So Michael D IS running again!

pixelburp · 26-10-2018 3:53pm

IIRC the bible is used as a backup if you don't have any ID, so instead they'll ask you to swear on a bible. At least that's the possible urban myth I'd be told but never looked into. Yes, there's obviously lots of followup questions with that answer.

Hurrache · 26-10-2018 3:53pm

They're always at elections and referendums, bizarrely you can swear on them that you are who you say you are.

An Ciarraioch · 26-10-2018 4:19pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

VinLieger wrote: »

Completely incorrect, neither FF nor FG had a candidate they felt could compete viably with MDH that was worth spending 200k+ on a campaign.

SF saw it as a way to gauge their support nationally and to also make the case for them to be considered a viable and core party worthy of government, this to them was worth the expense, they never expected to win.

The conspiracy theories about "the establishment" rigging the election etc are really just childish

Completely incorrect...neither FF nor FG have the resources to fund a national campaign, they didn't even attempt to identify a viable candidate, it is a money issue, simple as that!

We have locals and European elections in less than a year, we will have a GE in 2020 and not before.

For argument's sake, who would either of them have run who could have had crossover appeal? For FF, you're perhaps looking at Donnelly and Lisa Chambers (at a stretch), Kenny could have run for FG, but still has hopes of replacing Donald Tusk next year, and Máiread McGuinness might have given Higgins a good contest, but would hardly have won.

Silentcorner · 26-10-2018 4:23pm

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

For argument's sake, who would either of them have run who could have had crossover appeal? For FF, you're perhaps looking at Donnelly and Lisa Chambers (at a stretch), Kenny could have run for FG, but still has hopes of replacing Donald Tusk next year, and Máiread McGuinness might have given Higgins a good contest, but would hardly have won.

FF were never going to run a candidate, they are in a worse financial state than FG, they flirted with Miriam O'Callaghan in the hope that Bertie wouldn't get notions, is my guess, for what it is worth.

FG got badly burnt in 2011, didn't they remortgage HQ to pay for Mitchells campaign and didn't get the required quota to claim back expenses.

We can get used to this kind of debacle every 7 years from now on.

Hotblack Desiato · 26-10-2018 5:34pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

That turns logic on its head

I think you missed the sarcasm.

Hurrache wrote: »

They're always at elections and referendums, bizarrely you can swear on them that you are who you say you are.

Or you can affirm without swearing on anything, but then everyone will know you're a big dirty atheist.

It's entirely ridiculous in this day and age that people may have to reveal their religion or lack thereof to a public official in order to be allowed vote, sit on a jury or give evidence in court.

hotmail.com · 26-10-2018 5:53pm

VinLieger wrote:

Anyone suggesting abolishing it completely shows a serious naivety for the essential role it holds within the constitution as a safety valve

The main problem with the constitution is that it gives all power to the executive (the government).

The president plays no role in reducing this power as they are forced to sign all bills once they are constitutional.

The power to reject a call to dissolve the Dail can be overcome by introducing fixed termed parliaments.

So no, I don't believe we need a presidency in Ireland.

Rhineshark · 26-10-2018 5:56pm

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

If the whole thing is irrelevant, why should SF bother running a candidate at all?

I didn't actually say that. I said that (paraphrasing to clarify!) I suspected whether Liadh Ni Riada comes second or fourth won't matter/ be a millstone around SF's neck by next Friday. This race will be remembered for the winner and having three flaming Dragons Den eejits, also-rans aren't likely to be remembered.

Water John · 26-10-2018 6:02pm

Lisa would be a stretch, but moreso a wait, as she's only 32.

Kermit.de.frog · 26-10-2018 6:05pm

Let's say for argument sake Peter Casey was elected.

Does that pose any constitutional issue for the government given Varadkar openly criticised him? Anyone know?

Hurrache · 26-10-2018 6:06pm

I can't see how, there's no requirement in the Constitution that they should like or approve of each other.

Harry Palmr · 26-10-2018 6:06pm

It sounds like hardly anyone has bothered voting.

Water John · 26-10-2018 6:07pm

No.

Kermit.de.frog · 26-10-2018 6:08pm

I'm asking because in the past I believe a president/government got in trouble because a minister called the president a "thundering disgrace"

hotmail.com · 26-10-2018 6:12pm

Kermit.de.frog wrote:

I'm asking because in the past I believe a president/government got in trouble because a minister called the president a "thundering disgrace"

That president was unhappy in the office and wanted a way out. He didn't need to resign.

But we would be in uncharted territory if Casey was an outspoken president!

Liadh vowed to be a confrontational president as well, with a promise to address the Dail 3 times a year!

Water John · 26-10-2018 6:18pm

The issue was that the Minister involved was the Minister for Defence and the President is the Head of the Army. The President asked the Taoiseach to back him and this was not forthcoming. This put him in an untenable position.

hotmail.com · 26-10-2018 6:24pm

Water John wrote:

The issue was that the Minister involved was the Minister for Defence and the President is the Head of the Army. The President asked the Taoiseach to back him and this was not forthcoming. This put him in an untenable position.

It just further shows how weak our presidency is.

Danzy · 26-10-2018 6:43pm

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I'm asking because in the past I believe a president/government got in trouble because a minister called the president a "thundering disgrace"

The Minister was a chronic drunk with a deep disregard for the law and due process. He knew he ducked up but the then Taoiseach refused his resignation.

A man who was also iffy on law, his son was later done for corruption, Apple falls near the free.

Water John · 26-10-2018 6:49pm

Most of the power and work of the Presidency is, soft power. The post carries some key functions that are called upon on occasion.
That doesn't negate the power. O'Dalaigh validated the office by resigning.

FrancieBrady · 26-10-2018 6:54pm

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Let's say for argument sake Peter Casey was elected.

Does that pose any constitutional issue for the government given Varadkar openly criticised him? Anyone know?

Leo should be used to putting foot in mouth and dealing with the consequences of same.

It will be awkward but unless he said something similar while he is in office no constitutional crisis.

The whole thing about the presidency is that the government has the power to make it relevant or not, if they embrace the incumbent.

Then can just ignore it as easily and keep it low key.

richiepurgas · 26-10-2018 7:12pm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Leo should be used to putting foot in mouth and dealing with the consequences of same.

It will be awkward but unless he said something similar while he is in office no constitutional crisis.

The whole thing about the presidency is that the government has the power to make it relevant or not, if they embrace the incumbent.

Then can just ignore it as easily and keep it low key.

No issue, there have been a few occasions where the president and the taoiseach were on opposite sides politically but they just got on with it.

An Ciarraioch · 26-10-2018 7:13pm

Areas with best turnout so far (according to RTE), include Bishopstown, Glanmire, Blarney, Killarney, Ballinasloe, Roscommon, Greystones, Drogheda and the Laois Stradbally. Best Dublin performers are Dublin Bay North, Blackrock and Terenure. Now 40% in Dublin Bay South, 26% in Cullmullen (Meath).

tayto lover · 26-10-2018 7:46pm

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I'm asking because in the past I believe a president/government got in trouble because a minister called the president a "thundering disgrace"

Paddy Donegan from Monasterbouce, Drogheda.
He also fired a few shots to put Travellers who were camping on his land on the run. He was a FIne Gael TD.

An Ciarraioch · 26-10-2018 9:16pm

Appears overall turnout will be below 50%.

tayto lover · 26-10-2018 9:19pm

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Appears overall turnout will be below 50%.

Would you wonder with the selection they had?

Hotblack Desiato · 26-10-2018 9:30pm

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I'm asking because in the past I believe a president/government got in trouble because a minister called the president a "thundering disgrace"

Allegedly the word used was a lot stronger than "thundering" but that's what got reported!

FrancieBrady · 26-10-2018 9:36pm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Allegedly the word used was a lot stronger than "thundering" but that's what got reported!

Ah don't be saying that! I love that phrase, use it all the time.

This is like telling me Armstrong didn't say 'One small step for mankind...etc but 'youse better be here when I get back from this fecking walk'.

richiepurgas · 26-10-2018 9:43pm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Allegedly the word used was a lot stronger than "thundering" but that's what got reported!

There was only one reporter in the room when the remarks were made and he has consistently said, even as late as about 3 years ago, that the words reported were entirely accurate.

Donegan was a loose cannon, later tried for shooting into the air over a travelers' encampment. The Casey of his time ?

An Ciarraioch · 26-10-2018 9:56pm

With minutes to go, fair to say the personal fear is rising!

Water John · 26-10-2018 9:59pm

BTW was everybody handed back their Polling Card, marked?

L1011 · 26-10-2018 10:00pm

Higgins first count if true

So Michael D IS running again!

Comments