After Hours Presidential Election Poll

fergus1001 wrote: »

as I said before the really low turnout could cause a serious upset to the political elites

Low rural turnout aswell. I thought everyone rural was voting Casey to save them from Travellers reading here the last week?

fergus1001 wrote: »

as I said before the really low turnout could cause a serious upset to the political elites

Here's hoping.


The lower the turnout the better chance of a non higgins victory.
The higgins vote is in apathy at the other candidates, from speaking to people, rather than because he's done great (he hasnt done anything of note).

ELM327 wrote: »

As a bunch, people voting for Casey generally are tired of what they "have to say". They say what they want to say and ignore this enforced PC bull.

Exactly the spiel Trump uses to justify racism.

fergus1001 wrote: »

as I said before the really low turnout could cause a serious upset to the political elites

:pac:

"Upset the elites by voting for wealthy tax exiles"

Where's Waterford Whispers when you need them?

I wonder what goes through the mind of people who buy this "elites" nonsense. The actual "elites" are the 1%; the people who run businesses (into the ground) and use their money and position to increase their wealth at the expense of everyone else.

The goal of electing politicians should be putting in people who will balance it out, and resist the attempts by the elites to gut society for their own personal gain.

But they've managed to convince pockets of people that if you replace the politicians with the 1%, that somehow you're "sticking it to the elites", when you've actually just handed the bad guy the gun and asked him to protect you.

Surely if your goal was to "upset the elites", you'd vote for a socialist who proposes massive wealth taxes and widespread social spending?

pjohnson wrote: »

You dont need to pay tax to be a hero to those who whinge about tax apparently.

He probably just knows that if he shouts loud enough about poor people not paying taxes that the voting eejits won't think to look at him

ELM327 wrote: »

It is not, nor has it ever been, possible for a white Irish person to discriminate against a different white Irish person on the basis of race.
So I and the populous at large will thank you to not muddy the waters.


This is not america, this is Ireland. You don't speak for me, and you - demonstrably - don't speak for Casey supporters.


As a bunch, people voting for Casey generally are tired of what they "have to say". They say what they want to say and ignore this enforced PC bull.


For clarity, while you have quoted my posted question, you have not answered it.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Exactly the spiel Trump uses to justify racism.

Are you incapable of replying to a full post, instead picking words or lines to justify a view or position that does not fit the context in which it was posted?


For the third time now, while you have quoted my posted question, you have not answered it.

ELM327 wrote: »

Do you just watch me, or?

Donald Trump wrote: »

He probably just knows that if he shouts loud enough about poor people not paying taxes that the voting eejits won't think to look at him

Exactly

***LOUD NOISES*** = OMG he is amazing

banie01 wrote: »

What Irish President has ever done anything of note whilst holding the office?
The Presidency in terms of what it represents, is basically a direct substitution of the Lord Lieutenants role.
It is primarily a ceremonial role, one which in my opinion the incumbent should represent a manifestation of the dignity and hope of the nation, it is an office that as head of State should seek to be above the politics of government.

The President has no role in leading the country, even the power of assent is conditional.
I would much prefer that we save any "protest" votes for an election that matters, unfortunately in Ireland those elections don't come with parties capable of forming a viable alternative government.

McAleese had a great impact on the peace process.
Robinson steered a lot of human rights legislation and used the office to bring public conversation to rights issues.
Two recent examples.


In 2011 we elected the head of gringotts and all I can see that he did was leech money from the taxpayer at our darkest recessionary moment in recent history. He has done nothing of note. The only benefit to electing him again is that, as he is older, he will have a shorter taxpayer funded life left than other candidates

seamus wrote: »

How did that vote for Dana work out for you?

Ah now, don't mock them. I'm starting to feel sorry for them now. Let's not forget Dana managed to get nearly 14% of the vote. As a result, it really sent a message out to the leftist msm communists liberal elite and we all started to adopt the idiot's ideology and politics, as can definitely be seen in the 20 years that followed that vote.

Something very familiar with the 1997 language.



VOTE NO.1 DANA! She tells it like it is.

dav3 wrote: »

Ah now, don't mock them. I'm starting to feel sorry for them now. Let's not forget Dana managed to get nearly 14% of the vote. As a result, it really sent a message out to the leftist msm communists liberal elite and we all started to adopt the idiot's ideology and politics, as can definitely be seen in the 20 years that followed that vote.

Something very familiar with the 1997 language.



VOTE NO.1 DANA! She tells it like it is.

ok. i think you dont get it.....
my signature on boards perhaps....just perhaps shouldnt be taken as gospel.....but if it is or was....i feel sorry for you

ELM327 wrote: »

McAleese had a great impact on the peace process.
Robinson steered a lot of human rights legislation and used the office to bring public conversation to rights issues.
Two recent examples.


In 2011 we elected the head of gringotts and all I can see that he did was leech money from the taxpayer at our darkest recessionary moment in recent history. He has done nothing of note. The only benefit to electing him again is that, as he is older, he will have a shorter taxpayer funded life left than other candidates

McAleese would come quite far down on any list of influencers or guiding hands on the peace process IMO.
Granted she was very conciliatory and took steps to include unionists in her role as President many unionists would take issue with her comparison of protestent children to European anti-semites.

Similarly with Robinson, much of her good work around Human Rights was done either side of her presidency, whilst actually in the role she was constrained by what the actual office entailed.

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

How do we know that ? Where is the proof ?

Do you know what "unvouched" means ?

Yeah, I know what unvouched means, and I know how financial systems work in public bodies. Are you seriously suggesting that someone wrote a cheque to buy property from this allowance?