[Deleted User] wrote: » Whats the point though,whole thing falls apart every decade or so?? Ive seen enough once in a century crisis to do me a lifetime,and im nowhere near 100 Whats point of having full employment of people cant afford to live or make a life here,large numbers of polish, and lower paid left due to high rents and sh1t wages,some over a decade living here......they should be putting down roots,starting families (some had),buying houses etc,we cant provide a future for lower paid workers here The whole econmic recovery last time was a fraud,great on paper,but not so great to those who need it most.....when you have people work in childcare,who cant afford to put their own kids in childcare,this is perhaps the most glaring example of inequality that passes as econmic succes that sickens me
Edgware wrote: » No one said everything was perfect but if people actually believe that the magic money tree policies of S.F. and company will work then they deserve everything they get.
tikkahunter wrote: » We were in full employment before this . That is noting to be sniffed at .
Ultimanemo wrote: » Now we can say Boris Johnson and Mary Lou have something in comon
Deleted User wrote: » The fact they are largest party all age groups under 65 is to be ignored?? We've had 2 wasted booms,everytime something geos economically wrong ff/fg claim it a once in a century event....how come we have 2 of these in last 12 years,wheter it good or bad,im in favour of change anyway,this cant continue Shinnerz seem best placed of rest in the dail anyway
Bishop of hope wrote: » Having no idea is the "minister" for health saying there are 18 other covids. This is the minister in charge, he is on top of his brief isn't he.
Deleted User wrote: » She didnt have a head cold? She had coronavirus (quite bad too,developed pluericy)....its amazing your critism.of people for self isolating
thomasdylan wrote: » Are you asking how come coronavirus happened? It's going to be the biggest pandemic since 1919 so it probably is a once in a century event.
tikkahunter wrote: » Growing up in that area in the 80's i know full well what him and his associates are like and get up to . The younger generation that have been conned into voting for SF have no idea .
all about the mane wrote: » Ellis is like some of the clowns on here. Wishing that more people were dead. Then again it’s part of that shower’s history.
markodaly wrote: » They are a ****ing joke. Peddlers of fear and fake news.
hatrickpatrick wrote: » Of course I'm speculating, but I'd bet my life savings on it with little hesitation. The utter hatred for FFG among the vast majority of people I know from my own generation, spanning pretty much the whole spectrum of socioeconomic classes, speaks for itself. The fact that pretty much the entirety of social media and the actual results of the last election bear that out are why I'm confident these aren't mere guesses on my part.
They won't buy property unless someone solves the affordability situation, that's literally the whole point of everything we're arguing about here. The ladder has been pulled up so that this generation is unable to get on it and FFG are directly responsible for that.
See above. You're making the idiotic assumption that FFG will solve the housing unaffordability crisis. The reason they're being destroyed in elections isn't because they can't, it's because they won't. They refuse to. They don't care about it.
That would be a fair comment if the results of the election, and the demographic breakdown of those results, weren't perfectly in line with what I've been saying.
And because FFG refuse to tackle housing or the overall spiralling cost of living, having a well paying job doesn't do jack sh!t for one's quality of life. That's literally exactly what I've been saying for this entire thread - people were able to afford better living standards on part time incomes five years ago than they can on full time incomes, because the cost of living and housing have risen by orders of magnitude faster than average incomes, and Fine Gael seem to be perfectly happy with this - smugly and bizarrely cheerleading falling living standards as "progress". Unless that changes, they will not be able to win over this generation.
See above. The cost of living is too high regardless. And FFG refuse to tackle it. Unless they do, people who have been voting against them will not be changing their minds.
Again, if the cost of housing and the cost of living aren't tackled, we are headed for very profound changes to our political climate. The shoots of that can already be seen with the latest GE results.
You're acting like the cost of living crisis is temporary. It could be, but it won't be under FF or FG, because they have categorically refused to do anything about it except fiddle while Rome burns. Honestly I don't understand what you're not getting here. Your entire argument is built around the assumption that people are going to escape from the stagflation trap. They won't unless government policy tackles that stagflation, and FFG are ideologically opposed to prioritising quality of life above macroeconomics.
tikkahunter wrote: » https://www.independent.ie/world-news/coronavirus/sinn-fein-td-apologises-after-falsely-claiming-17-people-died-in-one-nursing-home-39149665.html
A Sinn Fein source said: “Dessie just got his facts wrong.” It is understood Mr Ellis based his statement on information he had received locally in his constituency.
all about the mane wrote: » That clown o’Reilly accusing the government of kite flying.
Yurt! wrote: » Were you not paying attention to what was going on the past couple of years?
Deluded. The combined share of FF/FG votes has plummeted like property ownership rates over the last few elections. This is a permanent change in the Irish political landscape, and the 'big two' created it.
45 year old property owners don't magic into existence like some law of nature. The conditions for affordable home ownership need to be there.
The algorithm has changed and quite frankly the traditional big two parties are without a map. In any case, the housing situation, as massive a failure as it is, is just one front.
McMurphy wrote: » Not so for the victims of the troubles though, no need for me to link back to my post outling how you have had 100s of posts using the deaths of others to point score for years now - it's there for all see - and they will return soon after this pandemic passes, as sure as night follows day. You quoting the wrong poster? Or did mark buy a dog that's not yet up to speed on who its supposed to be barking at?
Bowie wrote: » You did the very thing you castigated others for allegedly doing. That's it simply. Now you say you do, but don'y harp on it and in the same post re-visit it
markodaly wrote: » That's lovely of course, but again, you are speculating, the fact is you don't know if your prediction will be the actual outcome.
It may be strong now, but those younger people you harp on about, they will get jobs, buy a property, and become part of the establishment so to speak. The older you get, the more conservative you become. It's as true as night becomes day.
Votes will therefore go back to FF/FG, they will not all just move to a new party.
Don't you think this clouds your judgement then? Its a very small sample size.
Yes, younger voters who may not have as much to lose. Now though, they probably have lost their jobs and may have a different mindset? Whatever you think about FG, they did a good job in creating policies that created lots and lots of jobs.
Easy to forget that in good times, now though with unemployment at 22% it will focus minds, a lot!
Why? FF more than doubled it seats in GE 2016 after the debacle of GE 2011. You think after 9 years of FG in power, a few years away from the hot seat, FG won't come storming back? They will just disappear into nothing? FF too?
I can easily see FG storming back after an SF led left-wing government failing, that will ultimately disappoint as they will over-promise (its in their nature). Again, a 25-year-old voter who has just graduated is a very different beast to a 45-year-old taxpayer voter and property owner.
blanch152 wrote: » More fools those who fell for the SF palaver. The ones blocking social housing development were the SF-led councils. Thankfully last year's local elections rid us of that scourge.
Galwayguy35 wrote: » I never said they didn't have capable politicans in the party, Pearse Doherty and ML herself would be the best example of this. But the same tired old story they peddle of tax the rich for everything and the spending and house builds they were promising at the last election was off the wall.
Deleted User wrote: » Boys yous are gonna drop the notion shinnerz are wasters,there isnt enough votes there to give em numbers they are getting?? I would like to see a manifesto drawn up by new generation greens,before id dismiss em as an option....but noway are they going anywhere under ryan
McMurphy wrote: » Here. Before we go around the houses trying to claim Leo didn't specifically say "criticism/critical of or criticise"" Tony Holohan said "he was not comfortable with the idea of a company chartering a flight to bring in staff" I think we can all agree that he's referring to Keeling's? Leo said. he “shares the discomfort expressed” by Dr Holohan. I think that's safe to say he wasn't too impressed with their shenanigans, you might even say he was critical. Seriously lads.
Galwayguy35 wrote: » SF policies are always going top be popular with voters and a lot of their core vote aren't exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer so telling them they shouldn't have to pay for anything will always be a vote catcher. The Greens on the other hand want to bring in policies that are very unpolular in rural areas.
blanch152 wrote: » The issue is that they need a two-thirds majority of members to support it. However, have no doubt about it, the Greens at senior level would jump at the chance to be in Government, they want to change things and do it now. They are not prepared to wait. They would actually be happy to make permanent changes to the way things are done and then disappear. That makes them different from other political parties. As for the Shinners, it all depends on whether you are interested in power for powers sake or whether you want to get things done. SF aren't really interested in change, they are only interested in power for powers sake, so that they can push the united Ireland agenda. They will support anti-vaxxers, 5G weirdos and whatever other strange cause just to get into power, not because they actually believe in them.
Deleted User wrote: » Shinners once used poll at 1 to 2% (took local SF man 3 elections to get in,last election ge returned with twice the quota)...now shinnerz are largest party for 1st pref under 65 Anything is possible in politics,if you build a platform,good policies and win people around.......though for greens to push on,they likely need to oust eamonn lettuce ryan