Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Presidential Election 2025

1373840424376

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 54,770 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 892 ✭✭✭For Petes Sake


    EDIT: Apologies. Forgot about the warning.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 2,102 ✭✭✭Hibernicis


    What happens if only one candidate is nominated?

    She or he is declared elected. Happened on six occasions, most recently in 2004 and previously in 1938, 1952, 1974, 1976, 1983.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,070 ✭✭✭✭28064212


    As above, one nomination is a relatively common occurrence.

    As far as I'm aware, there is no provision for no nomination. However, given that one of the methods is having 20 TDs or Senators nominate someone, if the government of the day is in such disarray that they cannot cobble together 20 Oireachtas members to agree on a candidate, it's likely that we have far bigger problems than a presidential election

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, dark mode, and more). Now available through your browser's extension store.

    Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/boardsie-enhancement-suite/

    Chrome/Edge/Opera: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/boardsie-enhancement-suit/bbgnmnfagihoohjkofdnofcfmkpdmmce



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,914 ✭✭✭Caquas


    Eilís O'Hanlon thinks Leo may be lining up a run for the Áras. I doubt it, not least because FG won't back their former leader who walked out on them last year, and Eilís understands that Leo would lose in any event. I think his United Ireland talk is for the benefit of the Yanks who employ him now. Any candidate for the Áras should tread very carefully softly on that issue.

    https://www.independent.ie/opinion/eilis-ohanlon-now-he-has-all-the-answers-does-leo-varadkar-plan-to-go-from-pub-bore-to-president/a774861667.html

    The media are full of head-scratchers baffled by the lack of potential candidates for the ultimate plum job. There's no great mystery - the people who are best qualified i.e. former Taoisigh and senior Ministers, are not viable candidates because they are all damaged by the crash/austerity/tribunals. The next most credible group are "the great and the good" - people with exemplary CVs largely free from the taint of ordinary politics (like Mary Robinson and Mary McAleese) . But which of them does not have a skeleton or two in their closet? They would surely be exposed during the campaign. University Presidents might have the right CV but there are plenty of scandals in higher-level education. Jarlath Burns would look like a plausible candidate but he has ruled himself out - perhaps knowing that he would be hobbled by GAA+ "Vote for me - I took the best matches off your TV".

    "Celebrities" are a catch-all category and some of them must be dreaming of more glory days in the Aras but anyone out of RTÉ can forget it. And the stars of our COVID lockdown? They're relieved that there'll be no public inquiry so they won't open themselves up to the intense scrutiny of this campaign. (Has Mike Ryan ruled himself out yet?)

    Here's my best guess at this stage: FG will nominate Mairead (or maybe Sean Kelly but not Leo), FF will try to make a virtue of necessity by climbing on some bandwagon, the Left won't unite around a single candidate because the Shinners won't play ball with Ivana/Fergus. September could be hectic with unlikely names looking for Council nominations and Conor McGregor stinking up Council chambers.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,929 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    No, there won't necessarily be a presidential election.

    If only one candidate is properly nominated, then they will be deemed elected. In theory, the government parties could agree a candidate between them, and then put a whip on their Councillors to prevent any other nominations from coming from outside the Oireachtas.

    In that event, you can be as sure as night follows day that the leftist opposition parties would come together to back a unified candidate to oppose.

    Regardless though, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael will run a nominations process, and will probably send forward a candidate each, even if those candidates are from outside the obvious pool of choice.

    It will be between Mairéad McGuinness and Sean Kelly for FG and, I suspect, Mary Hanafin and Mark Daly for FF. Reason being, that this talk of Colum Eastwood running for FF will galvanise some blockers, who see it as their right to keep within the Party.

    SF will certainly nominate, either Conor Murphy, John Finucane or Michelle O'Neill.

    Can then the Sanctimonious Dems, Labour and others agree a rabbit out of their hat? Maybe.

    If all those big beasts do nominate though, then all other candidates can forget it. The votes are not available at County Council level, if the big parties whip their members.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 74,587 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    You have to realise that for Ellis, a UI represents a complete and utter defeat for her whole ideology and career. Anyone talking positively about it has to be deluded or has an agenda.
    Her failure to notice that it is not the Americans who are taking notice of Leo but NI's media and the UK's BBC, all of them covering his statements and the BBC interviewing him.

    Ellis is not a journalist, she is a polemicist and publicist for Ellis.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,088 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    The simple and only reason we don't have any nominees yet is they are all terrified of what happened to David Norris last time when he announced too soon and well before anyone else. I suspect FF and FG have a agreement that they will announce quite close to each other and far later than previously to try and avoid it happening to either.

    Also Leo may well run for the Aras in future but it absolutely will not be happening this time round, anyone still trying to push that theory is disconnected from reality.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,914 ✭✭✭Caquas


    That’s what the media are saying but it’s nonsense. Mary Robinson changed history because Dick Spring took the opposite approach- he sent her on a bus to every parish in the country six months before polling day (to the intense chagrin of Michael D. who backed Noel Browne). Sean Gallagher thrived during the 2011 campaign before he was nobbled at the last fence by SF/RTÉ. David Norris was never going to survive serious scrutiny outside the groves of academe. Adi Roche wasn’t going to win no matter how long or short her campaign. Ditto the other also-rans.

    The parties are feeding this line to the media because they are not ready to take the plunge but they know that a credible candidate with a clean CV entering the field today would be difficult to dislodge as the front runner. Each party has its problems - FF can’t nominate one of their own because…. well, they’re FF. FG need to fix things with the members who blocked Mairéad in 2011. SF don’t want a repeat of the O Riada fiasco, Labour are trying to muster the Left around Fergus. While the parties try to get their respective acts together, the media spin the “clever to go late” excuse.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,914 ✭✭✭Caquas


    It would be a national scandal and an abdication of their responsibilities if the parties and the county councils denied the Irish people their say in this matter by nominating only one candidate. What credibility would a President have if s/he was foisted on us by some cabal of politicians or, more likely, by the incapacity of political parties to face the electorate. Paddy Hillery had to endure fourteen years as a Trappist monk because only FF would nominate a candidate after the O Dalaigh scandal. How humiliating for Ireland if we had to repeat that scenario!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,640 ✭✭✭✭expectationlost


    What about Noeline Blackwell could run as Independent backed by Fianna Fail and Labour, GP and SDs. https://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/fianna-fail-crisis-as-barry-andrews-rules-out-running-for-presidency/a2065767125.html

    Don't like she was on the board of NGO funded by Denis O'Brien.

    Post edited by expectationlost on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,914 ✭✭✭Caquas


    She’d get lots of support from the media and legal circles but she’s no Mary Robinson.

    The President should be a uniter not a divider. And a candidate needs to win >50% of the vote.

    is way too strident and sexual assault is not a winning theme for a President.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 2,102 ✭✭✭Hibernicis


    Another person of substance who could do a competent job. Mightn't have the name recognition to rise above others if there are a few in the field. Not aware of her having any connection to FF. Would be a lot better than Andrews or Hanafin anyway.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 2,102 ✭✭✭Hibernicis


    Is there any word of Gemma giving it another lash, following her unsuccessful run in 2018 ! On that occasion she got an unbelievable 11 nominations by Oireachtas members but just 1 County Council (Laois stand up and take a bow).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,088 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    All the examples you mentioned are before some pretty monumental shifts in the political overton window both globally and nationally, not to mention the massive changes in consumption of media habits that absolutely impact races like this, comparing this years race to anything beyond the previous one is pointless.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 43,550 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    is way too strident and sexual assault is not a winning theme for a President.

    …as opposed to someone who has a proficient legal background (and won a Lifetime Achievement Award at the Irish Law Awards) and has spent much of their career advocating for the underprivileged via FLAC and also for victims of abuse?

    Post edited by Seth Brundle on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,421 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Ended up overhearing a group of random people in the pub discussing this last night, and they debated through various options and opted for McGuinness.

    First time I've heard any non-political people paying any attention to it whatsoever though!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 983 ✭✭✭StormForce13


    Almost as bad as you so, but with a much bigger readership. Plus she gets paid for her nonsense!

    Back to the theme of this thread:- surely it's time for Hazel Chu to launch her campaign.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 74,587 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    At least the person I mentioned had a link to the thread in that she was commenting on the presidential campaign, not some random woman I wanted to have a narky pop at. Any dislike of other women you want to get off your chest?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,461 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Norris's problem wasn't the early nomination. His problem was the years he spent out on 'disability' from this Trinity post while working as an enthusiastic and energetic Senator.

    'Strident'? Are we back to the repeal referendum tone policing of obstreperous women. Funny how we don't see men being accused of being strident.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,914 ✭✭✭Caquas


    Don't try to smear me with repeal referendum sexism. I say "strident" is the right word for Noeline. It applies to both sexes and it means "expressing views in forceful language that does not try to avoid upsetting other people". That's not how to campaign for the Aras and absolutely not how the President of Ireland should behave. (yes, Michael D. has been strident at times - he doth protest much).

    You say this word isn't used about men. Funny how we can now google up many counter-examples:

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/aug/17/duttons-strident-gaza-digression-drowns-out-liberals-epic-election-blunder-in-nsw-ntwnfb

    Oh, and of course Trump gets lots

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14837667/Starmer-Trump-escalation-Iran-US-attack-nuclear-sites-president-regime-change.html

    And there is no sexist pattern in Boards

    https://www.boards.ie/search?domain=all_content&query=%22strident%22&scope=site&source=community

    Your reaction says nothing about me but a lot about you.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,461 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    She wasn't campaigning for the Aras. She was campaigning for the Rape Crisis Centre.

    We need more and more strident voices about rape.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,914 ✭✭✭Caquas


    John Drennan in the Irish Daily Mail is not buying the nonsense that the parties have sold to other media commentators about strategic delay. He knows the only reason the parties haven't nominated anyone yet is they can't find a credible candidate. As he says, it almost as if an exhausted political class have come to an unwritten agreement.

    He points to the absurdity of the opposition parties bringing the Oireachtas to a standstill for months over a few minutes of speaking time but now they can't muster a candidate for the highest office.

    https://www.pressreader.com/ireland/irish-daily-mail/20250623/281706915659891?srsltid=AfmBOopyRn9F9rO630iLFVonwldvDh2I5cCpCoM6VWrC_sCBU71F7Bhh



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,914 ✭✭✭Caquas


    Do you know you're contradicting yourself? You claimed

    The simple and only reason we don't have any nominees yet is they are all terrified of what happened to David Norris last time when he announced too soon and well before anyone else. 

    I pointed to counter-examples for now you've gone all Overton window and

    comparing this years race to anything beyond the previous one is pointless.

    Comparing this years race with the last election is useless because in 2018 a sitting President seeking re-election has always succeeded and Michael D had the support of the Government parties (!!!) and he trounced a bunch of outsiders. David Norris did not run again.

    The lessons of 2011 are manifold and still relevant - yes, skeletons will emerge from the closet especially if it is as full as David's but Sean Gallagher is evidence of three more valuable lessons - firstly, a candidate who enters the ring early can come from nowhere to top the polls and, secondly, the final days are crucial and, thirdly, the mass media are biased (even our national broadcaster, which had to compensate Gallagher).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 74,587 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    That's not how to campaign for the Aras and absolutely not how the President of Ireland should behave. 

    I would love to know where all these requirements are written down. Are there some laws/parameters written in stone somewhere that you are invoking?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,088 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Indeed i got confused and contradicted myself, its funny how some people are capable of admitting to mistakes right?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 38,121 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Not this again. He wasn't on "disability" or any social welfare benefit, he paid into an income protection policy using his own money and met the conditions for benefit under that policy. Being a senator is very much a part time job

    I'm partial to your abracadabra,

    I'm raptured by the joy of it all.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,914 ✭✭✭Caquas


    To those who understand constitutional law, these requirements are obvious and fundamental to the job but, unlike his two immediate predecessors who pushed the boundaries while abiding by the Constitutional limits, Michael D. is a sociologist i.e. he thinks he knows better and he has overstepped the mark several times.

    It's no wonder some people are now confused and don't understand why a President can't be strident e.g. speak in strong terms without worrying about giving offence.

    The key to President's role is Article 13.9

    The powers and functions conferred on the President by this Constitution shall be exercisable and performable by him only on the advice of the Government, save where it is provided by this Constitution ……

    That means the President must act on the say-so of the Government with very few exceptions which are rarely exercised.

    It is obviously inconsistent with Article 13.9 for the President to criticise the Government. It would mean either that the President is just a blow-hard, spouting opinions without authority, or worse, trying to reverse Article 13.9 by dictating policy to the Government.

    Now think about the other limits on the President e.g. needing Government permission to leave the country. Read the whole document and think about the constitutional framework - legislative, executive and judicial - and the President's role within that framework. I hope a light will dawn for you and even amongst the media commentators who speculate about candidates with no appreciation of the constitutional quagmire into which Michael D. has led us.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 74,587 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Hold on, you stated that there was a defined 'way' to campaign for the Aras, where does the constitution outline this 'way'?

    The President decides how to behave. And as the government have not taken any action against him there is no breach of his role constitutionally. All we know is that you and other armchair constitutional experts just don't like what he had to say, but so what?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,461 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Wasn't it great the way he got the miracle cure after 16 years, right as he hit retirement age, just before the presidency job came up though?



Advertisement