Waterford Politics MEGATHREAD

hardybuck wrote: »

Listen, I've given you probably a dozen economic indicators, tax comparisons and cost of living comparisons. If you don't want to believe cold hard facts then that's your own business.

I suppose the rich will end up paying for the services regardless. They'll either buy them when they need them and they're paying for them now via their taxes anyway.

You mention all the immigrants rushing to Ireland, are they rushing to this utopian Danish society?

Tax and cost of living comparisons are not comparable on the level you are choosing to compare them on because there is more to factor in by way of levies and charges and government increases on companies that are passed onto customers. Its not as cut and dry as you make it out, im not saying your facts and figures don't exist im just saying there is more beyond the ones you are selecting to bolster your argument, i don't think that's unreasonable.

Maybe the borders and social welfare inspections are not as passive in Denmark? Maybe the number of people willing to/getting paid to fight for domestic citizens rights out weighs the number fighting for immigrants rights? Maybe they don't need cheap labor? Maybe it wont be as easy to express their cultural/religious beliefs in Denmark?

Who knows.

You might come across an immigrant friend who can tell you why they choose Ireland over Denmark?

Max Powers wrote: »

heard a fella on the radio months back, saying for all the money we put into the HSE, when compared with other countries and their systems, we should have a top class system so with that, my own experiences and what i hear on the radio/tv/papers, throwing more tax money at the HSE may not be whats most needed. Granted some things like child care, disabled and elderly care are woefully underfunded, you could argue the money is not getting to where it needs to go.

Yep. Admin. In some cases people shouting "next" are apparently on €40k+.

Odds for the Waterford Constituency have been put up:

https://twitter.com/pppolitics/status/683955562137137152?lang=en

No value in that market as there's a crazy overound built in at this stage. Mary Butler might worth a bit of a punt at 5/4

hardybuck wrote: »

Paudie Coffey should not be 2/7. Will be a good battle between him and Butler for the fourth seat. Interesting that they're both from Portlaw.

I think FF need to put an additional candidate from the west of the county to gather some votes and some transfers for her. Her reach to date seems to be very much local.

A second candidate will only split the FF vote and put them both out of contention. Same goes for Labour, they're stuck with Conway.

When we calculate what PP reckon each candidates chances are of being elected, we can see that the market is heavily weighted in their favour due to the lack of information out there - this was simply the result of a small sample of Waterford based constituents for a nationwide Red C poll, not nearly enough to be statistically significant.

We won't see any movement among John Halligan or John Deasy because at those prices nobody will back them. Cullinane might drift a bit but not enough to become any sort of value bet.

If you're looking for a bit of fun for your money, I'd back either Mary Butler or Ciara Conway. I'd compare Conway to Kenneally last time. He was agonisingly close to a seat and I definitely think one of those two will be in the running until the last.

Selection | Odds | %
John Deasy | 1/50 | 98.04
John Halligan | 1/40 | 97.56
David Cullinane | 1/9 | 90
Paudie Coffey | 2/7 | 77.78
Mary Butler | 5/4 | 44.44
Ciara Conway | 9/4 | 30.77
Una Dunphy | 25/1 | 3.84
Mailo Power | 25/1 | 3.84

Is the fact that so few of these are city based candidates significant? As it is I feel the city is underrepresented. I'd have thought that the party grassroots organisation would be stronger in the city than the county, at least to the point where they'd give options for voters to vote for candidates that are living in the city itself. A mix is best, but this seems very one sided.

AdMMM wrote: »

A second candidate will only split the FF vote and put them both out of contention. Same goes for Labour, they're stuck with Conway.

When we calculate what PP reckon each candidates chances are of being elected, we can see that the market is heavily weighted in their favour due to the lack of information out there - this was simply the result of a small sample of Waterford based constituents for a nationwide Red C poll, not nearly enough to be statistically significant.

We won't see any movement among John Halligan or John Deasy because at those prices nobody will back them. Cullinane might drift a bit but not enough to become any sort of value bet.

If you're looking for a bit of fun for your money, I'd back either Mary Butler or Ciara Conway. I'd compare Conway to Kenneally last time. He was agonisingly close to a seat and I definitely think one of those two will be in the running until the last.

Selection | Odds | %
John Deasy | 1/50 | 98.04
John Halligan | 1/40 | 97.56
David Cullinane | 1/9 | 90
Paudie Coffey | 2/7 | 77.78
Mary Butler | 5/4 | 44.44
Ciara Conway | 9/4 | 30.77
Una Dunphy | 25/1 | 3.84
Mailo Power | 25/1 | 3.84

What are the odds on anyone elected doing anything constructive to lift Waterford out of the current hole that it's in?

space2ground1 wrote: »

Halligan is city based I think. Are Deasy, Coffey and Cullinane not based outside the city?

Cullinane was a member of Waterford City Council from 2004 to 2011.

AdMMM wrote: »

Depends who you ask

Resident in south Kilkenny where his wife ran in the by-election. How can he thus represent Waterford?
On an earlier question, Waterford won't be pulled out of the mire, we have no realistic chance of a ministerial role for any of the candidates.

AdMMM wrote: »

Odds for the Waterford Constituency have been put up:

https://twitter.com/pppolitics/status/683955562137137152?lang=en

No value in that market as there's a crazy overound built in at this stage. Mary Butler might worth a bit of a punt at 5/4

Former Independent Councillor Eddie Mulligan must be kicking himself that he joined Fianna Fail!! A City-based candidate taking a positive approach to issues and is pro-business etc, would do well in my opinion. A real blunder on his part to join Fianna Fail, without guarantee of a nomination!! Coffey and Deasy are now best-positioned to exploit that vote!

Smiley Burnett wrote: »

Former Independent Councillor Eddie Mulligan must be kicking himself that he joined Fianna Fail!! A City-based candidate taking a positive approach to issues and is pro-business etc, would do well in my opinion. A real blunder on his part to join Fianna Fail, without guarantee of a nomination!! Coffey and Deasy are now best-positioned to exploit that vote!

I can only imagine he was promised that by the local organisation, or his own supporters were promised something if they could convince him to come back into the fray?

Irish Times have updated the Waterford constituency part of their site. I'd love to see the internal polls that suggest Coffey is going to struggle to get a seat. I'm sure FG will be able to manage their vote across the constituency but will have to be much smarter about it than Labour were in 2011. I'm not sure how Deasy's camp would react to being told not to canvass certain areas however.

http://www.irishtimes.com/election-2016/waterford

1gunsnroses wrote: »

Will Mary butler get in?

I wouldn't bet on it....Mulligan would have had a decent shot I reckon but the gender quota nonsense put paid to his chances.

Mulligan has to be regretting his decision to join FF now.

That party stinks. None of the councillors like each other and poor Mary Butler is out of her depth.

Some turnup for the books. The FG cheerleaders very quiet.........:)

hardybuck wrote: »

You're right, FF had a great result didn't they?

Ah it's hard not to laugh really. Didn't vote FF, but to listen to ends going on five years ago about "a new kind of politics". And then turned out to be worse than FF.......:D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RccUrz4gJMQ