Election 2007: Prime Time Leaders Debate

**pete** · 18/05/2007, 10:08 AM

I don't doubt FG-Lab can delivery that much more than FF but I think FG-Labour government will be more accountable. When Ministers feck up they will be booted out. In the current setup its almost impossible for Bertie to sack his friends.

**Dodge** · 18/05/2007, 10:14 AM

Originally Posted by pete

I don't doubt FG-Lab can delivery that much more than FF but I think FG-Labour government will be more accountable. When Ministers feck up they will be booted out. In the current setup its almost impossible for Bertie to sack his friends.

Its where the PDs failed IMO. They had several chances of discussing Bertie's payments etc but left it until election to voice their concerns as they wanted te power more than anything. I honestly don't think Labour would back up FG the same way (and vice versa)

**galwayhoop** · 18/05/2007, 10:15 AM

Originally Posted by dahamsta

In my opinion the main difference is with the partner in government, and there's a pretty big difference between the core views of the PDs and Labour.

adam

agree totally with this. the coalition partner will represent the real change in the incoming government. the PD's have returned themselves almost totally with FF and do not represent the 'moral conscience' that they were supposed to!

Labour will be a change whether it is with FF or FG and voters should be looking down this avenue instead of believing that FG will be a change of major proportions.

**MyTown** · 18/05/2007, 10:45 AM

Well impressed with the comments here so far & that fellow Foot.ie members are engaged enough with the importance of actually voting next Thursday.

I've already nailed my colours to the mast on the Galway United link here, but for me the television highlight last night was the Green party political broadcast BEFORE the debate. I won't be voting Green this time and I think their ship has sailed, but I still thought it was good TV.

Over on TV3 at 8pm, Pat Rabbitte was being grilled

by Eddie Hobbs and Matt Cooper. I thought it was better coverage overall than the huge hyping the national broadcaster did for the main event.

reder · 18/05/2007, 10:58 AM

I watched last night's debate and the debate the night before from start to finish as I am totally undecided on how to vote in truth.

Last night I primarily wanted to see what Enda Kenny could/would be like as a the leader of this country. I was impressed with his opening 20 mins but as this progessed and the debate started to flow it became clear to me that he is a top-notch local politician but will never be Taoiseach material.

This contract is complete an utter non-sense. As many have correctly said, it will thrown out the window once the polls close and the parties come together to form a program for goverment. I would also have huge reservations about how well he could manage our economy if we encountered a recession of any kind.

Was nobody else completely dumbfounded by Gerry Adam's complete inability to discuss even the most basic figures relating to the economy here the night before. This seems to have been completely overlooked by the media. This party currently holds in or around 10% of the vote and its leader has a pathetic knowlege of our economy. SF are without the ultimate single issue party. It saddens me greatly that 10% are actually willing to give these people a vote. It really says so much about the people of Ireland nowadays.

**pete** · 18/05/2007, 11:11 AM

I think a lot people don't believe that Labour won't do a u-turn & bring FF back into government. Because of this if you want to ensure FF don't get back in the only choice is FG.

**galwayhoop** · 18/05/2007, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by reder

the ultimate single issue party.

and many would argue not very strong on that issue either

**Poor Student** · 18/05/2007, 11:52 AM

Originally Posted by pete

I think a lot people don't believe that Labour won't do a u-turn & bring FF back into government. Because of this if you want to ensure FF don't get back in the only choice is FG.

Well Pat Rabbitte has staken his leadership on an FG coalition. Are the likes of Brendan Howlin staying back in case they need to jetison Rabbitte and replace him to do the deal? The numbers would have to fall in such a way that FG/Lab/Green can't establish a majority and neither can FF/PD.

reder · 18/05/2007, 11:56 AM

Originally Posted by pete

I think a lot people don't believe that Labour won't do a u-turn & bring FF back into government. Because of this if you want to ensure FF don't get back in the only choice is FG.

I actually think that FF & Labour will end up as the next government. The other night Pat Rabbitte was very careful in not ruling out going into government with FF. I suspect that when the votes are counted and if the "prefered" coailition with FG & PD is not possible, Labour will be in government with FF.

**Erstwhile B�z** · 18/05/2007, 11:59 AM

Yep, they'll be in like Flynn. Rabbitte resigns the leadership to save the tiniest shred of dignity but gets a nice Cabinet seat nontheless. Howlin becomes T�naiste. My brother-in-law (ludicrously committed Labour activist) kills himself.

**pete** · 18/05/2007, 12:34 PM

Labour have campaigned on anti-government stance. I think going in with FF would be dishonest. Its not like they can claim dropping the PDs means its a completely new government.

**Poor Student** · 18/05/2007, 12:39 PM

Originally Posted by pete

Labour have campaigned on anti-government stance.

Pat Rabbitte has. Hasn't Sergant said he'd step down if the Greens went into coalition with FF?

**jebus** · 18/05/2007, 1:22 PM

Originally Posted by galwayhoop

US system is totally different. you vote for a president, you vote for your congres, and you vote for your senate. it is a three tier system. the president and the ruling party in the congress are not always the same. in our system the leader of the largest party in government (usually) becomes the taoiseach. giving the government much more stability as the leader and the ruling party are from the same party. The american system can become unstable as one party is in congress while the leader is from the opposition. the president of ireland is merely a figure head - a glorified ambasador.

oh yeah and that great system in the USA gave us George W instead of Clinton! Great change there then!! And because a president can only serve 2 terms you usually see some serious dodgy moves in the final weeks of their term. Grants, criminals exonarated, contract issued, promotions.....etc.

However bad our system is do not say that the Yank's is better. If you think a few builders at the Galway Races is treason then look at the donations to American Presidential campaigns from Drug Companies, Oil Co.'s, Weapons manufactures. Ever wonder why the Americans seem to need a War every decade, well look at who funded their election!!!! Has their been many Medical breakthroughs in recent memory or merely serious advancement in Drugs which contain or reduce symptoms - what was the last major disease that was cured with all of our major technology???? But I don't want to go on about all of that.

I fully understand the US model, and agree that in many ways its a shambles, all I said I agreed with is replacing the leader of the party/head of state every eight years is a good idea, as I feel said leader would have grown tired and stale in the job. Jesus I hardly needed a rant about the conspiracy of US politics

**Aberdonian Stu** · 18/05/2007, 1:26 PM

I'm not ruling out any possible combo government that can get the seats together, except an FF-FG coaliton.

That combo aside all the commitments X makes to not going into power with Y tend to disappear when basic post election arithmetic comes into play. Anyone remember 1992?

**Erstwhile B�z** · 18/05/2007, 2:29 PM

Indeed. When the results are declared in a close election the parties start interpreting them like so many Christian sects interpreting the Bible. "Will of the people" = "Word of God". The people of Ireland have clearly stated their preference for a Fianna F�il-PD-Worker's Party coalition with the support of four Independents...

**Calcio Jack** · 18/05/2007, 3:16 PM

Originally Posted by Erstwhile B�z

Indeed. When the results are declared in a close election the parties start interpreting them like so many Christian sects interpreting the Bible. "Will of the people" = "Word of God". The people of Ireland have clearly stated their preference for a Fianna F�il-PD-Worker's Party coalition with the support of four Independents...

Or Pat Rabbit as he puts aside his principles to save the electorate from themselves and goes into goverment with FF.... " forgive them lord , they know not what they do..."

or no doubt Bertie will be looking for inspiration from the Sermon on the Mount (apologies to Monty Python fans) " Blessed are the peacemakers....and builders for they shall inhherit the earth..."

**galwayhoop** · 18/05/2007, 4:58 PM

Originally Posted by jebus

I fully understand the US model, and agree that in many ways its a shambles, all I said I agreed with is replacing the leader of the party/head of state every eight years is a good idea, as I feel said leader would have grown tired and stale in the job. Jesus I hardly needed a rant about the conspiracy of US politics

Yeah I went off on one there alright

But while there is an arguement for the leader going stale there is the counter arguement of stability. For a football example you need look no further than Alex Ferguson who has consistently shuffled those around him and remained in 'Power' for nearly 2 decades.

Both cases have merit but I don't buy the 2 terms and your out as a truly great leader can be put out to stud early against the will of the people.

Anyway the reason I started on America was to illustrate that it is a different system where the Presidential Candidate is not in fact the Leader of the party but instead put forward by the Party members to stand as President. It would require a fundamental change in our political system to bring something similar into effect.

**dahamsta** · 19/05/2007, 6:00 PM

I don't think Labour can go into government with Fianna Failure with Rabbitte in charge now, not after his recent comments. I just hope he isn't being over-confident, there's plenty of time for the Failures to fight dirty yet. It could lose Rabbitte his leadership if it winds up an odd one.

adam

**pete** · 20/05/2007, 11:19 AM

Originally Posted by dahamsta

I don't think Labour can go into government with Fianna Failure with Rabbitte in charge now, not after his recent comments. I just hope he isn't being over-confident, there's plenty of time for the Failures to fight dirty yet. It could lose Rabbitte his leadership if it winds up an odd one.

Because people don't seem to believe Labours stance on coalition with FF it means FG are grabbing all the anti-government votes often at the expense of Labour.