So, the Leaders Debate (II) is Over, who won

Lockstep · 15-02-2011 11:50AM

I doubt many people have their minds changed by these debates.

Nearly everyone who watches these debates is already interested and would have their own preconceptions and given none of the speakers did badly, every party can claim their leader did best.

That said, I greatly enjoyed the debate. Every speaker came across well.

Anonymous1987 · 15-02-2011 11:51AM

swiss wrote: »

I saw a tweet on the eleventh hour directly after the debate that I thought was apropos. I can't remember the text verbatim but the point was effectively that for the most part the debates don't really change peoples minds and that most people use these debates to reinforce their own biases.

I'd agree with this, for the informed voter anyway. If you know a parties policies then the debate is really just a clash of personalities and a charisma test. The substance of the arguments remain the same so it's really how they are presented.

Bottle_of_Smoke · 15-02-2011 12:19PM

gandalf wrote: »

No Dobson lost all creditability with Bertie Aherns Crying Game show.

I'd suggest hiring in Jeremy Paxman to chair, he would chew every one of our lightweight leaders up totally without breaking into a sweat.

I thought Kenny was pretty suitable. In a 5-way debate(a format I am completely against btw) there's no point in the moderator grilling them because that's what the other leaders are there for.

In a 2 way debate I'd agree a Paxman type would be good for getting to the issues

RachaelVO · 15-02-2011 12:22PM

Anonymous1987 wrote: »

I'd agree with this, for the informed voter anyway. If you know a parties policies then the debate is really just a clash of personalities and a charisma test. The substance of the arguments remain the same so it's really how they are presented.

That is very true, I will say one thing though, I am not necessarily a big fan of SF, but I think it would be so easy to get swept up in Gerrys rhetoric. He was very convincing, and in a much as I wanted to belive him I can't see how he can back up his sweeping statements. In as much as I didn't want to like him, I found I couldn't help myself. I also found that I liked Micheal Martin too, even though I wanted to hate him after all FF have put the part through!

I wanted to like Eamonn and felt a bit let down by him. I'm from his constituency and I've voted for him since he was in council for the Workers Party and he just didn't do himself an good whatsoever.

That's if I'm being honest and objective, rather than using their performances to cement my earlier bias... at least I hope I'm being honest!

gandalf · 15-02-2011 12:30PM

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

I thought Kenny was pretty suitable. In a 5-way debate(a format I am completely against btw) there's no point in the moderator grilling them because that's what the other leaders are there for.

In a 2 way debate I'd agree a Paxman type would be good for getting to the issues

No my original idea was to have one leader having a live audience put questions directly to him and a strong presenter/moderator to ensure he answers the questions asked. I think that would be a far more effective way to get to the substance as it effects the ordinary citizens (feck it I don't want to us that word after GA sullied it last night) of this country.

RTE or TV3 could give each leader 1 hour from Monday to Friday in this format and we would learn an awful lot more about their parties policies that we will with an infinite number of adversarial leaders debates whether they are a 3-way of 5-way (sounds like we are talking about a dodgy porno at this stage!).

Pete_Cavan · 15-02-2011 12:39PM

gandalf wrote: »

No my original idea was to have one leader having a live audience put questions directly to him and a strong presenter/moderator to ensure he answers the questions asked. I think that would be a far more effective way to get to the substance as it effects the ordinary citizens (feck it I don't want to us that word after GA sullied it last night) of this country.

RTE or TV3 could give each leader 1 hour from Monday to Friday in this format and we would learn an awful lot more about their parties policies that we will with an infinite number of adversarial leaders debates whether they are a 3-way of 5-way (sounds like we are talking about a dodgy porno at this stage!).

The best approach would be a dragons den type interrogation, although not necessarily for the party leaders. We should get each parties spokesperson on finance/health/jobs etc. up and question them on the relevant issue.

county man · 15-02-2011 12:43PM

RetroBate wrote: »

What they said I'd heard before and it didn't sound any more convincing.

All were men.
All wore ties.
All wore suits.

Why do 99% of male politicians wear suits and ties?

Uniformity of dress indicates an unwillingness to challenge conventions and accepted truths.

Scary.

Would you prefer if they wore tracksuits and trainers?:rolleyes:

gandalf · 15-02-2011 12:43PM

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The best approach would be a dragons den type interrogation, although not necessarily for the party leaders. We should get each parties spokesperson on finance/health/jobs etc. up and question them on the relevant issue.

Oh I like that, with 2 Irish interrogators and Jeremy Paxman

steelcityblues · 15-02-2011 12:47PM

No bias towards 'de leader' of course in today's Irish Cork Examiner, on their scorecard they give Martin 33 out of 50.

Will_H · 15-02-2011 01:05PM

Firstly, I think RTE said this morning there were a million viewers for the programme last nite which was interesting in itself.

TBH, I don't care who is perceived as the "winner" - as someone else posted, it's the media who wins!

I did think Gormley spoke the most sense, he was articulate & to the point. I was very interested to see who responded to his request for sitting down and changing the way government works.

I'm not sure that Gilmore is a leader of the country & anyway, Joan Burton scares the beejezus outta me.

Kenny's policies of "we're all going to suffer more" is typical political claptrap for more taxes. The people want to know, needs to know where they are going and how we're going to get there. Taxing us to death seems to be their policy. Adding 2% onto the VAT rate for imports is utter, utter madness.
"Increases in standard rate of VAT to 22% in 2012 and 23% in 2013"
"Increases in motor tax [€50 & €100 respectively]".
"Increase in the carbon tax to €20 per tonne in 2012, and to €25 per tonne by 2014"
"An environmental tax on packaging"
"€1 increase in excise duty on a bottle of wine"
"25c increase in a pack of cigarettes in 2012"

On the plus side:
"2-Year cut in reduced 13.5% Rate of VAT to 12% on labour-intensive services"
"2-Year halving of lower 8.5% rate of employers’ PRSI on employees with
earnings up to €356 per week (instead of minimum wage cut)"
"Abolition of €3 travel tax"
"Allowing defined contribution pension savers to access funds early
(2.5% per year for 4 years) (and taxing the drawdowns)"

The reason I put so much up on FG is that they will most likely be in Govt.

Just for the record, I am still undecided as to who I will vote for, although I am fully decided on who I will NOT be voting for!

Mental Mickey · 15-02-2011 01:17PM

RetroBate wrote: »

What they said I'd heard before and it didn't sound any more convincing.

All were men.
All wore ties.
All wore suits.

Why do 99% of male politicians wear suits and ties?

Uniformity of dress indicates an unwillingness to challenge conventions and accepted truths.

Scary.

Your point being??

RetroBate · 15-02-2011 01:32PM

Mental Mickey wrote: »

Your point being??

Read the two last lines of my post.

RetroBate · 15-02-2011 01:35PM

county man wrote: »

Would you prefer if they wore tracksuits and trainers?:rolleyes:

Why not? As long as it didn't become the new uniform.

nesf · 15-02-2011 01:39PM

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The best approach would be a dragons den type interrogation, although not necessarily for the party leaders. We should get each parties spokesperson on finance/health/jobs etc. up and question them on the relevant issue.

That'd be great, but the parties would never agree with it because they'd all be ripped to shreds by a competent group of interrogators.

kunob · 15-02-2011 01:45PM

Apart from Gerry Adams, none of the party leaders appear to care one iota. Someone who is distraught over seeing his children and grandchildren emigrate, over the taxation, over the job situation, the cuts in benefits: What does it for him if Enda tells him that FG have a five point plan? Have the party leaders no decency? What about telling that poor man that they are sorry to hear about his plight, that they sympathize with him? What about expressing some care and concern to another human being? Apart from Gerry, all of them are just cardboard cut-outs who are obsessed with power and money. Why did nobody ask Michael Martin what the size of his pension package is going to be? And then let Michael make the point that everybody has to share in the pain. Developers, gamblers, criminals, bankers lost money because of their insane greed, and now low and middle income earners have to replace the money that these scumbags have burned?And not with one word have I heard a FF politician say that this is unfair and morally wrong. This countries needs leaders and managers who care, and not another bunch who equally care about no one but themselves.

nesf · 15-02-2011 01:47PM

swiss wrote: »

I saw a tweet on the eleventh hour directly after the debate that I thought was apropos. I can't remember the text verbatim but the point was effectively that for the most part the debates don't really change peoples minds and that most people use these debates to reinforce their own biases.

I'm not sure that applies to everyone. I'm fairly "floating voterish" in outlook, was a PD supporter but never lived in an area where I could actually vote PD so was used to voting for parties that I didn't really support (also helped me never fall into the trap of being a "party man" and blindly supporting my party). And even then, I only joined the PDs because I felt I should join some party as a politically active adult and the PDs were the closest to my personal views but their policies never represented my views if that make sense.

I'm probably going to vote FG, to a large extent because I really like their health policy and I consider health an extremely important issue for various personal reasons (am horribly biased in this respect), but I definitely did not come out of last night thinking Kenny won or that Kenny put in a great performance. My favourite of the lot was Gormley and I've no intention of voting Green.

outandabout · 15-02-2011 02:03PM

Kenny hands down for me. Micheal Martin spent too much time laying into Gerry Adams, presumably because FF will be fighting SF for the last seat in several constituencies.

Gormley wasn't bad but I think the Greens have been marginalised.

Gilmore looked a bit lost but may do better when there's a three way debate.

Gerry Adams looked out of place and they might have been better with Caoimhin O Caoghlain who at least has been active in the Dail for the last few years.

maynooth_rules · 15-02-2011 03:14PM

InigoMontoya wrote: »

A minor point - on Newstalk this morning some commentator mentioned Kenny's answer to the "who's going to suffer?" question (he said "everyone is going to suffer, blah, blah, 5 point plan!") as being "close to a major gaff".

I thought it was at least a bit more honest than most of the other answers, and a plus point for Kenny. Opinions?

Agreed. The easy option is to say nobody will suffer, FG will make everything perfect. instead he spoke the truth and I hope people will respect him for that

Koyasan · 15-02-2011 03:26PM

SmurfX wrote: »

Seems a lot of agendas are going on here in the voting. It'd hard to be unbiased and not accept Gormley "won" this and by some margin. He was the most direct in answering the actual questions, took the fewest unnecessary swipes at the opposition, gave informative details on his policies and was generally gentlemanly and polite when dealing with other candidates.

Beyond belief how anyone could vote for anyone else in the context of this poll.

+1 to this. It was so clear, which made the bias on TV3 and RTE afterward so clear.

I wonder how many undecided voters actually watched. If Gormley actually gets the last seat in DSE, I'd say it would be due to last night.

tracking · 15-02-2011 03:42PM

RachaelVO wrote: »

So who do you think, between the 5 leaders won. They were all a bit reticent, but I can't decide who I think did better. What does everyone else think? and Why?

There is clear breach of the Good Friday Agreement in the Leaders Debate. Attack against the will of the overwhelming majority of the people of this state. There is need for censure against the groups involved. All done to defend the rampant corruption and cronyism those people suffer under.

jmayo · 15-02-2011 04:16PM

the_syco wrote: »

...
Adams did an excellent job at speaking, and promised the silver bullet, to deny the IMF, and to pay for all this, and more, from a limited fund.

Everyone attacked him on this.

They attacked him becuase he is talking through his ar**.
You can't reverse all cuts (taxes etc), tell anyone that may lend to us in the future to f*** off, meanwhile keep our 20 billion current budget deficit and fund it from a combination of a pension reserve fund that currently has 4 odd billion and from taxing or cutting the salaries of the "rich".

It is pure bullsh**.

paky wrote: »

thought it was quite funny when michael martin attacked gerry adams on the issue of fraud when him and his party stole over 40 billion euro from the tax payer and gave it to the banks. pure and utter scum. cant wait to see the day when they're all unemployed

Its pot and kettle to some degree but it is a bit rich when shinners lecture anyone else on morals and ethical behaviour. :rolleyes:
ff have been a corrupt unethical political organisation it appears for decades and have used the country and it's non connected taxpayers/citizens to get their suppporters rich.

Meanwhile sf didn't actually recognise the democratically elected government of this state until a couple of decades ago, they have considered killing and maiming women and children as justifiable and in our name.
Hell some of the current elected members see the murder of one our police force as regrettable, but not something that should be condemmed as wrong.
So neither in my mind are worthy of being in positions of power.

InigoMontoya wrote: »

A minor point - on Newstalk this morning some commentator mentioned Kenny's answer to the "who's going to suffer?" question (he said "everyone is going to suffer, blah, blah, 5 point plan!") as being "close to a major gaff".

I thought it was at least a bit more honest than most of the other answers, and a plus point for Kenny. Opinions?

It is probably one of the most honest statements from last night.

RetroBate wrote: »

What they said I'd heard before and it didn't sound any more convincing.

All were men.
All wore ties.
All wore suits.

Why do 99% of male politicians wear suits and ties?

Uniformity of dress indicates an unwillingness to challenge conventions and accepted truths.

Scary.

Now scary would be seeing them in dresses, but whatever floats your boat as they say.

Will_H wrote: »

...
Kenny's policies of "we're all going to suffer more" is typical political claptrap for more taxes. The people want to know, needs to know where they are going and how we're going to get there. Taxing us to death seems to be their policy. Adding 2% onto the VAT rate for imports is utter, utter madness.

Actually it isn't claptrap it is the bloody truth.
We are all going to get hit with taxes or cuts.
You would need to be living off the land and not spending a penny to avoid being caught in some way.

We haven't seen the half of it and anyone like adams that spouts pure sh**e about taxing the rich and finding 20 billion magically to fund a 20 billion deficit is the one misleading people.

Adding 2% onto imports might be no harm although not shure if they can get away with it (EU and all that mullarkey) ?
People are all spouting about getting people spending, but on what ?
How much use is it if people buy a new TV or ipod ?
Yeah it gets a few quid for the shop or the postal service that delivers it, but how much of that money remains in Ireland ?
Upping retail spending will not get us out of this mess.
Producing stuff and services that others want to buy off us, or producing stuff that cuts our imports is what will get us out of this mess.

Will_H wrote: »

"€1 increase in excise duty on a bottle of wine"

And how many vineyards are there in Ireland ?
Drink whiskey, vodka, beer etc.

Will_H wrote: »

"25c increase in a pack of cigarettes in 2012"

Cigs are bad for you

BTW how many tobacco plantations have we got ?

Will_H wrote: »

Just for the record, I am still undecided as to who I will vote for, although I am fully decided on who I will NOT be voting for!

Let me guess you are not voting for FG. :rolleyes:

kunob wrote: »

Apart from Gerry Adams, none of the party leaders appear to care one iota. Someone who is distraught over seeing his children and grandchildren emigrate, over the taxation, over the job situation, the cuts in benefits: What does it for him if Enda tells him that FG have a five point plan? Have the party leaders no decency? What about telling that poor man that they are sorry to hear about his plight, that they sympathize with him?

Yeah gerry really cares about ya. :rolleyes:
Offering someone sympathy and no viable solution or plan is f*** all use.

And please lets not have a discussion about the fairytale that SF call a plan.

LordSutch · 15-02-2011 04:30PM

kunob wrote: »

Apart from Gerry Adams, none of the party leaders appear to care one iota. Someone who is distraught over seeing his children and grandchildren emigrate . . .

Or maybe just like Someone who was distraught over seeing his children exiled by the IRA pre 94, (not that Mr Adams would know anyting about that kind of thing) :cool:

I agree that Adams came over all Statesman like (to his own followers), and he did speak well as he wagged his finger, but if you actually analyze the content of what he said, "Republic this & Republic that", Citizens this, and Citizens that, All the people have a right, etc etc, which all amounts to a hill of beans in the real world > Telling the EMF to bugger off while raiding the pension fund at the same time!!! Hmm, He's not for Government me thinks.

I thought Enda was a bit slow & not as camera friendly as Adams, but the content of Enda's policies, along with Gilmore's more leftish proposals (are where we are really heading). I thought Eamon had a solid performance, and I even thought Michael Martin was in good speaking form (specially when he put down Adams) Nice

and as for poor old Gormley, well, I think he's a nice man, but I'm not sure that he should be the leader of the Green Party.

In my opinion . . .

GFJD · 15-02-2011 04:30PM

We need a hardline stance in Europe when negotiating. Out of the 5 of those people , I would say I would want either Gerry or Eamon to be in that room when those negotiations are happening , preferably both.

Enda will be going around redfaced and frustrated lookin as if hes just farted , Gormley would be trying to get more eco grants into a deal and Michael Martin would be happy with any token gesture of a re-negotiation.

No , its very clear. We cant do it unilateraly granted , but we need the approach of Labour and the Shinners in any future re-negotiations.

Gerry won it hands down in my opinion.

Sin é.

Cyrus · 15-02-2011 04:50PM

GFJD wrote: »

We need a hardline stance in Europe when negotiating. Out of the 5 of those people , I would say I would want either Gerry or Eamon to be in that room when those negotiations are happening , preferably both.

Enda will be going around redfaced and frustrated lookin as if hes just farted , Gormley would be trying to get more eco grants into a deal and Michael Martin would be happy with any token gesture of a re-negotiation.

No , its very clear. We cant do it unilateraly granted , but we need the approach of Labour and the Shinners in any future re-negotiations.

Gerry won it hands down in my opinion.

Sin é.

Gerry isnt looking to negotiate with them tho is he, he is going to do his own thing, thankfully it wont come to pass

also himself and gilmore seem to think that the people who pay most of the tax in this country are going to be happy to pay more and more so people on the dole wont be cut

Indestructable · 15-02-2011 05:06PM

Adams, simply for his reference to the DUP...

Will_H · 15-02-2011 05:35PM

jmayo wrote: »

Actually it isn't claptrap it is the bloody truth. We are all going to get hit with taxes or cuts.

Read what I said again - "is typical political claptrap for more taxes" - i.e. more taxes. :rolleyes:

jmayo wrote: »

Adding 2% onto imports might be no harm.....How much use is it if people buy a new TV or ipod ?

You seriously think that electronics are the only 'goods' imported into this country???!! Please - say it ain't so...:(

jmayo wrote: »

Yeah it gets a few quid for the shop or the postal service that delivers it, but how much of that money remains in Ireland ?
Upping retail spending will not get us out of this mess.

Well, let's see now - if & when people start spending again [in the retail sense], the money goes to employ people/keep people in a job, who pay taxes, who are paid wages, some of which they will spend, which keeps people off the dole....can you see the pattern yet..?? Have you worked out how the money stays in Ireland...?! Particularly in the border counties where people will simply start popping across the border to spend their hard-earned cash.

And I agree 100% with you, retail spending will not get us out of this mess, however, it will alleviate the burden on the taxpayer which is already high enough.

jmayo wrote: »

Producing stuff and services that others want to buy off us, or producing stuff that cuts our imports is what will get us out of this mess.

You mean, like wine & cigarettes?!

Our exports are already performing reasonably well. We need to stimulate the LOCAL economy which, I believe, adding 2% onto imports will not do.

jmayo wrote: »

Let me guess you are not voting for FG. :rolleyes:

Wrong again :rolleyes: - I'm not voting FF. Haven't decided on who else yet which is why I am researching what they offer.

wee truck big driver · 15-02-2011 09:59PM

the funniest part is the renegoiation of the imf deal while not considering not bailing out the banks is like playing poker and showing everybody your hand before you start betting it would be funny if it wasnt so serious

antomack · 15-02-2011 10:29PM

For all the actual concrete information gained in terms of how they're going to solve all our problems it would have made better tv if they had put the five of them into a boxing ring and let them fight it out.

None of the questions were really answered, not unusual for politicians, and other than mentioning some general facts and figures you were none the wiser in terms of how likely any of their policies would be in achieving what they say.

Main thing to come out of the night was that you'd be wondering how any coalition could exist at all. We keep hearing that a coalition between FG and Labour is likely but from what was seen in the debate you'd wonder could it work at all since Enda and Eamon kept dissing each other's policies at every oppportunity, quite something considering there are quite a few similarities between those policies.

Overall we just saw a tit for tat in terms of trying to run down each others policies even though no one leader left one with the concrete impression that their proposed policies would work.

What might make a better format of 'debate' would be to have various sessions covering each aspect of the main issues, economy, health, education, employment, etc.. Then each party would nominate it's spokesperson for the subject and an 'expert' panel and audience would be there to grill each party's policies. Full costings and breakdown of the policies would be necessary so a detailed evaluation could be done, these breakdowns would need to be provided to the expert panel in advance so their questions would deal with specifics. For example let the finance spokepersons go in front of a panel of economic experts and have their policies taken through a detailed analysis to see how achieveable they actually are and where they intend getting the money to implement their policies. I realise that a lot of the sessions might be above what the average Joe needs to know so it might not suit a live tv scenario. If impartial coverage of the sessions could be ensured then some sort of executive summary could be aired from them.

flipall · 15-02-2011 11:16PM

OK i watched it and still don't have my mind made up, usually i wouldnt sit and watch this stuff for so long but this year i have an interest, like thousands others i presume.

For starters i'm sorry to any diehard FGers but Enda Kennys voice and the way he talks goes through me.. Also FG say they are going to put billions into creating jobs, where are they gonna get these billions since they are not going to raise taxes?! Are they gonna rob a bank

Sinn Fein... Not a hope!

FF, they got us into this mess but i think Micheal Martin seems to bring a younger eye to Irish politics tho he hasnt done anything outstanding in the last few years just gone with the flow while all taxpayers were screwed!

Labour - Your policies are sooooooo not realistic in my eyes!

Greens

This is all in my own opinion, i am still bewildered as to who to vote for! They are all promising very unrealistic goals!

Sergeant · 15-02-2011 11:42PM

flipall wrote: »

Also FG say they are going to put billions into creating jobs, where are they gonna get these billions since they are not going to raise taxes?! Are they gonna rob a bank

By the sale of non-strategic state assets, and through further efficiencies in the public service. In their 87 page election manifesto that they published today, as well as in their NewEra policy paper.

So, the Leaders Debate (II) is Over, who won

Comments