Labour - really serious contenders?

[Macy]

If you understand the situation clearly, chose not to vote, then you really don't deserve the chance to complain about the Government as much as those who voted against the status quo IMO.
Of those that voted, FF only got 41% of the vote.

Off topic - I don't think this Government has ever actually had 50.1% of the vote, including Greens, PD's and Independents - even with the comfortable majority it had at the start. The number of 3 and 4 seaters reduces the proportionality of our system.

[OneRedArmy]

Agreed. However the majority of people who voted, did not vote for FF.

Personally, although I'd love to see FF fall, I couldn't have voted for FG solely to see that happen. My vote went elsewhere.


Of those that voted, FF only got 41% of the vote.

Off topic - I don't think this Government has ever actually had 50.1% of the vote, including Greens, PD's and Independents - even with the comfortable majority it had at the start. The number of 3 and 4 seaters reduces the proportionality of our system.The Government is elected by those who vote for it and those who don't vote at all.

We can get very philosophical on this and get into what the value of a single vote is, but that statement IMO holds.

I don't think we're disagreeing btw.

[Fr Damo]

Off topic - I don't think this Government has ever actually had 50.1% of the vote, including Greens, PD's and Independents - even with the comfortable majority it had at the start. The number of 3 and 4 seaters reduces the proportionality of our system.


Could you replace this with any?

Gilmore was pressed and pressed by morning Ireland this morning with tepid argument on how smug labour must feel with this? So bloody what RTE? They also asked him to reiterate his stance re FF and the next election. Could we have a National Governemnt by default with the big three on 30% each by time the people vote?

[Macy]

1992 FF-Labour had nearly 60% of the vote. Obviously 30% of the vote doesn't necessarily mean an even spread of seats, but it would mean any two from three. FF and FG "in the national interest"?

[mypost]

Of those that voted, FF only got 41% of the vote.

Off topic - I don't think this Government has ever actually had 50.1% of the vote, including Greens, PD's and Independents - even with the comfortable majority it had at the start.

They don't need 50%, they simply need more than the combined FG-Lab vote. If it's less than the combined FG-Lab vote, FF are out of office.

Hasn't happened since 1982 though. FF won the most individual seats then, but the combined FG-Lab seats was more than FF.

[Mr A]

Irish Times Poll: (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0929/breaking75.html)


The figures for party support when the undecided voters are excluded, compared with the last Irish Times poll on June 11th last, were: Fianna Fáil, 24 per cent (up three points); Fine Gael, 24 per cent (down three points); Labour, 33 per cent (up four points); Sinn Féin, 8 per cent (down two points); Green Party, 2 per cent (down two points); and Independents/ Others, 9 per cent (no change).

[Spudulika]

Well, if you want to put your trust in vague policies, that's your lookout. Don't come crying to Foot.ie when they crystallise later though, because we'll point you back here and that'll be an end to the discussion for you.

TBH, I think if that's your accepted view of politics, you shouldn't be here in the first place. Your local newsstand will have a handy copy of the Star to occupy you.

Maybe it's too many rounds on your wheel, or the little pellets they feed you, but if I were to depend on net warriors for political direction I think we'd all have a problem. Maybe you don't understand how politics work, but no party is going to explicitly outline it's policies to the mass public, and there are a multitude of reasons for it. Policies that are set in stone are going to be used as a stick to beat you with, it's life, you need to adapt, change and know that in the public eye you'll be hammered for not achieving what you stated in the first place - New Labour's little book saw to that in the last UK election.

And your honesty, though valued, really has no place when it's used as an insult without even scant humour attached. TBF.

[Mr A]

That latest poll is a massive kick in the balls for FG. To find themselves level with FF is astonishing. FF may have to some extent benefited from the Dail Recess but it's still an absolutely shocking result.

I'm beginning to wonder if people are starting to view FG and FF as essentially the same at this stage.

[Dodge]

Which backs up my point that people are smarter than they're being given credit for. :D

[dahamsta]

Like I said Spudulika, if you trust a party that won't tell you there policies, that's your lookout. But that precludes your right to complain about them not implementing anything here.

You're everything I dislike about the Irish electorate. Accept mediocrity, complain afterwards, don't do anything about it.

[hula4]

is there any party that tells you their policies?? i think that is the point he is trying to make. i dont think their is, not that id trust any of the parties but i dont expect them to set their policies out in stone when they are not in power especially

[Dodge]

http://www.labour.ie/policy/

[Spudulika]

Like I said Spudulika, if you trust a party that won't tell you there policies, that's your lookout. But that precludes your right to complain about them not implementing anything here.

You're everything I dislike about the Irish electorate. Accept mediocrity, complain afterwards, don't do anything about it.

Hmm, interesting, rather than apologise for insulting a poster, you heap more stupidity onto yourself with another post. Now unless you didn't read my post clearly or are not so sure about politics, parties will not completely outline their policies as it is insane to do so. However one can always question and read deeper into what is presented. I can understand your insecurity on this and the need to use childish remarks and insults, however having worked in politics both in Ireland and abroad, I can safely say that the most carefully laid out plans for parties or individuals will always have to be changed with new circumstances and events. If one has laid out a set in stone policy which then has to be changed, then such a change will be used by critics, opposition or those who are unsure about how politics operate as a stick to beat them with. Likewise in the sporting world, a coach is never going to lay out his exact tactics in advance.

Again, your childish remarks really have no place on a proper CA forum, maybe slagging off fans of opposition clubs, but on more serious matter it really is a tad off.

[OneRedArmy]

http://www.labour.ie/policy/......was I the only one expecting a "404: page not found" error on that link?

[Spudulika]

http://www.labour.ie/policy/

Dodge, having read (I think you previously posted this) some of the policies, especially the "outline" on sport, they're exactly what I'm talking about, outlines, suggestions, that the other parties are also parrotting. However the one thing that (I think) would stand in Labour's favour, is that they'd carry through on more as they would look to make a change. Then again, most of the points they make are done anyway (reviewing the support systems for athletes after 2012, being one). It will be interesting if they do get into government and if they'll push on with their current tactics. Having watched Joan Burton in action last night I hope they do!

[Dodge]

......was I the only one expecting a "404: page not found" error on that link?

He hee.

spud - @wasn't me who posted before.

Policies are in there. Some specific. Some not. Sport isn't high on any party's agenda so none of them will publish anything specific.

Obviously I'm left leaning but I think its ludicrous that anybody would think Labour are the only party being vague about some of their intentions. Parties in opposition obviously don't trust Govt figures so it'd be fairly foolish to promise x, y and z without first checking to see how it can be paid for.

[dahamsta]

spudulika, I have no problem with you having a difference of opinion with me, and I understand that you might be offended that I dislike your attitudes intensely and don't think your opinions are the brightest. But I didn't call you stupid, and that's not an acceptable way of behaving in here. If you call me or anyone else on Foot.ie stupid again, I'll throw you out on your ear. Am I making myself fairly clear? Modify your behaviour or don't post in here again.

I have no further comment on your opinions, I've already stated my position. Twice.

[Macy]

It's all fine and dandy having a go at the Labour policies, but what good are Government "specific" policies when they have to feckin revisit them every few months (again overnight).

We're going to have a new 4 year plan for a Government that, at most possible, has 18 months to run. Give me a lack of specifics over nonsense specifics that can't be followed through on!

[Spudulika]

spudulika, I have no problem with you having a difference of opinion with me, and I understand that you might be offended that I dislike your attitudes intensely and don't think your opinions are the brightest. But I didn't call you stupid, and that's not an acceptable way of behaving in here. If you call me or anyone else on Foot.ie stupid again, I'll throw you out on your ear. Am I making myself fairly clear? Modify your behaviour or don't post in here again.

I have no further comment on your opinions, I've already stated my position. Twice.

You are baffling with the continuing insults and seem to think that smothering them in words makes it any more acceptable in adult discussion. So saying you think someone's ideas are not the brightest is actually offensive, though I do take back saying that you are heaping more stupidity onto yourself (I shouldn't have dropped a level to answer as it doesn't make for proper disucssion) and it certainly doesn't mean I would ever call you stupid, as well as being wrong it is impolite. I understand that you may see your own opinions as being the brightest of the posters, though it's extremely unfair to describe others ideas as not being the brightest and then threatening to throw them off the forum, wouldn't you agree? You're right to look for specifics, though having worked on the dark side for longer than I'd have liked, it's just not good pr for them. So it remains for anyone with a brain to look for answers and use their grey matter!

Macy, you're right, the government again have had to go back over their position on Anglo, even though there were flags raised about it way back when. I agree with you on them just getting on with the job instead of "goals" or "aims", though for some reason I can't see them doing anything. More ire was focussed on Biffo being under the weather instead of his absolute nonsense in the interview, he had no answers and it was like the famous (or infamous) Joe Jacob interview.

[Dodge]

http://twitter.com/PaulGogartyTD

Gogarty trying to get the soundbite "Gutless Gilmore" off the ground

If anything being attacked by Gogarty is a ringing endorsement. Fruitcake...

[dahamsta]

You are baffling with the continuing insults and seem to think that smothering them in words makes it any more acceptable in adult discussion.

Taking this to PM. Calm down man!