nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Dublin Bay South By-Election

blackwhite

I see breaking news this morning that Eoghan Murphy is resigning from the Dáil

https://www.rte.ie/news/2021/0427/1212292-politics-eoghan-murphy/

Will be quite the battle to take his seat, in what is a very diverse constituency. It has some of the most affluent neighbourhoods in Dublin, but also has sizeable traditionally working class areas like Ringsend, Irishtown & Pearse St. On top of that there's a large population of young renters in the constituency who can have a large voice if they come out to vote.

FG were the only party to run two candidates in the 3-seater, with all others opting for single candidates, and FG won the most combined first-preference votes last year, taking 27.7% but splitting it between Murphy and Kate O'Connell with only Murphy ultimately being elected for them (without meeting the quota).

Eamon Ryan topped the poll individually with 22.4% getting in on the first count.
Chris Andrews took 16.1% for SF, but only actually polled 15 votes more than Murphy (who had a running mate), and ultimately reached the quota on the 8th & final count with transfers from Labour pushing him over the line.
Jim O'Callaghan took 13.8% for FF and was elected without reaching the quota.

Labour took 7.9% and SocDems 4.5% with the remaining small parties and Indos combining for approx 7.5%

Hazel Chu likely to be the Green candidate, given she's their highest profile councillor in the constituency, and has been pushing for promotion within the party. Claire Byrne has a decent profile in the eastern end of the constituency, but unlikely to get the nod ahead of Chu.
Kate O'Connell is the first name likely to be thought of for FG, but she's had a few high profile spats with Varadkar so remains to be seen if they'll back her here, although their councillors on DCC for DBS all have a lower profile than O'Connell.
Sinn Fein's only councillor within the constituency is Daniel Ceitinn, who was co-opted to replace Chris Andrews following GE20. Andrews has been their only high profile face in the area for a number of years, so difficult to see if they'll use this as an opportunity for Ceitinn to build some profile, or draft someone else in.
Claire O'Connor is probably the highest profile FF councillor in the area, but FF in Dublin Bay South has been dominated by Jim O'Callaghan for some time now (and before that Chris Andrews prior to his jumping ship) so they'll suffer for not having a ready-made 2nd candidate in place.
Kevin Humphries will likely be the Labour candidate again, whilst long-standing repeat candidates Sarah Durcan (SDs), Annette Mooney (PBP), and Mannix Flynn (IND) are all likely to be on the ballot.

FG will likely top the poll, with Greens and SF vying for 2nd spot. Personal popularity of the Green and SF candidates will be very important in getting out the vote.
How strong FF poll will likely determine how the final picture looks (has it been a personal O'Callaghan vote, or will the FF share hold?), because ultimately the transfers from FF and Lab will determine the final position here.
I think this will end up either FG or Green - if either is in 3rd place in the penultimate count then their transfers will end up pushing the other over the line. If SF end up in 3rd place, then their transfers could be enough to push the Green candidate into 1st ahead of FG.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Sam Russell

Augme wrote: »

It will be fascinating to see the reaction to this. If it was Hazel Chu who said it the internet would go I to meltdown. I expect Byrne will get a pass though. Two fingers to Eamon Ryan as well.

Well if Bacic reciprocates and says her second preferences should go to Byrne, then that will be a win for Byrne, as her transfers pass after she is eliminated.

L1011

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well if Bacic reciprocates and says her second preferences should go to Byrne, then that will be a win for Byrne, as her transfers pass after she is eliminated.

Bacik has requested her second prefs to go to the Greens and Soc Dems.

Annasopra

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well if Bacic reciprocates and says her second preferences should go to Byrne, then that will be a win for Byrne, as her transfers pass after she is eliminated.

Maybe but looking at the poll Byrne will more likely be eliminated before Bacik

Larbre34

Geoghegan will still win.

athlone573

Larbre34 wrote: »

Geoghegan will still win.

Its lookin like a 50 50 ball

expectationlost

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Bacik is going to win this. The controversy over re-opening and the growing sense of incompetence surrounding the Government's handling of it has sunk Geoghegan. People are going to give the Government a bit of a kicking. Game over imho.

why would they vote for Labour instead?

L1011

Its interesting to see that the "I just don't like Bacik" crowd have moved on from "she's unelectable, sure look at the record, she shouldn't run again" - when its actually a very solid electoral record at all levels - on to trying to twist decades old stuff to what they want it to mean when she starts polling solidly.

You don't like her - we get it. Its wasting everyones time trying to twist justifications for it. You're not going to vote for her (if you even live in DBS). Awful justifications as to why won't influence anyone else.

Marcusm

Augme wrote: »

It will be fascinating to see the reaction to this. If it was Hazel Chu who said it the internet would go I to meltdown. I expect Byrne will get a pass though. Two fingers to Eamon Ryan as well.

Claire Byrne is Ryan’s parliamentary assistant; I doubt she is on an unapproved manoeuvre.

Cal4567

L1011 wrote: »

Coalition partners in Ireland have always (officially at least - there may have been some stepping aside in the past that I'm not aware of) competed against each at elections so there would be no expectation of saying to transfer to your partners.

FG/Labour had a deal for the 07 GE which did not assist Labour at all and didn't get the hoped for result - but that was from opposition.

Sounds like the FG's team wet dream. Try to dismantle the only candidate they see as a threat. She's 'a failed candidate', get that point out there. Must be worried if they are resorting to this.

Looking at the poll, the 2nd and 3rd preferences are going to be crucial. Might Boylan's transfers even get Bacik over the line?

ancapailldorcha

Off topic posts removed and sanction issued. Please be civil and focus on the byelection.

golfball37

I hope Gheoghagan wins. The media machine is behind Bacik and the dirt thrown at him was insignificant yet made out to be important. The female transfers means he has an uphill battle though I fear. I’d rather Boylan got elected ahead of Bacik being totally honest.

Bobtheman

At the moment I still think Geoghan will win. He will get transfers from FF and even labour. All three parties appeal in various ways to the well heeled but socially Liberal sets.
Though I'd say most people voting for bacik are not rampaging feminists like she is.

Red Silurian

In the 2020 election the greens and the two civil war parties pulled 63.9% of the first preference votes across 4 candidates

Simple maths show there would need to be at least a 13.9% swing away from the govt for them to lose this, fair enough a lot has changed in that time but I don't think it's enough for such a swing

My money is on the FG candidate as they were the highest of any party at 27.7%

KevRossi

Is there any TV debate with all candidates scheduled?

Annasopra

Bobtheman wrote: »

At the moment I still think Geoghan will win. He will get transfers from FF and even labour. All three parties appeal in various ways to the well heeled but socially Liberal sets.
Though I'd say most people voting for bacik are not rampaging feminists like she is.

Labour transfers wont come into play!!

Annasopra

KevRossi wrote: »

Is there any TV debate with all candidates scheduled?

Tonight on VM has had candidates in 2s

The Phantom Jipper

golfball37 wrote: »

I hope Gheoghagan wins. The media machine is behind Bacik and the dirt thrown at him was insignificant yet made out to be important. The female transfers means he has an uphill battle though I fear. I’d rather Boylan got elected ahead of Bacik being totally honest.

To be fair, him being knee deep in Renua is surely of importance to voters and I'd imagine would be a dealbreaker for many.

foxyladyxx

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Bacik is going to win this. The controversy over re-opening and the growing sense of incompetence surrounding the Government's handling of it has sunk Geoghegan. People are going to give the Government a bit of a kicking. Game over imho.

Sinn Féin vote is also underestimated in that poll and would be at odds with other private polling.

This 100%. I had a canvasser from the Green Party at my door. I told her that in no corcumstances would I vote for a party in Government after the way MM was allowed to present the erroneous model to the cabinet with no backlash from any TD's in the three Government parties.

I told her that I would vote Labour as a protest vote. ( I can see many voting Sinn Fein however) . .She asked for my second vote. My answer was ''no''.

My neighbour is equally clued in and I heard him ranting at the male canvasser about how the unelected NPHET were given so much power ....he is a cantankerous old man at the best of times,

Bacik will romp it at this stage. the handling of NPHET will gift her the win.

Brussels Sprout

The whole "Bacik is a misandrist" argument being floated by some posters is a bit of a reach. It seems to rely mainly on a zero-sum mindset where any gains for women can only be won at the expense of men.

blanch152

Red Silurian wrote: »

In the 2020 election the greens and the two civil war parties pulled 63.9% of the first preference votes across 4 candidates

Simple maths show there would need to be at least a 13.9% swing away from the govt for them to lose this, fair enough a lot has changed in that time but I don't think it's enough for such a swing

My money is on the FG candidate as they were the highest of any party at 27.7%

The assumption in that is that the government parties would have transferred to one another. That didn't happen in the general election, and there is no reason to assume that it would happen in a by-election.

hatrickpatrick

L1011 wrote: »

Its interesting to see that the "I just don't like Bacik" crowd have moved on from "she's unelectable, sure look at the record, she shouldn't run again" - when its actually a very solid electoral record at all levels - on to trying to twist decades old stuff to what they want it to mean when she starts polling solidly.

You don't like her - we get it. Its wasting everyones time trying to twist justifications for it. You're not going to vote for her (if you even live in DBS). Awful justifications as to why won't influence anyone else.

Why is pointing out an election candidate's bigotry such a controversial issue here, exactly? If James Geogheann had been on the record ten or twenty years ago as saying that married women shouldn't be allowed to be employed in the civil service, or some other such outdated and backwards garbage, would we be similarly "twisting justifications" for not liking him by pointing this out?

hatrickpatrick

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

The whole "Bacik is a misandrist" argument being floated by some posters is a bit of a reach. It seems to rely mainly on a zero-sum mindset where any gains for women can only be won at the expense of men.

To say "women shouldn't be imprisoned for non-violent offences" as opposed to "people shouldn't be imprisoned for non-violent offences", and make the argument that judges should take gender into account when passing sentence, is out and out discrimination being called for. If you approach an issue which affects both genders with a view to changing it only for one of those genders, you are inherently discriminatory in your outlook. If you believe this to be justified, you are also bigoted in your outlook.

Apple the same criteria to any demographic group, by the way. This issue just happens to be gender-based. If somebody in the United States argued that white people should get a lesser prison sentence because statistically white people supposedly commit less crime, there would rightly be uproar. It's bigoted in the extreme to propose any form of demographic discrimination in any facet of public policy. End of.

blanch152

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

The whole "Bacik is a misandrist" argument being floated by some posters is a bit of a reach. It seems to rely mainly on a zero-sum mindset where any gains for women can only be won at the expense of men.

Some of it is based on fury that the leading anti-government candidate doesn't come from SF or PBP.

Bacik isn't a particularly likeable person with a prickly personality, but that doesn't mean she wouldn't make a good TD.

[Deleted User]

I think there's a great post somewhere earlier round here about "the right looking for allies and the left looking for traitors."

Blut2

athlone573 wrote: »

Where are you seeing those odds Blut? I don't see it on BF exchange and the overround on the sportsbook looks a bit hefty.

Paddypower.

athlone573

Blut2 wrote: »

Paddypower.

Yeah same on betfair but it's pretty atrocious value as a gambler. Thanks

[Deleted User]

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

To say "women shouldn't be imprisoned for non-violent offences" as opposed to "people shouldn't be imprisoned for non-violent offences", and make the argument that judges should take gender into account when passing sentence, is out and out discrimination being called for. If you approach an issue which affects both genders with a view to changing it only for one of those genders, you are inherently discriminatory in your outlook. If you believe this to be justified, you are also bigoted in your outlook.

Apple the same criteria to any demographic group, by the way. This issue just happens to be gender-based. If somebody in the United States argued that white people should get a lesser prison sentence because statistically white people supposedly commit less crime, there would rightly be uproar. It's bigoted in the extreme to propose any form of demographic discrimination in any facet of public policy. End of.

Where did she say anything about changing "for only one gender "? People should really stop making up fairy stories to try to rationalise their own personal preferences.

jm08

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

To say "women shouldn't be imprisoned for non-violent offences" as opposed to "people shouldn't be imprisoned for non-violent offences", and make the argument that judges should take gender into account when passing sentence, is out and out discrimination being called for. If you approach an issue which affects both genders with a view to changing it only for one of those genders, you are inherently discriminatory in your outlook. If you believe this to be justified, you are also bigoted in your outlook.

Apple the same criteria to any demographic group, by the way. This issue just happens to be gender-based. If somebody in the United States argued that white people should get a lesser prison sentence because statistically white people supposedly commit less crime, there would rightly be uproar. It's bigoted in the extreme to propose any form of demographic discrimination in any facet of public policy. End of.

The conference that Bacik spoke at was hosted by the Irish Penal Reform Trust. That particular conference was to do with women in the penal system. As you will see from the link to the Irish Penal Reform Trust, they have hosted many conferences / publications on the penal services which cover the rights of people with disabilities, to Solitary Confinement to the Rights and Needs of Children and Families affected by Imprisonment which would have experts/advocates as speakers.

https://www.iprt.ie/

L1011

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Why is pointing out an election candidate's bigotry such a controversial issue here, exactly? If James Geogheann had been on the record ten or twenty years ago as saying that married women shouldn't be allowed to be employed in the civil service, or some other such outdated and backwards garbage, would we be similarly "twisting justifications" for not liking him by pointing this out?

What's being dragged up by the posters here is personal interpretations or unverifiable personal memories of things, not anything 'on the record'

iwasliedto

L1011 wrote: »

Its interesting to see that the "I just don't like Bacik" crowd have moved on from "she's unelectable, sure look at the record, she shouldn't run again" - when its actually a very solid electoral record at all levels - on to trying to twist decades old stuff to what they want it to mean when she starts polling solidly.

You don't like her - we get it. Its wasting everyones time trying to twist justifications for it. You're not going to vote for her (if you even live in DBS). Awful justifications as to why won't influence anyone else.

I think all you need to do is look at Labour's record in power to find a reason not to vote for them. They have enabled FF and FG to run the country for too long, they have been found out and will find it difficult to rise in the polls with a lot of their traditional voters having deserted them.

Alan Kelly called to my door looking for the vote and I asked him how would he expect me to vote for Labour with their most recent record in government. He did not even try to justify it or defend it, says it all really. A vote for Ivan of the bicycle is a vote somewhere down the line to enable FG or FF to implement their right-wing policies.