General Election - Feb 26th Megathread

Sunnyisland · 21-02-2016 9:40pm

JustTheOne wrote: »

Bit rich coming from a Sinn Fein person.

Considering they defend Adams to the hilt about his IRA membership claiming everyone is wrong from the gards to the media to the government.

And there reason is sure there is no evidence, its all just accusations.

Ha your gas, maybe if you read all my posts and not assume everyone that's disagrees with this goverment is a shinner. Anyway carry on.

LostinKildare · 21-02-2016 9:41pm

JustTheOne wrote: »

There is no direct link to a fg person saying it.

Oh someone heard someone say it. I'm sorry but that doesn't stand up.

Sure we could all go around saying people said stuff without any evidence.

Doesn't work like that.

It's not "Oh, someone heard someone say it". The direct quote was said by an unnamed source, identified as a key government strategist (so could only be FG or Labour) to a journalist, and was reported in the Sunday Business Post, a very reputable newspaper. That is evidence. Do you think the reporters lied? What do you mean, "direct link"? Are you saying you don't believe quotes from an unnamed source? Or you don't believe it unless you see it on video, or what?

JustTheOne · 21-02-2016 9:48pm

LostinKildare wrote: »

It's not "Oh, someone heard someone say it". The direct quote was said by an unnamed source, identified as a key government strategist (so could only be FG or Labour) to a journalist, and was reported in the Sunday Business Post, a very reputable newspaper. That is evidence. Do you think the reporters lied? What do you mean, "direct link"? Are you saying you don't believe quotes from an unnamed source? Or you don't believe it unless you see it on video, or what?

Kelleher is the one making the claim not a reporter.

Why should we believe him?

Richard Hillman · 21-02-2016 9:55pm

RobertKK wrote: »

I never voted for Labour and that won't change.

But there is something about Joan Burton that makes me smile. We had the incident in Thomastown when she and Ann Phelan capsized.
The end of this video makes me smile too.

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/701447004845551616

I find her as very likable. She was is just a bit crap at debating and the support that Labour had for the last election was a bit wishy-washy. They were always going to lose them.

I would love her to retain her seat, just as an up yours to those that are so personally abusive towards her.

Jack Killian · 21-02-2016 9:56pm

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I find her as very likable. She was is just a bit crap at debating and the support that Labour had for the last election was a bit wishy-washy. They were always going to lose them.

You find Joan likeable ?

KomradeBishop · 21-02-2016 9:59pm

Billy86 wrote: »

Good spot on the CSO numbers, as I had not been able to find them and had been using separate sources for the most recent numbers which must have been incorrect. Here is the source I had used by the way, now please do try to move away from the petty ad hominem attacks.

So let's completely disavow that source and work off of the CSO numbers. I fully agree that they would be the best to use here.

As of April 2015, the working age population was about bang on 3,000,000. http://www.cso.ie/multiquicktables/quickTables.aspx?id=cna15
In 2011 it was 3,070,000 - so it had dropped by around 70,000, you are correct there: http://www.cso.ie/multiquicktables/quickTables.aspx?id=pea01

But, you're still wrong about job creation.

With 15.1% of 3,070,000 unemployed in 2011 (464,000), 84.9% would be in employment - 2,606,000.
With 9.7% of 3,000,000 unemployed in 2015 (291,000), 91.8% would be in employment - 2,709,000.

- 291,000 is a smaller number than 464,000... by 173,000. So roughly 100,000 less unemployed, even after taking working age populations into account.
- 2,709,000 is a bigger number than 2,606,000... by 103,000. So roughly 100,000 more in employment.

Remember this is as of April, 2015. Since then the unemployment rate has gone down a further 0.9%, which had the population stayed completely static since April, would mean a further 45,000 jobs and bring the number to 2,754,000. That would be an increase of 148,000 in employment from 2011.

Of course the population will not have stayed completely static, but the difference would only be a few thousand in either direction.

So yes, there are now well in excess of over 100,000 in employment than were in 2011, and over 100,000 less unemployed even allowing for working age differences (170,000 if not).

Your figures are completely all over the place again - your raw-number-unemployed stats are off by up anywhere between ~20,000-70,000 depending on what period is looked at:
http://i.imgur.com/l4R2S8y.gif

I think you're missing the point of my original post replying to you as well: I was pointing out the massive numbers of emigrated people, which is around 140,000 since 2011, as a counterpoint to the increase in employment.

KomradeBishop · 21-02-2016 10:03pm

RobertKK wrote: »

I never voted for Labour and that won't change.

But there is something about Joan Burton that makes me smile. We had the incident in Thomastown when she and Ann Phelan capsized.
The end of this video makes me smile too.

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/701447004845551616

I don't know what to think about Joan Burton - Labour's record in government is abysmal, but then, she also seems to support very progressive-but-controversial policies like this (which is something I also support):
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/joan-burton-wants-a-job-guarantee-for-everyone-on-dole-30176171.html

She's the only Irish politician I know of that supports that.

21-02-2016 10:06pm

JustTheOne wrote: »

Kelleher is the one making the claim not a reporter.

Why should we believe him?

Dear God.

It's so simple that I assume you are being deliberately obtuse or you want to have a go at Billy Kelliher.

A newspaper carried a report about election strategy, citing a Govt source. Billy Kelliher responded. His comments came later, afterwards, subsequently. Now whether the initial report was accurate or not may be a point of debate, though you are accusing the journo of lying. But what is patent nonsense is your releated efforts to put Kelliher at the heart of the story.

LostinKildare · 21-02-2016 10:06pm

JustTheOne wrote: »

Kelleher is the one making the claim not a reporter.

Why should we believe him?

No, no, no. It was said to a journalist who reported it in the SBP. Kelleher then referenced that SBP story in the Irish Times.
You let yourself down by not reading posts properly. Please go back and read my first post, #581. Or no, here it is, and it even includes a link with a picture so you can see it with your own eyes:

LostinKildare wrote: »

The quote comes originally from "Voters not buying coalition's auction politics," in the SBP, February 14. It's behind a paywall, but here is a quote: ". . . the government parties will now embark on a full scale fear offensive . . . 'We will scare the s**t out of them for the last ten days,' said one key government strategist last week."

a photo of the page is here at Broadsheet: http://www.broadsheet.ie/2016/02/16/fear-we-go/#comments

masti123 · 21-02-2016 10:12pm

Well worth a read. The Irish media attempts to control opinion is worrying at best.

https://medium.com/@beyourownreason/rigging-the-elections-e4b0ee7f12ee#.lofkr7m9a

feargale · 21-02-2016 10:24pm

ChippingSodbury wrote: »

Just had a look on RTE website at the list of candidates and their Bio pages. Some of them have video messages. Just had a look at a couple at random. But this one:
http://www.rte.ie/news/election-2016/candidates/754217-catherine-ardagh/

Was the tele-prompter not working? That's fairly unprofessional I'm afraid...

Nah. That was her dog gnawing the hem of her skirt.

prinzeugen · 21-02-2016 10:35pm

FalconGirl wrote: »

Social Democrats are saying they will retain the USC. They're opting for an alternative method of putting money back in peoples pockets by establishing initiatives to reduce the cost of living which makes absolute sense.

Wonder if its the same method that bankrupted the former East Germany. Farmer sells chicken to state for 20 marks. Goes to butchers and buys same chicken back for 10 marks.

State subsidising of food/clothing etc for the masses will not end well.

Richard Hillman · 21-02-2016 10:42pm

masti123 wrote: »

Well worth a read. The Irish media attempts to control opinion is worrying at best.

https://medium.com/@beyourownreason/rigging-the-elections-e4b0ee7f12ee#.lofkr7m9a

Since when do the Newspapers need to be fair and balanced? Are An Phoblacht fair and balanced?

Sinn Fein supporters are going into meltdown. The blame game has started and none of the fingers are pointed at King Gerry of Adams. Over 5 years of Austerity and this was all they could muster up, 20 odd seats.

LostinKildare · 21-02-2016 10:46pm

On the whole "let's scare the s**t out of the electorate" thing, let's remember that FG have form on this. Remember back in 2012 when we passed the fiscal treaty referendum? The one that the govt told us would strengthen our hand in getting that debt writedown from the EU that we never got? Remember how the govt was scared sh**tless they might lose that referendum?

From the Irish Independent:

The shambolic Government referendum campaign has been pushed into further chaos in the wake of claims that a key Fine Gael campaign strategy will be to "put the frighteners on the electorate'' if it fears that there is a real danger that the referendum may be lost.
In the wake of a top secret FG party meeting, astonished TDs and senators told the Sunday Independent they had been informed by the party's referendum director, Simon Coveney, that "the Government would prefer to win the referendum by being nice but if necessary we will change tack''.

One party grandee told the Sunday Independent: "We couldn't believe it when Simon said if the campaign is not going well after the first week we [Fine Gael] are going to have to put the frighteners on the public and really spell it out,'' and added, "They have really lost contact with the voters if they think Simon's 'we'll be nice but if necessary we will be nasty' line will work."

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/fg-pledges-to-put-the-frighteners-on-electorate-26848040.html

Read it and weep. They really do hold the electorate in contempt.

Richard Hillman · 21-02-2016 10:52pm

The "<Placename> Says No" conglomerate are starting to get paranoid. They are telling their followers to bring a black pen to the polling stations, on the presumption that people will start rubbing out their pencilled votes :pac:

I will bet my life savings of €11.40 that there will be made-up stories circulating the internet on Moratorium Thursday about some secret Dail meetings to rush through legislation

Jack Killian · 21-02-2016 10:54pm

Richard Hillman wrote: »

The "<Placename> Says No" conglomerate are starting to get paranoid. They are telling their followers to bring a black pen to the polling stations, on the presumption that people will start rubbing out their pencilled votes :pac:

I will bet my life savings of €11.40 that there will be made-up stories circulating the internet on Moratorium Thursday about some secret Dail meetings to rush through legislation

There was one of those in Sept 2008, so it's not that far of a stretch.

SafeSurfer · 21-02-2016 11:21pm

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Kenny was dead right, some people want everything handed to them on a silver plate while contributing absolutely nothing themselves to society.

Yeah. Like people with Down's syndrome. When you think about it they are just an expense. Maybe if FG get back into government they will deal with this group and all the other non contributors to society.

RobertKK · 21-02-2016 11:27pm

Ipsos poll for the Irish Times tomorrow:

FG 28% (no change)
FF 23% (+2%)
SF 15% (-4%)
Lab 6% (-1%)
Independent and others 28% (+3%)

So momentum continues for FF. The only big party that is gaining support.

tomwaterford · 21-02-2016 11:33pm

RobertKK wrote: »

Ipsos poll for the Irish Times tomorrow:

FG 28% (no change)
FF 23% (+2%)
SF 15% (-4%)
Lab 6% (-1%)
Independent and others 28% (+3%)

So momentum continues for FF. The only big party that is gaining support.

The smattering of independents that are to come in...will cause all sorts of political rangling....it's not beyond possibility that ff could be bank in govt <10 years after destroying the country

Though it would make for a somewhat unstable govt which could collapse after 2 years or so

Jack Killian · 21-02-2016 11:40pm

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Yeah. Like people with Down's syndrome. When you think about it they are just an expense. Maybe if FG get back into government they will deal with this group and all the other non contributors to society.

If they dealt with the ones in their midst who do nothing but leech tax money it might be a start.

RobertKK · 21-02-2016 11:45pm

Mary Lou McDonald says she finds the term 'abortion on demand' offensive.
Wonder why she is in SF, plenty to offend there.

mansize · 21-02-2016 11:47pm

Mary Lou spoke very well on Repeal the 8th

mansize · 21-02-2016 11:48pm

RobertKK wrote: »

Mary Lou McDonald says she finds the term 'abortion on demand' offensive.
Wonder why she is in SF, plenty to offend there.

I abhor lots about SF, but that's a cheap shot

RobertKK · 22-02-2016 12:03am

mansize wrote: »

Mary Lou spoke very well on Repeal the 8th

She supports repeal the 8th and want it removed. But she leaves a gap where there is no legislation between a repeal and new legislation, which means abortion on demand would be the case with no legislation, if there was nothing ready if the 8th amendment was repealed as it would not be illegal.

mansize wrote: »

I abhor lots about SF, but that's a cheap shot

You can call it a cheap shot, but it is the truth.

Jack Killian · 22-02-2016 12:13am

RobertKK wrote: »

She supports repeal the 8th and want it removed. But she leaves a gap where there is no legislation between a repeal and new legislation, which means abortion on demand would be the case with no legislation, if there was nothing ready if the 8th amendment was repealed as it would not be illegal.

You can call it a cheap shot, but it is the truth.

The 8th isn't fit-for-purpose, as the HSE statement in some PR mode after some girl was forced to have a child was

The pregnancy was terminated by Caesarian as per legislation

No-one I know uses the word "termination" in that context.

Link for the doubters : http://www.thejournal.ie/hse-abortion-inquiry-terms-of-reference-1630553-Aug2014/

tomwaterford · 22-02-2016 12:15am

RobertKK wrote: »

She supports repeal the 8th and want it removed. But she leaves a gap where there is no legislation between a repeal and new legislation, which means abortion on demand would be the case with no legislation, if there was nothing ready if the 8th amendment was repealed as it would not be illegal.

You can call it a cheap shot, but it is the truth.

What exactly is wrong with abortion on demand

At the of the day If someone deosnt want to go through with/put their body through a pregnancy...it's not right to force them??

It would also remove a crutch and leaning on england...ireland should look out for it's own interests in the unlikely event of a British exit from the EU

spiralism · 22-02-2016 12:16am

LostinKildare wrote: »

On the whole "let's scare the s**t out of the electorate" thing, let's remember that FG have form on this. Remember back in 2012 when we passed the fiscal treaty referendum? The one that the govt told us would strengthen our hand in getting that debt writedown from the EU that we never got? Remember how the govt was scared sh**tless they might lose that referendum?

From the Irish Independent:

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/fg-pledges-to-put-the-frighteners-on-electorate-26848040.html

Read it and weep. They really do hold the electorate in contempt.

Of course they do, because it keeps working. It was the same shtick in both Lisbon referenda as well. "You better vote Yes, or the EU will be very mad". The second time was the most grating. Tiny changes and they just trot the same **** out but much more vigorously and it passes.

The general public buys into it though. They'll keep treating the electorate with contempt as long as they're allowed. Because it works, and that's politics.

mansize · 22-02-2016 12:17am

RobertKK wrote: »

She supports repeal the 8th and want it removed. But she leaves a gap where there is no legislation between a repeal and new legislation, which means abortion on demand would be the case with no legislation, if there was nothing ready if the 8th amendment was repealed as it would not be illegal.

You can call it a cheap shot, but it is the truth.

It's your truth

22-02-2016 12:19am

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Yeah. Like people with Down's syndrome. When you think about it they are just an expense. Maybe if FG get back into government they will deal with this group and all the other non contributors to society.

Legalizing abortions for foetuses diagnosed with disabilities would help with that. They really should not exist because it can be a very severe disability and the severity can't be fully diagnosed until the child is born.

mansize · 22-02-2016 12:22am

511 wrote: »

Legalizing abortions for foetuses diagnosed with disabilities would help with that. They really should not exist because it can be a very severe disability and the severity can't be fully diagnosed until the child is born.

No one is calling for legalising abortionsfor fotesus with disabilities, plenty try to conflate the issue with FFA, which are NOT the same thing at all

SafeSurfer · 22-02-2016 12:24am

511 wrote: »

Legalizing abortions for foetuses diagnosed with disabilities would help with that. They really should not exist because it can be a very severe disability and the severity can't be fully diagnosed until the child is born.

I don't agree with you. There is a difference in someone's ability to contribute to an economy or to a society. Liberals are all for inclusion, multiculturalism and equality but believe people with an extra chromosome "should not exist".

masti123 · 22-02-2016 12:26am

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Since when do the Newspapers need to be fair and balanced? Are An Phoblacht fair and balanced?

Sinn Fein supporters are going into meltdown. The blame game has started and none of the fingers are pointed at King Gerry of Adams. Over 5 years of Austerity and this was all they could muster up, 20 odd seats.

An Phoblacht is owned by SF so surprise surprise it's biased, I don't think anyone would say otherwise.

In contrast the Indo is a pathetic piece of journalism when it comes to politics I mean did you see their '10 reasons you shouldn't vote SF' article, it literally is something you'd see on Buzzfeed, not a serious broadsheet.
Take the Irish Times for comparison and you'll see what impartiality is like.

The problem is I know it's biased, and you do. But people like my mother who reads the Sindo and aren't in tune with politics accept it as gospel. It really does a disservice, no wonder Michael Collins sent the squad in to put guns to the editors heads, evidently editorial policy hasn't changed much in 100 years.

thee glitz · 22-02-2016 12:37am

tomwaterford wrote: »

What exactly is wrong with abortion on demand

At the of the day If someone deosnt want to go through with/put their body through a pregnancy...it's not right to force them??

Some people hold morals and believe it should be illegal to take an innocent human being's life.

The_Kew_Tour · 22-02-2016 12:51am

LostinKildare wrote: »

Wow, that's harsh. Okay, he lost control of his emotions and was rude, but geez, he's a teenager. And at least he cares about politics and what's going on in the country, if he expressed himself poorly. Most kids his age --- hell, an awful lot of adults --- don't give a flying **** about what's going on in the country.
There's a zillion things more embarrassing than an earnest, politically aware kid getting upset and losing his cool.

He does not give flying **** either, let's be honest I bet you he can't even name 3 people in his constituency.

22-02-2016 12:53am

tomwaterford wrote: »

What exactly is wrong with abortion on demand

Absolutely everything is wrong with it.

LostinKildare · 22-02-2016 12:55am

RobertKK wrote: »

She supports repeal the 8th and want it removed. But she leaves a gap where there is no legislation between a repeal and new legislation, which means abortion on demand would be the case with no legislation, if there was nothing ready if the 8th amendment was repealed as it would not be illegal.

No, that's not right. If the 8th was repealed, we'd still have the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act of 2013. Remember that? That'd still be in effect, it doesn't disappear because the 8th amendment is repealed. The point is, we would amend or replace that existing legislation -- liberalise it to also allow for abortions in the case of fatal foetal abnormality, for example. The 8th amendment stands in the way of making that kind of change.

Jack Killian · 22-02-2016 12:56am

thee glitz wrote: »

Some people hold morals and believe it should be illegal to take an innocent human being's life.

It is. However it's debatable as to when that "life" starts.

tomwaterford · 22-02-2016 1:01am

Jack Killian wrote: »

It is. However it's debatable as to when that "life" starts.

Life starts at conception IMO

But no one should be forced to put there body through the ringer if they don't want to/not up to it IMO

**it should at this point be pointed out that I don't believe people should be allowed abort for disabilities/gender of the child.....

only if they don't wish to put their body through a pregnancy...,as some people are not able/want to do it....and others are just not cut out to be parents

Jack Killian · 22-02-2016 1:04am

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I don't agree with you. There is a difference in someone's ability to contribute to an economy or to a society. Liberals are all for inclusion, multiculturalism and equality but believe people with an extra chromosome "should not exist".

[Edited slightly when Safesurfer clarified to avoid confusion]

Completely disagree [with those "liberals"] and would emphasise the contribution to society; contributions are more than merely economic.

I've known and worked with disabled kids who contribute far more to society than "normal" kids. The innocence and love that a Downs or Autustic child can show is a joy to behold, even if their darker or more difficult moments - like any child's - are tough going.

I've also had a niece who shouldn't have lived past 4, but made it to 14, and we were blessed to have her and what she brought and taught us.

So whatever about the life-changing decision for someone to make an early call having been raped, I do not concur with the above opinion that disabled kids cannot contribute to society.

They - like anyone else - can be givers or takers. And if they have reduced mental capacity, at least their "taking" isn't a conscious self-serving leeching decision, which is more than can be said for many supposedly "non-disabled" people.

That mindset is - in my opinion - far more of a society-crippling disability than any extra chromosome.

SafeSurfer · 22-02-2016 1:22am

Jack Killian wrote: »

Completely disagree. I've known and worked with disabled kids who contribute far more to society than "normal" kids. The innocence and love that a Downs or Autustic child can show is a joy to behold, even if their darker or more difficult moments - like any child's - are tough going.

I've also had a niece who shouldn't have lived past 4, but made it to 14, and we were blessed to have her and what she brought and taught us.

So whatever about the life-changing decision for someone to make an early call having been raped, I do not concur with the above opinion that disabled kids cannot contribute to society.

They - like anyone else - can be givers or takers. And if they have reduced mental capacity, at least their "taking" isn't a conscious self-serving leeching decision, which is more than can be said for many supposedly "non-disabled" people.

That mindset is - in my opinion - far more of a society-crippling disability than any extra chromosome.

I completely agree with you. I was replying to someone who believes people with disabilities should not exist because they don't contribute to society. I think this view is abhorrent.

Jack Killian · 22-02-2016 1:47am

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I completely agree with you. I was replying to someone who believes people with disabilities should not exist because they don't contribute to society. I think this view is abhorrent.

Sorry - misinterpreted. Let me know if you need me to edit somehow so that it doesn't look misleading.

Billy86 · 22-02-2016 2:48am

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Your figures are completely all over the place again - your raw-number-unemployed stats are off by up anywhere between ~20,000-70,000 depending on what period is looked at:
http://i.imgur.com/l4R2S8y.gif

I think you're missing the point of my original post replying to you as well: I was pointing out the massive numbers of emigrated people, which is around 140,000 since 2011, as a counterpoint to the increase in employment.

And you did it by replying to my post, suggesting that tens of thousands more were not in employment but had simply left the country. The fact is well upwards of 100,000 more are in employment.

KomradeBishop · 22-02-2016 3:00am

Billy86 wrote: »

And you did it by replying to my post, suggesting that tens of thousands more were not in employment but had simply left the country. The fact is well upwards of 100,000 more are in employment.

Okey - well I wasn't trying to imply that the rise in employment wasn't real or was overstated, I was counterpointing it with the huge number of emigrated people, and how that makes a big dent in the unemployed stats - that the 'recovery' Fine Gael are trying to lay claim to (when it's really more down to external economic events), when it comes to improvements in unemployed stats, is greatly assisted by emigration - which is a massive negative event on their watch, that they certainly aren't in a rush to lay claim to...

Billy86 · 22-02-2016 3:16am

Fair enough, but your original reply was in response to this: Tell that to the tens and tens of thousands (if not over 100,000 by now) more adults in employment now than were in 2011.

I originally mentioned people in employment (as a bulk number and not a percentage), not the unemployment figures.

There are also a whole lot of those who have left who have done so to go and live somewhere else rather than purely in hunt of employment, but that's a different matter. Though I don't see how it can be considered so damning that FG didn't immediately halt the already occurring net emigration for the reason that I'm not sure what they could have realistically done to keep them here.

Galwayguy35 · 22-02-2016 7:43am

LostinKildare wrote: »

Wow, that's harsh. Okay, he lost control of his emotions and was rude, but geez, he's a teenager. And at least he cares about politics and what's going on in the country, if he expressed himself poorly. Most kids his age --- hell, an awful lot of adults --- don't give a flying **** about what's going on in the country.
There's a zillion things more embarrassing than an earnest, politically aware kid getting upset and losing his cool.

Posts like this annoy me, he was a bad mannered little prick and you're making excuses for him.

Galwayguy35 · 22-02-2016 7:50am

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Yeah. Like people with Down's syndrome. When you think about it they are just an expense. Maybe if FG get back into government they will deal with this group and all the other non contributors to society.

Yeah because those are the people I was suggesting want everything handed to them :rolleyes:

Try harder next time.

JustTheOne · 22-02-2016 8:56am

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Okey - well I wasn't trying to imply that the rise in employment wasn't real or was overstated, I was counterpointing it with the huge number of emigrated people, and how that makes a big dent in the unemployed stats - that the 'recovery' Fine Gael are trying to lay claim to (when it's really more down to external economic events), when it comes to improvements in unemployed stats, is greatly assisted by emigration - which is a massive negative event on their watch, that they certainly aren't in a rush to lay claim to...

You do know 1 in 7 people who emigrated in the last 5 years were unemployed when leaving?

22-02-2016 10:33am

LostinKildare wrote: »

Wow, that's harsh. Okay, he lost control of his emotions and was rude, but geez, he's a teenager. And at least he cares about politics and what's going on in the country, if he expressed himself poorly. Most kids his age --- hell, an awful lot of adults --- don't give a flying **** about what's going on in the country.
There's a zillion things more embarrassing than an earnest, politically aware kid getting upset and losing his cool.

He was a little boll*cks and you can be damn sure he doesn't give a fiddlers about politics nor know anything about it. It was there simply to act the scrote which he managed to do successfully and a good hard kick or two would do him no harm at all.

KomradeBishop · 22-02-2016 12:08pm

Billy86 wrote: »

Fair enough, but your original reply was in response to this: Tell that to the tens and tens of thousands (if not over 100,000 by now) more adults in employment now than were in 2011.

I originally mentioned people in employment (as a bulk number and not a percentage), not the unemployment figures.

There are also a whole lot of those who have left who have done so to go and live somewhere else rather than purely in hunt of employment, but that's a different matter. Though I don't see how it can be considered so damning that FG didn't immediately halt the already occurring net emigration for the reason that I'm not sure what they could have realistically done to keep them here.

Which you posted as a sign of 'success'/'recovery' in the current economy - that Fine Gael tries to take credit for, despite it being largely down to worldwide economic conditions - and ignoring the massive negatives which show the damage during their term - showing Fine Gael want to take credit for all of the 'good', and none of the bad, and many posters are trying to assist with this spin.

The last 5 years have been abysmal economically - this is an insanely long time to recover from an economic crisis, the main problems with the crisis (the massive private debt levels, reforming the regulatory system, reform at an EU level, reform of the Euro) have not been dealt with and will come home to roost later, and what little 'recovery' there has been is disproportionately felt by the better-off/well-connected parts of society - a 'recovery' likely to be derailed/reversed as worldwide economic conditions worsen.

On the one hand, people say there is 'little that could be done' economically by Fine Gael - well then that goes as much for the 'good' that happens in our economy, as well as the bad - so stop trying to give them credit for the 'good' (which they are trying to steal credit for anyway, since it's largely down to worldwide economic conditions), while ignoring the bad.

LostinKildare · 22-02-2016 12:08pm

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Posts like this annoy me, he was a bad mannered little prick and you're making excuses for him.

Alicia Mysterious Beeswax wrote: »

He was a little boll*cks and you can be damn sure he doesn't give a fiddlers about politics nor know anything about it. It was there simply to act the scrote which he managed to do successfully and a good hard kick or two would do him no harm at all.

Posts like this annoy me. With all the really serious s**t going on in the country, you get exercised about a cheeky 15-year-old. Get some perspective. Aim your wrath higher.

And Alicia Mysterious Beeswax, we don't kick, we use our words. Any 15-year-old knows that.

General Election - Feb 26th Megathread

Comments