Presidential Election 2025

The only other option would presumably be get a certain number of signatures of registered voters and/or a deposit. What would be a fair threshold to allow somebody onto the ballot? Dáil is 30 signatures (or €500), Local is 15 signatures (or €100), Europe is 60 signatures (or €1,800).

Dáil & local seem fine based on the size of the electorate there. Europe is way too easy to get nominated for.

There are 43 Dáil constituencies, so if we multiplied the criteria for Dáil by 43 we'd get 1,290 signatures or €21,500 deposit. If we did it based on local electoral areas (166 LEAs) we'd get 2,490 signatures or €16,600. If we did it on Euros we'd only need 180 signatures or €5,400.

I don't like the idea of sidestepping signatures by having money, so scrap the deposit rule. If we go by the current nominating rules you need either 20 Oireachtas members out of 234 (8.54% of the members) or 4 of the 31 councils (12.9% of the councils). Let's split the difference and say you need 10% of the expected voting populace to nominate you based on the previous election results. So in 2018 there were 1,492,338 votes cast, if we had 10% of that you'd need to be nominated by 149,234 people. That would have put you 3rd in the count in 2018 (Michael D got 822k votes, Peter Casey got 342K, Sean Gallagher got 94k votes).

It should be really hard to get nominated for president - so if you are unable to attract 10% of the public OR 8.5% of Oireachtas members OR 13% of the local councils then why should you run. If we did want to change the nominating procedure then I'd suggest that.

The block can be enforced as a result of an arbitrary set of circumstances.

Certain parties, voted on by the public. The public who know (or should know) that the councillors play a role in nominating presidential candidates.

Yes.

But here is one member of the public who thinks that a route should not be blocked just because of a temporary holding of the balance of power. By any party or set of party's.

Since when is the democratic will of the people an "arbitrary set of circumstances"??

Sounds like something out of 1930s Europe.

But you are 1, the majority has voted (consistently and disappointingly) for the parties that are "blocking"…

I am somebody who believes the President doesn't need to be from a political party.

I think there should be a route for people who don't necessarily have to be answerable for one political party or another nor necessarily needs the support of one political party or other and should not be stopped by political parties closing ranks.

Simple as that.

Let's hear it.

Propose a route that is simple, cost-effective and delivers suitably qualified candidates.

To me this is entirely reasonable for FG as they have always been intent on running their own candidate. If FF were not to do likewise things would get interesting. I think an argument could be made for Martin his councillors off the leash to facilitate other candidates "in the interests of democracy".