate. FG especially got badly burned the last time to the tune of over €500k and weren't going to waste money this time putting an unpopular candidate up against a popular incumbent. But if there's some great FF, FG or Lab candidate I've overlooked, feel free.

I don't believe it has to be a super well known politician, just backed by major party that isn't SF.

Has to be someone with a national profile, which is one of the reasons Ni Riada is doing so badly.* No point being a poll topper in your constitutency if you're not nationally known (and liked.)

Edit: not in the latest poll she's not, but still not getting all of the SF core vote (many of whom are clearly voting Higgins) never mind being able to pull in transfers and 1st prefs from other parties' voters, which is key to winning the presidency.

Hotblack Desiato · 17-10-2018 1:01am

Can't see yet on the IT site when the polling was done, it probably spans both before and after the Claire Byrne TV debate so can't really judge the effect of Gallagher's non-appearance.

Edit: was between Wednesday and Friday of last week

FrancieBrady · 17-10-2018 7:19am

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Figures drawn from that impeccable source, politics.ie:p:

Higgins 66%
Gallagher 12%
Ni Riada 11%
Freeman 5%
Duffy 4%
Casey 2%

Public not buying the Freeman show.
Gallagher will be hoping that his non appearance doesn't hurt him more or he will drop to third.

blackwhite · 17-10-2018 7:29am

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/higgins-holds-huge-poll-lead-over-all-rivals-1.3665774?mode=amp

Link to the IT article.

Higgins support still widespread across the country and across nearly all demographics

Rhineshark · 17-10-2018 7:29am

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Figures drawn from that impeccable source, politics.ie:p:

Higgins 66%
Gallagher 12%
Ni Riada 11%
Freeman 5%
Duffy 4%
Casey 2%

An embarrassing morning for Gallagher.

So Sept- mid Oct;

Higgins - 67%-70-66
Gallagher - 15-14-12
Ni Riada - 7-5-11
Freeman -3-6-5
Duffy - 6-4-4
Casey - 1-1-2

I kinda expected Ni Riada and Duffy to go up, Freeman down a bit. Wasn't expecting quite such a jump for Ni Riada though.

blackwhite · 17-10-2018 7:37am

Peter Casey throwing out the Hail Mary passes at this stage to try and get any votes

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/presidential-election-2018/listen-presidential-candidate-peter-casey-believes-travellers-should-not-be-recognised-as-an-ethnic-minority-37428508.html

Whether people agree with his view or now - the vast majority also know that such comments aren’t exactly “Presidential”

nice_guy80 · 17-10-2018 8:08am

Casey has my vote!

Seriously though, i won't be voting for Michael D

He had his 7 years

So Michael D IS running again!

Comments