Presidential Election 2025

Connolly is very good at that in fairness playing the passive aggressive role. Even if her comments make no sense logically at times. Re her stance on her various controversies.

She likes preface her sentences with “As a mother”. I noticed Connolly has even written “As a mother” on her campaign leaflet. Clever strategy.

But at same time, the colouring and style of her leaflet has echoes of Irish Republicanism 1916. The colouring and lettering etc.

On the Humphreys side of things it is notable she doesn’t use her surname in her leaflet. As it is not very “Republican”. “Heather” is also an attempt to make her sound personable. A smart strategy.

It is what makes Humphreys the wrong candidate for FG. Humphreys is approaching these debates like Connolly is the FF candidate. That kind of back and forth might happen with an FF candidate (a real FF candidate). Connolly is too smart to engage. As a result, Humphreys is just left attempting to smear Connolly while Connolly and the moderators look on.

Id go as far as to call this an obvious tactic. The media were destined to go after Humphreys background, in government, and as a minister. By avoiding it herself, Connolly takes a higher road, while knowing full well that it will be brought up regardless of her input. We have seen this in each of the debates thus far. Humphreys has been questioned RE housing, austerity, cuts on spending et al, and she is placed in the possition of having to defend FG in government. CC would have been aware too, that the budget was perfectly timed to damage Humphreys Campaign. By the way, just to be clear, I think this is all fair game and to be expected.

In contrast Humphreys is left with little choice but to attack Connolly's positions over the years, and in particular on foreign policy. Thus far, despite certain unforced errors on the part of CC, it seemingly hasnt worked. I think Humphreys has this week alone, to make a serious impact on the outcome of the election. I doubt she has it in her to do so, and you can really tell why McGuinness was the first choice for nomination.

I think unless Connolly stumbles into an 'October Surprise' type situation, between now and polling day, then she will win comfortably. Now i wouldnt put it passed her to do this, and i have previously pointed to the unforced errors of the Connolly campaign. But i think it would require something disastrous now, and well out of left field (no pun intended). This remote possibility is the only way i see HH winning. Its almost out of Humphreys hands at this stage.

Unless a Poll conducted after Gavins exit, shows a shortening of the gap, its all but over. Im half annoyed that the latest poll was conducted, and overlapped with JG suspending his campaign. Had it began on Monday 6th, we would have a more accurate indication of where CC and HH stand relative to one another. In the next poll if the gap is more than 10 odd percentage points, then its over. That is my honest view.

My new mate “Heather” 🙄, she could easily claim that she was speaking metaphorically and not in a legal sense. As Burton was not “totally restrained” as per the judge’s direction in the Murphy case. But still felt “locked in” given the context.

Exactly and those are the images Humphreys wanted to conjure up by bringing it up.
Smart move in my view.
Clearly rattled the Connolly core vote who are claiming defamation (as shown on this thread), hoping Murphy would sue HH. But the middle ground who are unsure could think - aggressive protest radical lefties.

No question, its deeply damaging. I saw it mentioned that sheep welfare was brought up in the budget more times than homelessness. Ludicrous in this day and age, and i hope FFG take a pasting in the polls. It goes toward indicating that, as far as the presidential election is concerned, FFG have all but thrown in the towel. Nothing about the budget would indicate a second thought for the plight of Humphreys (or Gavin previously) in an ongoing election cycle.

Despite the misgivings I have for Connolly, I remain convinced she will win at present, barring a total disaster between now and the 24th. If i were advising CC's campaign, I would be cautious, and probably advise her not to stray toward contentious issues. Not that it would have an impact in fairness, she remains as she always has done on policy points.

Im not going to condone or defend Ivan Yates comments RE smearing. It was sloppy and stupid, and if anything, it hurt Humphreys. If i give him the benefit of the doubt for a brief moment, I think he was highligting a 'nothing to lose' situation for Humphreys. Its 85 mins on the clock, and FFG are losing, having conceded multiple goals. And metaphorically, having had a man sent off/retired. In that situation there really is nothing to lose, you do what ever you can to try and make an impact. It will be interesting to see what Humphreys and her staff come up with this week. But it may be too late, and out of her hands so.

I don’t think so. In my view all those water protests succeeded in doing was painting Burton and the centre left Labour as “establishment”. Even though Burton was working class. Fragmenting the left vote allowing SF to fill the vacuum. Tightening the bond on the centre right.

But ultimately PBP are not really a party which could form a government. President might be the height of it for this “left alliance”.

Different font on the Connolly for President though.

Has echoes of this for me -

Connolly should have admitted she worked on repossessions the first time she was asked. It looks now like she did and there’s nothing wrong with it. Failing to be forthright about this matter reflects badly on her but it’s in tune with her make believe politics.

We aren't.

Ivan Yates hasn't been a FG member for 25 years, let alone a strategist or campaigner.

In fact, what he says is very unhelpful for us, his old comrades.

However, it is also a bit naive of him. Presidentials are smear campaigns above all, anyway, in every direction. He knows this.

You just don't say the quiet bit out loud.

At the same time, smears can't be baseless or they become slander. So, rather than a smear campaign, think of it just as a campaign of inconvenient truths.

If you want to vote for Connolly after you hear them, well thats up to you...

Which begs the question- with such a controversial candidate, why isn’t it a walk over to beat her?
Ans: her opponent is completely lacking any clear focus for the presidency and can instead only fling mud at Connolly - some of it is certainly sticking and rightfully so- but it’s not a good look continually doing it and it only shows up Heather as equally lacking any credible claim to the position