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

c68zapdsm5i1ru

jay0109 wrote: »

That's true but the cries of racist the last few days and the attempts to shut down any debate on Travellers shows that while the Catholic church may be as good as gone, we have a new orthodoxy calling the shots today and woe betide anyone who disagrees with it

Yes, it's amazing how some people who think they're great liberals are often the most aggressive at shouting down and insulting anyone who dares to say anything that goes against their beliefs or is not considered by them to be PC.

seamus

jay0109 wrote: »

The thing is, Casey had nothing to retract. He's entitled to question the awarding of ethnic status to Travellers. It's a valid argument.

Anyone is "entitled" to question anything.

Whether Casey is qualified to question it is the issue, and no, he's not. There is a mountain of well-considered social data as well as genetic evidence, that support the ethnic status assignment of travellers.

Peter Casey's "feelings" about it do not qualify as a "valid argument".

There is a bias/silence agenda in relation to Travellers. But Casey decided to attack the thing which makes him look like an idiot and a bigot. He could have pointed out the more obvious issue that people are not biased against travellers for no reason. They're biased because their experience of travellers has in the main been a bad one. They don't want travellers living near them, because their experience in the past tells them this is not what you want.

This is the elephant in the room that Pavee Point jump up and start shouting "racist" about whenever you bring it up.

But Peter Casey and others don't approach the debate in a considered way, willing to listen. They approach it from the "Travellers should all be locked up" point of view and then claim they're being silenced when they get a negative response.

Hotblack Desiato

Jameswhalley wrote: »

Varadkar went a step too far basically telling people which way to vote

Ehh you are aware that his party has endorsed a candidate in this election?

Hurrache

jay0109 wrote: »

The thing is, Casey had nothing to retract. He's entitled to question the awarding of ethnic status to Travellers. It's a valid argument.
MSM and the Liberal agenda win again

I don't buy into this whole liberal agenda nonsense.

But I do think the media, published and aired, in their rush to condemn and accuse him of being racist, are actually creating the atmosphere for someone with a far right agenda to step in and get some reasonable numbers.

Many of the commentators I've heard have said that we shouldn't even be talking about such things, as if it's an idea that shouldn't even be entertained.

This will have some people saying hang on, we feel this is a valid issue to be discussed by our representatives, yet they're all claiming we shouldn't, or don't, have such worries.

So once someone willing to bring this up, regardless of their other policies, will become attractive.

All politics is local. If you're current representatives don't reflect your local and specific issue, you're going to find one that does.

B0jangles

Casey'll probably pop back up in a couple of days to say that he really really was going to withdraw but the flood of support he's received from ordinary decent people has convinced him that it's his Moral Duty to stay in the race.

Obvious Chancer is Obvious.

blanch152

blackwhite wrote: »

Questioning how appropriate it was to grant special status to travellers isn’t verboten (no matter how much certain lobby groups try to make it so).

Making a claim that all travellers are nothing but a group of people who illegally camp on other people’s land is a very different claim to make.

It’s a broad and sweeping slur against every member of the travelling community, and that needs to be retracted and apologised for.

Absolutely correct.

Casey may well have a good point about whether Travellers deserve ethnic status, but he chose the completely wrong way to express it.

blanch152

Jameswhalley wrote: »

Varadkar went a step too far basically telling people which way to vote,he just can't resist the mic.

He should have expressed his opinion on the matter and left it at that.

Casey's comments are dangerous as they are basically a blanket incitement to hatred rather than a rational discussion of the issues with travellers.

Can you explain to me why a politician can't have an opinion on which way people should vote in an election?

Should Varadkar announce during the next general election that he is not telling people to vote for FG?

blackwhite

jay0109 wrote: »

The thing is, Casey had nothing to retract. He's entitled to question the awarding of ethnic status to Travellers. It's a valid argument.
MSM and the Liberal agenda win again

Questioning how appropriate it was to grant special status to travellers isn’t verboten (no matter how much certain lobby groups try to make it so).

Making a claim that all travellers are nothing but a group of people who illegally camp on other people’s land is a very different claim to make.

It’s a broad and sweeping slur against every member of the travelling community, and that needs to be retracted and apologised for.

FrancieBrady

Good solid performance from MDH again on Sean O'Rourke.
I can't see his temperate, reasonable persona taking much of a knock in the polls despite Casey's lies about the planning thing and his rant against travellers. His 'fantasy list' as Higgins brilliantly called it.

If Casey gets above 10% it will only confirm what we all know, there are some very intemperate unreasonable kneejerk people in this country.

Sycamore Tree

Jameswhalley wrote: »

Casey's comments are dangerous as they are basically a blanket incitement to hatred rather than a rational discussion of the issues with travellers.

I think the point is that there will never be a rational discussion without someone saying something controversial. No PC loving politician will go there.

Larbre34

jay0109 wrote: »

I disagree (unless he gets 10%+ of the vote). The Apologists have won the day and have screamed him into a corner.
The ordinary people will look at this and be more likely to keep their mouths even more firmly shut on issues such as Travellers as a result

He was on 0% (+/- 1%) before the traveller comments. If he gets anywhere near ~10% its a positively Trumpian outcome against the apologists.

BabyCheeses

jay0109 wrote: »

I disagree (unless he gets 10%+ of the vote). The Apologists have won the day and have screamed him into a corner.
The ordinary people will look at this and be more likely to keep their mouths even more firmly shut on issues such as Travellers as a result

If his supporters actually liked him and weren't just voting for him because they hate travelers he wouldn't be considering backing out. It's your fault, not whatever conspiracy you repeat for everything.

FrancieBrady

Jameswhalley wrote: »

Varadkar went a step too far basically telling people which way to vote,he just can't resist the mic.

He should have expressed his opinion on the matter and left it at that.

Casey's comments are dangerous as they are basically a blanket incitement to hatred rather than a rational discussion of the issues with travellers.

When you see people claiming '90% of the country agree with him', you know that what he did was extremely dangerous. The classic fueling of witch hunts and Putsch's spring to mind.
Hopefully jhe will reflect on that over the weekend. He was too anxious to wave his arms around throwing out accusations about many things. Silly boy Peter.

jay0109

Larbre34 wrote: »

If he has done any service it would be to leave traveller groups and apologists in no doubt that the people do not buy the red herring of traveller "ethnicity" and are completely eyes-open as to the reality on the ground.
.

I disagree (unless he gets 10%+ of the vote). The Apologists have won the day and have screamed him into a corner.
The ordinary people will look at this and be more likely to keep their mouths even more firmly shut on issues such as Travellers as a result

Jameswhalley

Varadkar went a step too far basically telling people which way to vote,he just can't resist the mic.

He should have expressed his opinion on the matter and left it at that.

Casey's comments are dangerous as they are basically a blanket incitement to hatred rather than a rational discussion of the issues with travellers.

Larbre34

jay0109 wrote: »

That's true but the cries of racist the last few days and the attempts to shut down any debate on Travellers shows that while the Catholic church may be as good as gone, we have a new orthodoxy calling the shots today and woe betide anyone who disagrees with it

Nah, I'd say for all his clumsiness, 90% of the Country agrees with him, there is no new orthodoxy around the traveller question.

If he has done any service it would be to leave traveller groups and apologists in no doubt that the people do not buy the red herring of traveller "ethnicity" and are completely eyes-open as to the reality on the ground.

He just showed no political savvy or having good advice around him in the way he dealt with it and thats a hole below the waterline in any campaign.

Sycamore Tree

I know 3 people in Galway that voted Michael D in 2011 that are putting Casey down as #1 and Michael D #2.

jay0109

Larbre34 wrote: »

Yeah it is, but it could just be that he's an unmitigated flute.

That's true but the cries of racist the last few days and the attempts to shut down any debate on Travellers shows that while the Catholic church may be as good as gone, we have a new orthodoxy calling the shots today and woe betide anyone who disagrees with it

Larbre34

jay0109 wrote: »

The thing is, Casey had nothing to retract. He's entitled to question the awarding of ethnic status to Travellers. It's a valid argument.
MSM and the Liberal agenda win again

Yeah it is, but it could just be that he's an unmitigated flute.

FrancieBrady

jay0109 wrote: »

The thing is, Casey had nothing to retract. He's entitled to question the awarding of ethnic status to Travellers. It's a valid argument.
MSM and the Liberal agenda win again

I think 'common decency' would be the winner if he stepped aside.

jay0109

The thing is, Casey had nothing to retract. He's entitled to question the awarding of ethnic status to Travellers. It's a valid argument.
MSM and the Liberal agenda win again

blackwhite

RTE reporting Casey is considering pulling out.

He’s done all he needs to do, can call himself a Presidential nominee on his marketing material forever more. And “pulling out” gives a ready made explanation to excuse his poor final vote tally

For Forks Sake

Make of this what you will

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1053213539010256896?s=09

FrancieBrady

Casey 'considering his position'.

A stunt to avoid retracting and ride the wave, such as it is?

jay0109

Casey is backing off...sounds like he could be about to pull out but his name will surely still be on the ballot paper

AGC

blanch152 wrote: »

I thought he was backing MDH. Am I wrong?

He is supporting him and a number of Ministers actively canvassing

AGC

Peter Casey looking like he might withdraw from the race

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The Taoiseach should not be getting involved in a live presidential election when he has no horse in the race himself imo. His answer should have been a respectful, 'No comment'.

I thought he was backing MDH. Am I wrong?

Edward M

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The Taoiseach should not be getting involved in a live presidential election when he has no horse in the race himself imo. His answer should have been a respectful, 'No comment'.

His party backed MDH. They didn't even want an election. We can probably thank SF for that election as they were the only major party to field a candidate.
To SFs surprise and probably disgust, a week out from the election, there are only two candidates grabbing the headlines, PC and MDH.
Its a boring and now farcical campaign and but for controversial comments there's nothing policy wise that any of them have the power to change.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

For some, Leo can do no right. I can only imagine the extent of your outrage if Varadkar had said something like that Casey was making some legitimate points but in the wrong way or had fully backed him.

That would have been wrong too. The point is, he shouldn't be getting involved at all, whether he agrees or disagrees.
If he wants to be involved maybe he should have had the balls to run a candidate.