Presidential Election 2025

From what I remember of Quinn in the past, he was always talking on TV and radio about religious affairs and the perspective of the Catholic Church. His interest in topics like immigration, Israel, trans issues etc seems much more recent….is he simply trying to ride a populist wave?

He is an opininator. Immigration, Israel, Gaza and trans affairs are all topical issues. His focus has been on religious issues. He is entitled to his own opinions as are his critics.

The thing about publications and programmes that have talking heads giving their opinions is that many people will read, listen or watch in order to be outraged. The outraged generally outnumber those who share the same views. Outrage sells.

Carlow is 11/18 FF&FG, would need a few defectors.

I'm still a bit puzzled as to why he is taking a very strong stand on issues like immigration and Israel. This ostensibly has nothing to do with the Iona Institute and its aims of the promotion and advancement of the Catholic Church and its theology (and he is the guy who set up the Institute in 2007, not a mere foot soldier). Since when is the Catholic Church anti-immigration?

You would have to ask him. The Immigration issue has shifted away from the Far Left open borders position and even the government has been making noises about deportations and cracking down on economic migrants abusing the asylum system.

As for Israel, he may be providing a contrarian view to that of the usual virtue signalling media types and that is better for publications. They can get low grade virtue signalling pieces from any "commentator". Well argued pieces are more difficult to find and get readers even among the perpetually outraged. Think of it in terms of audiences and sales and why publications and broadcasters use such material makes more sense. They know their audiences.

It was interesting to see the presidential candiates also virtue signalling on the Gaza issue. There was a hissy fit when Gavin used military terms about what Israel was doing in Gaza. It was quickly walked back by FF.

I would still say Quinn appears to be going on a solo run here and defying everything we know the Catholic Church says about migration - a cynical attempt to ingratiate himself with the 'right wing populist' and MAGA crowd perhaps?

It would be interesting to hear Maria Steen's views on all this. So far she doesn't seem to have touched on the immigration debate and has confined herself to regular Iona Institute stuff (as one would expect).

For sure, but he seems to be going totally off-script or off-message in his strong opposition to immigration. In no way would that be the position of the Catholic Church…..they would be the last people you would expect to be coming out with an anti-immigration message or claiming that 'Ireland is full' etc. In other words he is giving very un-Catholic opinions in these articles.

If any of the candidates do not perform well in the office. People will be saying “Why didn’t I vote?” Or “Why didn’t I vote for xyz instead?” Seven years is a long time.

But I think you are correct most people don’t seem bothered at the moment. The 2011 election people seemed much more exercised about it. There was a bit of needle and controversy between candidates.

For this one you do have to wonder if the electorate is distracted by either international affairs, or the more practical issues Ireland has cost of living, housing issues etc.

It is definitely not O’Neill if the candidate has “a lot of Irish”. Given that McDonald herself is by no means fluent. It must mean more Gaeilge than Mary Lou.

 it'd damage relations with other left wing parties they would hope to form a future coalition with. 

Comes down to what internal SF thinking is on the possibility of that happening.

Which article refers to "a lot of Irish"? The RTE one on Mary Lou's comments doesn't say anything about that…..are you speaking about a different article?

If you were internal SF what do you think -

1. Would be SF’s best course of action?

2. Would be SF’s likely course of action?

3. Would appeal more to the grassroots
in SF?

My interpretation of her remarks is that she's not talking about CC at all. She would hardly be that enthusiastic in backing someone who has nothing to do with SF : it sounds much more like they have identified a potential candidate and are about to name them.