Loafing Oaf wrote: » Well I suppose the underlying argument is that since the office is ceremonial it doesn't really amount to a hill of beans how it's chosen. The advantage of these other systems I'm half-heartedly suggesting is that they would spare us from enduring the current farce every seven years.
RobertKK wrote: » Plus Higgins 5 years ago said he wants to visit President Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, so far he has failed to distance himself from his friend who runs death squads. Right up until the race for the presidency started, and while Ortega was murdering his own people, our president had a picture of himself and ortega on president.ie as if it was something to be proud of, rather than Ortega being someone he should have been condemning.
martingriff wrote: » So have them picked by the Seanad which is government majority or by the go government panel so again by the go government. Which will be fine unless is the government you do not like. Again how is it democratic
Loafing Oaf wrote: » There are other options for choosing the president: the Seanad, the Council of State, a government-appointed panel.
MrMusician18 wrote: » Id argue that all six candidates are low quality. Michael D's eulogizing of Castro demonstrated his unfitness for the role
VinLieger wrote: » That poll was taken before casey's remarks, and tbh im worried how stupid most of the country is. Not that casey might win but i think he could possibly push it to a 2nd count due to how many morons are saying they will vote for him specifically on an issue he has no control over or power to do anything about
Zubeneschamali wrote: » Yes, but those are all worse options. People are complaining that the race is low quality this time,
MrMusician18 wrote: Michael D's eulogizing of Castro demonstrated his unfitness for the role
Zubeneschamali wrote: » Yes, but those are all worse options. People are complaining that the race is low quality this time, but that would only be an issue if one of the low quality candidates wins. The system is working fine - Michael D and a bunch of low quality candidates are running - and Michael D is going to beat them all handily. Not only is he going to get 50%, right now it looks like he is going to get 50% more than the the nearest challenger! Is it a waste of time and money? Yes, this time. Blame SF for that. But we keep the option to remove an unpopular incumbent by popular vote for the future.
Pussyhands wrote: » They're also only supporting him because technically he is an independent now. Once we're back on a fresh slate we'll have the major parties put their own candidate forward again.
Tell me how wrote: » Many would say, why can't the Taoiseach do that but, if there is a crisis or hot topic going on, it could look weird to have the Taoiseach attending what might be a somewhat low-key function which might simultaneously be important to a visiting head of state.
Also, it provides a separation of state and government. Personally, I think its good to be able represent the country without every engagement being politically charged.
An Ciarraioch wrote: » Surely better that the electorate pick the President, rather than the Dáil, as happens elsewhere in Europe?
Loafing Oaf wrote: » Tell me how wrote: » The president represents the state abroad and when greeting dignitaries visiting Ireland. Many would say, why can't the Taoiseach do that but, if there is a crisis or hot topic going on, it could look weird to have the Taoiseach attending what might be a somewhat low-key function which might simultaneously be important to a visiting head of state. Also, it provides a separation of state and government. Personally, I think its good to be able represent the country without every engagement being politically charged. Does he/she have to be directly elected though?
Tell me how wrote: » The president represents the state abroad and when greeting dignitaries visiting Ireland. Many would say, why can't the Taoiseach do that but, if there is a crisis or hot topic going on, it could look weird to have the Taoiseach attending what might be a somewhat low-key function which might simultaneously be important to a visiting head of state. Also, it provides a separation of state and government. Personally, I think its good to be able represent the country without every engagement being politically charged.
tayto lover wrote: He is indeed. However that's not the point. If Casey gets a high vote it will seriously annoy the establishment who tried to put him down like Govt and RTE. Great laugh if he finishes in second or third.
tayto lover wrote: » He is indeed. However that's not the point. If Casey gets a high vote it will seriously annoy the establishment who tried to put him down like Govt and RTE. Great laugh if he finishes in second or third.
Johnny Dogs wrote: » The latest poll being taken pre - Casey taking a lot of the limelight.
L1011 wrote: » Higgins is extremely likely to win on the first count.
Pussyhands wrote: Actually what's the point in having a president at all?
Johnny Dogs wrote: » Which is why voting for Casey can be a fairly effective protest vote. I'm just glad that Higgins isn't getting the free run that he was expected to get, and am looking forward to further televised debates with him in them.
Pussyhands wrote: » The president can't do anything so there's no point even having debates. Actually what's the point in having a president at all?
Zubeneschamali wrote: » They finish the first count (all the #1 votes) regardless. If Higgins gets above 50%, he wins. They do not have a 2nd count, and nobody's #2 to #6 matters. Higgins is polling at 68% in he latest poll.
Tell me how wrote: » Yes but do they finish out the count regardless or halt as soon as someone is deemed the winner?
L1011 wrote: Higgins is extremely likely to win on the first count.
