Fianna Fail on 14%

Fann Linn · 09-05-2020 6:54pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Indeed a direct named quote from local president of the constituency executive is grasping at straws

and in noway representive of the collaspe in support for micheal martin leadership or concern expressed among membership at polling 14%

'Tragic M M according to the Indo this morning'. and FG and SF the only game in town for Fionnan as two most relevant parties left.

FrancieBrady · 09-05-2020 6:59pm

Fann Linn wrote: »

'Tragic M M according to the Indo this morning'. and FG and SF the only game in town for Fionnan as two most relevant parties left.

The Indo was a FF paper yesterday, was it not?

Fann Linn · 09-05-2020 7:00pm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The Indo was a FF paper yesterday, was it not?

It was. That's what surprised me!!

Shefwedfan · 09-05-2020 8:58pm

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

I struggle to understand the merits of a national government or how it would have any hope of functioning

It doesn’t, it’s more BS made up by S.F. to try cover up the fact they don’t want to be in government and prefer to sit slinging mud for next 5 years

09-05-2020 8:59pm

Shefwedfan wrote: »

It doesn’t, it’s more BS made up by S.F. to try cover up the fact they don’t want to be in government and prefer to sit slinging mud for next 5 years

It was proposed by the green party

This is nearly as bad your PBP previously in government brain-fart

McMurphy · 10-05-2020 11:05am

Deleted User wrote: »

I personally liked how the ceann comhairle being auto-reeelcted was somehow a SF conspiracy

I'm sure the army council would be laughing into their Balaclavas at that one.

You wouldn't mind only it was discussed on boards to death the days and weeks following the election results. In fact I'm pretty sure in threads he has hundreds of posts in.

The Bishop Basher · 10-05-2020 11:15am

atticu wrote: »

Can you explain how Leo is preventing a national government from being formed, please.

I would have thought it was fairly obvious but by refusing to speak to one of the 3 main democratically elected parties he is obstructing any chance at the formation of a national government.

It’s a childish position for any leader to adopt and certainly not in the national interest particularly at this time.

Leo’s irrational hatred for SF will be his undoing if he can’t find a way to rein it in. It has already done immense damage to him and his party.

christy c · 10-05-2020 11:28am

The Bishop Basher wrote: »

Leo’s irrational hatred for SF will be his undoing if he can’t find a way to rein it in. It has already done immense damage to him and his party.

I think FG will be rewarded for refusing to deal with SF, the stark reality facing us is a huge deficit and many will not want someone like Pearse Doherty as minister for Finance during this time. Remember all the rubbish he came out with during the last recession plus his cheerleading of Syriza as the cherry on top. Then more recently his Bertie Ahern style pension and tax plans.

As we all know, it is a very different world now compared to 3 months ago prior to the election.

_Kaiser_ · 10-05-2020 11:40am

I always love how any criticism of FG is always dismissed by claiming the poster must be a Shinner, or having a pop at that party to try and deflect attention :rolleyes:

Well I'm not a SF supporter or voter. I think they'd be a disaster for our FDI-dependent economy and I am someone who works full time on a "top earner" wage, pays for pretty much everything, and thinks that the long term unemployed should not be benefiting more from their lack of efforts than I do from mine in many cases.

I should therefore be a perfect target for the FG vote but I think that their main achievement is to make FF electable again by reminding us that they're even worse if given the chance and are currently led by a weak, vain populist who seems to be more concerned with ticking things off his bucket list than anything else.

LeYouth · 10-05-2020 11:42am

Fann Linn wrote: »

They are about to merge.Just waiting for Eamonn Ryan to solemnise the marriage.

I'm not sure why i read this as sodomise the marriage but that'll probably happen too

christy c · 10-05-2020 11:49am

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I always love how any criticism of FG is always dismissed by claiming the poster must be a Shinner, or having a pop at that party to try and deflect attention :rolleyes:

Well I'm not a SF supporter or voter. I think they'd be a disaster for our FDI-dependent economy and I am someone who works full time on a "top earner" wage, pays for pretty much everything, and thinks that the long term unemployed should not be benefiting more from their lack of efforts than I do from mine in many cases.

I should therefore be a perfect target for the FG vote but I think that their main achievement is to make FF electable again by reminding us that they're even worse if given the chance and are currently led by a weak, vain populist who seems to be more concerned with ticking things off his bucket list than anything else.

Broadly agree, except for FG being worse than FF- plenty of populist BS and spending but the economy was somewhat stable compared to the Bertie era tax and spending policies. Other issues of course, but dont know what FF would have done better.

Do you mind me asking who you vote for? I voted FG since 2011, but getting sick of them and wont vote for parties like SF for reasons you outline.

Shefwedfan · 10-05-2020 11:56am

The Bishop Basher wrote: »

I would have thought it was fairly obvious but by refusing to speak to one of the 3 main democratically elected parties he is obstructing any chance at the formation of a national government.

It’s a childish position for any leader to adopt and certainly not in the national interest particularly at this time.

Leo’s irrational hatred for SF will be his undoing if he can’t find a way to rein it in. It has already done immense damage to him and his party.

FF/FG are trying to form a government so not sure why you are saying they are not acting in national interest

10-05-2020 12:06pm

christy c wrote: »

Broadly agree, except for FG being worse than FF- plenty of populist BS and spending but the economy was somewhat stable compared to the Bertie era tax and spending policies. Other issues of course, but dont know what FF would have done better.

Do you mind me asking who you vote for? I voted FG since 2011, but getting sick of them and wont vote for parties like SF for reasons you outline.

Theres always the soc dems....i think they have some good speakers and reasonable policies,but are completly inactive in most areas tbf and may not be an option for you.....if they were where i am,likely id give them uimhir 1

_Kaiser_ · 10-05-2020 12:09pm

christy c wrote: »

Broadly agree, except for FG being worse than FF- plenty of populist BS and spending but the economy was somewhat stable compared to the Bertie era tax and spending policies. Other issues of course, but dont know what FF would have done better.

Do you mind me asking who you vote for? I voted FG since 2011, but getting sick of them and wont vote for parties like SF for reasons you outline.

Think about it. Despite the country being on its knees in 2011 and having a clear mandate and majority support to make the hard decisions and drive REAL reform, we instead got "business as usual" and they somehow managed to not only squander the recovery, but actually make many things worse.

It's for those reasons that I consider them worse than FF because they also managed to make that party not only electable but effectively in coalition (thanks to Enda's personal arrogance and ego) after their decimation in 2011.

As for who I usually vote for - usually FF.
The reality is that we're a two party State and served by very poor choices anyway. It's one of the Big Two or a vote for a group who think people in the Republic really care about "the North" as a key policy item. Plus as I said above, they'd be disaster for our country if they actually did get power.

The alternatives are a group of self-serving, one-policy parochial "Independents" (who are often former members of FF/FG anyway) or a cabaal of lefty extremists. What's left? Labour (who sold out any USP to get into power with FG) or the tax-everything urban Middle class virtue signallers? (AKA the Greens).

Given those options, FF become the only real choice. As bad as they are (and they are!), they've dragged this country forward over the years and are self-aware enough to realise that you have to give the peasants something back occasionally (as opposed to the arrogance of FG).

It's not pretty and I think there's a increasing amount of people not really served by any of them, but that's what we have.

atticu · 10-05-2020 12:32pm

The Bishop Basher wrote: »

I would have thought it was fairly obvious but by refusing to speak to one of the 3 main democratically elected parties he is obstructing any chance at the formation of a national government.

It’s a childish position for any leader to adopt and certainly not in the national interest particularly at this time.

Leo’s irrational hatred for SF will be his undoing if he can’t find a way to rein it in. It has already done immense damage to him and his party.

Are you actually trying to say that a government can not be formed without FG?

Your position seems to be that if there is to be any government, it has to have FG.

I think that is quite bizarre.

What is stopping all the other parties and independents forming a government?

As I understand it, you need 81 seats to form a government, is this wrong?
You seem to believe that it is.

Mad_maxx · 10-05-2020 12:35pm

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

Labour and the SDs have ran away.

The SDs in particular seem to have no interest in power. I voted for them, and won't again if there is a new election

not sure why your surprised by the Soc Dems ?

rosin shorthall has always been the quintessential " hurler on the ditch " waffler , much happier to blather away on radio panels

10-05-2020 12:36pm

atticu wrote: »

Are you actually trying to say that a government can not be formed without FG?

Your position seems to be that if there is to be any government, it has to have FG.

I think that is quite bizarre.

What is stopping all the other parties and independents forming a government?

As I understand it, you need 81 seats to form a government, is this wrong?
You seem to believe that it is.

Way to.move the goalposts....you enquired about how varadkar was blocking a national/unity government

Your answer is really mean-spirited to a genuine reply

_Kaiser_ · 10-05-2020 12:46pm

atticu wrote: »

Are you actually trying to say that a government can not be formed without FG?

Your position seems to be that if there is to be any government, it has to have FG.

I think that is quite bizarre.

What is stopping all the other parties and independents forming a government?

As I understand it, you need 81 seats to form a government, is this wrong?
You seem to believe that it is.

There's the numbers/seats and there's practicality.

A "Government" made up of all the small groups and Independents would fail within the month because they couldn't agree on anything or get anything done. Most of these ran on very limited vague platforms or single local issues to get elected.

As I said above, the political reality is that we're a two party State. The problem we have though is twofold :

- we have no real way to hold the Government to account during its term due to a powerless or largely similar main opposition (although that last point will change with SF taking that role but just as powerless)

- the electorate itself is a big part of the problem. Voting as a protest, or for the aforementioned one-issue parochial types who should really be running for the local council, and not getting involved in politics or the performance of Government beyond polling day in the vast majority of cases.
Many people genuinely believed that Leo's youth, sexual orientation and being media savvy was enough to justify him being Taoiseach (and that it would send a message about how far Ireland has come - as if that matters or is even noticed in countries that can't even find the place on a map), but completely ignored his lack of results in the 2 ministries he held under Enda, or that most of what he had to say was about someone else's department!

FF or FG. Both can actually deliver results if pushed. The problem is we leave them at it and they understandably then think they have a free hand to do what suits them, not necessarily the rest of us.

Shefwedfan · 10-05-2020 12:46pm

Mad_maxx wrote: »

not sure why your surprised by the Soc Dems ?

rosin shorthall has always been the quintessential " hurler on the ditch " waffler , much happier to blather away on radio panels

You have to put S.F. into the same bracket so, they have ran away from parties who have tried to come together with them

The only parties seem interested in forming a government is FF/FG/Greens

10-05-2020 12:52pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

There's the numbers/seats and there's practicality.

A "Government" made up of all the small groups and Independents would fail within the month because they couldn't agree on anything or get anything done. Most of these ran on very limited vague platforms or single local issues to get elected.

As I said above, the political reality is that we're a two party State. The problem we have though is twofold :

- we have no real way to hold the Government to account during its term due to a powerless or largely similar main opposition (although that last point will change with SF taking that role but just as powerless)

- the electorate itself is a big part of the problem. Voting as a protest, or for the aforementioned one-issue parochial types who should really be running for the local council, and not getting involved in politics or the performance of Government beyond polling day in the vast majority of cases.
Many people genuinely believed that Leo's youth, sexual orientation and being media savvy was enough to justify him being Taoiseach (and that it would send a message about how far Ireland has come - as if that matters or is even noticed in countries that can't even find the place on a map), but completely ignored his lack of results in the 2 ministries he held under Enda, or that most of what he had to say was about someone else's department!

FF or FG. Both can actually deliver results if pushed. The problem is we leave them at it and they understandably then think they have a free hand to do what suits them, not necessarily the rest of us.

Tbf to varadkar,the man runs a v.slick good PR campaign,but once you start to see through it....it falls apart quite quickly and realisation of little substance to him

The reason large tracts of the country voting local issue (waterford have now elected 2 indo TDs on cardiac care issue),is that if outside M50 people/country kind of left to its own devices....the childrens hospideal being a prime example,to me,there was no sense in building it,where it is

christy c · 10-05-2020 12:55pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Think about it. Despite the country being on its knees in 2011 and having a clear mandate and majority support to make the hard decisions and drive REAL reform, we instead got "business as usual" and they somehow managed to not only squander the recovery, but actually make many things worse.

It's for those reasons that I consider them worse than FF because they also managed to make that party not only electable but effectively in coalition (thanks to Enda's personal arrogance and ego) after their decimation in 2011.

As for who I usually vote for - usually FF.
The reality is that we're a two party State and served by very poor choices anyway. It's one of the Big Two or a vote for a group who think people in the Republic really care about "the North" as a key policy item. Plus as I said above, they'd be disaster for our country if they actually did get power.

The alternatives are a group of self-serving, one-policy parochial "Independents" (who are often former members of FF/FG anyway) or a cabaal of lefty extremists. What's left? Labour (who sold out any USP to get into power with FG) or the tax-everything urban Middle class virtue signallers? (AKA the Greens).

Given those options, FF become the only real choice. As bad as they are (and they are!), they've dragged this country forward over the years and are self-aware enough to realise that you have to give the peasants something back occasionally (as opposed to the arrogance of FG).

It's not pretty and I think there's a increasing amount of people not really served by any of them, but that's what we have.

Thanks for the answer. Still disagree on FF being worse, anything FF gave the peasants was an illusion based on completely unsustainable economic policies. And along with SF, they have no problem making these reckless promises again if they think it will benefit them in an election (see pension age for example). Also Bertie telling people to commit suicide would rank fairly highly on the arrogance scale.

That said, I would still count FG as a poor option. And I broadly agree with your assessment of Irish politics.

blanch152 · 10-05-2020 1:47pm

The Bishop Basher wrote: »

I would have thought it was fairly obvious but by refusing to speak to one of the 3 main democratically elected parties he is obstructing any chance at the formation of a national government.

It’s a childish position for any leader to adopt and certainly not in the national interest particularly at this time.

Leo’s irrational hatred for SF will be his undoing if he can’t find a way to rein it in. It has already done immense damage to him and his party.

Rubbish.

If the others don't want Fine Gael, and they spent the election telling the people they wanted them out, they have 120 or so seats to use to elect a Taoiseach and government without Fine Gael.

It is certainly childish of other parties to say they now need Fine Gael.

FrancieBrady · 10-05-2020 1:55pm

blanch152 wrote: »

Rubbish.

If the others don't want Fine Gael, and they spent the election telling the people they wanted them out, they have 120 or so seats to use to elect a Taoiseach and government without Fine Gael.

It is certainly childish of other parties to say they now need Fine Gael.

Clearly they don't have the numbers.

It's 'childish' to keep using this as a stick.

Taking a sledgehammer to your principles and policies, and/or offering freebies/garda stations/motorways etc, is not the way everyone wants to do business.

Remember yer man that promised 'new politics', who was he leading again?

The Bishop Basher · 10-05-2020 1:58pm

Shefwedfan wrote: »

FF/FG are trying to form a government so not sure why you are saying they are not acting in national interest

Yes. A government with a Taoiseach nobody wants, a party that, by their own admission, lost the election and the greens who, lets face it, are the only other party willing to do business with FG.

This government has a questionable mandate. An issue that has been called out by members of each of the parties involved.

No one in this country voted for a FG/FF government.

And I’m not a Shinner.

ittakestwo · 10-05-2020 1:59pm

FF TD out saying that PS have to get a pay increase at the end of the year due to the big effort they made during Covid-19.

We know they destroyed the country leaving us in an IMF bailout but you would think they would have learned a lesson and gone away from the goodies for all method they have.

How can they pay for this increase if its inevitable we will be left with a massive bill from covid-19 and a load of private sector jobs destroyed. The lucky people who dont lose their jobs from covid-19 in the private sector even if they do have to take a pay cut will have to be hit with higher taxes because FF want to increase PS pay. This all going on while in the background we still have a housing crises that will take billions to fix.

The Bishop Basher · 10-05-2020 2:19pm

ittakestwo wrote: »

FF TD out saying that PS have to get a pay increase at the end of the year due to the big effort they made during Covid-19.

It should beggar belief but it doesn’t.

Leopards and spots and all that.

McMurphy · 10-05-2020 2:44pm

atticu wrote: »

Can you explain how Leo is preventing a national government from being formed, please.

My understanding was that you need 81 seats to form a government.
Am I wrong?
Or, have things changed?

So.........Up above you're quoting and asking me how Leo is preventing a national government of unity being formed, had an answer provided to you detailing exactly how he was preventing it (by specifically excluding another party)

And now you're trying to rewrite the question.

atticu wrote: »

Are you actually trying to say that a government can not be formed without FG?

Your position seems to be that if there is to be any government, it has to have FG.

I think that is quite bizarre.

What is stopping all the other parties and independents forming a government?

As I understand it, you need 81 seats to form a government, is this wrong?
You seem to believe that it is.

No one is suggesting a government can't be formed without FG (from memory they have been in opposition far more that in govt - so that proves that point).

So going back to your original question.

Leo is preventing a national government of unity taking place by trying to exclude one of the other party's, one that has more seats than his own party have.

Your understanding about needing 81 seats needed to make up a govt is correct, you're not wrong about that, and nothings changed.

You're just trying to rewrite your own question, or do you not know the difference in government and a national government?

A national unity government, government of national unity (GNU), or national union government is a broad coalition government consisting of all parties (or all major parties) in the legislature, usually formed during a time of war or other national emergency.

The pandemic can rightly be described as national emergency, and Leo is preventing it (as already mentioned).

https://twitter.com/neasa_neasa/status/1241666712346509312?s=19

Shefwedfan · 10-05-2020 3:07pm

The Bishop Basher wrote: »

Yes. A government with a Taoiseach nobody wants, a party that, by their own admission, lost the election and the greens who, lets face it, are the only other party willing to do business with FG.

This government has a questionable mandate. An issue that has been called out by members of each of the parties involved.

No one in this country voted for a FG/FF government.

And I’m not a Shinner.

Based on the election plenty of people want FF in government, having a FF government always meant MM

I voted for a FF government but they didn’t get the numbers because of a revolt vote which has left us in a bit of a mess. The best option is FF/FG/Greens and I hope it comes together

atticu · 10-05-2020 8:46pm

McMurphy wrote: »

So.........Up above you're quoting and asking me how Leo is preventing a national government of unity being formed, had an answer provided to you detailing exactly how he was preventing it (by specifically excluding another party)

And now you're trying to rewrite the question.

No one is suggesting a government can't be formed without FG (from memory they have been in opposition far more that in govt - so that proves that point).

So going back to your original question.

Leo is preventing a national government of unity taking place by trying to exclude one of the other party's, one that has more seats than his own party have.

Your understanding about needing 81 seats needed to make up a govt is correct, you're not wrong about that, and nothings changed.

You're just trying to rewrite your own question, or do you not know the difference in government and a national government?

The pandemic can rightly be described as national emergency, and Leo is preventing it (as already mentioned).

https://twitter.com/neasa_neasa/status/1241666712346509312?s=19

FG said that they would not go into government with SF before the elections.
A lot of people probably voted for them because of this.
Now you want them to go against this, and you are saying that it is Leo’s fault, and he is selfish.
What about the people who vote for FG on the basis that they would not go into government with SF?

Next you might try and tell me that SF must take their seats in Westminster, and if they don’t then they are selfish.

atticu · 10-05-2020 8:59pm

McMurphy wrote: »

So.........

do you not know the difference in government and a national government?

I never used the word unity.

So, there is no difference.

I can just as well ask how is Leo preventing a government being formed?

Definition of a National Government?
A national government is the government, or political authority, that controls a nation. At minimum, a national government requires a national army, enough power over its states or provinces to set and maintain foreign policy, and the ability to collect taxes. Beyond that, a national government can be anything from a dictatorship to a loose federation of states, like the Confederacy during the U.S. Civil War. National governments can be separated into two basic types - unitary and federal.

Fianna Fail on 14%

Comments