Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Peter Casey's beliefs of Travellers' ethnicity Part II

1…1617192122…45

Comments

  • #902
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    Calhoun wrote: »
    Apparently all the people on here who voted for Peter Casey or had an issue with Travelers are Russian bots.

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=108560611#post108560611

    Wow.

    Not sure of the social classification, but there is definately a pattern to that trend, pity Dav couldnt see it, despite is claims.


  • #903
    givyjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 3,287 ✭✭✭givyjoe


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    Wow.

    Not sure of the social classification, but there is definately a pattern to that trend, pity Dav couldnt see it, despite is claims.

    That thread is utterly pathetic.


  • #904
    Blazer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,468 ✭✭✭✭Blazer


    givyjoe wrote: »
    That thread is utterly pathetic.

    It’s step number 1.
    Deflect and disinformation.
    The last thing travelers want is a government that could start cracking down on their
    1. Criminality
    2. Welfare
    3. Free houses
    4. Tax fraud
    5. Children not going to school
    6. High suicide rates of gay travellers
    7. Oppression of women
    8. Animal cruelty


    But that’s exactly what’s needed to bring them into the 21st century.


  • #905
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Patrick2010 wrote: »
    What’s with the 10%, didn’t he get nearly 25% of the vote??

    He got 23.6% of 46% of the vote.

    Which is approx 10% of the electorate or there are 3.5million registered to vote and he got ove 300,000 of that.

    It was the lowest turnout ever for a presidential election. Which doesn't fit the narrative that there was a 'huge' mobiliasation of a 'protest vote'.
    In fact the reality is that on both issues - The President and Travellers - most people are not all that concerned about either.
    From those that did care MDH got the overwhelming endorsement. A record majority apparently.


  • #906
    Edward M
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,837 ✭✭✭Edward M


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    He got 23.6% of 46% of the vote.

    Which is approx 10% of the electorate or there are 3.5million registered to vote and he got ove 300,000 of that.

    It was the lowest turnout ever for a presidential election. Which doesn't fit the narrative that there was a 'huge' mobiliasation of a 'protest vote'.
    In fact the reality is that on both issues - The President and Travellers - most people are not all that concerned about either.
    From those that did care MDH got the overwhelming endorsement. A record majority apparently.

    Well you are very concerned it seems. :)


  • Advertisement
  • #907
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Edward M wrote: »
    Well you are very concerned it seems. :)

    Concerned about any growth in that type of politician - certainly. Well spotted!


  • #908
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,997 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Patrick2010 wrote: »
    What’s with the 10%, didn’t he get nearly 25% of the vote??

    Francies understanding of proportion is questionable at best.

    Common sense would just extrapolate pro rata.


  • #909
    Edward M
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,837 ✭✭✭Edward M


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Concerned about any growth in that type of politician - certainly. Well spotted!

    But your Gerry Adams and Co wouldn't concern you, or as Brendan said, yer man walking around with the Kingsmill loaf on his head?
    As I said before, and you have admitted above, it's the type of politician that concern many, much more so than the points he made.
    It would be beneficial for some left leaning party's in particular perhaps, to stem any likely growth contrary to their doctrine.


  • #910
    Jackman25
    Registered Users Posts: 456 ✭✭Jackman25


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Higgins got his vote out to win the election.
    Apparently, Casey got a protest vote out. That protest amounted to 10% of electorate. If it was a genuine registering of a 'protest' vote then electing a president was incidental.

    An awful lot of people decided not to bother registering a protest (Which usually means one thing) nor to vote for a president. Apathy, not bothered enough etc etc

    Complete spoofer.
    That 10% nonsense is embarrassing at this stage. Like posting 500 times to say the result is not significant.


  • #911
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Roll on the general election!


  • Advertisement
  • #912
    tretorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭tretorn


    It was a huge vote and belittling it will get us nowhere and lead to even bigger trenches being dug between both communities.

    Irish people were never asked for their opinion on the ethnic status, if it had been put to vote I believe 99% of the country, fearing that it would entitle the travellers even more, would have voted NO.

    If it was put to the people now most would vote to remove this status. Its quite clear there was no justification for this status, we still havent been told what part of the traveller culture is important to hold onto, most people are only familiar with the negative aspects of this lifestyle as the positive parts seem to be very limited. Attachment to religion while terrorising old people wont cut it and the homophobia and domestic abuse of women is hardly christian either. Language was mentioned but in reality do many travellers speak the language of Cant, the traveller language, has it died out. It a written language or just a spoken one.

    If you set up a poll here asking should the status be removed 1% of posters would say NO, this opinion according to Francie wouldnt be relevant at all because 99% of the rest contributing would say remove this status immediately. Can someone set up a poll and lets see what happens.


  • #913
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    Francies understanding of proportion is questionable at best.

    Common sense would just extrapolate pro rata.

    No, I don't think on reflection that you can extrapolate pro rata in this instance.

    As you will get vociferously told here this was really 2 elections. One where people voted for president and another where people endorsed/protested about what a candidate said about travellers. A 'protest' vote.

    It was the lowest turnout ever to vote for a president and a piss poor turnout for a protest that is supposed to be about 'what everybody knws' and what 90% believe. On that basis, it can't be a huge concern to 'everybody' nor the 90% who believe Casey to be right.

    But 10% did respond to Casey, no doubt about that.


  • #914
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Jackman25 wrote: »
    Complete spoofer.
    That 10% nonsense is embarrassing at this stage. Like posting 500 times to say the result is not significant.

    No it is significant in the sense that it tallies with my guess at the amount of people who have this prejudice and bias against all travellers. I said before, had Casey plumped to have a pop at immigrants, he'd have got a similar vote share.

    That's based on my own observations of the electorate btw.


  • #915
    Blazer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,468 ✭✭✭✭Blazer


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    No, I don't think on reflection that you can extrapolate pro rata in this instance.

    As you will get vociferously told here this was really 2 elections. One where people voted for president and another where people endorsed/protested about what a candidate said about travellers. A 'protest' vote.

    It was the lowest turnout ever to vote for a president and a piss poor turnout for a protest that is supposed to be about 'what everybody knws' and what 90% believe. On that basis, it can't be a huge concern to 'everybody' nor the 90% who believe Casey to be right.

    But 10% did respond to Casey, no doubt about that.

    I’m pretty sure if we applied your maths to welfare you wouldn’t be long getting your figures right.


  • #916
    Blazer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,468 ✭✭✭✭Blazer


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    No it is significant in the sense that it tallies with my guess at the amount of people who have this prejudice and bias against all travellers. I said before, had Casey plumped to have a pop at immigrants, he'd have got a similar vote share.

    That's based on my own observations of the electorate btw.

    Actually I’d say at least half of the settled population have this predujice against travellers. Why’s that now Francis?


  • #917
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Blazer wrote: »
    I’m pretty sure if we applied your maths to welfare you wouldn’t be long getting your figures right.

    Well I noticed a distinct fall off in the outrage and posting to this thread when Casey started on welfare recipients. Which might tell a bit of a story about how far he can go with that one before annoying a portion of his vote base.


  • #918
    Blazer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,468 ✭✭✭✭Blazer


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Well I noticed a distinct fall off in the outrage and posting to this thread when Casey started on welfare recipients. Which might tell a bit of a story about how far he can go with that one before annoying a portion of his vote base.

    No harm in cracking down on them too.


  • #919
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Blazer wrote: »
    Actually I’d say at least half of the settled population have this predujice against travellers. Why’s that now Francis?

    Where were they on election day? Not arsed enough or maybe they know, like me that there are issues with some travellers and massive issues with crime and prevention of crime in all areas of society BUT they don't think targetting one community is a reasonable, just or even practical solution? Democrats in other words.


  • #920
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    FrancieBrady is an anagram of Bad Carny Rife


  • #921
    givyjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 3,287 ✭✭✭givyjoe


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Where were they on election day? Not arsed enough or maybe they know, like me that there are issues with some travellers and massive issues with crime and prevention of crime in all areas of society BUT they don't think targetting one community is a reasonable, just or even practical solution? Democrats in other words.

    That is some serious Trump level spin/twist on reality.


  • Advertisement
  • #922
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    givyjoe wrote: »
    That is some serious Trump level spin/twist on reality.

    How is it spin?


    If you want it to be about who would make the best president, Casey lost heavily, as the winner romped home outpolling everyone by 3 votes to 1. A record margin.

    If this was as claimed as a 'protest' vote, it therefore had nothing to do with electing a president.

    10% of the electorate turned out for this protest.

    No spin, just a cold clinical look at the figures versus the claims about what this was.


  • #923
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Where were they on election day? Not arsed enough or maybe they know, like me that there are issues with some travellers and massive issues with crime and prevention of crime in all areas of society BUT they don't think targetting one community is a reasonable, just or even practical solution? Democrats in other words.

    Careful Francie, sounds like you're coming around...


  • #924
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    Careful Francie, sounds like you're coming around...

    Saying nothing different to what I have been saying since the start Rog.


  • #925
    Jackman25
    Registered Users Posts: 456 ✭✭Jackman25


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    No it is significant in the sense that it tallies with my guess at the amount of people who have this prejudice and bias against all travellers. I said before, had Casey plumped to have a pop at immigrants, he'd have got a similar vote share.

    That's based on my own observations of the electorate btw.

    Horsesh*t.


  • #926
    givyjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 3,287 ✭✭✭givyjoe


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    How is it spin?


    If you want it to be about who would make the best president, Casey lost heavily, as the winner romped home outpolling everyone by 3 votes to 1. A record margin.

    If this was as claimed as a 'protest' vote, it therefore had nothing to do with electing a president.

    10% of the electorate turned out for this protest.

    No spin, just a cold clinical look at the figures versus the claims about what this was.
    He took a quarter of the vote. Would you like to come back to us and tell us what proportion of the electorate actually voted for Higgins.. 25/30% was it? As i said, complete spin. Laughable stuff.


  • #927
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,997 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    By your very twisted logic francie, 26% of the electorate voted for Michael d, therefore the vast majority of the electorate (74%) DID NOT vote for the winner. Are you happy to stand by that logic??


  • #928
    7aubzxk43m2sni
    Closed Accounts Posts: 636 ✭✭✭7aubzxk43m2sni


    givyjoe wrote: »
    He took a quarter of the vote. Would you like to come back to us and tell us what proportion of the electorate actually voted for Higgins.. 25/30% was it? As i said, complete spin. Laughable stuff.

    Nah, it's not spin really.

    How many people turned around and said one of the following things:

    I wasn't going to vote, but Casey "saying it how it is" is getting my vote now.

    I was going to vote for X, but now Casey is getting my number 1.

    It's disingenuous to suggest that the 23% of the vote he did receive indicates that 23% of the total population support him.

    People were fairly apathetic to the election, and those who were motivated by Casey went out and voted for him, anyone who didn't care in the first place, and weren't swayed by his nonsense, continued not to vote.


  • #929
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    How is it spin?


    If you want it to be about who would make the best president, Casey lost heavily, as the winner romped home outpolling everyone by 3 votes to 1. A record margin.

    If this was as claimed as a 'protest' vote, it therefore had nothing to do with electing a president.

    10% of the electorate turned out for this protest.

    No spin, just a cold clinical look at the figures versus the claims about what this was.

    Give over Francie, Casey was never going to unseat the incumbent. Unlikely anyone was.
    Casey didnt suffer a defeat. He has come out if it with the most gained.

    Because as a resut of an election no one really wanted or gave much of a šhit about, we now have someone mandated to deal with issues that were heresy for too long to even discuss in "polite conversation". Thats the part that hurts the most for the anti-Casey lobby.

    Maybe it was a protest vote, but with local and national elections coming up, things got a bit interesting. SF, FG and Mickey Martin should ve worried.

    Would Casey have made a good president?
    I dont think so, he's a bit giddy and flakey for me. The most presedential IMO was Gavin Duffy. And look where he polled, not that i gave him anything.


  • #930
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    By your very twisted logic francie, 26% of the electorate voted for Michael d, therefore the vast majority of the electorate (74%) DID NOT vote for the winner. Are you happy to stand by that logic??

    Already have. Contrary to belief I don't spin the figures just to make my favourite candidate look better.

    MDH won an election overwhelmingly by getting the biggest majority of those who took the time to vote.


  • Advertisement
  • #931
    7aubzxk43m2sni
    Closed Accounts Posts: 636 ✭✭✭7aubzxk43m2sni


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    Would Casey have made a good president?
    I dont think so, he's a bit giddy and flakey for me. The most presedential IMO was Gavin Duffy. And look where he polled, not that i gave him anything.

    No comparison between Duffy and MDH.


  • #932
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    Give over Francie, Casey was never going to unseat the incumbent. Unlikely anyone was.
    Casey didnt suffer a defeat. He has come out if it with the most gained.

    Because as a resut of an election no one really wanted or gave much of a šhit about, we now have someone mandated to deal with issues that were heresy for too long to even discuss in "polite conversation". Thats the part that hurts the most for the anti-Casey lobby.

    Maybe it was a protest vote, but with local and national elections coming up, things got a bit interesting. SF, FG and Mickey Martin should ve worried.

    Would Casey have made a good president?
    I dont think so, he's a bit giddy and flakey for me. The most presedential IMO was Gavin Duffy. And look where he polled, not that i gave him anything.

    Nobody is saying he didn't gain.

    He got 23% of the vote.

    But that was 23% of 46% of the electorate, which is 10% of those who can effect change in this country.


  • #933
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    Briella Tender Shark wrote: »
    Nah, it's not spin really.

    How many people turned around and said one of the following things:

    I wasn't going to vote, but Casey "saying it how it is" is getting my vote now.

    I was going to vote for X, but now Casey is getting my number 1.

    So how the jump from 2% to 23%
    Something resonated with the electorate


  • #934
    givyjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 3,287 ✭✭✭givyjoe


    Briella Tender Shark wrote: »
    Nah, it's not spin really.

    How many people turned around and said one of the following things:

    I wasn't going to vote, but Casey "saying it how it is" is getting my vote now.

    I was going to vote for X, but now Casey is getting my number 1.

    It's disingenuous to suggest that the 23% of the vote he did receive indicates that 23% of the total population support him.

    People were fairly apathetic to the election, and those who were motivated by Casey went out and voted for him, anyone who didn't care in the first place, and weren't swayed by his nonsense, continued not to vote.

    Except I didn't say that. I'm merely calling the absolute horse**** logic being deployed by Francie.

    On your last point, unerifiable nonsense. My group of mates, 6 of us in a group chat, none of us voted. If we had of, would all have voted Casey. All for a simple reason, in all of the bullsh1tting from the candidates for the job (that doesn't need to/shouldn't exist) he was the only one who said ANYTHING of any meaning.


  • #935
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,997 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Already have. Contrary to belief I don't spin the figures just to make my favourite candidate look better.

    MDH won an election overwhelmingly by getting the biggest majority of those who took the time to vote.

    And Peter Casey came a very strong second at 23% and reflected views which you are now trying to belittle.

    As I have said already, any political party being 23% in a general election would be king makers.

    So you are very right to be worried.

    However belittling that vote or claiming its from racism or ignorance is a very very stupid and dangerous thing to do. That road leads to trump.

    What needs to happen is that the views that lead to that 23% vote need to be either listened to and acted on, or the inconsistencies in communication (see Leo varadkers comments) need to be well and truely clarified


  • #936
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    So how the jump from 2% to 23%
    Something resonated with the electorate

    Yes, something did. We know there is a percentage in the country who have a bias and prejudice against ALL travellers and who would like measures deployed against all travellers unilaterally.

    Some may be surprised that is 10%, I wasn't, I had guessed it was a bit higher, in the 13-14% percentile, actually.


  • Advertisement
  • #937
    7aubzxk43m2sni
    Closed Accounts Posts: 636 ✭✭✭7aubzxk43m2sni


    givyjoe wrote: »
    Except I didn't say that. I'm merely calling the absolute horse**** logic being deployed by Francie.

    On your last point, unerifiable nonsense. My group of mates, 6 of us in a group chat, none of us voted. If we had of, would all have voted Casey. All for a simple reason, in all of the bullsh1tting from the candidates for the job (that doesn't need to/shouldn't exist) he was the only one who said ANYTHING of any meaning.

    Great that you're here talking sh1te but you couldn't be arsed going out to vote. Keep fighting the good fight


  • #938
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    And Peter Casey came a very strong second at 23% and reflected views which you are now trying to belittle.

    As I have said already, any political party being 23% in a general election would be king makers.

    So you are very right to be worried.

    However belittling that vote or claiming its from racism or ignorance is a very very stupid and dangerous thing to do. That road leads to trump.

    What needs to happen is that the views that lead to that 23% vote need to be either listened to and acted on, or the inconsistencies in communication (see Leo varadkers comments) need to be well and truely clarified

    Please stop fooling yourself that this is anything like a GE. It really shows a basic lack of understanding of our democracy.


  • #939
    Jackman25
    Registered Users Posts: 456 ✭✭Jackman25


    givyjoe wrote: »
    That thread is utterly pathetic.

    Ah its hilarious. What a complete tool that lad is.

    Repeat in your best Liam Neeson from Taken voice.
    You are being targeted, you are being targeted by users outside of Ireland. You will continue to be targeted if you do not take action against them.


  • #940
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    givyjoe wrote: »
    Except I didn't say that. I'm merely calling the absolute horse**** logic being deployed by Francie.

    On your last point, unerifiable nonsense. My group of mates, 6 of us in a group chat, none of us voted. If we had of, would all have voted Casey. All for a simple reason, in all of the bullsh1tting from the candidates for the job (that doesn't need to/shouldn't exist) he was the only one who said ANYTHING of any meaning.

    You listened to the debates but STILL didn't vote?????

    I rest my case, your honour. :rolleyes::eek::eek:


  • #941
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,092 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    How is it spin?


    If you want it to be about who would make the best president, Casey lost heavily, as the winner romped home outpolling everyone by 3 votes to 1. A record margin.

    If this was as claimed as a 'protest' vote, it therefore had nothing to do with electing a president.

    10% of the electorate turned out for this protest.

    No spin, just a cold clinical look at the figures versus the claims about what this was.


    It was less that 10% of the electorate that protested against water charges.

    Yet you deemed those protests a success.


  • Advertisement
  • #942
    givyjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 3,287 ✭✭✭givyjoe


    Briella Tender Shark wrote: »
    Great that you're here talking sh1te but you couldn't be arsed going out to vote. Keep fighting the good fight

    Ha, the irony. Yourself and Francie have come up with some golden turds this morning.

    75% of the population as Francie highlighted, couldn't be arsed voting. What's that go to do with having an opinion on travellers or what Casey said about them?
    Are only those who voted allowed to have an opinion?


  • #943
    Jackman25
    Registered Users Posts: 456 ✭✭Jackman25


    givyjoe wrote: »
    Except I didn't say that. I'm merely calling the absolute horse**** logic being deployed by Francie.

    On your last point, unerifiable nonsense. My group of mates, 6 of us in a group chat, none of us voted. If we had of, would all have voted Casey. All for a simple reason, in all of the bullsh1tting from the candidates for the job (that doesn't need to/shouldn't exist) he was the only one who said ANYTHING of any meaning.

    The vast majority of the entire electorate agreed with Caseys comments, but 23% agreed enough with him to give him their first preference to be President.

    Now the above statement is spoof as I have no basis really on which to make such a statement. But unlike Francie, I recognize that.


  • #944
    givyjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 3,287 ✭✭✭givyjoe


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    You listened to the debates but STILL didn't vote?????

    I rest my case, your honour. :rolleyes::eek::eek:

    :eek::eek::eek::eek: Is pretty much how everyone reacts to your ramblings.


  • #945
    KrustyUCC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭KrustyUCC


    FF reviews policies on Travellers amid Casey storm fallout

    Fianna Fáil will review the party's policy on the Traveller community after a robust internal debate on the outcome of the presidential election.

    During a parliamentary party meeting, TDs and senators agreed to establish a committee which would examine Fianna Fáil's stance on Travellers.

    An RTÉ exit poll showed one in three Fianna Fáil supporters voted for Peter Casey, who made inflammatory comments about Travellers' ethnic status during the campaign.

    One source said there was an "undercurrent throughout the debate" that Mr Casey struck a cord with the public and Fianna Fáil voters.

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/ff-reviews-policies-on-travellers-amid-casey-storm-fallout-37500998.html


  • #946
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    It was less that 10% of the electorate that protested against water charges.

    Yet you deemed those protests a success.

    Did I?

    I had very little to say about the water issue, maybe you can link me to where I said that?


  • #947
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,997 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Please stop fooling yourself that this is anything like a GE. It really shows a basic lack of understanding of our democracy.

    Your claim that NONE of the 54% of the electorate that didn't vote would never have voted for casey shows a truely remarkable lack of understanding of democracy.


  • #948
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    givyjoe wrote: »
    :eek::eek::eek::eek: Is pretty much how everyone reacts to your ramblings.

    Ramblings? At least I voted.

    How dare you criticise anyone's opinion on here if you couldn't get off your arse and vote.

    Joke. No interest in interacting with somebody who didn't vote after listening to the issues.


  • #949
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    Your claim that NONE of the 54% of the electorate that didn't vote would never have voted for casey shows a truely remarkable lack of understanding of democracy.

    I didn't claim that anywhere.
    54% where not bothered ENOUGH either by the choice of president or what Casey said.
    I have, like you no idea how they would have voted in relation to Casey, if you are claiming that Casey's vote was a 'protest' vote.
    They certainly weren't motivated enough to want him as President.


  • #950
    givyjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 3,287 ✭✭✭givyjoe


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Ramblings? At least I voted.

    How dare you criticise anyone's opinion on here if you couldn't get off your arse and vote.

    Joke. No interest in interacting with somebody who didn't vote after listening to the issues.

    Wind your neck in. How dare I?! More laughable nonsense.No interest in someone poking holes in your 'logic' and taking the easy way out.

    If there was an option to vote for 'none of the above' I would have been there in a heartbeat. Why should I go out an vote for someone to be in a position, that I believe shouldn't exist in the first place.


  • #951
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Jackman25 wrote: »
    The vast majority of the entire electorate agreed with Caseys comments, but 23% agreed enough with him to give him their first preference to be President.

    Now the above statement is spoof as I have no basis really on which to make such a statement. But unlike Francie, I recognize that.

    It is not 'spoofing' to quote the factual figures, which is what i did.

    23% of 46% of the electorate wanted Casey as President. Which is 10% of the Total electorate.

    If it was a 'protest' vote, which is a sidebar to the election, then what we know is that 10% of the electorate where motivated/concerned enough to make a protest vote.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement