alaimacerc wrote: ... about the best thing you could manage to actually come up with?
alaimacerc wrote: » Sounds like a pretty good reason not to. But also a rather inflated figure -- where's it from? 'Tis terrible, so they are, yadda-yadda. Hardly anyone votes for them at all these days!
Tell me how wrote: » Would it have been just these 5? I can't imagine so.
Hitman3000 wrote: » I'm sorry, have you a point?
alaimacerc wrote: » I just found this poll: http://www.thejournal.ie/poll-general-election-5-4141349-Jul2018/ Fairly even split between each of the years '18, '19, '20, and '21. Ye'd be mad to call an election on the basis of that as "public demand for it". And you'd get a hiding for it if you did.
alaimacerc wrote: Did you somehow contrive to miss it?
FrancieBrady wrote: » For someone who attempts to be so eloquently dismissive you don't seem to up to date or able to use Google. Can't post links on the phone but try the latest IT poll.
blackwhite wrote: » The poll had a higher percentage who didn’t want an election (46%), but it appears you just read the headline and missed the actual details. Some serious editorial spin from the IT to focus on the option that had the smaller level of support.https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/irish-times-ipsos-mrbi-poll-44-in-favour-of-general-election-1.3664554
Jameswhalley wrote: » Among others the jibe about the 8 years allowed for aUS president to complete their mission.
Also the obvious point that Higgins left little time for serious candidates to contest the election and we're stuck with 3 dragons and SF and ANother.
realdanbreen wrote: » To paraphrase a previous president, WOW! How gracious of the mighty president to invite travellers into the Arus for a garden party no less!.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Was I wrong to say that 45% want an election? Yes I was, it was 44%. I didn't say anything about 'higher or majorities'. By all means dispute my analysis but don't be inventing things I said for the usual defence.
AGC wrote: » FF FG labour would have candidates. SF would have a stronger one and I’d expect Casey and Duffy wouldn’t be on the ballot paper
FrancieBrady wrote: » Not sure they would. FG seem marginally more afraid to face the public than FF. They both know what a further decline in their share of the vote means and they no likey doing anthing to hasten it. Their share of the vote has been in steady decline for a while now.
Tell me how wrote: » Yes, but, any ideas on names? Agree Casey and Duffy out. I think the aforementioned Bertie/Enda might have been touted for their respective parties. Not sure about too many other strong candidates. Maybe Sean Kelly for FG?
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » I asked this before. Who in FF, FG or Labour is remotely interested and electable? I can't see how SF's position would have changed in any way. They committed to running a candidate and didn't decide (or, reveal) who until after MDH nominated himself There would have been nothing stopping councils putting idiots on the ballot paper, regardless.
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » I asked this before. Who in FF, FG or Labour is remotely interested and electable?
There would have been nothing stopping councils putting idiots on the ballot paper, regardless.
AGC wrote: » People like O’Cuiv for FF and possibly Enda from FG.
Sycamore Tree wrote: Here is my prediction. 1. Michael D by a landslide 2. Ni Riada 3. Casey 4. Freeman 5. Duffy 6. Gallagher
Goldengirl wrote: » This post has been deleted.
alaimacerc wrote: » Ivana Bacik's name was dropped in, last night...
Sycamore Tree wrote: » 1. Michael D by a landslide 2. Ni Riada 3. Casey 4. Freeman 5. Duffy 6. Gallagher
alaimacerc wrote: Ivana Bacik's name was dropped in, last night...
alaimacerc wrote: » Casey's "I hear you're a Travellerphobe now, Peter. Fair play to you!" will be the only real break-out from that.
Hitman3000 wrote: » Well done answering a question with a question. Although all you have done is answer or respond in a sneering condescending manner to every poster with a different opinion to you.
Nothing more to say other than if Casey hadn't rattled cages you and a few like you would not be here posting in the manner which you are.
I wouldn't be responding to you further. Bye bye, ;-)