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

General Election TV debates

Muahahaha

Deserving of its own thread I feel, especially with FF and FG being neck and neck.
Michael Martin and Leo Varadkar about to debate now on TV3, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Likely to be a score draw but if Varadkar wobbles at any point it could send the campaign south pretty quick. TV3 reporting that they have a genuine hatred for each other so they'll have to keep emotions in check.

RTE will also be holding a Martin-Varadkar debate as well as one for all the party leaders together.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Asitis2019

Lord god almighty

Greta wannabes

[Deleted User]

Did hear her say that the climate crisis was mens fault?

boardise

Eoin O Broin others in SF may be earnest and well-informed on many issues but I think their financial estimates and costings are off the gable wall.
I would actually be willing to see them in Government if only to see them collide with the constraints of fiscal reality -were it not a palpable risk to the welfare of the country . It could be a costly experiment.

alias no.9

CH3OH wrote: »

Is she related to Greta?

#metoo

mgn

bfa1509 wrote: »

We should all be ashamed of ourselfs... Hang our heads in shame.

And off to bed with no supper.

lawred2

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Did hear her say that the climate crisis was mens fault?

Well men were up there wittering about it she said...

I've actually no idea what it is she was specifically upset about?

Which bits did she disagree with?

Pure soapboxing

Suckit

boardise wrote: »

Eoin O Broin others in SF may be earnest and well-informed on many issues but I think their financial estimates and costings are off the gable wall.
I would actually be willing to see them in Government if only to see them collide with the constraints of fiscal reality -were it not a palpable risk to the welfare of the country . It could be a costly experiment.

Maybe not as costly as the last two.

gmisk

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I didn't know that, but could have had a fair old guess! Whiff of the dogmatist off him.

I think he was in some of the debates from what I remember, he still has same massive eyebrows but a new hairdo...some bravado and horrible attitude
https://twitter.com/Roscomman/status/1224464198530478085?s=09

hotmail.com

Asitis2019 wrote: »

Lord god almighty

Greta wannabes

If this election has showed us anything.. the likes of Greta and Trump and other rubbish people discuss online and bicker over are not issues real people talk about or are interested in.

shenanagans

bfa1509 wrote: »

We should all be ashamed of ourselfs... Hang our heads in shame.

We're all in for a wake up call over next few years ....like it or not. Truth is people won't change behaviour unless they're made to by govt legislation/policy.

This govt has done nothing for climate change....the next lot won't be able to turn a blind eye.

is_that_so

Deleted User wrote: »

Did hear her say that the climate crisis was mens fault?

No just the men on the panel. She might have said old and white but I know she wanted to.

Suckit

shenanagans wrote: »

We're all in for a wake up call over next few years ....like it or not. Truth is people won't change behaviour unless they're made to by govt legislation/policy.

This govt has done nothing for climate change....the next lot won't be able to turn a blind eye.

They'll ban wrapping fruit and veg in styrofoam and plastic.

is_that_so

Suckit wrote: »

Maybe not as costly as the last two.

€18bn they want to spend, the other two not a lot less but more grounded. SF's money will come from taxing MNCs, despite the very big risk of that path.

hotmail.com

is_that_so wrote: »

No just the men on the panel. She might have said old and white but I know she wanted to.

You would have wet yourself if she said it.

The Phantom Jipper

TL17 wrote: »

Jack Chambers has been excellent. Has CB still quivering in her boots. Great to see her get her come uppance.

I didn't find Chinbers persuasive at all, I had to lower the volume down every time he came on. Shrieking at the top of your lungs makes for amusing TV but not a hope I'd ever vote for the guy because of it.

Hurrache

TL17 wrote: »

Jack Chambers has been excellent. Has CB still quivering in her boots. Great to see her get her come uppance.

Bizarre take on it. He's blown up on twitter and shot up the trending list for exactly the opposite reason you think. Women aren't afraid of him, as much as he'd like them to not have their own opinions.

is_that_so

hotmail.com wrote: »

You would have wet yourself if she said it.

Nah, I struggled to make head nor tail of what her point was. She should have started with the report and then the abuse after. It was a kitchen sink rant.

gmisk

is_that_so wrote: »

Nah, I struggled to make head nor tail of what her point was. She should have started with the report and then the abuse after. It was a kitchen sink rant.

Why was children and woman's rights lumped in with a climate change manifesto?
He just got so aggressive right away...came across horrendously throughout.
Hq clearly sent him out to be aggressive but he took it too far not a good look

snowgal

Chambers an absolute unlikeable person,

shenanagans

is_that_so wrote: »

It was completely rambling and even Claire Byrne seemed bewildered by it. There is really no answer to it.

He made the point very clearly.....it's the dept for Communications, Climate Action and Environment......so all their policies for those areas were in the manifesto. It was stupid of Claire to spend 5 minutes on it.

He even pointed out Richard Burton's title.....Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment. These areas are put together ..... She looked silly focusing on such nonsense.

James Brown

Calhoun wrote: »

I know it's stupid right, it's almost like any example of bad behavior from a political party can be excused because we have examples of other political parties doing something else.

I quoted the wrong post or got in after an edit.
However, you'll note criticism of the governing party on policies generally leads to that because of the lack of defences. See all the SF threads and zero talking up FG? Also you might note most of the SF criticism is troubles/IRA based. That's why they don't tend to pick on the Greens or Labour or SD's as much. Obviously not FF, them being pals n' all.

is_that_so

shenanagans wrote: »

He made the point very clearly.....it's the dept for Communications, Climate Action and Environment......so all their policies for those areas were in the manifesto. It was stupid of Claire to spend 5 minutes on it.

He even pointed out Richard Burton's title.....Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment. These areas are put together ..... She looked silly focusing on such nonsense.

Who's this? I am talking about the audience contributor at the end.

The Phantom Jipper

shenanagans wrote: »

He made the point very clearly.....it's the dept for Communications, Climate Action and Environment......so all their policies for those areas were in the manifesto. It was stupid of Claire to spend 5 minutes on it.

He even pointed out Richard Burton's title.....Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment. These areas are put together ..... She looked silly focusing on such nonsense.

They both looked like a pair of thicks arguing over nonsense. Considering he's a candidate who is trying to persuade people to vote for him, I think he came off worse out of the encounter.

shenanagans

The Phantom Jipper wrote: »

They both looked like a pair of thicks arguing over nonsense. Considering he's a candidate who is trying to persuade people to vote for him, I think he came off worse out of the encounter.

I disagree. RTE invited people on to discuss climate....then launch an attack about a nonsense issue....wasting 5minutes on bullsh**

I think he was spot-on calling her out on it.

boardise

is_that_so wrote: »

It was completely rambling and even Claire Byrne seemed bewildered by it. There is really no answer to it.

I thought CB started badly on this -she wasted a lot of time bickering over an irrelevancy -it didn't matter what was in the manifesto if it wasn't pertinent.
JC answered the question first off and it should have been let go at that .
CB came through to me as a bossy bully and I could understand JC's annoyance at being repeatedly forced to deal with a side issue.

FrancieBrady

Chambers is getting stick for his bullying bombastic manner. Not so much the content of what he said, which was not much really at the end of the day. Like most of them.

Not a word of course to the Green lady about why the Greens are getting zero traction in the polls.

Suckit

snowgal wrote: »

Chambers an absolute unlikeable person,

He's in the same constituency as Leo. Both get in. It takes a type.

orchard farm

Suckit wrote: »

Chanbers would slot in well in FG.

Eh how about naaaa

The Phantom Jipper

shenanagans wrote: »

I disagree. RTE invited people on to discuss climate....then launch an attack about a nonsense issue....wasting 5minutes on bullsh**

I think he was spot-on calling her out on it.

It wasn't as if it was a five minute Claire Byrne soliloquy. It was her throwing some chum into the water and Chambers taking the bait in a manner that made him look an utter fool. A simple clarification to dismiss the premise of the question would have sufficed instead of rambling on ad nauseam and making allusions to media bias that made him look like a complete crank.

shenanagans

The Phantom Jipper wrote: »

It wasn't as if it was a five minute Claire Byrne soliloquy. It was her throwing some chum into the water and Chambers taking the bait in a manner that made him look an utter fool. A simple clarification to dismiss the premise of the question would have sufficed instead of rambling on ad nauseam and making allusions to media bias that made him look like a complete crank.

He made his point of view.....It was Claire who won't let it go. He then asked her why time was being wasted on the issue.

Rewatch it!