Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

General Election 20 GalwayWest

Options
13567…25

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    flazio
    Registered Users Posts: 12,805 ✭✭✭✭flazio


    fergiesfolly wrote: »
    Ya. Unless you're a close friend to either of those TDs, I can't imagine they let those lines slip out intentionally.
    Or, you could name and shame.
    Big legal issues for boards if the forums go down the slander and bitching route.


  • Options
    #63
    spurshero
    Registered Users Posts: 1,761 ✭✭✭spurshero


    Roberto Whining Dandelion wrote: »
    Is that you Hildegarde??? :D

    Certainly not ! She won’t be in my top 5!


  • Options
    #64
    Bredabe
    Registered Users Posts: 4,001 ✭✭✭Bredabe


    Snow Garden wrote: »
    Ok.

    Please explain in your words what you think the FG TD meant by this statement...

    Given the context and with the evidence of time passing, I think he meant that they had no notion of putting money into the health system or rebuilding houses/flats, like previous governments had. Things that had been lost in the recession and restructuring of the sw system.

    Tho it was the lack of concern about the people impacted by these cuts and our reactions as voters was the most telling aspect of the comment.


  • Options
    #65
    Snow Garden
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,126 ✭✭✭Snow Garden


    Bredabe wrote: »
    Given the context and with the evidence of time passing, I think he meant that they had no notion of putting money into the health system or rebuilding houses/flats, like previous governments had. Things that had been lost in the recession and restructuring of the sw system.

    Tho it was the lack of concern about the people impacted by these cuts and our reactions as voters was the most telling aspect of the comment.

    ok thanks.


  • Options
    #66
    Arghus
    Registered Users Posts: 14,339 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    Roberto Whining Dandelion wrote: »
    Surely that's not going to happen after his recent disgusting xenophobic and racist remarks?

    That's what is going to get him the votes. Unfortunately.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    jr86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,930 ✭✭✭jr86


    Roberto Whining Dandelion wrote: »
    Surely that's not going to happen after his recent disgusting xenophobic and racist remarks?

    Haha, if only life was that simple.

    He'll absolutely romp home.

    Sure he'll absolutely hoover up votes in Carnmore and Claregalway obviously, and he was a big supporter of the Renville GAA project for Oranmore/Maree GAA - raising it in the Dail with the Taoiseach - so he'll absolutely clean up in these areas too (which he has done to date in any case).


  • Options
    #68
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,066 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Roberto Whining Dandelion wrote: »
    Surely that's not going to happen after his recent disgusting xenophobic and racist remarks?

    I don't know what was said exactly, but to say bogus AS are not welcome is perfectly fine, and not bad.

    I will say it again and again.

    Bogus AS are not welcome in Ireland, and should be deported asap.

    I will ask any canvassers do they agree with this reasonable statement.

    Now, his second statement, about the funds being transferred abroad, the stats aren't great there, so I'd say his figures were incorrect.

    However, an interesting point is that after we gave refugee status to "people fleeing persecution" from west Africa, lo and behold, they go there on holiday the following year!!!!!

    I'm happy to see some TDs state the truth - bogus AS are really economic migrants.

    I want politicians to speak the truth, not hide behind political correctness.


  • Options
    #69
    45mhrc7evo1d3n
    Closed Accounts Posts: 427 ✭✭45mhrc7evo1d3n


    Geuze wrote: »
    I don't know what was said exactly, but to say bogus AS are not welcome is perfectly fine, and not bad.

    However, an interesting point is that after we gave refugee status to "people fleeing persecution" from west Africa, lo and behold, they go there on holiday the following year!!!!!

    The issue is with assuming all asylum seekers are bogus. And it is only an assumption unless the person making that statement has researched the personal circumstances of every asylum seeker out there.

    Same with your allegation that asylum seekers returned to west Africa for holidays. Where is the research or stats to support this? I'd be willing to bet there is none.


  • Options
    #70
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,066 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    All the evidence is that the vast majority of AS are bogus.

    The facts are there to see, printed and published by State agencies.

    For years, it is well known that the vast majority of AS are bogus, they are in fact economic migrants.

    And we can have a more mature debate once we accept the facts.

    The bogus AS are often men from Asia, who enter into sham marriages, again widely reported.

    Or recently, many bogus AS are from Albania and Georgia, again widely reported, and stated by the Taoiseach.




    (Note that I am not referring to the 3,00-4,000 genuine refugees that have come here under various programmes, they are welcome)


  • Options
    #71
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,066 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Roberto Whining Dandelion wrote: »
    Same with your allegation that asylum seekers returned to west Africa for holidays. Where is the research or stats to support this? I'd be willing to bet there is none.

    You are correct here, as of course we don't track people's foreign travel.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Snow Garden
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,126 ✭✭✭Snow Garden


    jr86 wrote: »
    Haha, if only life was that simple.

    He'll absolutely romp home.

    Sure he'll absolutely hoover up votes in Carnmore and Claregalway obviously, and he was a big supporter of the Renville GAA project for Oranmore/Maree GAA - raising it in the Dail with the Taoiseach - so he'll absolutely clean up in these areas too (which he has done to date in any case).

    Grealish's core vote around Carnmore/Claregalway will stay for sure but he will pick up a lot more votes in Oughterard and Connemara.
    I am curious to see how O'Cuiv's massive FP vote (15%) stacks up this time around. I have a sneaky suspicion that Grealish might poll higher than O'Cuiv.


  • Options
    #73
    45mhrc7evo1d3n
    Closed Accounts Posts: 427 ✭✭45mhrc7evo1d3n


    Geuze wrote: »
    ... it is well known that the vast majority of AS are bogus, they are in fact economic migrants.

    Again, the assumption there is that economic migrants are "bogus". Irish people have been economic migrants for many years. There can hardly be a family in Ireland who doesn't have relatives who emigrated for economic reasons. I think most right-minded people would prefer that their family members weren't referred to as "bogus" by the countries they chose to travel to seeking better lives for themselves.


  • Options
    #74
    WallyGUFC
    Registered Users Posts: 2,052 ✭✭✭WallyGUFC


    Roberto Whining Dandelion wrote: »
    Again, the assumption there is that economic migrants are "bogus". Irish people have been economic migrants for many years. There can hardly be a family in Ireland who doesn't have relatives who emigrated for economic reasons. I think most right-minded people would prefer that their family members weren't referred to as "bogus" by the countries they chose to travel to seeking better lives for themselves.
    There is nothing wrong with genuine asylum seekers fleeing conflict. I also personally don't think there is anything wrong with an economic migrant, someone coming from abroad to work, better themselves and offer their skills to society. Once they have skills to offer and have gone though the appropriate channels regarding visas and all that, then come on in.



    The issue in my eyes is economic migrants gaming the asylum system to get into the country illegally. When you read articles on these people complaining that Direct Provision is worse than prison, you can be fairly sure they're bogus. I'd rather be in Direct Provision than in a warzone.


  • Options
    #75
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,066 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Roberto Whining Dandelion wrote: »
    Again, the assumption there is that economic migrants are "bogus". Irish people have been economic migrants for many years. There can hardly be a family in Ireland who doesn't have relatives who emigrated for economic reasons. I think most right-minded people would prefer that their family members weren't referred to as "bogus" by the countries they chose to travel to seeking better lives for themselves.

    The difference is that when most Irish emigrate, they legally immigrate to another country.

    Yes, members of my own family legally emigrated to the USA.

    There are some Irish illegal immigrants in the USA, and they should be dealt with as the law allows.

    I accept legal immigration into Ireland, e.g. EU immigrants, medical doctors, etc.

    I reject the illegal immigration by the bogus AS.

    Many tear up their documents between the plane and the GNIB/INIS desk.

    Before anybody asks for proof - this is all reported in the news.


  • Options
    #76
    1641
    Registered Users Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭1641


    WallyGUFC wrote: »
    There is nothing wrong with genuine asylum seekers fleeing conflict. I also personally don't think there is anything wrong with an economic migrant, someone coming from abroad to work, better themselves and offer their skills to society. Once they have skills to offer and have gone though the appropriate channels regarding visas and all that, then come on in.
    The issue in my eyes is economic migrants gaming the asylum system to get into the country illegally. When you read articles on these people complaining that Direct Provision is worse than prison, you can be fairly sure they're bogus. I'd rather be in Direct Provision than in a warzone.


    I would not agree with all your points (eg, I don't think think that distinguishing between asylum seekers and economic migrants is always so clear-cut, and I think that complaints about at least some aspects direct provision centres is valid, although I do not oppose it in principle).

    However, I do not have a problem with a TD, or anyone else, raising concerns about the asylum process. I am not doubting that it can be exploited. But I do have a concern about a TD raising it in such a dog-whistle manner, simply labelling African asylum seekers as "bogus" and "spongers" off the system. For someone who rarely speaks in the Dail, he then quoted World Bank figures which he knew to be guesstimates (or would have known if it had suited his agenda to do so). He knew exactly what he was doing and, no doubt, stirring up easy division will reap him some rewards electorally. It will likely make no difference but I will put every other candidate in the election higher in my vote simply on the basis of his crude cynicism.


  • Options
    #77
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,066 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    WallyGUFC wrote: »
    The issue in my eyes is economic migrants gaming the asylum system to get into the country illegally. When you read articles on these people complaining that Direct Provision is worse than prison, you can be fairly sure they're bogus. I'd rather be in Direct Provision than in a warzone.


    Correct 100%.

    I would love if a politician had the guts to simply speak the truth.

    That's all we ask - the truth.


  • Options
    #78
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,066 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    1641 wrote: »

    However, I do not have a problem with a TD, or anyone else, raising concerns about the asylum process. I am not doubting that it can be exploited. But I do have a concern about a TD raising it in such a dog-whistle manner, simply labelling African asylum seekers as "bogus" and "spongers" off the system. For someone who rarely speaks in the Dail, he then quoted World Bank figures which he knew to be guesstimates (or would have known if it had suited his agenda to do so). He knew exactly what he was doing and, no doubt, stirring up easy division will reap him some rewards electorally. It will likely make no difference but I will put every other candidate in the election higher in my vote simply on the basis of his crude cynicism.

    His figures on the remittances were probably wrong, good estimates are very difficult to get.

    As there are no direct flights from Africa to Ireland (other than Morocco I think, and maybe Addis?), then all African AS are bogus, as you should claim asylum in the first country.

    This has been going on for years, remember the famous case of Pamela Izevbekhai:

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/1m-legal-bill-after-pamela-and-girls-finally-deported-26753400.html


  • Options
    #79
    spurshero
    Registered Users Posts: 1,761 ✭✭✭spurshero


    Indo has a small section on it today . It seemed to think o cuiv and Kyne are safe . And that naughtoun Grealish and Connolly will be under threat from Crowe and o Reilly . It gave remote chances to o tuaihll and o Reilly . I think Grealish will get in comfortably though .


  • Options
    #80
    spurshero
    Registered Users Posts: 1,761 ✭✭✭spurshero


    spurshero wrote: »
    Indo has a small section on it today . It seemed to think o cuiv and Kyne are safe . And that naughtoun Grealish and Connolly will be under threat from Crowe and o Reilly . It gave remote chances to o tuaihll and o Reilly . I think Grealish will get in comfortably though .

    Should have said remote chances to otuaihll and Farrell . Not Oreilly .


  • Options
    #81
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,066 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    I'm hearing Greens have a better chance than SD.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    ben.schlomo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,977 ✭✭✭✭ben.schlomo


    Don't see how Crowe or Farrell would have any chance really.


  • Options
    #83
    Arghus
    Registered Users Posts: 14,339 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    Greens definitely have a better chance than SDs. But I wouldn't put money on either of them.


  • Options
    #84
    biko
    Registered Users Posts: 81,223 ✭✭✭✭biko


    Geuze et al, keep it to local politicians and local politics.
    Do not let this thread descend into a debate on immigration please

    On second though, Geuze, don't post until Monday


  • Options
    #85
    Snow Garden
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,126 ✭✭✭Snow Garden


    Arghus wrote: »
    Greens definitely have a better chance than SDs. But I wouldn't put money on either of them.

    I think the opposite. O'Tuathail has a track record already (3,455 FPV 2016) but the Green candidate is a complete newbie.
    I don't think Greens have a hope in hell here.


  • Options
    #86
    zell12
    Registered Users Posts: 23,334 ✭✭✭✭zell12


    Snow Garden wrote: »
    I think the opposite. O'Tuathail has a track record already (3,455 FPV 2016) but the Green candidate is a complete newbie.
    I don't think Greens have a hope in hell here.
    Greens ran four newbies for councillors in the locals covering GW and three (O'Reilly, O'Connor, McKinstry) got elected. Unexpected and very transfer friendly too.


  • Options
    #87
    ClanofLams
    Registered Users Posts: 4,210 ✭✭✭ClanofLams


    Would partially agree with Indo. O’Cuiv is home, Kyne too. Would say Grealish will be safe even though I have no time for him and he gets away with all sorts of nonsense. He missed almost as many days as the Healy raes in terms of voting when that story broke few months ago and then claimed some sort of nonsense, that he had agreement with Fine Gael to miss votes to make up for a TD of theirs that was missing. Then his spokesperson could give no examples of this when requested, was a very suspicious story, don’t understand why local media didn’t go to town on it, think there was one small piece in Connacht Tribune.

    After that i see a four way scrap between Naughton, Connolly, O’Reilly and Crowe with perhaps the two non TDs having the advantage. Great green vote in the local elections and O’Reilly seems strong candidate. Don’t agree with everything Catherine Connolly says but she’s admirable in lot of ways. But O’Reilly will really hurt her base in the West and might pull more than her elsewhere.

    Galway West always returns three TDs from the traditional parties, maybe that will change this time but I doubt it. Naughton needed John O’Mahonys transfers last time to get her over the line, won’t have that luxury this time. Fianna Fáil got the largest vote in both City and County locals so think Crowe has the edge.

    Don’t see SF featuring at all. Nor Soc Dems, voted for O’Tuathail last time but they had a poor local elections and think he made mistake not running. He’ll do alright in City but once you pass City boundaries, will be non entity.


  • Options
    #88
    Snow Garden
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,126 ✭✭✭Snow Garden


    zell12 wrote: »
    Greens ran four newbies for councillors in the locals covering GW and three (O'Reilly, O'Connor, McKinstry) got elected. Unexpected and very transfer friendly too.

    Yeah I know but local elections are not really reflective of Dail elections. They are a lazy vote.
    People are happy to have Greens in the council getting little done but a TD is a different kettle of fish. I guess we will see but if O'Reilly, for example, says we need more public transport instead of the bypass, she is toast. I see Crowe already going after the bypass vote. He won't get in either imho. Rightly or wrongly the politicians don't seem to be talking about green issues or climate change so far. Its all crime, HSE and housing so far.


  • Options
    #89
    ClanofLams
    Registered Users Posts: 4,210 ✭✭✭ClanofLams


    zell12 wrote: »
    Greens ran four newbies for councillors in the locals covering GW and three (O'Reilly, O'Connor, McKinstry) got elected. Unexpected and very transfer friendly too.

    McKinstry only registered to run a month in advance too, think he was running mainly so they would have a candidate, don’t think he thought he had a chance.


  • Options
    #90
    Stewball
    Registered Users Posts: 655 ✭✭✭Stewball


    I think the Greens might struggle to hold their local election votes for the general.

    They're almost certain to make up the numbers for FF or FG to form a government and that will put off some of their voters.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    lion_bar
    Registered Users Posts: 170 ✭✭lion_bar


    Snow Garden wrote: »
    I think the opposite. O'Tuathail has a track record already (3,455 FPV 2016) but the Green candidate is a complete newbie.
    I don't think Greens have a hope in hell here.

    One could argue he has an unsuccessful track record, and that O'Reilly has a successful record having been elected on the first count in LE, plus now has the experience gained working in the council for her constituents.


Advertisement