Why would you vote SF?

Wtf ? wrote: »

They were voted into Stormont, They pulled out ?, They have seats in House of Commons, They don't attend (But collect expenses) They could be in London now downing the DUP and helping the no border brexit thing but they aint. They talk the talk etc. Why bother with them really. Flushing your ballot paper down the toilet would be better methinks. They are a wasted vote

Presumably they hold the only real hope of reuniting the country, a romantic idea that few want to let go of

Wtf ? wrote: »

They were voted into Stormont, They pulled out ?, They have seats in House of Commons, They don't attend (But collect expenses) They could be in London now downing the DUP and helping the no border brexit thing but they aint. They talk the talk etc. Why bother with them really. Flushing your ballot paper down the toilet would be better methinks. They are a wasted vote

Because since the GFA and the parity of esteem that comes with it nationalists have had the loudest voice they have ever had in NI.

As a result they have moved towards to the party that promises to listen to that voice more intently than any other party.

On the other side the unionists have countered this which they perceive as a threat to their culture by morning towards the part the will listen to them.most intently.

So you have a society that is getting more and more divided and entrenched and it's a vicious circle.

That's why people voted for SF.

For over 100 years SF said they would not sit in the HOC so anyone voting for them know that full well.

Wtf ? wrote: »

Still a wasted vote tho, Nobody down here would go into Government with them and I see why. Their history does them no favors either. Their current mouthpiece does not help either, They just oppose everything and do nothing. Waste of space of a hopefully gone era.

Voting in an election is not supposed to be tantamount to backing a horse. You are supposed to be voting for the party closest to your convictions, not the party you think is going to win.

Wtf ? wrote: »

Voting for an Independent is the same thing then, You can vote for them but they can't/wont do anything because they are 1 voice, Who might mumble once about something dear to your heart but really they can do nothing, Thats what I mean, A wasted vote. Mary Lou babbles on all the time but nobody really listens to her either

You need an opposition as well to question the Government. Mary Lou was pretty good on the Public Accounts Committee.

Wtf ? wrote: »

But you are assuming that your opinion is fact....No ?

which is my opinion?



Did the DUP bring down stormont due to dodgy actions? Yes
Do SF get elected on not going to Westminster? Yes

Both facts (kinda see how you ended up starting this thread)

blanch152 wrote: »

To be fair, both are opinions based on certain facts and assumptions and are not facts in and of themselves.

(1) In the case of bringing down Stormont, you are correct that the actions of the DUP were cited by SF as the reason why they were bringing down Stormont. However, that does not lead to a fact that the DUP brought down Stormont. The facts allow you to have the opinion that SF brought down Stormont or that the DUP brought down Stormont. Both opinions are valid, which is more valid is a matter for debate.

if the DUP let the facts be known, then maybe we might get somewhere. You cant deny the scandal exists, and you cant deny these are the reasons SF used to walk out - therefore my point remains

blanch152 wrote: »

(2) In the second case, again you are correct that Sinn Fein have a policy of not taking up their seats at Westminister. However, it is not necessarily true that they got elected on that basis. People have myriad reasons for voting for political parties. Maybe Sinn Fein did get elected by those who voted for them to abstain from Westminister, maybe not. It is valid to hold an opinion that if you only include the votes for Sinn Fein that were on the basis of boycotting Westminister, then Sinn Fein would not have been elected to any of the seats. Therefore, you can have the opinion that they were not elected on that basis. Again, how much weight you give that opinion is up to you, but it is a valid opinion.

As someone from the north who voted for SF in the 80s and 90s, it was one of the reasons I voted for them - plus everyone else I grew up with who voted for them. In fact Ive never heard of anyone - in my experience - voting for SF who wanted them to take their seats.

Unless you can find me something to suggest otherwise, my point on this still stands too. In this case its YOUR opinion being stated. Mine is based on reality plus what SF say themselves

maccored wrote: »

if the DUP let the facts be known, then maybe we might get somewhere. You cant deny the scandal exists, and you cant deny these are the reasons SF used to walk out - therefore my point remains


As someone from the north who voted for SF in the 80s and 90s, it was one of the reasons I voted for them - plus everyone else I grew up with who voted for them. In fact Ive never heard of anyone - in my experience - voting for SF who wanted them to take their seats.

Unless you can find me something to suggest otherwise, my point on this still stands too. In this case its YOUR opinion being stated. Mine is based on reality plus what SF say themselves

I didn't put them forward as my opinions, I put them forward as valid alternative opinions.

(1) You say they are the reasons that "SF used to walk out". That implies that you accept that Stormont was brought down by the action of SF walking out. You justify their walking out by citing facts that the scandal exists, but whether the facts justified a walkout is undoubtedly an opinion. Again, people are entitled to a different opinion, including the one that it was SF's fault the Assembly collapsed as the scandal didn't merit a walk-out. Again, no point disputing with me whether the opinion is correct, but it could be a valid opinion, based on the known facts.

(2) I never said that there was anyone "voting for SF who wanted them to take their seats". What I disagreed with was your statement that "SF get elected on not going to Westminster." Sinn Fein get elected because they are a nationalist party, because they favour marriage equality and abortion, because they want a united Ireland, because they want to increase social welfare etc. etc. and not solely or even majorly because they are not going to Westminister. However, I would agree that many (possibly most) of those who voted for SF in the 1980s voted for them because they didn't take up their seats. However, they only held one seat for a part of the time in the 1980s, and didn't win any in the early 1990s, before getting two in the late 1990s. That suggests that merely having a policy of abstention doesn't appear to be sufficient to get one elected. Again, as there is no hard evidence or facts to support either side, all you can have is an opinion which could be yours or could be the alternative.

Wtf ? wrote: »

Still a wasted vote tho, Nobody down here would go into Government with them and I see why. Their history does them no favors either. Their current mouthpiece does not help either, They just oppose everything and do nothing. Waste of space of a hopefully gone era.

I've voted Sinn Fein on every given opportunity now for 32 years. I've watched them go from a party with no seats to the third largest party in the state. Based on that I'd say their era is far from gone.

jm08 wrote: »

You need an opposition as well to question the Government. Mary Lou was pretty good on the Public Accounts Committee.

The current PAC is an absolute disgrace, nothing but soundbites with various TDs jockeying to get their mug on the evening news headlines, and Mary Lou has been the very worst of the lot.

satguy wrote: »

giving Wesley College another hockey pitch.

Ohh look a SF supporter misrepresenting the facts to suit their own agenda, yeah Shane Ross who was responsible for that is an independent so nothing to do with FG and it was roundly proven there was no favoritism or special representations made by him regarding it. In fact it was exactly the opposite with Mary Lou herself making special representations regarding a boxing club in her constituency.

For Forks Sake wrote: »

The current PAC is an absolute disgrace, nothing but soundbites with various TDs jockeying to get their mug on the evening news headlines, and Mary Lou has been the very worst of the lot.

Mary Lou hasn't been on the PAC for at least a year now.

laoch na mona wrote: »

Stormont collapsed due to a scandal the DUP created and a refusal to deliver on aspects of the GFA such as the Irish language act, Theres has been negotiations to get the assembly back running it's not Sinn Fein who are preventing this

But Stormont really collapsed because the timing really suited SF's agenda to push for a border poll within the environment created by Brexit - an agenda also made easier with the absence of a devolved parliament.

laoch na mona wrote: »

publish a fully costed alternative budget each year

Ah yes, their creative accounting. Like the years they spent advocating a rise in corporation tax to 17% and counting all the new tax receipts that would ensue.

Until they got tired of the ridicule and had to admit that the 12.5% should stay and that it should also be the rate applied in N. Ireland.