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

People like SF candidates but won't vote for SF

frillyleaf

I’ve heard people saying multiple times that they like certain SF candidates but they won’t vote for them as they are Sinn Fein. Trying to understand why there is such opposite to Sinn Fein? Have looked up online but not getting good info. Surely if someone likes a candidate and what they stand for they should vote for them? Please explain

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

fergus1001

RCK1 wrote: »

The fact that they think murdering 1,800 people during the troubles is grand and still try to cover it up

not a shinner but this arguement makes my blood boil, every other main stream party in the state has violent pasts whether it was 35 years ago or 100 years ago

FTA69

Jesus Christ the conflict in Ireland ended 23 years ago with a mutually-agreed peace treaty. Despite what the Independent news group will tell you, Republicans weren’t the ones who invented violence in Ireland; it occurred due to a set of political conditions brought about by a variety of actors.

The IRA etc are finished, SF are a run-of-the-mill social democratic party. It’s time people moved on.

is_that_so

frillyleaf wrote: »

Not necessarily. A lot of people will vote for anyone but FF or FG. I also think huge amounts of people that have never voted before will register to vote to vote anyone but FFFG

They'll also be fuming when a government can't be formed or worse it's a poorer one than the previous one.

Winning_Stroke

Maybe once the killers are totally cleared from their ranks, and if they stop grandiosing it and if they changed from their far left policies/stances... then maybe I'll give them a number on the ballot.

Chesty08

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

There's more that one debate and this one is between two leaders that we already know one of which will become taoiseach.

I don't think a single person will vote for SF on this basis. The only people complaining about this are SF voters who are voting that way anyway

That’s incorrect!

I’d like to see Sinn Fein on the debate because I’d like to make up my own mind and not be told it’s either Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael

is_that_so

FTA69 wrote: »

Jesus Christ the conflict in Ireland ended 23 years ago with a mutually-agreed peace treaty. Despite what the Independent news group will tell you, Republicans weren’t the ones who invented violence in Ireland; it occurred due to a set of political conditions brought about by a variety of actors.

The IRA etc are finished, SF are a run-of-the-mill social democratic party. It’s time people moved on.

As recently as 2006 they were disinclined to support the PSNI and until very very recently wanted to scrap the Special Criminal Court. Now they'll review it! Then there's the child abuse stuff and Adams' brother.

eagle eye

irish_goat wrote:

How exactly does a vote for Sinn Fein in the south equal a United Ireland?

It's a huge goal for them to have a UI.

is_that_so

Chesty08 wrote: »

That’s incorrect!

I’d like to see Sinn Fein on the debate because I’d like to make up my own mind and not be told it’s either Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael

At a glance I'd say that they are looking at giving people a look at who will be the biggest party out of the two. Multiple debaters just means lots of shouting and very limited responses.

smurgen

is_that_so wrote: »

As recently as 2006 they were disinclined to support the PSNI and until very very recently wanted to scrap the Special Criminal Court. Now they'll review it! Then there's the child abuse stuff and Adams' brother.

Talk about slurring with no actual link to the party. Fg have multiple TD's with what many would consider to be fraudulent insurance claims.that's far more serious in my eyes.

2020Vision

fergus1001 wrote: »

not a shinner but this arguement makes my blood boil, every other main stream party in the state has violent pasts whether it was 35 years ago or 100 years ago

Paul Quinn was brutally murdered in 2007, which is a lot more recent than 35 years ago.

James Brown

eagle eye wrote: »

A vote for a SF candidate you like is also a vote for Mary Lou and for more money for the wasters on social welfare and less for the ordinary hard working person who earns a decent wage. It's also a vote for a UI and that'll mean even less money in your pocket.

Financial prudence is the reason you don't vote SF.

Financial prudence?

From FF/FG?

So you don't see any problems with welfare and foreva homes? It's never been an issue for you?
What makes you think SF will be worse in that regard than FF/FG?
It's just spin that SF and every other party get the blame for what FF/FG do.
We need parties that look after low/middle income tax paying workers not billionaires and vulture funds.

frillyleaf

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

If you were to base it on the outrage you see on social media then SF should have been the larhest party in the last election. However many of the outraged don't even bother to vote.

I think things have gotten out of control since the last election. A lot of working families can’t afford rent, for a lot of people owning a home is completely out of reach. I understand what you mean about a lot of people not voting but it would be interesting to see how many people have registered to vote since the last election. People don’t like a lot of FG member and they’ve had a lot of controversy while in power. I’m not sure on opinion polls accuracy but they are shown FG FF SF are remarkably close

is_that_so

smurgen wrote: »

Talk about slurring with no actual link to the party. Fg have multiple TD's with what many would consider to be fraudulent insurance claims.that's far more serious in my eyes.

Talk about changing the subject! These are factual reasons why people have an issue with SF, never mind the old historical stuff.

2020Vision

Chesty08 wrote: »

That’s incorrect!

I’d like to see Sinn Fein on the debate because I’d like to make up my own mind and not be told it’s either Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael

But presumably it's your own mind that's telling you that it's either FF or FG?

irish_goat

eagle eye wrote: »

It's a huge goal for them to have a UI.

So Taoiseach Mary Lou would just declare one on the 9th February...?

christy c

smurgen wrote: »

The likes of Pearse Doherty is if far better caliber than anyone that FG

Pearse Doherty is either a complete buffoon or a cynical populist IMO. If not a buffoon, why is he sitting on his hands while his party runs with the crazy retirement idea? Why was he and his party colleagues cheerleading the other clowns in Syriza?

seamus

It's always telling whenever you talk to or about Sinn Féin in relation to the IRA, they never distance themselves from it. They never claim to be removed from them, or to have separated.

It's one thing to have been the political wing of the IRA in the past. Many, many parties have dodgy pasts.

It's the fact that they are still linked - unashamedly - with the IRA, that's a problem.

In a radio debate involving O'Broin and a FF TD, the question of whether SF and FF could make a government came up. The FF TD raised the very valid concern that in negotiations they wouldn't know whether there was a shadow leadership in the IRA Army Council reviewing every decision, every proposal put to SF. That such a situation is democratically fraught, because you're putting the real power in the hands of the IRA and not the elected TDs.

At that point, O'Broin had the perfect opportunity to deny that such a thing happens or would happen. That SF stands on its own. But he didn't. Instead he deflected, "sure all politicians use advisors".

That says enough for me that SF haven't shaken off their past and are still ultimately under the direction of terrorists.

frillyleaf

Chesty08 wrote: »

That’s incorrect!

I’d like to see Sinn Fein on the debate because I’d like to make up my own mind and not be told it’s either Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael

Yes people don’t being made feel like they haven’t got a choice. Leo has said he is open to debate with SF which means Mary Lou May be on it after all.

James Brown

seamus wrote: »

It's always telling whenever you talk to or about Sinn Féin in relation to the IRA, they never distance themselves from it. They never claim to be removed from them, or to have separated.

It's one thing to have been the political wing of the IRA in the past. Many, many parties have dodgy pasts.

It's the fact that they are still linked - unashamedly - with the IRA, that's a problem.

In a radio debate involving O'Broin and a FF TD, the question of whether SF and FF could make a government came up. The FF TD raised the very valid concern that in negotiations they wouldn't know whether there was a shadow leadership in the IRA Army Council reviewing every decision, every proposal put to SF. That such a situation is democratically fraught, because you're putting the real power in the hands of the IRA and not the elected TDs.

At that point, O'Broin had the perfect opportunity to deny that such a thing happens or would happen. That SF stands on its own. But he didn't. Instead he deflected, "sure all politicians use advisors".

That says enough for me that SF haven't shaken off their past and are still ultimately under the direction of terrorists.

With the exception of those who understand the IRA's important place in our shared history during a time when we left our fellow countrymen and women to be maltreated and abused up north, the troubles will fade only to be raised in history lessons and when FF/FG run out of road in a debate.

eagle eye

Matt Barrett wrote:

Financial prudence? From FF/FG?

Where did I say anything about FF or FG?
I've posted elsewhere on this site that I'm voting independent only.
A new political party is badly needed in this country. One that wants to give people more money to spend to help grow the economy. One that will cut through all the red tape in the health sector and move out all the unnecessary administrators and bring in more nurses and doctors.
One that supports both urban and rural Ireland.

smurgen

is_that_so wrote: »

Talk about changing the subject! These are factual reasons why people have an issue with SF, never mind the old historical stuff.

Not at all.none of those you mentioned had a position in SF it's a slur. Looks like the nasty party are putting the spin unit into overdrive after the latest polls.

is_that_so

smurgen wrote: »

Not at all.none of those you mentioned had a position in SF it's a slur. Looks like the nasty party are putting the spin unit into overdrive after the latest polls.

Two posts on this and you still haven't made sense. Ah well.

marieholmfan

christy c wrote: »

Pearse Doherty is either a complete buffoon or a cynical populist IMO. If not a buffoon, why is he sitting on his hands while his party runs with the crazy retirement idea? Why was he and his party colleagues cheerleading the other clowns in Syriza?

Syriza are great. They should have stuck to their guns.

frillyleaf

seamus wrote: »

It's always telling whenever you talk to or about Sinn Féin in relation to the IRA, they never distance themselves from it. They never claim to be removed from them, or to have separated.

It's one thing to have been the political wing of the IRA in the past. Many, many parties have dodgy pasts.

It's the fact that they are still linked - unashamedly - with the IRA, that's a problem.

In a radio debate involving O'Broin and a FF TD, the question of whether SF and FF could make a government came up. The FF TD raised the very valid concern that in negotiations they wouldn't know whether there was a shadow leadership in the IRA Army Council reviewing every decision, every proposal put to SF. That such a situation is democratically fraught, because you're putting the real power in the hands of the IRA and not the elected TDs.

At that point, O'Broin had the perfect opportunity to deny that such a thing happens or would happen. That SF stands on its own. But he didn't. Instead he deflected, "sure all politicians use advisors".

That says enough for me that SF haven't shaken off their past and are still ultimately under the direction of terrorists.

I’m surprised that the opportunity wasn’t used. I wonder what will happen if SF do win a majority vote. Some of the candidates are very good at communicating very relevant issues at the moment. They don’t appear to be out of touch like FG are. People seem to like the candidates more on a personal level. They relate to them more than Leo / Murphy / Harris. I think they’ll get far more votes than ever before!

Tough job for whoever takes over housing and health. It’s such a huge mess I don’t know why anyone would want to touch it!

golfball37

You'd swear Syriza bankrupted Greece reading this? They made promises & got elected in a bankrupt country, saw they couldn't deliver on these and resigned government. If an Irish politcal party behaved like that we'd be in a much better place.

is_that_so

golfball37 wrote: »

You'd swear Syriza bankrupted Greece reading this? They made promises & got elected in a bankrupt country, saw they couldn't deliver on these and resigned government. If an Irish politcal party behaved like that we'd be in a much better place.

They didn't but they overpromised in the end and couldn't deliver. That's what got them kicked out.

harr

Kind of in same in boat ... my local SF rep is a hard working on the ground politician and I know him well. He is well liked locally and gets a lot done with limited resources. Answers his phone and meets people when he is asked unlike the other local politicians especially the FG ones who are so far removed working class people it’s laughable.
But I just can’t see myself voting for SF because of the parties economic proposals ..
I would be very uneasy like a lot of people of SF getting any sort of power in the government.
For me this time it will probably be independent , FF and labour as locally the FF candidate is again the best of a bad bunch. Anyone but the FG heads around here who are so out of touch with the everyday people on the street:

[Deleted User]

frillyleaf wrote: »

I’ve heard people saying multiple times that they like certain SF candidates but they won’t vote for them as they are Sinn Fein. Trying to understand why there is such opposite to Sinn Fein? Have looked up online but not getting good info. Surely if someone likes a candidate and what they stand for they should vote for them? Please explain

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Ferris

Ferris has courted controversy by his refusal to condemn the murder of Detective Garda Jerry McCabe during a botched Post Office raid by the Provisional IRA in 1996. Ferris had also greeted Pearse McAuley and Kevin Walsh, the men charged with the manslaughter of Garda McCabe, upon their release from prison as part of the Good Friday Agreement.[17]

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/message-of-support-from-mccabe-killers-1.420865

The IRA prisoners jailed for killing Det Garda Jerry McCabe have expressed their "complete support" for Sinn Féin leaders.

In a message read out to the ardfheis yesterday, the prisoners paid tribute to the leadership for its work in last year's negotiations. "We wish to express our complete support for the leadership of the republican movement, the peace strategy and the republican movement.

Some of our local Sinn Fein reps are really hard working and capable (same for Cathal King in South Dublin CC, when I lived there) but they are a generation away from being clean.
Honestly, I can get over the targeting of soldiers and government targets. Of the elder parties only Labour are not wholly drenched in blood, from their inception?

I can not forget bombing Warrington streets, drugs, and plain out armed robbery etc; whose perpetrators have been given hero status by Sinn Fein Membership to this day.

Phoebas

jimgoose wrote: »

The last buck-toothed pavee to come to my door parroting "tax the rich!!" thought the rich meant "anyone with a job".

maccored wrote: »

anyone with a job earns over 100 grand a year? OP - this is why people dont vote SF - they're too caught up with the anti SF hype.

So that's what? 2% of workers.
Even if you confiscated everything they earned over 100k, you still don't get much, because by the time you get to people earning over 140k, your pool is down to the top 1%.

It all sounds great to get the rich to pay, but we all know that if you want to raise real money, it needs to come primarily from ordinary working people.

This is why people don't trust SF on economics

Phoebas

golfball37 wrote: »

You'd swear Syriza bankrupted Greece reading this? They made promises & got elected in a bankrupt country, saw they couldn't deliver on these and resigned government. If an Irish politcal party behaved like that we'd be in a much better place.

I suggest we short-circuit the process in this country,