I think they could. There's clearly a gap in the market for a political party which supports traditional values, families, are anti-abortion and are sceptical of the wokery rubbish.
Can't address FG issues without a pop at SF. How predictable. SF support will be the last to give the DUP a vote IMO for reasons that should be apparent. Nobody is surprised at the embarrassment FG feel about Donaldson's reception.
No doubt you'll keep trying to ignore the fact that if we rejoin the Commonwealth that it will be most enthusiastically promoted by some in FG and it's support. If somebody in FF was enthusiastic about it as Neale Richmond is for one, would they rise through the party ranks as successfully as he has? I doubt it. That is not to deprive Richmond etc of their opinions, they are entitled to them even if I can't support them, I'm just pointing to facts about the party and their possible amenability to DUP and wider Unionism.
What 'personal jibe'?The discomfort pointed to, is very apparent in your inability to read posts properly.
What 'personal jibe'?
The discomfort pointed to, is very apparent in your inability to read posts properly.
Well that one will do for start. I guess noting the passage of time touched a nerve but you'll find Boards is predominantly old men these days. We're all obsolete.
Your insistence to read what amounted to a diplomatic speaking engagement as some ideological manifestation or proof of conservative values is borderline histrionic. Doubtless were relations softened enough a DUP leader spoke as a guest at a SF conference there'd be a much different read of things.
Hilarious on both occasions I challenge this Donaldson appearance, one person quips I must be a closet SF supporter, while the resident SF supporter winks at disgruntled FG supporters having some truths told. Very telling that.
All the main parties are socially liberal now more than they were in the 80's. The conservative vote has not disappeared though.
What 'personal jibe'? And I never said there was a 'relationship', I said they would be more amenable to one than any other party I can see. The discomfort pointed to, is very apparent in your inability to read posts properly. Donaldson, as leader of the DUP received applause at a key FG event, it happened and it happened for reasons. You might not like those reasons being 'interrogated' but ho hum TBH.
It shouldn't need pointing out that the 1980s were approximately 40 years ago and tethering your belief of FG being a predominantly conservative party to relative ancient history doesn't match the reality of recent, relevant events. FG is socially liberal, and parties re-align their ideologies all the time. What times you lived through, I'm afraid, are irrelevant to the discussions of today.
But trotting out the Donaldson talk as some Silver Bullet is so laughable it defies credibility. As if polite applause of a guest speaker is some ideological j'accue when … what? They should have booed? Thrown rotten eggs.
And I see mixing in the personal jibe like others again; pretty good way to dirty the waters without having to interrogate the obvious personal bias in your own views. There's a difference between wanting there to be some relationship, and proving there is one. Raging Thatcherite that he is the mere presence, the mere existence of Leo Varadkar undercuts the entire argument in the crib - though doubtless there'll be an exuse there too.
Personal experience. I was one of those who as a recently graduated student campaigned for divorce in the 80's for instance. The most bitter and vociferous objection to that social change encountered, came from conservative FGers. If you didn't live through those times and later ones I can understand how you might not share my point of view. To this very day, the most partitionist and pro-unionist people in the south support FG, this site is a microcosm of that hence the easy applause for the leader of the DUP. They may not wholly agree but they are amenable to agreeing with them. Just an pretty obvious fact IMO however uncomfortable it might now be for some.
That's not what you said Francie. This is what you said:
the vast majority of FG voters were always the most conservative in Ireland
You have not provided anything whatsoever to substantiate this.
Bringing up Donaldson's visit yet again is ridiculous. You might as well be trying to link FG with alleged sex offenders, it'd make no less sense than what you are saying.
liberal wing
Which is what I said. See post. Is the entire FG vote 'liberal'. No, I don't think you can say that at all. I think some would align with the social policy of the DUP and after a time give them a vote. Donaldson addressing their conference and being applauded shows you that IMO. Brexit may have set that friendship back a bit but that had more to do with the DUP's aversion to the south generally than FG.
Nonsense. FG has had a strong liberal wing since the mid 1960s. It certainly wasn't FF pushing for divorce or non-prescription condoms…
This makes no sense though. FG currently have absolutely no socially conservative policies, if anything they pride themselves on their crusading progressive zeal. What would motivate a social conservative to vote for a party which is the opposite of socially conservative?
Bringing up some past stereotypical FG voter is pointless too, unless through time travel unification happens in the past. FG have planted their flag firmly in the liberal/progressive/whatever camp, and they'll have no social policies in common with the DUP if/when unification comes.
I've seen people luxuriate in this image of FG being 'progressive'. It's not my experience of them. Sure they have had 'progressive' politicians and even some policy, but the vast majority of FG voters were always the most conservative in Ireland followed closely by elements of FF. Leo Varadkar is nearly 15 years younger than me and in his lifetime he was opposed to same sex marriage rights until the wind changed. 'Progressive'? Yeh right.
Might make you uncomfortable but that still present conservative rump have more in common with the Paisley's party than anyone else. Take the constitutional question out of it (and sometimes you don't even need to do that as FG would attract most partitionists and those who regret leaving the UK resident in the south) and I see no problem with the DUP attracting votes here at times.
FG take the "progressive" stance on just about any social issue you can imagine though (abortion, gay marriage, surrogacy, trans, hate speech, "conversion therapy" etc.).
If this isn't costing them votes from social conservatives, I don't know how the DUP entering the fray would change anything.
If they take any votes at all, it will be the FG socially conservative ones. Socially conservative FFers republicanism would put them off I think.
Sure why not? Cos at this stage it seems any and all comparisons are on the table if alignment can be tethered like random policies like a Stopped Clock. At this stage if the DUP's leadership prefer the same brand of teabag it'd be enough it seems.
Let's not forget for a second this entire, utterly pointless thread that won't die, all started because of this statement:
With a start that suspect & ideologically tedious, where else could it all have gone except downward? And at the risk of blowing my own trumpet, the only rational answer I still think is that if a United Ireland happened, the Capital-U Unionist vote will have been diluted enough that anyone still that socially-conservative under that umbrealla would probably just drift into whatever equivalent minor party existed at the time (New-Renua? Post Tóbín Aontú if it still exists?)
I see the argument now is that the DUP is also ideologically aligned to literally every governing party in Europe outside Ireland as if that makes any sense whatsoever.
The very people who are least likely to care whether a UI is in the BC or not.
Sigh, okay if you insist on pedantry to score points: Yes I am disputing your answer and already had done so because, again, your assertion that FG and the DUP are kin because of one guest speaker 5 years ago and "water charges" are not silver bullets towards some "same coin". And, TBH, wilfully ignores the fairly distinct and inescapable ideological differences that foundationally makes the entire thread laughable redundant. But here we are 7 pages later.
But if you're gonna make childish jibes about closet SF support or clinging to technicalities rather than interrogate the credibility of your point - and I suspect you know it - then we're done here.
I'm not sure are you disputing my answer. Do you need more than one similarity between the DUP and FG? If so you should have asked
If you're gonna trot out childish, asinine comments like that because your "proof" of like mindedness was some polite applause and a single point of comparison wasn't taken seriously, then, lol, sure. If you think a meeting of minds would be possible because of Water Charges? Okay.
But I think we can all see there's no sane merit to claiming FG and DUP are kindred because ... "water charges" @donegal_man hit on the more likely ideological relationships found further down the food chain of Irish politics.
Being called a "closet SF supporter" did give me a good laugh though, so fair play.
Wuestion posed: Name a single economic or social policy on which FG and the DUP align
Answer given: Water charges
If you don't like the answer given then maybe it's beacause you're a closet SF supporter
On social issues DUP is probably a lot closer to Aontu than it is to any mainstream party in the Republic.
Right so a glib mic-drop; yet nothing substantive that makes the proposal remotely credible vs. all the fairly obvious differences in policy or social outlook - including 2 referenda that … well, let's charitably say the DUP would probably have opposed?
The DUP do not have an analogue South of the Border and its weird to spitball FG beyond what I presume is some resting pre-existing personal contempt for the party. If you had have said "parts of Fianna Fáil" it might have made more sense, not FG tho'.
"Water Charges" and polite applause for a guest speaker don't exactly read like stirring proof here.
Regarding the Commonwealth,it might need a change of name before we'd rejoin it
Imagine if we had never left
One less issue to be resolved in tandem with a UI
Water charges
Name a single economic or social policy on which FG and the DUP align; a FG audience applauding a visiting politician's speech 5 years ago doesn't really prove anything except default politeness towards visitors, or back up the idea the two parties align on anything.
Its likely to be part of a package of sops to try and quell loyalist violence after a border poll that passes; rather than an attempt to win them over in advance.
Oh no, JD was at that conference five years ago being dragged up yet again.
No unionist worthy of the name is going to be won over by a united Ireland joining the Commonwealth.
FG are socially liberal
Joke of the week alert. They're already fairly close policy-wise and now seem fairly friendly with each other
https://www.independent.ie/news/fine-gael-audience-applauds-as-dups-donaldson-says-ireland-should-join-the-commonwealth/37944279.html
As an a-side I think joining the commonwealth would be on the cards in a United Ireland situation to bring the Unionists with us
Are you serious? FG are socially liberal
Dyed in the wool DUP puritans would have nothing to do with that ideology
If there was a UI,I'd suspect voters up north would finally converge on parties that they agreed with on policies and outcomes as much as possible
I think in the event of a United Ireland the DUP would merge with FG. They would then be seen as a party that would try to align more closely with the UK than with the EU
It's NI's public sector that is massively overmanned compared to ours (or rest of UK) but when all you have is a hammer…
