jimmycrackcorm wrote: » Sinn Feins chief housing objector is quoted: “You’re trying to compete with the bigger parties who are able to pay professional polling companies, so it was the only way parties like ours were able to do polling.†He claimed it was a way to “have a level playing field†But SF is the richest party, owner the most property of any party, and gets millions in foreign donations. It's not just the level of dishonesty that the party shows to the voters, such as promising magically conjured up housing, this is the actual level of practiced dishonesty.
starkid wrote: » let what go? your zealousness in trying to paint anybody who is anti SF as a fg or ff shill makes me doubt the veracity of your journey. you know there's multiple world views. it doesn't make it wrong. and trying to paint it as an us versus them is a very sad, toxic narrative. for the record i voted Soc Dems and labour. yes the true establishment parties.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Running away with yourself again to mis-represent. I never claimed that. In fact I have just once again in the last few posts said that SF are as susceptible to the shenanigan's and foibles of any political party. And again, yes, FF and FG did manage to fool me and, in my lifetime, 86% of the electorate as well. I get it, I understand why people like yourself and starkid find it difficult to let go...been there, done that. But as the power swap's share of the vote falls below 40%, there is hope for you.
blanch152 wrote: » Ok, you have admitted to have bought the fantasies of the "power swap parties" for almost 55 years of your life, and having been a self-admitted fool for that length of time, and taking so long to see through them, you now expect us to believe that after 5 years, you are certain that SF haven't fooled you? On the balance of probabilities, isn't it far more likely, given your own self-admitted record, that you have bought the fantasies and drank the koolaid of Sinn Fein, having just swapped it out?
FrancieBrady wrote: » starkid...every time in my almost 60 years on this earth, people bought the fantasies and drank the koolaid of the power swap parties...every single election I have been through as a voter. That used to be 86% of the electorate. It is now down to just over 40% buying the fantasies and drinking the koolaid.They lost me finally in 2016 and I have no doubt many more will follow.
Marine Layer wrote: » I think they'll become the new FF actually, they've already absorbed a lot of their vote So it'll be in and out of coalition until whatever home the permanently disgruntled out grows them and takes their mantle Rinse and repeat
starkid wrote: » maybe that is indeed the outcome of it. a shock to the establishment parties and a redrawing of the lines. fair enough you're not buying the economic fantasies or drinking the koolaid but many people are. and when change doesn't come about, what do you think is going to happen? imo its going to create a level of toxicity we haven't seen before.
FrancieBrady wrote: » This is funny. I have never canvassed for SF here or anywhere else. They are a political party subject as I say to the foibles and failings of all political parties. I have never once claimed they will achieve anything more than breaking the hold of the power swap. Which is why I am currently voting for them. Fantasies, indeed. Gas!
rdwight wrote: » ??
starkid wrote: » yeah i'm all for it. you're the only one living in fantasy if you think they can deliver on all their promises as well as a United Ireland. its utter fantasy. i actually feel sorry for you. it will be gas to see your reaction and your new level of bar setting. it would be worth it for that alone. its hardly inevitable seeing they can't convince the other 23 or so per cent. although they should be talked to if another election came about as it will just make it extremely toxic if they don't. but i'd emigrate if it created that toxic black and white, environment from which it was born. you see you don't seem to get that. many of us here take issue with SF's raison d'etre....strong arm violent republicanism.and at the moment they still have people involved in all sorts of ****e.people will always take issue with it, until they clean house. why is that so hard to understand?
Darc19 wrote: » That comment by OBroin made me laugh out loud. £26.5 million buys a lot of market research. And their annual dinner in new York makes the old FF Galway tent seem like a kids garden party. But their supporters will swallow the answers without question and that's all that matters
rdwight wrote: » Ó'Broin's claim that SF did it because they were a small party is laughable. They've never been short of resources.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Good man. You refusal is your right.
FrancieBrady wrote: » It sure will be interesting to see what happens people like yourself, so deeply led into fantastical paranoia, when SF do get into government. Which, I hate to deepen your fear is inevitable at this stage. It's a stint in government...hardly a tanks rolling into Warsaw or Paris scenario.
rdwight wrote: » Leave Chris Andrews out of this. As a republican, I resent the appropriation of the term by those (not necessarily referring to you, FB) who for a long time refuse to recognise the legitimacy of the republic I was born in.
For Forks Sake wrote: » I had them to the door a while back, high viz, badge, the lot. Said she was from IMRA, I smelled something off as didn't recognise the "agency" (Irish Market Research Agency sounded too generic and made-up), asked her for some credentials to prove who she was working for, which she couldn't produce (obviously) so I ran her before she got to ask any questions. Should have set the dog on them
FrancieBrady wrote: » Nope RD. Can you point to where I have said any SF policy is 'right'? I'm a republican who will never belong to a political party.I defend SF when the anti Republicans lash out and rant mainly. As a political choice they are as susceptible to the normal foibles and shenaniganis of any political party. I've called this out as 'silly, shenanagins'. I have asked anybody who cares to show me how it is any worse than that? Particularly keen to hear from those who handwaved away criminal investigations and penchants for anonymous accounts etc.
rdwight wrote: » It just happens that pretty much every thing they do is right. Reminds me the Rangers chairman years ago who was challenged on why they had never had a Catholic playing for them. He said Rangers were in no way sectarian and would have no problem signing a Catholic but they just had never come across one good enough.
Finty Lemon wrote: » I would like to hear more about the Army Council, now that it seem we are happy it will be running the country in the near future. How often does it meet? Who sets the agenda? Is there a gender balance policy? Is there a regional balance to its composition? How do I apply to become a member?
starkid wrote: » no its a deeper issue and more complex than that, but trivialise away if it makes you feel better.. if you don't see how a disallusioned SF base particularly in our already prpblematic areas could be toxic for the future then i'm done with this conversation.
SF want to be all things to all people. The reality is they won't be able to get into power without that middle class vote. I've seen the reality on the ground in Ballybough where cars with loudspeakers have to go out to encourage voting. They need to play both sides. Its useful having a Mary Lou there. But it creates the Holohon type issues. No matter if hes gone, it still ****ing happened on their watch. more than once.
And the reputational damage would be by having the political wing of the IRA as our government. it would change things immensely on diplomatic and business levels. to think otherwise is naieve imo. particularly if they turn hostile to those interests. as a small country with 2 million able bodied taxpayers we're ****ed if things turn. which is why i'm a centrist and firmly believe in the horseshoe theory and the fallacy of picking a side. i'd be more inclined to vote for a danish style social democratic party if it existed. but it doesn't.
FrancieBrady wrote: » The reason your point gets called ridiculous is because it is irrelevant. There are people who will never vote green, FF, FG etc because of things they done. That is politics, that is life.And I don't defend 'everything' SF do. If they need to be called out I do it.
FrancieBrady wrote: » And I don't defend 'everything' SF do. If they need to be called out I do it.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c50f1c871638bccbbf9aa952593dd0cd.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/0c95fbacfd3f8db330cceee65321bca3.svg)
