What have we come to

shesty wrote: »

They are one and the same.Anyone who knows their history knows that.SF are the public face of the IRA.

Their politicians stepped out of line (in their eyes), and in step the "dissident republicans" to remind them what their cause is (and who is boss.)

We really want this governing the country?

On a side note, I am very curious to see how the Gov make-up will happen.Numbers don't seem to be there - sensing a certain reluctance among left-leaning parties to be seen going into government with SF. Can't blame them really, but they are all damned if they do and damned if they don't.

It was also interesting that Michelle O'Neill did not outright condemn the dissidents
.
She mentioned the threat to her safety family etc
The bit that really stuck out to me was that Ms O'Neill mentions that the dissidents republicans have no strategy



Interesting choice of words?

It also struck me how her family the Doris's were involved in the very activity she now condemns. By people who had no mandate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_O%27Neill#Background

Of course Gerry Kelly's hypocrisy goes without saying

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Kelly#Early_life

It is the same thing I keep finding time and time again with SF. Hypocrisy and contradiction. They are just a contradiction wrapped in an hypocrisy at this stage.

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

So it is even LESS a percentage among new SF voters thanks for clarifying.

Also the very fact the ROI electorate does not care about Brexit is indicative of how they do not care about NI. As the two are intertwined.


Even when presented with an unbiased figure of how little importantance Brexit was to the electorate you still try to spin it. I'm surprised others are willing to engage with such a disingenuous standard of commentary.

Do you not understand the point? Brexit has a critical effect on the whole island of Ireland in particular NI.

Yet the ROI electorate do not care about it.

Partly this is do to lack of understanding of such a complex issue and the electorate's distance from NI. FG took the hit for this and it is only in years to come people will realise how momentous it was and how well FG did with the deal.

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Do you understand what disingenuous means? You attempted to spin figures to suit your own agenda.
I'm not disappearing down any rabbit holes with your style of posting. I'll let others fall for that behaviour.

Where did I spin figures I have given figures on housing on NI and so.
I have given details on NI health issues, social welfare and so on and so forth.

The point I make is about the contradiction regarding the electorate in the ROI, NI, Brexit and so on.

1% only care about Brexit in ROI.

How many of that percentage were SF voters?
0.02% max?

Is this the figure I should have used because if so it proves my argument even more. The Brexit issue was just too complex to sell to the Irish electorate vague promises of change much easier.

blanch152 wrote: »

It is actually an interesting situation.

The traditional Sinn Fein voter like yourself will only care if they push a united Ireland and really don't care if they break every other promise. The more recent Sinn Fein voter will get annoyed at them pushing for a united Ireland, especially if they are failing to deliver on every other promise.

The carbon tax one is the interesting point. Places like Wexford, Clare, Longford/Westmeath etc. elected Sinn Fein politicians because they were the only ones against the carbon tax. Rolling over to the Greens won't go down well.

People from my generation often do not care much about United Ireland, even if they did vote Sinn Fein this time around. I am personally not Irish but I care more about it than most of the Irish people I know. Most of the Irish people of my generation that I know are more like ' what use is it, the Brits and people who want to be British will still remain in Ireland even if it unifies'. Yet I have never met anyone who would be OPPOSED to a United Ireland per se. It's just not as big of a deal for the current generation. If NI wants to join Ireland then they can do that, but if they won't they won't.

As for domestic policies within what is now Northern Ireland, I personally don't give a sh1te nor would any Irish people of my generation (unless they happen to have a lot of family there). Why would they? Most of them have never even so much as visited Northern Ireland, it is far away, it is none of their concern. And once Ireland unifies, everything will be under the Republic government so internal Northern Ireland affairs will become mostly irrelevant.

Of course a post unification Ireland would face new political challenges (Imagine Arlene in the Dail hah) but that is none of our concern right now.

I would personally just designate certain majority-loyalist constituencies as 'Ulster Autonomous zones', with their own little regional parliament (the one in belfast possibly), an exemption to the Irish language which they so detest for whatever reason, and if they want to ban all sorts of progressive things in there and wave their union jacks then they can do that.

The rest of Northern Ireland can then just join the Republic just like the rest of it.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why would I have to explain it? I voted for SF, I am not a member.
And I ACCEPT that political parties make mistakes - do things for various reasons - and may not ALWAYS do what I want them to do.

So you ignore the fact that the SDLP called SF out on giving social welfare to WM and supporting welfare cuts because you are not a member?

That is your argument - seriously? - you can do better than that.
I suppose it gets you out of answering the question.

Here is SF's take on things, just to show you that there is in politics 2 sides to a story, as in life.

https://www.sinnfein.ie/files/2015/Welfare_the_facts_SF.pdf

Now you give me SF's take on things as a retort which is naturally propagandist in tone completely at odds with what they actually did in reality.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/sinn-f%C3%A9in-under-fire-over-welfare-cuts-move-1.2435441



The reality on the ground - (from the article I linked)

"Sinn Féin has been attacked in the Northern Assembly for supporting a motion handing over responsibility for welfare cuts to Westminster rather than to Stormont.


The DUP and Sinn Féin had sufficient numbers in the Assembly to push through a legislative consent motion that allows Westminster, instead of the Northern Executive, to legislate for British government welfare reform.

The SDLP, in particular, complained that Sinn Féin, by endorsing the motion, was diluting devolution and handing back some powers to Westminster.

“Only a matter of weeks ago, Sinn Féin would have described this as a huge, serious mistake but now Sinn Féin is doing Tory austerity – and in spades,” said SDLP deputy leader Fearghal McKinney."


By signing up to welfare changes, the party is likely to be accused of supporting austerity in Northern Ireland but opposing it in the Republic.

By the way, I am not getting into a debate on whether they are right or wrong. Just pointing out the existence of 2 points of view.
Well, again. That is an 'just your opinion man'.

BTW, The 'troubles' as you quaintly call them are in the distance. 24 yrs, to be exact.

Fair enough if you want to believe a SF pamphlet or an actual unbiased report of what happened in Stormont re-social welfare cuts that is your prerogative.

As for quaintly reffering to 'the troubles' as 'the troubles' is that not the term used by the majority in Ireland and NI? Or would you prefer me to call it 'the struggle' ?

Also as referring to .'the troubles' as in the distance at 24 years ago. There have been many other instances that have raised questions following thier official end. Not least Paul Quinn's murder in 2007 which was 13 years ago.
Yet FF etc are blamed for the economic crash in Ireland 12 years ago. Yet many will not let them forget about that!
Yet another contradiction and paradox.

Where did I say the vote was for a UI specifically? Did SF hide their UI aspirations from the voter? I seem to remember it being a key part of Mary Lou's contributions to the debates she took part in.

Nowhere, I was merely making the point that people in the ROI voted for SF secondary policies, not thier main raison d'être a UI

If SF have failed on the above in Northern Ireland then the electorate have the option of voting them out of the executive. Are they?

They deposed from government those who have failed in those areas down here though. Funny that...eh?

It is not odd at all really.
Because there is a loyalty to the established party with over 20 years of unbroken SF rule. FF had that to an extent back in the day in the ROI.

Also as you pointed out yourself NI is a 'special entity' many there would keep SF in no matter what they did if there was any hope of a UI - border poll etc.

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

So you ignore the fact that the SDLP called SF out on giving social welfare to WM and supporting welfare cuts because you are not a member?

That is your argument - seriously? - you can do better than that.
I suppose it gets you out of answering the question.




Now you give me SF's take on things as a retort which is naturally propagandist in tone completely at odds with what they actually did in reality.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/sinn-f%C3%A9in-under-fire-over-welfare-cuts-move-1.2435441

"Sinn Féin has been attacked in the Northern Assembly for supporting a motion handing over responsibility for welfare cuts to Westminster rather than to Stormont.


Sinn Féin has been attacked in the Northern Assembly for supporting a motion handing over responsibility for welfare cuts to Westminster rather than to Stormont.

The reality on the ground - (from the article I linked)

The DUP and Sinn Féin had sufficient numbers in the Assembly to push through a legislative consent motion that allows Westminster, instead of the Northern Executive, to legislate for British government welfare reform.

The SDLP, in particular, complained that Sinn Féin, by endorsing the motion, was diluting devolution and handing back some powers to Westminster.

“Only a matter of weeks ago, Sinn Féin would have described this as a huge, serious mistake but now Sinn Féin is doing Tory austerity – and in spades,” said SDLP deputy leader Fearghal McKinney."


By signing up to welfare changes, the party is likely to be accused of supporting austerity in Northern Ireland but opposing it in the Republic.[/B]







Fair enough if you want to believe a SF pamphlet or an actual unbiased report of what happened in Stormont re-social welfare cuts that is your prerogative.

So it's...don't listen to SF's side because that is party propaganda...here, listen to the SDLP's take on it, because that isn't propaganda.

As for quaintly reffering to 'the troubles' as 'the troubles' is that not the term used by the majority in Ireland and NI? Or would you prefer me to call it 'the struggle' ?

The 'troubles' originates from a British centric view that the Irish problem is a troublesome problem over there in one of our dominions.
It was a bloody and intractable conflict/war that lasted almost 40 years this time.

Also as referring to .'the troubles' as in the distance at 24 years ago There have been many other instances that have raised questions following thier official end. Not least Paul Quinn's murder in 2007 which was 13 years ago.
Yet FF etc are blamed for the economic crash in Ireland 12 years ago. Yet many will not let them forget about that!
Yet another contradiction and paradox.

You will have to show us where SF are implicated in the murder of Paul Quinn.

Nowhere I was merely making the point that people in the ROI voted for SF secondary policies, not thier main raison d'être a UI

How do you know this? As I said, MLMD said that a UI and preparing for it is a key point of what they intend to do, several times in the debates.

It is not odd at all really.
Because there is a loyalty to the established party with over 20 years of unbroken SF rule. FF had that to an extent back in the day in the ROI.

Also as you pointed out yourself NI is a 'special entity' many there would keep SF in no matter what they did if there was any hope of a UI - border poll etc.

Jesus. I don't know where to begin with that one.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I said just before we voted...whatever happens, things are changed fundamentally in the body politic going forward.

Anyone who voted for change needs to take a bow IMO.

It is funny that one word is the whole reason the bluff one fifth succeeded.
Sure a change is as good as a rest?

I think most people who voted SF and were new voters, Will not be taking a bow they will have thier hands on thier eyes with some of the SF antics that others see.
They will have thier fingers in thier ears for some of the SF antics that others hear.

And finally they will have the excuses made for any promises that SF fail to deliver. Far from taking a bow, they should duck and run for cover.

Leo, busy making excuses.

Mr Varadkar explained that he did not have the opportunity while Taoiseach to modernise and reform the party as he was busy with the work of Government and State, so he now relishes the opportunity to do that.

Quite an extraordinary statement really, when you think about it.

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2020/0212/1114778-varadkar-election/?fbclid=IwAR3u9k-iW5bKegbBTCNfZ5arSRoWZxvve2-POMPsvs6Qn_UpmRBpTehAqV0

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Exactly all 'the left' do not seem to want to be associated with SF

The main traditional parties said no to SF
M Martin, B Howlin, L Varadkar

The SD and the Greens have not said no. But have no said yes either. Plus as others have pointed out Green tax hikes v SF how will that end. And more importantly look? Most of Rural ireland do not like the Greens and most of working class Dublin do not like the Greens.

After all is said and done FF and FG appear the most likely collation this time and with xyz etc.
That would be truly historic the civil war parties letting bygones be bygones

The irony is that if all these new SF voters were bothered about the local elections and not just hype voters - SF would not have taken a hammering in them. In turn SF would have ran more candidates as a result which could have made SF the largest party. Letting them call the shots, sorry I mean make the calls.

Council elections not jazzy enough?

And that is all fair enough.
So SF fail to construct a government. The oppurtunity passes to FF and FG to create a very obvious government which was formed before. If they pass on doing that, there is no option but to go back to the electorate and see what they think.

That is democracy working and functioning perfectly.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Leo, busy making excuses.



Quite an extraordinary statement really, when you think about it.

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2020/0212/1114778-varadkar-election/?fbclid=IwAR3u9k-iW5bKegbBTCNfZ5arSRoWZxvve2-POMPsvs6Qn_UpmRBpTehAqV0

You shouldn't be so hard on him. He and Inda only had...er...nine years...