David Norris Attack Website

sensibleken · 26-10-2010 05:55PM

Im torn between Norris and Michael D for our next prez.

Either way we should have an adorable older gent.

Mickey D has plenty of moral fibre and in my opinion would be closer to Mary robinsons campaign.

with david on the other hand, we would get to wear jaunty straw hats.

fat__tony · 26-10-2010 05:57PM

What a horrible, nasty, vindicative agenda this is.

What does it matter in this day in age about a person's sexuality??

gandalf · 26-10-2010 06:28PM

Fairly pathetic website tbh, if they oppose David Norris they should run a candidate against him instead of resorting to this type of disgusting negative campaigning. Its obviously linked to the type of rubbish that right wing religious organisations engage in over the water in the States and I would hazard to guess that these "Christian" types are getting help from over there as well.

I would say that pathetic, knuckle dragging rubbish like that website will have the complete opposite effect than they want and drive people towards voting for David Norris.

Just for the novelty of having a Queen as the head of state i think we should all vote for David Norris

(just as an aside do you ever notice that these Christian types are not very Christian like at all!)

Scofflaw · 26-10-2010 06:37PM

sensibleken wrote: »

Im torn between Norris and Michael D for our next prez.

Either way we should have an adorable older gent.

Mickey D has plenty of moral fibre and in my opinion would be closer to Mary robinsons campaign.

with david on the other hand, we would get to wear jaunty straw hats.

And every day would be Bloomsday!

cordially,
Scofflaw

Permabear · 26-10-2010 06:56PM

This post has been deleted.

Callan57 · 26-10-2010 07:12PM

Poor Enoch ... I'll pray for him & his conscience :rolleyes:

NewHillel · 26-10-2010 09:16PM

fat__tony wrote: »

What a horrible, nasty, vindicative agenda this is.

What does it matter in this day in age about a person's sexuality??

Indeed, it never should have mattered.

(I have to admit to having a sneaking regard for DN, indeed I vote for him every election. Having said that, I don't believe that the Senate, in its current form, serves any useful purpose.)

26-10-2010 09:28PM

Just viewed their site.

I don't usually vote, but, after seeing this,

I will vote for Mr Norris.

egan007 · 26-10-2010 09:33PM

Oh I get it - God hates gays....

Wow insightful opinions from this young man.

Wolfe Tone · 26-10-2010 10:05PM

NoDrama wrote: »

Just viewed their site.

I don't usually vote, but, after seeing this,

I will vote for Mr Norris.

In fairness I think this reaction is very stupid.

26-10-2010 10:38PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

In fairness I think this reaction is very stupid.

Maybe the reaction is stupid, Mussolini, though the whole presidency is stupid in my world, and not needed, which is why I haven't voted in the past.

In relation to what I posted, I am sure if those sad people who created that site look at their analytics they will see many redirects which originated from here,

So, I wanted to give an objectionable voice to it.

Anyways, there are greater things to be worrying about these days.

Shea O'Meara · 27-10-2010 01:05AM

" out-of-line with traditional biblical morality. "

sounds good to me:D

Executive Steve · 27-10-2010 01:47AM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

In fairness I think this reaction is very stupid.

It's just the Presidency though, it's not as if it's a real political job.

All you really need to do the job properly is to be good at hosting tea parties and banquets, signing your name legibly and sitting through sporting events without falling asleep.

Einhard · 27-10-2010 01:49AM

Scofflaw wrote: »

And every day would be Bloomsday!

cordially,
Scofflaw

But I don't like liver.

egan007 wrote: »

Oh I get it - God hates gays....

Wow insightful opinions from this young man.

Sure didn't Jebus himself have two daddies??

Scofflaw · 27-10-2010 01:59AM

Shea O'Meara wrote: »

" out-of-line with traditional biblical morality. "

sounds good to me:D

AKA "updated since the Bronze Age".

cordially,
Scofflaw

Einhard · 27-10-2010 02:43AM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

In fairness I think this reaction is very stupid.

I don't think so really. The presidential election is really just a convuluted popularity contest. Voting purely to stick it to a few bible bashing homophobes is as valid a reason as any in a race that's all about personality/

TheReverend · 27-10-2010 03:23AM

sent a nice email to him

Wolfe Tone · 27-10-2010 09:25AM

Einhard wrote: »

I don't think so really. The presidential election is really just a convuluted popularity contest. Voting purely to stick it to a few bible bashing homophobes is as valid a reason as any in a race that's all about personality/

So you are letting literally a handful of people influence you so much? These people should be ignored, instead you are giving them power over you.

Einhard · 27-10-2010 12:37PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

So you are letting literally a handful of people influence you so much? These people should be ignored, instead you are giving them power over you.

They're not gaining power over me. If they did, I wouldn't be voting for Norris!! I have no particular preference who becomes president, and as such, will happily vote for a candidate for what may seem to you like the slightest of issues.

Scofflaw · 27-10-2010 01:23PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

So you are letting literally a handful of people influence you so much? These people should be ignored, instead you are giving them power over you.

Seeing something and making a (relevant) decision based on it is "giving people power over you"?

amused,
Scofflaw

charlemont · 27-10-2010 01:28PM

i previously said i wouldnt vote for david norris , he annoys me, but if this is the sort of bull he gets for running for president, i wish him well, if there is not another half decent candidate running, more than likely i will now vote for him, especially against the likes of dana or ahern..

OhNoYouDidn't · 27-10-2010 01:30PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

So you are letting literally a handful of people influence you so much? These people should be ignored, instead you are giving them power over you.

Its what I said earlier. People will see these inbreds foaming at the mouth and will vote to annoy them / to be on the other side of any issue from them.

I repeat, the more vicious the Catholic right get about Norris, the more urban votes he will garner.

Wolfe Tone · 27-10-2010 02:26PM

Scofflaw wrote: »

Seeing something and making a (relevant) decision based on it is "giving people power over you"?

amused,
Scofflaw

I think the best thing to do would be to ignore these people, rather than become so petty as to vote for the person of their ire simply to piss them off.
By effectively letting these people make up your mind for you, like in this case, you are in fact making these narrow minded bigots become a relevant force.

I don't usually vote, but, after seeing this,

I will vote for Mr Norris.

Scofflaw · 27-10-2010 02:33PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I think the best thing to do would be to ignore these people, rather than become so petty as to vote for the person of their ire simply to piss them off.
By effectively letting these people make up your mind for you, like in this case, you are in fact making these narrow minded bigots become a relevant force.

No, you're actually not. They're not making your mind up for you either pro or con - you're making up your own mind. Einhard has decided he might vote for Norris simply because it will annoy a certain set of people who he dislikes - that's a free choice. It doesn't make COIR any more relevant than they already were by their existence - all the site has done is made Einhard aware of COIR's opinion on Norris.

There is a sensible limit to being "uninfluenced" by information.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Wolfe Tone · 27-10-2010 02:44PM

Scofflaw wrote: »

No, you're actually not. They're not making your mind up for you either pro or con - you're making up your own mind.

The poster in question, who I replied to, said he never voted, yet in this instance as a direct result of the site, he will. Influence such as this is clearly power.

Einhard has decided he might vote for Norris simply because it will annoy a certain set of people who he dislikes - that's a free choice.

An incredibly petty choice, but yes a free one. If he feels his vote is worth so little a to throw it away in such a manner, then that is up to him.

It doesn't make COIR any more relevant than they already were by their existence - all the site has done is made Einhard aware of COIR's opinion on Norris.

I disagree. They are clearly relevant, as I highlighted, they have already motivated one poster here to go vote for Norris. Thus, since they are actually greatly influencing people to vote one way or another, they are clearly relevant as a result.

Personally,do you think that such a site/group should be ignored? Or should it be a deciding factor in you making up your mind which way you will cast your vote?

OhNoYouDidn't · 27-10-2010 02:50PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Personally,do you think that such a site/group should be ignored? Or should it be a deciding factor in you making up your mind which way you will cast your vote?

In the context of a Presidential election, by definition the criteria are more trivial. You don't need to know what his fiscal policy is, his opinion on foreign affairs, public sector pay or any of the other issues a councellor or TD will be drilled on. We are voting for the person who can best represent Ireland as a brand overseas and has a level head on the offchance of a constitutional crisis.

That means candidates will be looked at on 'soft' skills, how they look, sound and dress and the likes. Not can they balance the public finances or fix the health service. Thats the nature of the beast. Now if someone objects to Norris with the zealotry these nutters do, that will be a factor for those who are opposed to the nutters.

It certainly was for Robinson.

Its no more or less trivial than a lot of the other criteria that will be applied.

Scofflaw · 27-10-2010 02:55PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

The poster in question, who I replied to, said he never voted, yet in this instance as a direct result of the site, he will. Influence such as this is clearly power.

An incredibly petty choice, but yes a free one. If he feels his vote is worth so little a to throw it away in such a manner, then that is up to him.

I disagree. They are clearly relevant, as I highlighted, they have already motivated one poster here to go vote for Norris. Thus, since they are actually greatly influencing people to vote one way or another, they are clearly relevant as a result.

I did say that it doesn't make them any more relevant than they are by their existence.

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Personally,do you think that such a site/group should be ignored? Or should it be a deciding factor in you making up your mind which way you will cast your vote?

Whatever one prefers. Deciding you'll never be influenced by anything someone else says is a bit of a pose, since it's neither really possible nor necessarily desirable.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Nodin · 27-10-2010 03:19PM

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Its what I said earlier. People will see these inbreds foaming at the mouth and will vote to annoy them / to be on the other side of any issue from them.

I repeat, the more vicious the Catholic right get about Norris, the more urban votes he will garner.

"the right" would be more accurate. Certainly in this specific case, I don't think they're catholics.

Einhard · 27-10-2010 04:06PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

An incredibly petty choice, but yes a free one. If he feels his vote is worth so little a to throw it away in such a manner, then that is up to him.

As I pointed out, every presidential race comes down to personality. The position has no real power, so therefore no policies can be presented. It's all about who the individual voter likes most, as has been made clear from this thread and others. In that context, it's not at all petty, or a waste of a vote, to exercise one's mandate, in part, as a snub to the type of reactionary forces represented by this web site. Were someone to do so in a General Election when real polcies and issues at stake I'd take your point; not however when its in the context of a glorified popularity contest.

zuroph · 27-10-2010 04:20PM

I hope he wins, because I've done magic for him, and I'd get to say so on my promo stuff!

David Norris Attack Website

Comments