ForestFire wrote: » , maybe the message is, to give us grants and incentives to insulate our homes, convert to cleaner energy??
Blueshoe wrote: » The 3 candidates who are current councillors were secretly filmed during a prime time investigation and said they would act in the developers favour in return for cash and or work for their own companies. The clips were replayed last week with the candidates being approached for comment since they were running for election. One in particular was a nasty pos. Looks like they have all been elected again in spite of them being shown up as corrupt parasites
Aska wrote: » Anyword on young Lowry in tipp? Michaels son I assume, saw all the 'team Lowry' posters around the place down there
ForestFire wrote: » So the green party have about 8.4% of the national vote and conveniently the government will use this to push through carbon taxes on the actual majority (the 91% that did not vote green) . Saying we are ready to accept it.... Eh... No thanks... I'm paying enough taxes, thanks very much. I mean give us a break. If you want carbon taxes, just do it yourself and stop claiming there is a clear message from the voters.... 8.4%... Really. Are they going to take all the policy's of any party that has at least 8%? No I'd doubt it very much... Jeuses... the healy Ray family probably have close to 8% on their own in kerry :-) Let's listen to them........ By the way I'm all for green policies, but instead of taxing everything, that will have little effect, except raise money, that is not spent on anything green, maybe the message is, to give us grants and incentives to insulate our homes, convert to cleaner energy??
AndrewJRenko wrote: » What videos are you talking about? But if you're going to quote from another site, you really should reference that site. Here's the 'Pro' list from the site where you found the 'Con' list that you copied above;https://www.idea.int/data-tools/data/gender-quotas/quotas I actually didn't like the ideas of quotas myself, until I looked the evidence showing that the actually work, and they're the only thing that actually works to improve gender balance of public representatives.
bren2001 wrote: » They should equate to the first preference votes. You've a number of people standing over each box marking down each ballot. Take several hours for the boxes to be counted and a few more for them to be inputted in a spread sheet. Typically, all the parties work together except SF. They work by themselves.
devlinio wrote: » Gender quotas are bull****. I don't care if my candidate is male or female. I care that they appear competent enough to get my vote.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » I dunno, I'm not in charge. There's a big difference between TDs/Senators/Councillors and nurses or bin collectors in fairness. But if you think it's important, maybe you'd like to start doing something about it yourself, like get a campaign going.
c.p.w.g.w wrote: » So are we going to do this for nursing too? Or Bin collecters? True gender equality for each role and job in society is an unrealistic pipe dream and is only going to embolden the fringes of both the right & left alike
Danzy wrote: » That screams out crisis but few will listen.
Blueshoe wrote: » You must have missed the videos. Open to bribery. Not that it matters to you since you are just here to argue with anyone and everyone Gender quotas: Quotas are against the principle of equal opportunity for all, since women are given preference over men. Quotas are undemocratic, because voters should be able to decide who is elected. Quotas imply that politicians are elected because of their gender, not because of their qualifications and that more qualified candidates are pushed aside. Many women do not want to get elected just because they are women. Introducing quotas creates significant conflicts within the party organization. Quotas violate the principles of liberal democracy.
ProsQuotas for women do not discriminate, but compensate for actual barriers that prevent women from their fair share of the political seats. Quotas imply that there are several women together in a committee or assembly, thus minimizing the stress often experienced by the token women. Women have the right as citizens to equal representation. Women's experiences are needed in political life. Election is about representation, not educational qualifications. Women are just as qualified as men, but women's qualifications are downgraded and minimized in a male-dominated political system. It is in fact the political parties that control the nominations, not primarily the voters who decide who gets elected; therefore quotas are not violations of voters' rights. Introducing quotas may cause conflicts, but may be only temporarily. Quotas can contribute to a process of democratisation by making the nomination process more transparent and formalised.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Except for the fact that they work to bring about improved gender balance over the course of a few elections Here's details of the Government requirements, which impact party funding. Leo has stated that the 30% requirement will increase to 40% in the coming years.https://content.sciendo.com/view/journals/admin/65/2/article-p15.xml Because the democratic process worked? Didn't you say that it wouldn't make any difference anyway?
L1011 wrote: » No. Don't want to name him in case it works like summoning Beetlejuice!
c.p.w.g.w wrote: » It's not true equality...gender quotas are a backward ideology
Fan of Netflix wrote: » I'm referring to the Sinn Fein policy. Sinn Fein brought in a 50-50 split gender quota in a lot of areas where possible. It was another reason they lost several councillors and members. Was viewed as unfair on male candidates.
Blueshoe wrote: » A sad day for democracy
is_that_so wrote: » Wicklow Tally is interesting.https://twitter.com/ingridmileyRTE/status/1132355662401417221
mugsymugsy wrote: » Yeah reading the Anglo celt online the tallies seem to say SF could be wiped out of all Cavan council. Border county in theory should be their stomping ground
Harry Palmr wrote: » Sinn Fein's collapse is hard to read for me, is it the fall out of no grizzled hard men at the top? Has it alienated the aging traditionalists while not getting in new votes who this time have gone to the Greens?
Fan of Netflix wrote: » Is her manager her sister by any chance?
L1011 wrote: » If she could have kept her campaign manager *off* social media it might have helped. Abrasive to say the least
Sierra Oscar wrote: » Also while it's positive to see the Green Party doing well, I would be cautious to read into it too much when it comes to trying to predict a General Election outcome. First off the local and European elections are second order elections. There was pretty much no actual discussion regarding policies and their impact during these elections. That won't be the case during a General Election. A lot of people who voted Green now might not be as happy to do so when they realise the impact of some of their policies when it comes to their own wallets. If there is any sense of an economic downturn on the horizon it could change peoples attitudes entirely. You're also likely to see the main parties put a big focus on climate and sustainable development issues (including housing) during the General Election campaign.
