The wondrous adventures of Sinn Fein (part 3) Mod Notes and Threadbanned List in OP

Marine Layer wrote: »

Young people are also voting for other parties
Its a larger number
One of the issues here is expecting the perfect
The market doesnt allow for that
Socialism certainly doesn't
You have to work at it yourself
It was ever thus
No panacea for any other route has ever been found

Nobody is expecting the perfect, we're expecting those we elect to govern our country, to prioritise the preservation of the nation's quality of life. FG and FF's measures, such as promoting horrifically lowered accommodation standards by legalising co-living developments and championing the selling off of public land to private developers, actively assist in decreasing quality of life for thousands of people. All SF had to do was oppose these policies, and they were immediately and automatically the better option out of the three.

Why is that so difficult to understand? Nobody is expecting the perfect, but if you have several options, you pick the least sh!te of them.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I suggest you actually read their housing policy - there's a detailed pdf on their site.
Amusing that one of their policy tenets is to investigate why local authorities turn down NAMA offers, given that their own councilors are a part of those authorities.

There isn't a single mention of "Direct building", which is not surprising as it's totally impractical for LA's to try to become developers. They refer to using public land by housing associations such as Clúid, but I wonder if there is no push for their councilors to do that now with the public lands they control purely to keep the housing crisis as a focal political point.

"Direct building" was a misnomer on my part. Who builds public housing is irrelevant, the important aspect keeping it public so that the state can charge fair and reasonable rents as opposed to allowing the market to continue fleecing people. Young people are sick and tired of seeing FF and FG knocking down public housing and rebuilding it with only a fraction of the original number of public units, and turning the rest over to the mercy of the market. It's that simple. We need more state-owned, state-rented affordable housing, not less.

SF has also been vocal. If they have an alternative then yes, but Eoin O'Broin could demonstrate that by not objecting to developments providing that.

I'm not suggesting that SF don't engage in NIMBYism, but one of their reasons for opposing housing developments is specifically the selling off of public housing to the private market. And that aspect gets constantly overlooked by their detractors. Two very recent examples are O'Devaney Gardens and Oscar Traynor Road. These developments were not opposed because SF didn't want high density housing on those sites, they were opposed because in both cases, a portion of the planned development would have been retained by the private sector and rented at profit-making rates despite being built on public land.

This is absolutely infuriating and repulsive to those suffering under the current system of rental fleecing. That's why it's being opposed, and rightly so. Not one single flat or house built on public land should be charging the current market rate, because not one single flat or house built anywhere should be charging the current market rate. The current market rate is absolutely f*cking peoples' lives up, and society shouldn't be tolerating it.

blanch152

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Nobody is expecting the perfect, we're expecting those we elect to govern our country, to prioritise the preservation of the nation's quality of life. FG and FF's measures, such as promoting horrifically lowered accommodation standards by legalising co-living developments and championing the selling off of public land to private developers, actively assist in decreasing quality of life for thousands of people. All SF had to do was oppose these policies, and they were immediately and automatically the better option out of the three.

Why is that so difficult to understand? Nobody is expecting the perfect, but if you have several options, you pick the least sh!te of them.

Actively assist in decreasing the quality of life for thousands of people?

What sort of planet do you live on? Quality of life has been increasing year on year. Yes, people can't afford to buy a semi-detatched house in Dublin 4 or 6 beside their mammy, but it was always that way.

starkid

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

So do the other large parties in the Dáil. In fact, the only two I can definitively say don't (or at least didn't, at their inception) are the SocDems and Renua. It's possible that Aontu are also on this list but I don't know enough about their inner workings.

The very reason Renua exists as a party is because of FG's democratic centralism. It was founded by people who got kicked out of the party for thinking for themselves. Aontu was the same, with regard to SF.

This is the reason I've always voted for independent candidates and continue to do so. It is for the very reasons I mentioned above, to do with friends and family suffering the most horrific experiences due to the cost of living spiralling out of control, that I bumped SF up to second place on my ballot paper in the 2020 election. I'm sure many people acted in a similar way.

Ridiculous assertion. Most of the Boomer / Gen X folk in my own family would be FG voters. One of my uncles is a Green Party member. The millennials are SFers. Among my close friends, two of them are card carrying FG members, one of them (my ex girlfriend, indeed) is a card carrying IFP member, former Renua. These are childhood friends, school friends, people I met in college. Over time, our political opinions have diverged and re-merged, and diverged again. Such is life. I personally don't discriminate based on politics when deciding who to be friends with.

What I can tell you is that I've been beating the leftist drum since I was a teenager and it's only in the last three years or so that people my age have come around to this way of thinking. Many of the people I'm talking about ridiculed me relentlessly for my leftist activism during the 2000s and early 2010s. The flocking to SF I've witnessed among people I literally never would have imagined voting for them even five years ago has been incredible. Dismiss it as anecdotal all you like, but as others have said, there are statistics and polls to back this up.

I honestly don't know what evidence you'll accept, if personal anecdotes are out and polling data, both opinion and exit, is also out. What exactly are you looking for, as evidence that millennials have overwhelmingly flocked to SF - regardless of their own background or that of their family - and that the horrendous housing situation they have been landed with by the previous government is the cause of this?

Denying it as you continue to do seems very pointless to me and honestly I don't quite understand it. Just to be clear, are you actually denying that Ireland's young people have overwhelmingly chosen SF over the last three or so years? And are you denying that for most of those people, the Troubles don't even register as a relevant issue as long as they're being asked to pay four figures every month for one bedroom flats?

You do realise there's other left wing parties right? One's whos core tenet is Left wing policies and not a United Ireland with tacked on socialist principals.

You and your friends are going to be sorely disappointed in SF. At this stage i hope they get into power, as it will wake so many people up when they fail to deliver and they lose focus as they have pinned their flag to so many different, conflicting positions. And then perhaps, at least, we can have grown up politics, and a real concerted effort of establishing a true Danish style social democratic party.

If you truly want to see a left leaning Ireland that focuses on real issues (rather than populism and fantasist positions) then you should be voting Soc Dems or Labor. This is the reality. A huge focus of SF is to do with the All Ireland question. And if thats part of it fair enough but from the people i've talked to who voted for them they have divorced that part, as well as the history of violence and women and child killing. SF trying to be all things to all men/women. Populist, Republican, generic, left wing, democratic (while wielding some very dubious democratic party principles and private army) targeting the middle class vote, the working class vote, peace building, terrorist commemorating, economically responsible and economic negligence. Woke, hip full of feminist Mary Lou led vigour, but lauding women killers and having had people like Liam Adams involved, and other people that did very bad things.

They are offering it all. The party led by a privately educated, Rathgar born, ex FFer is offering it all. To everybody. And people are buying into it. Color me shocked.

blanch152 wrote: »

Actively assist in decreasing the quality of life for thousands of people?

What sort of planet do you live on? Quality of life has been increasing year on year. Yes, people can't afford to buy a semi-detatched house in Dublin 4 or 6 beside their mammy, but it was always that way.

If you're renting, your quality of life absolutely has declined on a massive scale over the second half of the 2010s, as rent increases (~40%) have vastly outstripped income increases (~14%), thus resulting in a corresponding drop in disposable income of around 26%.

If you're well off, perhaps a drop in disposable income of 26% isn't a big deal for you. If you're a renter who was already cash strapped even before the rent hyperinflation began, it's devastating. In the earlier half of the 2010s, it wasn't this way. And people are demanding that the government attempt to claw back some of the quality of life that has been lost to investment funds and landlords.

This isn't complicated, Blanch. Hypothetically speaking, if your income is €2,000 per month now and your cost of living is €1,000 per month, your disposable income is €1,000 per month. If I tell you that next month, your income will be €2,500, but your cost of living will now be €1,500 per month, your actual disposable income has declined by €500.

Imagine if that €500 per month in lost disposable income was a gigantic amount to you. If it impacted your weekly grocery shop in a massive way, or made you hesitant to turn the heating on in the cold winter months, or prevented you from socialising in any meaningful way (affording food or drink to entertain any of your friends, affording a ticket to the cinema or two pints on a Friday evening, affording a train ticket to visit friends or family in another county on a bank holiday weekend, etc).

You had the ability to do those things previously, you do not now. Because your disposable income now is lower than it was previously, as a result of cost of living inflation outstripping how quickly you could attain pay rises at work.

The government of the day gleefully pursues policies which actively encourage this disparity, and smugly or condescendingly tell you that you should be "excited" to see your quality of life decline over time.

Do you vote for that government again when the next election comes around? Or do you vote for the people who have been consistently slamming that government for actively pursuing an economic and social policy which knowingly f*cks up your life?

starkid wrote: »

You do realise there's other left wing parties right? One's whos core tenet is Left wing policies and not a United Ireland with tacked on socialist principals.

Of course. That's why I vote for People Before Profit's Richard Boyd Barrett #1 every time, and until the most recent election always grouped SF with the other whipped parties. This was the first time I bumped them up to #2 on my ballot paper, because PR and momentum matter in politics and that momentum is currently with SF. They are currently the best chance for a legitimate leftist government - our only options at the moment are PBP, SocDems and SF, and rightly or wrongly, the perception at the moment is that neither of the other two parties are mainstream enough to successfully get enough candidates elected for coalition formation.

You and your friends are going to be sorely disappointed in SF. At this stage i hope they get into power, as it will wake so many people up when they fail to deliver and they lose focus as they have pinned their flag to so many different, conflicting positions. And then perhaps, at least, we can have grown up politics, and a real concerted effort of establishing a true Danish style social democratic party.

I would 100% support this. 100%. Unfortunately, people who are desperate can't wait around for that to happen. I'm watching what my friends are going through week after week and it's f*cking horrific. My best friend lives in a building owned by a vulture fund in which she pays €1,650 per month for a flat with a stained glass window that this vulture fund have allowed to fall apart entirely since they acquired the building several years ago, it has multiple holes in it which she's had to constantly harass the management company to get repaired and in the meantime, her winter heating bill is off the charts.

Before she moved to this building as her previous landlady needed the flat back for her son, she lived in a flat literally two minutes walk around the corner from where she lives now, slightly larger, and paid €1,250. That's the kind of hyperinflation we're talking about. It's obscene. €1,250 would have got you a lease for several very nice buildings in Dun Laoghaire around 2016-2017, now, a minimum of €1,500 is the norm for the same or smaller flats.

This is the reality of what people are going through. Can you understand why someone going through something like this would be utterly enraged at seeing the likes of Eoghan Murphy spouting bullsh!t about co-living being built in the same town, being rented for €1,400 which is more than she was paying for her previous flat with its own kitchen and living room, and calling it "progress"? It's ridiculous that I have to spell this out for anyone.

She and the many others I know in this situation can't take a gamble on a new party forming, or voting for a party which doesn't enjoy mainstream support yet. They need a policy and paradigm shift urgently before they are forced to give up living as adults and move back to their family homes. In this scenario how can anyone blame a desperate voter for following the crowd? When a policy issue is urgent, momentum is a deciding factor in who one votes for.

If you truly want to see a left leaning Ireland that focuses on real issues (rather than populism and fantasist positions) then you should be voting Soc Dems or Labor. This is the reality.

Labour tolerated widespread wrongdoing and corruption in the FG/Lab government from 2011-2016, beginning mere days after the election when Enda Kenny and Michael Noonan allowed their own personal advisors to breach salary caps that they themselves had introduced. They allowed FG to run roughshod over that coalition and barely raised a squeak in protest any time something serious went down (where were they during the numerous Garda scandals of 2014, for example?) - nobody in my circles will ever, ever trust them again. Most of these people actually voted for them back in 2011 - when I was trying to convince my friends to vote for Richard Boyd Barrett, Eamonn Gilmore was generally their preferred #1.

A huge focus of SF is to do with the All Ireland question. And if thats part of it fair enough but from the people i've talked to who voted for them they have divorced that part, as well as the history of violence and women and child killing. SF trying to be all things to all men/women. Populist, Republican, generic, left wing, democratic (while wielding some very dubious democratic party principles and private army) targeting the middle class vote, the working class vote, peace building, terrorist commemorating, economically responsible and economic negligence. Woke, hip full of feminist Mary Lou led vigour, but lauding women killers and having had people like Liam Adams involved, and other people that did very bad things.

You say they've tried to be all things to all people. Have they ever tried to be economically right wing or neoliberal, in your opinion?

Right now, that's literally the only question of a party's past which people in the demographics we're talking about give a f*ck about.

They are offering it all. The party led by a privately educated, Rathgar born, ex FFer is offering it all. To everybody. And people are buying into it. Color me shocked.

They're offering what neither of the other two large parties is offering, a return to genuine social democracy in economic policy.

The one thing I agree with you on is that the SocDems should be doing better than SF with young voters, and I don't understand why they're not, beyond the question of momentum. My uncle is a lifelong political junkie (and I'm fairly sure an FGer, although I'll have to ask him) and he reckons that the SocDems shot themselves in the foot when they very publicly fell out with Stephen Donnelly and made people see them as amateurs playing at politics as a result of such a public spat.

Given Donnelly's recent performance in government, I can only imagine that anyone who sided with him against Shortall and Murphy must be feeling like a bit of an eejit at the moment

If my uncle is right about this being the reason for them losing their shine, I'd expect to see them recovering a little towards the next election - although I do know that a lot of my peers were annoyed with them for ruling themselves out so quickly on an alternative government formation after the last election. I'd imagine that's a wound that time can heal depending on how they present themselves during the next election, but we'll have to wait and see.

jimmycrackcorm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

If
Do you vote for that government again when the next election comes around? Or do you vote for the people who have been consistently slamming that government for actively pursuing an economic and social policy which knowingly f*cks up your life?

Translated: Do you vote for that government again when the next election comes around? Or do you vote for the people who have no actual, practical solutions to solve the housing crisis and actively engage in nimbyism?

Not a word about who would do the actual building on public land.

Brendan Bendar

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Translated: Do you vote for that government again when the next election comes around? Or do you vote for the people who have no actual, practical solutions to solve the housing crisis and actively engage in nimbyism?

Not a word about who would do the actual building on public land.

Good call Jimbo…… four lines said it as it is.

Edit….make that three

blanch152

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Unfortunately, people who are desperate can't wait around for that to happen. I'm watching what my friends are going through week after week and it's f*cking horrific. My best friend lives in a building owned by a vulture fund in which she pays €1,650 per month for a flat with a stained glass window that this vulture fund have allowed to fall apart entirely since they acquired the building several years ago, it has multiple holes in it which she's had to constantly harass the management company to get repaired and in the meantime, her winter heating bill is off the charts.

Before she moved to this building as her previous landlady needed the flat back for her son, she lived in a flat literally two minutes walk around the corner from where she lives now, slightly larger, and paid €1,250. That's the kind of hyperinflation we're talking about. It's obscene. €1,250 would have got you a lease for several very nice buildings in Dun Laoghaire around 2016-2017, now, a minimum of €1,500 is the norm for the same or smaller flats.

This is the reality of what people are going through. Can you understand why someone going through something like this would be utterly enraged at seeing the likes of Eoghan Murphy spouting bullsh!t about co-living being built in the same town, being rented for €1,400 which is more than she was paying for her previous flat with its own kitchen and living room, and calling it "progress"? It's ridiculous that I have to spell this out for anyone.

She and the many others I know in this situation can't take a gamble on a new party forming, or voting for a party which doesn't enjoy mainstream support yet. They need a policy and paradigm shift urgently before they are forced to give up living as adults and move back to their family homes. In this scenario how can anyone blame a desperate voter for following the crowd? When a policy issue is urgent, momentum is a deciding factor in who one votes for.

This is the sort of disconnect from reality that I have been talking about. If you have a flat with a stained glass window, it will be expensive. Dun Laoghaire is an affluent suburb of Dublin. Those rental prices are not unrealistic for somewhere like that. Somewhere like Putney in London, a similar distance from Central London would have rentals at twice or three times that amount.

However, if she moved to the Northside, she could get a 2-bed apartment for as little as €1,040 per month in Phibsboro. You could even get a studio apartment for as little as €650 per month there.

But I know, the standard of accommodation, the place, the distance from where she grew up or her friends etc.

blanch152 wrote: »

This is the sort of disconnect from reality that I have been talking about. If you have a flat with a stained glass window, it will be expensive. Dun Laoghaire is an affluent suburb of Dublin. Those rental prices are not unrealistic for somewhere like that. Somewhere like Putney in London, a similar distance from Central London would have rentals at twice or three times that amount.

However, if she moved to the Northside, she could get a 2-bed apartment for as little as €1,040 per month in Phibsboro. You could even get a studio apartment for as little as €650 per month there.

But I know, the standard of accommodation, the place, the distance from where she grew up or her friends etc.

But what you're omitting is that this wasn't the case when she first moved here four years ago. It has changed since then, and the same has happened all over Dublin. That's the decline in quality of life. Fair enough, she could move far away from her entire social circle and pay less - that would be a decline in quality of life. She could easily afford rent in this town in 2017, she couldn't by 2019. Ergo, quality of life has declined. This is not unique to Dun Laoghaire FFS.

Government policies which actively exacerbate this are going to piss off the people in that situation. Why is that difficult for you to grasp? The government should be acting to prevent inflation like this.

A decline in quality of life over a period of time will piss voters off. This is literally the most basic political concept in the history of politics all over the world. Her cost of living has increased faster than her income over the course of four years, because of policies which Fine Gael and Fianna Fail actively pursued in order to benefit those at the other end of the see-saw. Ergo, she votes for those who oppose those policies.

How is this complicated for you?

If the government built more social housing, people like her wouldn't be at the mercy of the market.

blanch152

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

But what you're omitting is that this wasn't the case when she first moved here four years ago. It has changed since then, and the same has happened all over Dublin. That's the decline in quality of life. Fair enough, she could move far away from her entire social circle and pay less - that would be a decline in quality of life. She could easily afford rent in this town in 2017, she couldn't by 2019. Ergo, quality of life has declined. This is not unique to Dun Laoghaire FFS.

Government policies which actively exacerbate this are going to piss off the people in that situation. Why is that difficult for you to grasp? The government should be acting to prevent inflation like this.

A decline in quality of life over a period of time will piss voters off. This is literally the most basic political concept in the history of politics all over the world. Her cost of living has increased faster than her income over the course of four years, because of policies which Fine Gael and Fianna Fail actively pursued in order to benefit those at the other end of the see-saw. Ergo, she votes for those who oppose those policies.

How is this complicated for you?

If the government built more social housing, people like her wouldn't be at the mercy of the market.

You are making the mistake of thinking it the norm that people can afford to live in affluent suburbs on low rents. They can't except in exceptional times, including the aftermath of the 2008 crash. FF made it possible for her to afford that apartment as they crashed the economy in 2008. The last four years have seen rental in places like that rebound to the long-term trend.

The government can't prevent inflation like that, it is delusionary to think so. There is a fixed amount of land. There is an increasing population, particularly in the 20-40 age group thanks to high birth rates following the recovery of the late 1980s and net immigration since then. Furthermore, there are stupid politicians and courts blocking development like we saw today in Raheny. So an equation of fixed amount of land, growing population together with a refusal to allow high-rise development results inevitably in higher rents, and the government can only change that in two ways - loosen the restrictions on development and restrict immigration - both of which you oppose.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

But what you're omitting is that this wasn't the case when she first moved here four years ago. It has changed since then, and the same has happened all over Dublin. That's the decline in quality of life. Fair enough, she could move far away from her entire social circle and pay less - that would be a decline in quality of life. She could easily afford rent in this town in 2017, she couldn't by 2019. Ergo, quality of life has declined. This is not unique to Dun Laoghaire FFS.

Government policies which actively exacerbate this are going to piss off the people in that situation. Why is that difficult for you to grasp? The government should be acting to prevent inflation like this.

A decline in quality of life over a period of time will piss voters off. This is literally the most basic political concept in the history of politics all over the world. Her cost of living has increased faster than her income over the course of four years, because of policies which Fine Gael and Fianna Fail actively pursued in order to benefit those at the other end of the see-saw. Ergo, she votes for those who oppose those policies.

How is this complicated for you?

If the government built more social housing, people like her wouldn't be at the mercy of the market.

God, what dream are you living in, what do you and anyone else of that mindset expect?
Is it that economy should be stifled so that housing can become cheap?
The govts of the last 10 years have worked hard to bring the economy back to levels needed to provide for the growing spending needed to run the country.
What you espouse is stifling that by means of trying to bring everyone's quality of life down to achieve this.
The aim of the left is delusional. You can't bring everyone's ability of affordability up to the levels needed to survive in certain areas, so by default the only way to achieve this is to bring everyone's quality of life down to levels where everyone can afford to live anywhere the want.
This is not the case in any vibrant economy.
The left is a dangerous animal, an economy breaker.
SF are part of that maybe, unless they're liars.?

Jinglejangle69

blanch152 wrote: »

Actively assist in decreasing the quality of life for thousands of people?

What sort of planet do you live on? Quality of life has been increasing year on year. Yes, people can't afford to buy a semi-detatched house in Dublin 4 or 6 beside their mammy, but it was always that way.

Always gives me a laugh when people talk about a decline in quality of life.

Did they ever listen to their parents and grand parents how things were years ago to now?

We have it so much easier and better.

Most pampered to people in this country nowadays wouldn't last a day to what are parents and grand parents had to go through to survive in this country.

My parents didn't have a couch and lived off beans for the first years after saving and working every hour under the sun to get a box house.

Nowadays people expect a fully furnished house before they move in supplied by the council for 50 euro a week.

The sheer arrogance and entitlement is astounding.

nigeldaniel

I sometimes wonder why some people's command of economics is so wobbly. People can not expect to rent a house in a well-to-do area on the cheap or indeed a city located on the cheap. I think some ultra-left ideologies are responsible for putting daft notions into their heads. If you wish for a nice comfy life it is going to cost and if you are willing to live a little bit cheaper you will have to compromise. The maths is pure and simple. If you live your life expecting to get everything free/on the cheap, you most likely will never find content and in its place will be angry.

The use of the Tory 'You Never Had It So Good', mantra should really work. Oodles of votes for the power swap in making people realise that.

Billcarson

Ah yes the country has never had it so good. Damn those who moan about not being able to afford a house. Etc etc etc. All wasters I suppose.
The FG working class hero types seem to know it all. Lol

Billcarson

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Always gives me a laugh when people talk about a decline in quality of life.

Did they ever listen to their parents and grand parents how things were years ago to now?

We have it so much easier and better.

Most pampered to people in this country nowadays wouldn't last a day to what are parents and grand parents had to go through to survive in this country.

My parents didn't have a couch and lived off beans for the first years after saving and working every hour under the sun to get a box house.

Nowadays people expect a fully furnished house before they move in supplied by the council for 50 euro a week.

The sheer arrogance and entitlement is astounding.

Its the sheer arrogance of ff fg and their deluded followers i find astounding.
In someways people may have it easier then in the past but in other ways not. I'm sure our parents and grandparents had it better then those before them That's what's called progress and this is the 21st century not the fcuking 19th.

The rich are getting richer the poor getting poorer. The cost of living seems to be always increasing.
Its the entitlement of the rich and powerful who think they can piss down on those below them that really annoys me.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The use of the Tory 'You Never Had It So Good', mantra should really work. Oodles of votes for the power swap in making people realise that.

So if you can't counter throw in tory there as a reply, default shinner response.

Bishop of hope wrote: »

So if you can't counter throw in tory there as a reply, default shinner response.

It is a reply. And it is not just throwing in the word 'Tory'. It is about the way these guys have deployed a mantra of the 50's which happened to come from the Tory's. Which is a valid criticism.

Bubbaclaus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It is a reply. And it is not just throwing in the word 'Tory'. It is about the way these guys have deployed a mantra of the 50's which happened to come from the Tory's. Which is a valid criticism.

No idea why it has even been brought up, but feel it is worth mentioning that it was the US Democratic party that came up with that slogan. Tories borrowed it a few years later.

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

No idea why it has even been brought up, but feel it is worth mentioning that it was the US Democratic party that came up with that slogan. Tories borrowed it a few years later.

Well there you go. No need for some to be so over sensitive and guilty about being compared to the Tories.

RandomViewer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Well there you go. No need for some to be so over sensitive and guilty about being compared to the Tories.

Neily Richmond constantly refers to himself as a Conservative so FGers are Irish tories (means pirate by the way)

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It is a reply. And it is not just throwing in the word 'Tory'. It is about the way these guys have deployed a mantra of the 50's which happened to come from the Tory's. Which is a valid criticism.

But it doesn't counter the argument at all.
It just brands the policy without refuting the point made.

[Deleted User]

Bishop of hope wrote: »

But it doesn't counter the argument at all.
It just brands the policy without refuting the point made.

Its just being finegaelist,fiannafailist and vradakarist and trying to be insulting again to the girlfriend half of the population they know they'll never get.
When in doubt or all else fails,name call or sneer
It's a branch of bullying
Backfires though because,it shows tunnel vision and vacancy of mind
Easily countered & countered by being ignored

Billcarson

Marine Layer wrote: »

Its just being finegaelist,fiannafailist and vradakarist and trying to be insulting again to the girlfriend half of the population they know they'll never get.
When in doubt or all else fails,name call or sneer
It's a branch of bullying
Backfires though because,it shows tunnel vision and vacancy of mind
Easily countered & countered by being ignored

Lol,lol,lol.

Fg and ff don't sneer sf? Rte don't sneer sf?
You talk of backfiring. Lol. The more rte etc try to sneer sf the more that will backfire on them wanting to keep the fg ff status quo.

Half the population will turn eventually to most of the population , well those not voting for ff or fg ,its just a matter of time. Good luck to fg and ff supporters when your older voters die off.........

Marine Layer wrote: »

Its just being finegaelist,fiannafailist and vradakarist and trying to be insulting again to the girlfriend half of the population they know they'll never get.
When in doubt or all else fails,name call or sneer
It's a branch of bullying
Backfires though because,it shows tunnel vision and vacancy of mind
Easily countered & countered by being ignored

Or it is simply somebody feeling guilt and being triggered by the word 'Tory'.

I will make the 'point' again without the word:

The use of the US Democrats 'You Never Had It So Good', mantra should really work. Oodles of votes for the power swap in making people realise that.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Or it is simply somebody feeling guilt and being triggered by the word 'Tory'.

I will make the 'point' again without the word:

The use of the US Democrats 'You Never Had It So Good', mantra should really work. Oodles of votes for the power swap in making people realise that.

No guilt here, just wondering what your point was really?
If I'm classed as tory or whatever so be it, it's just the classic shinner response when there's no rebuttal.
Ah shur you must be a tory.

Bishop of hope wrote: »

No guilt here, just wondering what your point was really?
If I'm classed as tory or whatever so be it, it's just the classic shinner response when there's no rebuttal.
Ah shur you must be a tory.

Why the offence at the word 'Tory' then and why call it a 'slur'?

I took it out of the sentence and still made the same point. Carry on with the 'you never had it so good' mantra's, that will be sure to gain votes.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why the offence at the word 'Tory' then and why call it a 'slur'?

I took it out of the sentence and still made the same point. Carry on with the 'you never had it so good' mantra's, that will be sure to gain votes.

But that's not a point really, or an argument of what I said.
Votes, does that make a difference to how the economy works?
Will the shinners stifle the economy to bring housing prices down?
What will they do that's different to make house prices cheaper?
Tory calling or sayings blurted out makes no difference to the point I made.
As regards that, your reply was waffle, as Bertie said, you've been waffling round here for years, you're a waffler.