I never said you were comparing politics. But you said you were not comparing numbers, which you indeed were because you replied to a post about the NUMBER of people who would vote for him. If you weren't talking numbers then your reply is completely irrelevant.
I'd prefer if nobody voted for him, he might learn you need to respect others.
What I'm saying is his name is known in every household in Ireland and the vast majority don't follow MMA and a lot of those people would think he's the best that there ever was in the UFC. These people know nothing about him only that he's Irish and famous. It's entirely possible he'd get a decent amount of votes from people like that.
I'm not comparing politics at all. I'm comparing individuals who are loved by many and despised by many.
I don't doubt they would turn up for a guerrilla riot if asked. But I'm questioning if being registered to vote is part of the wartime manifesto.
…underestimating how many people would vote for him…
I'm talking about the how many people part. Whatever number would support him, a significant number wouldn't be the voting sort.
But it was in reply to my post, about numbers are how many people will vote for him. As I said, he'll get a few scrote votes, but as Mellor pointed out it's not as if he's part of a party that has a large chunk of built-in votes. American politics is a bad comparison because there are so many people who will vote blue or red no matter who the leaders of the respective parties are. He'll get votes from the Coolock Says No crowd and a few session heads whose cocaine expenditure is only matched by their 2005 Louis Copeland bills and money spent on trips to Vegas.
But the rest of the country can't stand the guy. And certainly would not see him fit to be President.
I wasn't comparing numbers, I was talking about the love vs hate similarity.
when one goes to war they all go to war Mellor
Trump benefitted by a partisan system. Any GOP candidate automatic picks in 40% support. That would not apply to McGregor. And even if he did have 50% support. The side of the population that support him are not exactly known for actively voting
He might wear the poppy again, will help him get some of the FG lads onside for the nomination
Would love to see him run, the absolute car crash of him taking part in debates with other candidates would be great viewing. Unfortunately he'd never get the nominations needed to run.
Was looking forward to seeing him step back in the cage and getting a beating but looks like that's not going to happen either
None of the scutter who would nominate him are either TDs or senators. Its not happening.
Hes just filling a publicity gap until he fights.
he needs to be nominated / backed by 20 either TDs or senators, or by 4 City / County councils. Can't see that happening, tbh.
very hard to predict what vote he would get if nominated though, looking back at the last couple elections
I certainly wouldn't support him but you are underestimating how many people would vote for him I think. He's like Trump in that he's hated by many but loved by many too.
He needs votes from TDs I think, so if he can line their pockets he might get on the ticket…but he couldn't run a bath, never mind for president
I am reading that as another way for him to kick the can down the road and avoiding fighting…again.
He is also completely out of touch with reality. Does he really think he'd get many votes? A few scrotes might give him the nod but the rest of the country know the person he is and wouldn't be seen dead supporting him
"Its just business" etc.
UFC holding off on having him fight as he has two fights left on his contract (his last 2 you ould assume) and they're negotiating deals at the moment so 2 x McGregor fights is nice to have in the back pocket.
His post about what he thinks he can do as president would lead me to believe he was sniffing more Charlie than the Rolling Stones combined.
I know what a split decision is 🤣. I was saying that you can't pick "split decision" as how you judge it. Which is something you hear people saying. It's clear what you meant now.
Even at that stage we all knew how good Khabib was on the ground but he never got Tibau down. The only takedown was by Tibau. That's why I remember it.
How did we know that at that stage? He was close to a nobody at that stage. I doubt many people knew who he was.
As I said, Tibeau had the better of him in strikes, but it was a tiny margin. It's easy to see how some clinch control would outweigh a tiny striking head. I need to rewatch it to score tbh.
30-27 may be wrong, but it's not a significant robbery. That sort of decison happens weekly (Ramos beating Culibao last week was one).
As I also said in my last post, it's now known that Tibau was juicing so I'm delighted the result went the way it did.
He was caught juicing. But it was some years after that fight iirc. Before he retired.
A split is two judges going one way and one going another. The last round could have went either way.
I wasn't sure who won it because of how much time Tibau was stuck on the fence preventing takedowns. When he got off it he did some good work which I thought might get him the round. As I said I thought he nicked the last round but could understand it being given the other way. As a result of this I felt it was likely that it was going to be a split decision with the last round going against both with at least one judge.
30-27 from all three judges was a disgraceful decision.
I remember thinking he lost too. But I also remember that I'd heard people repeat that over and over. To the point I'm sure many have are just parroting what others have said. Wasn't suggesting you were doing that to be clear.
You remember the specific take down count? Or you checked the stats this week - like I did above?
I'm confused how you judged it as a split decision? A individual can't judge a fight to be split. The scoring means each person score is definitive. 29-28 is not a split.
I don't think the volume of strikes was significant enough either way to say either fighter and unquestionably won any round. But it is clearly leaning one way
I remember it well. No takedowns for Khabib and one for Tibau. I was sure it'd be a split decision one. Khabib won the first round, he had him on the cage a lot. Tibau clearly won the second, he got a takedown and hit the better strikes. The third one was close, Khabib had him on the fence a good bit but Tibau hit him with some really good punches and nearly got a takedown.
I felt Tibau just about won the last round but you couldn't blame a judge for giving it to Khabib.
The scorecards were ridiculous, all three judges scored it 30-27 to Khabib. Most people thought Tibau won it. It was very close but it was definitely a 29-28 either way.
In hindsight the result was the right one because Tibau was juicing.
I watched it ages back and at the time thought he lost that one.
That was definitely the closest he came to losing. But Tibau also never had him in trouble. I also think the fight became somewhat mythical in the years since. I'm sure half the people who mentioned it, never seen it.
The stats suggest a very close fight. Significant strikes were 10-8, 9-9 and 9-8. I think I need to rewatch it to shake the myth out.
The only fighter that probably should have beaten Khabbib was Tibau,very unlucky not to win that.
Hell end up in the WWE or something like that.
That article is paywalled mate
some good lines about the human skid mark in this article
Dave Hannigan: Conor McGregor eager to weigh in on the side of bare-knuckle fighting
https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/2024/07/04/dave-hannigan-conor-mcgregor-eager-to-weigh-in-on-the-side-of-bare-knuckle-fighting/
And at the other extreme, somebody else called it a lucky punch only a week ago. 🤣
There are people who still try and justify the Aldo loss as Aldo being "out of his prime" despite the fact he hadn't lost in a decade at that point, was only in his 20s, and is still fighting at elite level almost another decade later.
