Seth Brundle wrote: » People in NI complain about Brexit for example yet voted for a group that would not defend the views of the majority in NI on the matter.
Matt Barrett wrote: » For me I've given them the nod off and on depending on what else is on offer. They never used tax payer monies for sweet deals, lost the tax payer monies on bad deals or 'looked after their own' with state appointments. Also they never were responsible for the economy crashing or ignoring growing crises to concentrate on a proven to be flawed economic system. So I'd vote SF long before I'd vote FF/FG.
Junkyard Tom wrote: » Regardless, let's say that 5/6 votes will be the difference in Westminster. So SF rock up to 'save the day'. Can you imagine the complete uproar in Westminster when the political wing of the IRA march to their seats with big smiley heads on them? What do you think that would cause? That 5/6 votes balance would evaporate and the side SF decided to go with would suffer a major defeat.
Seth Brundle wrote: » Not once in this thread have I suggested that SF discard their policy of abstention yet you choose to read it that way. What I said was that I don’t understand why the people of NI chose a party that would not attend WM given what is currently happening. Now the people of NI face exclusion from the EU partly because of their elected choices.
maccored wrote: » I cant see the DUP getting cleared. Arlene introduced it and they were basically paying people to burn the fuel (may as well have been since the price was cheaper than the cost) - absolute con or complete stupidity one of the two. Where SF meant to sit there and say nothing?March 2017 was when article 50 was triggered. This whole hoohaa came to light in Oct/Nov 2016. you'll be telling me SF are psychic next
ancapailldorcha wrote: » If this turns into a hotbed of trench warfare and petty sniping, it will be locked. No more oneupmanship please.
Seth Brundle wrote: » I understand this SF's stance. I just don't get why people would rather have no representation in NI when it matters. People in NI complain about Brexit for example yet voted for a group that would not defend the views of the majority in NI on the matter. Now they're complaining that whilst NI voted to remain,it looks like they're being forced to leave against their wishes. Someone should be representing these people, not necessarily SF but someone!
blackwhite wrote: » In the limited time they had in power in NI, they managed to do at least one of the things you've claimed they never did. That aside - I can fully understand why nationalists in NI would vote SF. The nature of northern politics, combined with the structure of devolved Govt in Stormont (before the rug was pulled) was always going to result in voting for the nationalist and unionist communities moving to the more extreme parties rather than the parties of pragmatism and compromise. If unionists are shifting towards the DUP, then nationalists have no choice but to shift to SF for fear that the SDLP get railroaded. Similar logic applies for unionists looking at Alliance or UUP candidates. Throw in the system which incentives having one big party on "your side" instead of many smaller parties, and it's a recipe for a shift to the more hardline uncompromising parties.
bilbot79 wrote: » Presumably they hold the only real hope of reuniting the country, a romantic idea that few want to let go of
Junkyard Tom wrote: » It never ceases to amaze me how little thought people put into their musings. Has nobody who comments on this issue ever played chess or poker? Regardless, let's say that 5/6 votes will be the difference in Westminster. So SF rock up to 'save the day'. Can you imagine the complete uproar in Westminster when the political wing of the IRA march to their seats with big smiley heads on them? What do you think that would cause? That 5/6 votes balance would evaporate and the side SF decided to go with would suffer a major defeat. Think for goodness sake.
blanch152 wrote: » Doesn't that just tell you how divisive a political force Sinn Fein are? Their mission should be to reach across the community in the North and into Britain to build support for a united Ireland yet they just divide people with their stunts.
blanch152 wrote: » Their mission should be to reach across the community in the North and into Britain to build support for a united Ireland yet they just divide people with their stunts.
maccored wrote: » eh? SF go to the seat of power of the government they've been opposing and you expect them to be welcomed?
blanch152 wrote: » The Scottish National Party seem to be able to do it with conviction and authority.
Wtf ? wrote: » Still a wasted vote tho, Nobody down here would go into Government with them and I see why. Their history does them no favors either. Their current mouthpiece does not help either, They just oppose everything and do nothing. Waste of space of a hopefully gone era.
BalcombeSt4 wrote: » This might be true, but the DUP & hardline UUP members are just as gulity if not more so of dividing people with stunts, from Paisley declaring his support for the UVF & setting up Ulster Resistance, to blocking gay marriage rights, to Trimble at Drumcree, to Roberts declaring his support for bigoted hate preachers and trusting Muslims to buy him a paper but nothing more.
BalcombeSt4 wrote: » This might be true, but the DUP....
Topgear on Dave wrote: » Whataboutery much?
Good loser wrote: » I would never vote for SF. Their nationalism is a turn off, as is that of the DUP, and the English nationalist Brexiteers. In any case the heydey of nationalism has passed. Their economic policies are pretty infantile. Opposition to water charges and property tax and now the carbon tax are mind boggling for a socialist-leaning party. They support a 'wealth tax' though 75% of all wealth is in residential property! Each year at budget time they produce a so-called costed budget and when challenged about spending figures revert to the 'costed budget'. This budget is riddled with anomalies and omissions which journalists are too lazy to interrogate. Their housing proposals are circular and never related to the true costs. In the last weeks at least three votes in the HOC were lost by lest than 7 votes. If they were concerned with the economic interests of their voters SF would have attended. If they don't want to attend why not refuse to stand in the elections. They are elected to represent all their constituents not just their own voters. The greatest cheerleaders for their abstention policies must be their political enemies - Farage, ERG, Brexiteer Tories, DUP. Or are they? What chance a peerage for Mary Lou?
Good loser wrote: » I would never vote for SF.Their nationalism is a turn off, as is that of the DUP, and the English nationalist Brexiteers. In any case the heydey of nationalism has passed. Their economic policies are pretty infantile. Opposition to water charges and property tax and now the carbon tax are mind boggling for a socialist-leaning party. They support a 'wealth tax' though 75% of all wealth is in residential property! Each year at budget time they produce a so-called costed budget and when challenged about spending figures revert to the 'costed budget'. This budget is riddled with anomalies and omissions which journalists are too lazy to interrogate. Their housing proposals are circular and never related to the true costs. In the last weeks at least three votes in the HOC were lost by lest than 7 votes. If they were concerned with the economic interests of their voters SF would have attended. If they don't want to attend why not refuse to stand in the elections. They are elected to represent all their constituents not just their own voters. The greatest cheerleaders for their abstention policies must be their political enemies - Farage, ERG, Brexiteer Tories, DUP. Or are they? What chance a peerage for Mary Lou?
Matt Barrett wrote: » Would you not see elements of nationalism within the support for a Brexit? It's hardly had it's day
riddles wrote: » SF engage in the politics of protest. This is the easiest stage of all to operate. We are all experts at pointing out things that are wrong and indulging in mock indignation but creating positive solutions is the challenging part. This is SF’s greatest challenge. They reached a budget impasse in the north and pulled down the assembly under the disguise of the Irish language issue and the cash for ash stuff. It probably suited the DUP also to ensure they keep the budget subvention coming. Even with record highs numbers in employment there they have a personal debt crisis and need 10-11 billion a year budget top up. In short SF in power is most likely a fast track to become the next Venezuela. They lack any basic grounding in the realities of how mobile financial capital is and our dependency on inward investment. The pond life who vote for them here and in the North[/B] don’t realize the SF ‘free everything’ mantra is just nonsense.
blanch152 wrote: » I would think that we are on the cusp. There has been a determined resurgence in nationalism from the extremes, be that Trump supporters, Brexiteers, Irish nationalists, Northern unionists, parties in France, Germany, Italy etc. The choice facing us now is regression and acceptance of that old-style nationalism or moving forward with international (indeed non-national) projects like the EU. For me, taking a full part in Europe takes priority over any national ambition.
tipptom wrote: » Amazing this is let go while a couple of posts later the mod says he has removed any offensive posts!!!, while this comment was also thanked by at least two Mods. Pond life indeed
Matt Barrett wrote: » The usual scaremongering. So putting SF in power will make us bankrupt, (been there, the party responsible invited into bed by FG)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/23af546224513cf852af4d456d68d01c.svg)
