Separate discussion for the EU election results.
Absolutely, there are real issues for SF to consider, but there's no question whole swathes of their vote didn't come out.
I'm not being touchy at all. As you said , it's a discussion.
True. FG had a very good locals there so he could be in some bother though Smyth of the GP will be vulnerable too.
Coppinger should regain a seat in 5 seat DW, Barry in Cork could hold on. Gino Kenny is likely to lose, they won't hold what was Brid Smith's seat.
I wouldn't write off Paul Murphy, they had a good locals in Tallaght.
Everything you say is laced with such certainty, do you know it's a discussion?
A ‘retired and seasoned operator’ - Ivan Yates , I think in an interview with Katie Hanson- recently said that the media loves to court controversy EVEN IF it DOES NOT EXIST. This probably explains why it is constantly interviewing MLMD, , O Broin, Paul Murphy , Boyd Barrett, Pierce Doherty, et, al. CD would fit right into this group. You are guaranteed , with this line up, that the item under discussion is maximised to cause the most damage/ most controversy possible - as the saying goes ‘ I know it’s not true but let him see denying it’. And ‘ Throw as much S—T as possible and some of it may stick’. . Both taken from the US Hymn Book of Politics
You're clearly confusing me with someone else!
Of course. Hence why you see that tosser Murphy and Brid on a panel every couple of days
did he not draw the votes from the entire ‘Ireland South’ constituency - from Wicklow to Kerry to Clare ?
We definitely need to do something about the 'waster' candidates - even changing the rules to allow them all to be eliminated at a one swipe would make a big difference.
I'd prefer something along the lines of a percentage of 1st preference votes rather than restrictions on candidates. Similar to the German 5% rule, but have it 2 or 3% immediate elimination and redistribution.
Yeah not sure I like the idea of raising the cost of entering an election, it just makes it seem like it's (even more) for the rich and elite then. Let the headbangers headbang, they all cancel each other out in the end and get firmly rejected by the electorate due to said headbanging.
Less than 1% of the quota almost always means immediate elimination anyways, unless someone is elected on first count with a surplus.
https://www.rte.ie/news/elections-2024/2024/0612/1454451-european-elections/
The count does take way too long.
It's a good point that we can keep the old system for local and general elections.
Not sure though if a list system would hinder independents from running. But that said we have way too many candidates particularly independents with very little support.
Keep the core of the current system but try to simplify it.
No surpluses, just work off eliminations.
Limit the number of the preferences to 1-5.
The advantage of that is that it keep the voting process familiar.
OR
A hybrid system of list and constituencies.
Each constituency elects one MEP - like Presidential election, with single transferrable vote. There'd be haggling about how many constituencies (3-5) but that gives scope for individual independents to stand.
And you get a single non-transferrable vote in a party list system that elects the rest of the MEPs aka "The Back Door". MEPs can be both on ballot in constituency and on list. If they are elected in constituency then party list moves down to next candidate.
Yes, but with the number of candidates, it's ended up that only one being eliminated at a time. If you had those on less than 2% immediately eliminated it would've been 8 less counts in South, 10 less in Midlands North West.
Or hire more people to count. We don't need to change the system or spend money on computers. Get in more people to count. It will cost a bit more but then it should since the population is increasing.
No reason why the EU elections and Locals could not be counted at the same time.
All these solutions to a problem that doesn't really exist, can someone give me a specific downside to the count taking this long other than "oh, it's a joke that it takes so long"?
The spouses and families of vote counters having to listen to same bullshit night after night
Yep. Some people just have no patience.
Yep, agreed. Though I think there is merit in getting in more counting staff for all the elections, not just the EU ones.
Self proclaimed Irish patriot and failed MEP candidate Herman Kelly who describes Britain as the mainland posted this pic on twitter with the St.Georges cross to further enhance his image as an Irish patriot.
Makes no sense and means that the system isn't representative anymore. Aside from surpluses on Count #1, they don't overly slow things down.
Likely doesn't speed up things. I doubt most people go beyond 5 preferences. The counts slow down when the bigger numbers get eliminated. These still have to be checked anyway.
Each constituency elects one MEP
Just no. This wouldn't be representative of an area. 51% of people could elect our MEPs as opposed to 75-80% of people when you have 4 or 5 seats.
This would make our system less democratic. We shouldn't compromise on that at all.
Hard to see Mullooly missing out at this stage - even if Gildernew gets ~22k from MacManus, that would put her ~3k ahead of Mullooly (assuming he gets ~1k from MacManus).
You'd expect he'll make up that 3k difference in transfers from Toibin and then say Chambers votes splits roughly evenly between the two of them leaves him ahead on the final elimination
Explains Newstalks regular line up of political Wacky Races interviewees.
At least it gives RTE something else to report on at this time of year instead of weeks of annual leaving cert boringness …..
Do you have any examples of scanners that would accommodate the MNW Euro ballot paper?
There's a limit as to how many people can be productive working in a fairly small space. This isn't a production line.
There are suggestions to speed it up marginally, while still keeping the 'drama' of the unfolding of transfers etc.
How could it not speed it up if you only have to deal with 1-5 preferences? More preferences filled in has to mean more work for the counters, for whatever % of the ballots are filled out to that.
The system is still representative. Why are surpluses essential for it to be representative? In the EU elections especially have marginal impact but having to process that many ballots for surplus distribution is effort and time. Let the parties manage their vote better if they're bothered about it.
I explained there'd be constituencies and a list system. The constituency candidate is elected on a single transferrable vote, same as the Presidential election here. So by your argument, is our Presidential election not democratic? If someone gets 51% of the first prefences in any election here, they are elected.
And the "75-80%" of people are catered for, as they are in all the other countries where a list system operates.
Is a list system less democratic than what we currently have? If it's such a great system how does everyone else except the Maltese manage without it?
Ah yeah, some of the count centres are tiny tbf so you wouldn't be able to do it everywhere. But the EU ones for example are held in massive centres that could accomodate more staff imo.
Count 17 is in and Wallace has an almost 6000 lead over Ni Mhurcu. Will it be enough? I think not.
The stupidity of the Irish people who fell for the far right propaganda is going to be talked about in schools in many years when they are teaching the broad concepts of Irish history.
I can't see how Ní Mhurchú beats Wallace now
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
