SafeSurfer wrote: » Why don’t you ask your comrade who doesn’t think it was a power struggle. How’s that Irish Language Act coming along Matt.
FrancieBrady wrote: » And he portrayed it as 'woe is me, I did it for the country' etc etc etc last night on the debate. My view of him, is that he is a leader looking for a spine. He is a master of this kind of rhetoric and he will do it again if it comes to a situation that it's a coalition with SF or nothing.
SafeSurfer wrote: » Martin outlined his position and kept his word after the election in 2016. There is no reason to believe he won’t keep his word about not entering coalition with SF after this election.
SafeSurfer wrote: » That’s the mantra of the New National Socialist party in Germany too. It’s unfair to constantly bring up the past. Especially those pesky Jews, gypsies etc. Godwin Alert!
rob316 wrote: » Can't people build a bridge and get over SF part in the troubles? MM and LV are looking over their shoulders and doing everything they can to keep them away from power. You can be sure FG/FF will have no problem carrying on this supply and confidence agreement again the other way around if it comes to pass.
Matt Barrett wrote: » Tell us more about the troubles :rolleyes:
SafeSurfer wrote: » Yawn.
FrancieBrady wrote: » What twisting? The two aren't mutually exclusive, in fact they go and in hand normally IMO. I didn't say he did. I said 'he found a way to go' into one after I can't remember exactly how long they circled each other.
Phoebas wrote: » Peadar Toibin has thrown a big spanner in the SF works on who controls Sinn Fein.Sinn Féin TDs have 'zero' influence and policies are handed down, says Tóibín We used to get a lot of this from FF & FG but now it's coming from the horse's mouth.https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/election-2020/sinn-fein-tds-have-zero-influence-and-policies-are-handed-down-says-toibin-38901964.html
SafeSurfer wrote: » You are contradicting yourself. You are labelling MM as power hungry and then when this was contradicted as unintelligent. As usual you are twisting yourself in knots to defend a point which is clearly untrue.
Show me the quote where MM ruled out confidence and supply.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Many many power hungry people lack the intelligence to see obstacles they put in their own way and have a habit of digging holes. That's why I made the point that when faced with the consequences he will swallow his words and 'find a way'. The exact same way he found a way to go in to a confidence and supply arrangement. You can see the 'form of words' he found to justify that if you replay the debate. Try reading what is being said?
SafeSurfer wrote: » You see Michael Martin’s refusal to enter coalition with Sinn Fein as a sign of lack of intelligence because you say he is unbelievably power hungry so he is stupid to forego the chance of power if it means SF as a partner. You accuse someone else of lacking in intelligence when you can’t see the stupidity of your own argument.
FrancieBrady wrote: » I say Michael lacks the intelligence to see he is restricting his chances and you pivot to some irrelevant working class/private school Mary Lou something or other theorising? WTF?
SafeSurfer wrote: » I know. Shocking isn’t it!
FrancieBrady wrote: » What???
SafeSurfer wrote: » Of course the alternative is that he is not power hungry enough to entertain the idea of coalescing with a party like Sinn Fein. More a morality issue than an intelligence issue. Even though SF leader Mary Lou is the privately schooled daughter of a property who sends her kids to private schools it doesn’t mean that representitives from working class backgrounds who have gone through the public school system are any less intelligent.
FrancieBrady wrote: » I could see FG catching FF here. Varadkar is doing well against them after a bad start.
FrancieBrady wrote: » You said he has narrowed his path to power, I agree. He hasn't the smarts to see that. Doesn't in my opinion mean he isn't 'power hungry'.
McMurphy wrote: » Don't see it myself, Martin basil painted himself into a corner with categorically ruling out both FG and SF, so if there's to be a coalition with SF, doubtful it will be with him as leader, and he wants to be Taoiseach more than anything else in the whole world, which is why I think it will be a.slight reversal of the current set up, with FF having slightly more seats than FG. Who knows though, the shinners might even outpoll FG, nothing would surprise me, and the bookies have ruled out Leo being returned going by the odds.
blanch152 wrote: » I got in with a €20 bet on FF/SF at 12/1.
SafeSurfer wrote: » Obfuscate much?
FrancieBrady wrote: » Power hungry doesn't necessarily imply intelligence. He wouldn't be the first to allow the eye on the prize to be blinded and crash in flames.
McMurphy wrote: » 16-1 I think on Paddy Power. Nice wedge of cash there for a betting man. Edit, 6 - 1, 16-1 on a ff minority govt which I think may be ultimately where we're headed.
SafeSurfer wrote: » You are being ridiculous now Frankie. Describing a person as power hungry even though they ruled out SF as a partner therefore narrowing their path to power. If the Northern Ireland conflict wasn’t a power struggle what was it and is it?
JohnnyFlash wrote: » I don’t see what his tragic and unimaginable loses have to do with his notoriously prickly and cranky nature, or a nickname long assigned to him.
RandomViewer wrote: » Word is Dinny is getting final say on FG candidates,
blanch152 wrote: » So we can talk about Fianna Fail historically being founded in 1922 in a completely different era, but we can't talk about the involvement of current Sinn Fein representatives in terrorist activity. Got it.
FrancieBrady wrote: » SO what? You undermine the conflict/war in northern Ireland down to a 'power struggle' all you want. Even if it was, how does that alter the fact that MM is also power hungry? You don't have to kill anybody to be described as 'power hungry'. Get over yourself here, you aren't countering the point at all.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Martin runs a party that was born exactly the same way. What is your point here, other than wanting to drag a current debate back to the past?
