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

McMurphy

markodaly wrote: »

Good spot.

There is no way one can build that many houses for that price.

The cost to build a 1500 square foot house in Dublin/Greater Dublin area is as follows.

Hard Cost: Cement, finishes, foundation, brickes, cost of labour etc..
€180,000

Soft Cost: Land, Utility Levies, Fees, Certifications etc..
€144,000

Developer & VAT: Developer Margin @ 15%, Vat @13.5%
€99,000

Total: €421,000

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:WLIDBHH7faUJ:https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/homes-and-property/why-does-a-new-house-cost-what-it-does-1.4001085+&cd=21&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au

Now, you can build smaller and a bit cheaper, but this brings these costs down to over €300,000

So, where are these €65,000 houses are going to come from?

Then people are surprised that we the Irish people dont vote for SF en-mass?

If only the FG govt had your expertise when they were costing the NCH, and NBP Mark.

Maybe the shinners used the same firm they did?

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

FG were responsible for part of what happened in 2008. They cheer-leaded the lead up to it.

If you are going down that road, so did SF.
You the bank bailout you all hate, yeap SF voted for it...

:):)

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Well if it “negates anything said in manifestos” why are you claiming it proves your point of a broken commitment. It doesn’t.

What?

You asked 'what commitments MM had broken from his manifesto' in the confidence and supply arrangement.

I and others listed them. None of those things he said were commitments were achieved. They (FF) stood by and watched them get worse.

Here is a clause from that C&S agreement between FF and FG

– recognise Fianna Fáil’s right to bring forward policy proposals and bills to implement commitments in its own manifesto;

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So that just shows you that you are accepting the 'con'.

Nobody will be 'elected to government'. There will be a coalition, which negates anything said in manifestoes. Again...Francie can save you time and stress if you will just listen to him!

Well if it “negates anything said in manifestos” why are you claiming it proves your point of a broken commitment. It doesn’t.

SafeSurfer

markodaly wrote: »

Good spot.

There is no way one can build that many houses for that price.

The cost to build a 1500 square foot house in Dublin/Greater Dublin area is as follows.

Hard Cost: Cement, finishes, foundation, brickes, cost of labour etc..
€180,000

Soft Cost: Land, Utility Levies, Fees, Certifications etc..
€144,000

Developer & VAT: Developer Margin @ 15%, Vat @13.5%
€99,000

Total: €421,000

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:WLIDBHH7faUJ:https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/homes-and-property/why-does-a-new-house-cost-what-it-does-1.4001085+&cd=21&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au

Now, you can build smaller and a bit cheaper, but this brings these costs down to over €300,000

So, where are these €65,000 houses are going to come from?

Then people are surprised that we the Irish people dont vote for SF en-mass?

Maybe they are going to use the same builders that are constructing a dozen major railway projects like the Derry to Sligo rail line, Navan railway etc for €1.3 billion.

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

You are not proving any point claiming that a manifesto aspiration if elected to government is a broken commitment because the party wasn’t elected to government. But i suspect you already know that.

So that just shows you that you are accepting the 'con'.

Nobody will be 'elected to government'. There will be a coalition, which negates anything said in manifestoes. Again...Francie can save you time and stress if you will just listen to him!

markodaly

Skylinehead wrote: »

Question about the manifesto:

SF claim they will build 100,000 houses, at a cost of €6.5 billion.

Am I missing something? There's no way you can build a house for 65 grand.

Good spot.

There is no way one can build that many houses for that price.

The cost to build a 1500 square foot house in Dublin/Greater Dublin area is as follows.

Hard Cost: Cement, finishes, foundation, brickes, cost of labour etc..
€180,000

Soft Cost: Land, Utility Levies, Fees, Certifications etc..
€144,000

Developer & VAT: Developer Margin @ 15%, Vat @13.5%
€99,000

Total: €421,000

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:WLIDBHH7faUJ:https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/homes-and-property/why-does-a-new-house-cost-what-it-does-1.4001085+&cd=21&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au

Now, you can build smaller and a bit cheaper, but this brings these costs down to over €300,000

So, where are these €65,000 houses are going to come from?

Then people are surprised that we the Irish people dont vote for SF en-mass?

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Please don't make me go track down FG manifestos to prove the same point.

I'm self employed, and my partners job brings us there.

All I can tell you is my situation. I can't make you believe it. And what does it matter if you don't?

There are plenty who will willingly pay for a fairer society. High earners are not all selfish.

You are not proving any point claiming that a manifesto aspiration if elected to government is a broken commitment because the party wasn’t elected to government. But i suspect you already know that.

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

You used a line in a manifesto of a party which was not elected to government as an example of a broken commitment. That’s either disingenuous and childish or just plain ignorant.

Please don't make me go track down FG manifestos to prove the same point.

Now it emerges you claim to be in the highest household tax bracket.

You really are the creme de la creme Frankie.

Rich & Thick (just kidding- couldn’t resist) ;-)

I'm self employed, and my partners job brings us there.

All I can tell you is my situation. I can't make you believe it. And what does it matter if you don't?

There are plenty who will willingly pay for a fairer society. High earners are not all selfish.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Gets tough doesn't it?

Show me a political party ever that called the others manifesto 'credible'.

I'm not a member of a party SS, I don't pay any attention to their propaganda and election manifestos are just that.

I prefer to look at how they act.

If you look at how politicians act.......

One party has had repeated bullying allegations made by councillors within the party and has failed to act.

One party has had repeated allegations that it failed to deal properly with child abuse allegations from within its ranks and has failed to act.

One party spent three years refusing to form a government while serious issues went unaddressed in that jurisdiction.

Would anyone be able to vote for any party that acted like that? The reasonable answer would be no.

The party in question is Sinn Fein.

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes...because you asked as part of a debate about Michael Martin.

I could confidently claim that he had not lived up to commitments he made because I know they never do.

It is related to what I was saying earlier in this thread...that people 'know they are being conned'. They know manifestos are largely an auction. But they get all excited about the 'credibility' in the manifestos of other parties.

They aren't a very sound basis for choosing a government IMO.

You used a line in a manifesto of a party which was not elected to government as an example of a broken commitment. That’s either disingenuous and childish or just plain ignorant.

Now it emerges you claim to be in the highest household tax bracket.

You really are the creme de la creme Frankie.

Rich & Thick (just kidding- couldn’t resist) ;-)

Edgware

facehugger99 wrote: »

It's impressive all right.

SF must be paying Francie by the post.

50 posts yesterday defending SF from Board's resident 'floating voter'.

Who is taking up the village idiot position while he is here? Some young lad on transition year I suppose

facehugger99

mattser wrote: »

Lads, I have to say I'm impressed with your stamina. If ye're keeping a job down, fair play.

It's impressive all right.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

My partner and I are in the tax band they want to tax.

SF must be paying Francie by the post.

50 posts yesterday defending SF from Board's resident 'floating voter'.

James Brown

feargale wrote: »

You will be judging FG purely on their policies then, as opposed to outrage?

BTW FG is not my first preference.

TBF can you quote anybody criticising FG who doesn't have a policy or screw up as a reason?
Cant say the same for some of the crap posted today about SF voters.

feargale

frillyleaf wrote: »

Yes hopefully people will vote based on policies as opposed to outrage but we all know there are a huge amount of people that won’t do that which will be further fuelled by this

You will be judging FG purely on their policies then, as opposed to outrage?

BTW FG is not my first preference.

James Brown

Manifestos are a rough gist.
Building social housing is great.They may or may not build as many as they say. I'm cool with them heading in that direction.
I mean if some cost is going to be off I'd rather it was on something for the tax payer.

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

So you don’t pay any attention to manifestos, yet go off googling 2016 manifestos.
You say you judge politicians by “how they act”, not manifesto propaganda then search past manifestos to point out broken commitments.

Yes...because you asked as part of a debate about Michael Martin.

I could confidently claim that he had not lived up to commitments he made because I know they never do.

It is related to what I was saying earlier in this thread...that people 'know they are being conned'. They know manifestos are largely an auction. But they get all excited about the 'credibility' in the manifestos of other parties.

They aren't a very sound basis for choosing a government IMO.

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Because you asked. I googled it. And I guessed, because I knew there would be failed commitments.

Try it sometime, you'll find none of them ever fulfill their promises in manifestos.

Say thank you Francie for saving you time?

So you don’t pay any attention to manifestos, yet go off googling 2016 manifestos.
You say you judge politicians by “how they act”, not manifesto propaganda then search past manifestos to point out broken commitments.

What was that Kris Kristofferson song “you are partly truth, partly fiction, a walking contradiction”.

Night Frankie.

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Yet only yesterday you were happy to quote the 2016 FF manifesto to “prove” Michael Martin had broken a commitment!

Because you asked. I googled it. And I guessed, because I knew there would be failed commitments.

Try it sometime, you'll find none of them ever fulfill their promises in manifestos.

Say thank you Francie for saving you time?

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Gets tough doesn't it?

Show me a political party ever that called the others manifesto 'credible'.

I'm not a member of a party SS, I don't pay any attention to their propaganda and election manifestos are just that.

I prefer to look at how they act.

Yet only yesterday you were happy to quote the 2016 FF manifesto to “prove” Michael Martin had broken a commitment!

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Seeing how you attach such little importance to manifestos i don’t see why you care.

Gets tough doesn't it?

Show me a political party ever that called the others manifesto 'credible'.

I'm not a member of a party SS, I don't pay any attention to their propaganda and election manifestos are just that.

I prefer to look at how they act.

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Are FF right about FG's manifesto or vice versa?

Seeing how you attach such little importance to manifestos i don’t see why you care.

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Ah I see.

Are FF right about FG's manifesto or vice versa?

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Ah I see.

As I said, I attach little importance to any of them, credible or not.

Ah I see.

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I don’t have a copy of the letter. It was discussed on the Matt Cooper interview.

Ah I see.

So you are happy to agree that the Sinn Fein manifesto is not credible.

As I said, I attach little importance to any of them, credible or not.

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Can you link to what the Dept had to say?

I agree with Regina Doherty by the way, I never read manifestos, they are all engaged in auctioning, including SF.
FG are throwing stones at FF's one and vice versa.

I don’t have a copy of the letter. It was discussed on the Matt Cooper interview.

So you are happy to agree that the Sinn Fein manifesto is not credible.

mattser

Lads, I have to say I'm impressed with your stamina. If ye're keeping a job down, fair play.

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

If you are interested in the actual qualifications have a listen to Matt Coopers interview with Mary Lou Mc Donald. It turns out to be little more than a letter of comfort than a detailed costing.
They claim that all the figures in the manifesto, such as the houses for €65k and new railroads all over the country for €1.3 billion, are fully costed by the department is a fiction.

Can you link to what the Dept had to say?

I agree with Regina Doherty by the way, I never read manifestos, they are all engaged in auctioning, including SF.
FG are throwing stones at FF's one and vice versa.

SafeSurfer

maccored wrote: »

See how you ignored the one that did answer you

What answer?

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Wonder what the DoF qualifications were there...'will be 480m if FG and FF are kept away from it and somebody actually reads the tenders.'

If you are interested in the actual qualifications have a listen to Matt Coopers interview with Mary Lou Mc Donald. It turns out to be little more than a letter of comfort than a detailed costing.
They claim that all the figures in the manifesto, such as the houses for €65k and new railroads all over the country for €1.3 billion, are fully costed by the department is a fiction.