Irish Politics

Hah, no one can afford a house.

Healthcare is basically an apartheid system (in its two tiers without balance).

Homelessness is through the fecking roof.

What a laugh.

Blame the opposition, too, (which won the election albeit by a small margin in terms of being largest party) because that's who is to blame here. fecking mentalists.

Youre listing big problems, that somehow the opposition couldnt muster a credible campaign against in terms of getting enough seats for a mandate to lead. If that isnt reason enough to look at how they messed up that opportunity, nothing is.

For all the huge indignation about housing, health, and homelessness - enough people still couldnt turn to sinn fein. why? we know the answer, and it isnt because of the 'media'.
 
Youre listing big problems, that somehow the opposition couldnt muster a credible campaign against in terms of getting enough seats for a mandate to lead. If that isnt reason enough to look at how they messed up that opportunity, nothing is.
Who did you vote for? I'm asking because you seem to hate SF. I'm not in any party but I transferred left. Same as in 2020. And for the same fecking reasons. Making a joke out of it is a disgrace imo or trying to rile people up. This country is facing its worst problems in over a generation and for generations. It's not a joke.
 
That's literally not true.

And the manifesto is there to read.

You're on the magic money tree line from the Corbyn election but these dynamics aren't the same (except each faced the weight of their respective state apparati against them). If you listen to the debates, weekly, you'd know SF have outlined very easy and simple (and sometimes complex) solutions for housing. Their shadow minister for housing wrote two books on the topic. He's been excellent for what it's worth. You're spouting shite.

And how is it populist? Housing crisis, healthcare crisis, and education inadequacies. Record homelessness. What is populist here? As in blatantly false for the sake of engagement?
Ok, stop deleting the part of my post you don't want to discuss. It's dishonest.

What is not true? That their costings are way off? It is absolutely true.

The manifesto is there to read, it is not costed appropriately.

They have the best man in the country on housing, but hos solutions are not costed appropriately. You literally cannot build a house in Dublin for yhe cost that they eant them sold at, excluding any profit in construction.

It's populist because they are promising solutions that they can't deliver, telling people what they want to hear. They can't deliver it and they know they'll never have to because they won't have a majority - they will either be in opposition again or else will have a coalition partner to blame.

The current crowd are appalling - I'd what SF were selling was remotely possible then this would be a landslide. It isn't, so it isn't. I don't see how that can be argued against.
 
Who did you vote for?

independent

just saw your post edit. words like 'hate' in it. youre clearly worked up and thats fine. but the fact is im just objectively looking at how a party could have collapsed that lead at a time of such frustration in the electorate. to turn around and blame the media is American Democrats level of denial
 
Last edited:
You literally cannot build a house in Dublin for yhe cost that they eant them sold at, excluding any profit in construction.
That really, really, really, depends. It is so nuanced in terms of how you build them, the land, and many more factors. But OK. I'd need to see your figures.
The manifesto is there to read, it is not costed appropriately.
Which parts? Housing. I'd need to see the figures and where the manifesto diverges.
It's populist because they are promising solutions that they can't deliver, telling people what they want to hear.
You say this, and maybe it's true, but maybe it's not. They weren't promising to build houses on the moon. It wasn't that radical a manifesto. And it can be done. As for what they want to hear? It's what people need to hear. And all state organs should have been amplifying it. It's a genuine crisis.
 
That really, really, really, depends. It is so nuanced in terms of how you build them, the land, and many more factors. But OK. I'd need to see your figures.

Which parts? Housing. I'd need to see the figures and where the manifesto diverges.

You say this, and maybe it's true, but maybe it's not. They weren't promising to build houses on the moon. It wasn't that radical a manifesto. And it can be done. As for what they want to hear? It's what people need to hear. And all state organs should have been amplifying it. It's a genuine crisis.
You deleted parts of my post again to help you make and shape your point. You're a dishonest poster, so I'm disengaging.

It's frustrating too because I'd say we aren't too far from what we want delivered, it's just you have trust in a party to deliver it that, in my view, are not trustworthy. I hope we get what we are looking for, regardless of who delivers it.
 
independent

just saw your post edit. words like 'hate' in it. youre clearly worked up and thats fine. but the fact is im just objectively looking at how a party could have collapsed that lead at a time of such frustration in the electorate. to turn around and blame the media is American Democrats level of denial
No, it isn't. The media in America supports that duopoly and was vehemently anti-Trump. Democrats losing had nothing to do with the media or hostility of the apparatus to its candidate. It was just that people preferred Trump. It's not the same landscape. SF are left of center. They were massacred in the press for things that did deserve to be reported, of course, but the asymmetry is there for any with eyes and ears.

You're saying SF supporters are throwing their toys out of the pram. My position is that they have won the election (in terms of largest party) once again. That's twice in a row against all odds.
 
You deleted parts of my post again to help you make and shape your point. You're a dishonest poster, so I'm disengaging.

It's frustrating too because I'd say we aren't too far from what we want delivered, it's just you have trust in a party to deliver it that, in my view, are not trustworthy. I hope we get what we are looking for, regardless of who delivers it.
I just asked you for figures to substantiate your claims. That is not dishonest. If you don't have them that's fine. I don't expect you to have them on hand.
 
There are various reasons why people have dropped SF, they've had numerous feck ups and their housing stuff doesn't sound like it's based in reality at all. They've also probably had a number of voters realise that SF weren't going to give them what they wanted in terms of migrants etc.
 
Ah lads, that tagline is a step too far. I'd only gotten a mildly insulting one recently as well.
 
There are various reasons why people have dropped SF, they've had numerous feck ups and their housing stuff doesn't sound like it's based in reality at all. They've also probably had a number of voters realise that SF weren't going to give them what they wanted in terms of migrants etc.
Their policies are not that different from 2020 and that manifesto (as I think this one was) was costed (as is normal enough) by the department of finance. There is always criticism of the manifestos after that but the costing is done. It's not pulled out of the ether. Whether you agree with it or not, and some do and some don't, is a different matter. But all three parties do have costed manifestos. That has been the case for as long as I can recall. Indeed, all major political parties get the civil service to cost their expenditures. It's insane to think they just pluck figures. They do for soundbites, because that's what an election tends to be, but those soundbites usually refer back to the manifestos.
 
Their policies are not that different from 2020 and that manifesto (as I think this one was) was costed (as is normal enough) by the department of finance. There is always criticism of the manifestos after that but the costing is done. It's not pulled out of the ether. Whether you agree with it or not, and some do and some don't, is a different matter. But all three parties do have costed manifestos. That has been the case for as long as I can recall. Indeed, all major political parties get the civil service to cost their expenditures. It's insane to think they just pluck figures. They do for soundbites, because that's what an election tends to be, but those soundbites usually refer back to the manifestos.
They are talking about housing policies that rely on loan products that don't even exist in the country, which no current banks would have any interest in selling. Everything based around a number that sounds good to people, instead of something that might actually work in 2024 Ireland.
 
Who's likely to be in government after this?
FF/FG.

SF could/should* get the first chance to form a government if the exit poll translates into seat majorities. I don't know how they do that. They can with FF and maybe Labour or Social Dems. But otherwise they're left with Labour/Social Dems/Greens (if that's even possible)/PBP/and the general left, center left, and centrist mixture which is not FF or FG. It's not impossible but it's hardly easy.

*If the margin of error breaks their way tomorrow when counting. It did underestimate them by 2% or more last time. If that's the case again then they should have a majority in seats. And the first attempt is theirs, though feck knows how they do it.

The caveat as mentioned is it's not so easy for FF/FG to simply get to the required number either. We'll have to wait and see but I don't see social dems going in with them. If Labour do again then they may as well disband as a party. Other than that, independents and the greens. But that might not be enough. The number is higher this year. Should be noted, it is much easier because they have two "blocks" ready made.
 
Last edited:
They are talking about housing policies that rely on loan products that don't even exist in the country, which no current banks would have any interest in selling. Everything based around a number that sounds good to people, instead of something that might actually work in 2024 Ireland.
They also said that they were speaking with banks with respect to financing and engaged in negotiations. It's not that difficult to make moves if you do assume government.
 
FF/FG.

SF could/should* get the first chance to form a government if the exit poll translates into seat majorities. I don't know how they do that. They can with FF and maybe Labour or Social Dems. But otherwise they're left with Labour/Social Dems/Greens (if that's even possible)/PBP/and the general left, center left, and centrist mixture which is not FF or FG. It's not impossible but it's hardly easy.

*If the margin of error breaks their way tomorrow when counting. It did underestimate them by 2% or more last time. If that's the case again then they should have a majority in seats. And the first attempt is theirs, though feck knows how they do it.

The caveat as mentioned is it's not so easy for FF/FG to simply get to the required number either. We'll have to wait and see but I don't see social dems going in with them. If Labour do again then they may as well disband as a party. Other than that, independents and the greens. But that might not be enough. The number is higher this year. Should be noted, it is much easier because they have two "blocks" ready made.
Cheers bud
 
Xgg6870KO.jpg
 
independent

just saw your post edit. words like 'hate' in it. youre clearly worked up and thats fine. but the fact is im just objectively looking at how a party could have collapsed that lead at a time of such frustration in the electorate. to turn around and blame the media is American Democrats level of denial
Which independents?
 
I think FFG are going to need two parties for an coalition this time. Just trying to do the calculus.

The Soc Dems will be wiped out in the next election just as the Greens suffered losses here (not wiped out but halved) and as Labour were annihilated in 2015. The lesson is simple: being a minority partner in government always means you get shafted. I don't know a single example where this has not been the case. You get a sliver of what you campaigned on through and then the people who elected you, earnestly, as on option other than FFG, despise you for it. And rightly so imo.
 
independent

just saw your post edit. words like 'hate' in it. youre clearly worked up and thats fine. but the fact is im just objectively looking at how a party could have collapsed that lead at a time of such frustration in the electorate. to turn around and blame the media is American Democrats level of denial
Very good point
 
I know a FF T.D who would off the record 100% prefer a government with Soc Dems, Greens, and Labour. He still knows I wouldn't vote for him even if I could.
 
What happened to your SDP flirtation?
No candidates here. Also not angry enough to be decent opposition. That said from reading here you just get called populist for actually highlighting the problems.




Overall the expected outcome. I did secretly hope the electorate would do something great and unexpected.

Calling Sinn Fein populist and accusing them of not doing the costings is just so lazy and cliched. Nobody mentions costings with any other party, but suddenly everyone knows how the department of finance works. It's literally the same thing said to every left wing party in western democracies in modern times. Even the democrats fill that role in the US.

As for uninspiring leadership being the reason SF didn't get more votes. She is streets ahead of the her two direct opponents.

I still think that on the ground, the emergence of the right ate into their base, which again is very common in western democracies.

Ireland is not ready for change. Sometimes it's about moments and SF definitely missed theirs last time out. Maybe people did just see it as a protest vote last time but were glad they didn't get in.

If the trends in other countries are followed we will see a far right growth as anyone socialist is constantly attacked. Even in the UK Corbyn was set upon the way Keir isn't.

People are actually scared of change and conservative at heart.
 
Youre listing big problems, that somehow the opposition couldnt muster a credible campaign against in terms of getting enough seats for a mandate to lead. If that isnt reason enough to look at how they messed up that opportunity, nothing is.

For all the huge indignation about housing, health, and homelessness - enough people still couldnt turn to sinn fein. why? we know the answer, and it isnt because of the 'media'.

Listing big problems is what you do in opposition. People have short memories. 20+ years ago we had literally no opposition and neither party really attacked the other because they were identical.

Sinn Fein's presence for all their supposed flaws are the one of the best and most important thing to happen to our democracy since it's birth. We now at least have an actual opposition. And if ye all think that isn't rattling the previously cosy little establishment to quite a large degree then you're being naive.

Martin basically exonerated the British in a rush to blame Sinn Fein on the Troubles the other day.
 
The more things seem to change .. New
As it stands the exit polls are as predicted and expected. It's quite interesting that it's so close to the pre election polls. We are who we are and that's quite a conservative bunch. Vote for no change and complain about for 5 years. Phew, back to normal.
 
As it stands the exit polls are as predicted and expected. It's quite interesting that it's so similar. We are who we are and that's quite a conservative bunch. Vote for no change and complain about for 5 years. Phew, back to normal.
This is the problem, myself and a lad in his late 40s in work were agreeing that the government are shit, but the second you mention the other options, it’s you know there not that bad, the economy is good, {even though without yank companies Ireland is in the red for the last 17 years}.
 
independent

just saw your post edit. words like 'hate' in it. youre clearly worked up and thats fine. but the fact is im just objectively looking at how a party could have collapsed that lead at a time of such frustration in the electorate. to turn around and blame the media is American Democrats level of denial
There is a media effect though. The constant haranguing does land, especially with people who don't fully engage, and that's most people. And that's not an attack on them, it's natural for so many reasons.

The way anyone on the left is spoken to in RTE especially is quite disgraceful and always has been.

SF and the left are being held to a higher standard in the discourse and that's fine to a degree as it's all quite new, but the idea that the left won't be attacked by the stakeholders in any country is just wrong. The commercial media will rarely back any sort of left wing shift, it's not in their owners interests. That's obvious surely?

The degree of the effect is the only thing up for debate or are we saying we suddenly have a media above reproach who are being impartial and just want what's best for everyone?

The comparison to the Dems is wrong on a few levels. History mainly. That and their media backing. Not many parties are formed and then form a government in established two party democracies within a handful of elections. I can't think of one example, so to say Sinn Fein collapsed, as others have, is quite disingenuous or poorly informed.

The word collapse is loaded as hell. It's not like they were cruising and imploded, (not only were Sinn Fein never in power, the Dems were literally in office). They are a party new to the political landscape and had one pretty much unexpected (even to them) spike of popularity, that is now used as a stick to beat them with.

The level of change required obviously takes a lot more, and think that onus is across society. Expecting SF or anyone to arrive as some Messiah and fix all of our ills with no risk or gamble just isn't going to happen, ever.

So we trundle on with worsening health and housing.
 
This is the problem, myself and a lad in his late 40s in work were agreeing that the government are shit, but the second you mention the other options, it’s you know there not that bad, the economy is good, {even though without yank companies Ireland is in the red for the last 17 years}.

Yeah, it's quite shocking that people don't see that things like leaving health and housing to the private sector is policy and not an inevitability.
 
.

The current crowd are appalling - I'd what SF were selling was remotely possible then this would be a landslide. It isn't, so it isn't. I don't see how that can be argued against.

That's not true. And can be argued against by precedent. It's pretty much impossible for a third party to split an established two party system in western country with a stable economy with a landslide. As far as I know it's never happened anywhere ever.

Change is slow and maybe it should be to a degree. Maybe not as slow as here though. As a new democracy our stability in the last 100 years, even with partition has been fairly unique and admirable overall. But it took until scarily recently to end the idea of Civil War politics. Thankfully that phrase is gone. So while we can ask SF to be better, we don't rush to change.
 
No real change.
Its been telegraphed for a while and expected sadly. FFG are still bleeding support, so its progress. Sinn Fein / PBP and Labour / Greens / Soc Dems getting a similar percentage of votes as the pair of them would have been completely unimaginable 20 years ago.
Its still heading in only one direction. They wont get a 14billion windfall to throw at voters a month before the election every time.
 
Just for the record, I'm a member of two political parties, neither of which are SF. I just see them as a great opportunity and more than deserving of a chance, as they may instigate much needed change.
 
Its been telegraphed for a while and expected sadly. FFG are still bleeding support, so its progress. Sinn Fein / PBP and Labour / Greens / Soc Dems getting a similar percentage of votes as the pair of them would have been completely unimaginable 20 years ago.
Its still heading in only one direction. They wont get a 14billion windfall to throw at voters a month before the election every time.

Yeah, a slow process. I think that I read somewhere that the combined FFFG vote has been in constant decline for over 75 years. I'll dig it up. Even before SF there was a tiny but steady decrease. Our great grandchildren might see change, if the planet doesn't combust first.
 
Yeah, a slow process. I think that I read somewhere that the combined FFFG vote has been in constant decline for over 75 years. I'll dig it up. Even before SF there was a tiny but steady decrease. Our great grandchildren might see change, if the planet doesn't combust first.
Its 8% since last election isn't it? Its not that small.
I dont think they'll have an easy time forming a coalition anyway. Even with every independent i cant see them having the numbers. Martin has had a hissy fit with aontu so they're out. SF are out. PBP have ruled themselves out.
Labour, Greens and Social Democrats not being completely stupid would go a long way. Greens providing a handy reminder of the impact of going into coalition with them.
 
Its 8% since last election isn't it? Its not that small.
I dont think they'll have an easy time forming a coalition anyway. Even with every independent i cant see them having the numbers. Martin has had a hissy fit with aontu so they're out. SF are out. PBP have ruled themselves out.
Labour, Greens and Social Democrats not being completely stupid would go a long way. Greens providing a handy reminder of the impact of going into coalition with them.
Oh yeah, since SF it has quickened alright! But the drop from 2020 is predicted at 3%?

A merger is inevitable but not until the current shit show of coalitions has run itself into the ground.

Your last paragraph is spot on.

I suppose the best thing is that the voters who abandoned SF didn't return to FFFG. Ignoring the fact that some of them have gone to worse parties.

I still think it's much healthier in terms of Democracy to have FFFG in office together instead of one of them pretending to be in opposition. So onwards and upwards.
 
No, it isn't. The media in America supports that duopoly and was vehemently anti-Trump. Democrats losing had nothing to do with the media or hostility of the apparatus to its candidate. It was just that people preferred Trump. It's not the same landscape. SF are left of center. They were massacred in the press for things that did deserve to be reported, of course, but the asymmetry is there for any with eyes and ears.

You're saying SF supporters are throwing their toys out of the pram. My position is that they have won the election (in terms of largest party) once again. That's twice in a row against all odds.

There is a media effect though. The constant haranguing does land, especially with people who don't fully engage, and that's most people. And that's not an attack on them, it's natural for so many reasons.

The way anyone on the left is spoken to in RTE especially is quite disgraceful and always has been.

SF and the left are being held to a higher standard in the discourse and that's fine to a degree as it's all quite new, but the idea that the left won't be attacked by the stakeholders in any country is just wrong. The commercial media will rarely back any sort of left wing shift, it's not in their owners interests. That's obvious surely?

The degree of the effect is the only thing up for debate or are we saying we suddenly have a media above reproach who are being impartial and just want what's best for everyone?

The comparison to the Dems is wrong on a few levels. History mainly. That and their media backing. Not many parties are formed and then form a government in established two party democracies within a handful of elections. I can't think of one example, so to say Sinn Fein collapsed, as others have, is quite disingenuous or poorly informed.

The word collapse is loaded as hell. It's not like they were cruising and imploded, (not only were Sinn Fein never in power, the Dems were literally in office). They are a party new to the political landscape and had one pretty much unexpected (even to them) spike of popularity, that is now used as a stick to beat them with.

The level of change required obviously takes a lot more, and think that onus is across society. Expecting SF or anyone to arrive as some Messiah and fix all of our ills with no risk or gamble just isn't going to happen, ever.

So we trundle on with worsening health and housing.

Sorry to both of you - I shouldnt have posted in current events, its something I actively try to avoid and want to keep football and engagement with it as a sporting outlet, so I'm not going to stay in Current Events any longer - that's not a reflection on either poster, I just shouldnt have entered at all.

My best summation on points here, this being my opinion only:

Media- A huge percentage of the electorate seem to believe the media is biased against them. All the further-right lunatics think RTE is some sort of extreme left flag waving cess pit. And then the further left seem to see it as some sort of cynical men in suits brigade. There is huge amounts of confirmation bias involved, you need only see peoples thoughts during a TV debate - Sinn Fein supporters actively believing moderators are being harder and interrupting Mary Lou, non sinn-feiners believing the exact opposite. In a 100 year history, Im sure the 2 largest parties are in some way better connected, but I really do think one has to be living in a world of real confirmation bias to think there is any notable, active bias. It is in danger of becoming active delusion, where we all end up like the far-right, shouting about paedophiles in a Dail basement.

Sinn Fein 'collapse' - this word seems to have irritated. At almost any point in the course of the last Dail, had the election been held, Sinn Fein wouldnt just have been the 'biggest party' (0.5% lead in an exit poll), they would have comfortably been the biggest party. Their polling numbers at one point not long ago were huge. And in that time, the government has hardly rallied - you each point out enormous failures. If we're not going to turn around and say that there has been an enormous lost opportunity for Sinn Fein, then thats where we're actually being disingenous. How they have managed to go from such resounding polling, against the likes of McEntee and some of the most unpopular individuals to occupy high positions, and still not be close to forming a government, needs to be looked at. My own opinion is that they sacrificed their opportunity in the name of one, single issue. A final point on the 'largest party' thing. On the one hand Sinn Fein seem to want to say that FFFG are just an interchangable cosy cabal - if that's the case, then this FFFG single party is by far and away the largest party. Sinn Fein cant just lump them together as one when its convenient, then split them when it comes to polls. The sitting government has likely got about 44% of first preference votes.

The Left - Ireland is a left wing country. To look at things that have occurred under current government, and come to any conclusion other than them being left wing would be bizarre. We are generally a progressive country, and the 2 largest parties hold left or left-leaning stances on almost every issue. What you seem to want (or some people rather than you specifically) is a more-left government. Okay, that's a fair desire. So then we turn and look at who is there. Sinn Fein - getting a sizable number of votes. And who? Boyd Barrett? Paul Murphy? Bacik and Labour? What the further left never seems to recognise is that they live in an echo chamber as much as they far right lunatics do. Go to most of rural Ireland and it doesn't take long to see how hopelessly out of touch the alternative left are. For the overwhelming majority of this country, these characters are just as unvotable as the right wing nuts. But the left never seem to want to engage with this idea - they seem to project that they know best and if only the stupid electorate would give them a chance they'd prove them right. There is a delusion among the alternative left about what's important to people, and I don't expect they will ever ever have the humility to take stock of why they are unpopular.

Lastly on the left - one success has been the seemingly good return from SD. But like the Greens, I suspect that should Cairns see it as a chance to implement any bit of influence, rather than stay on the sidelines, they will be committing political suicide by forming a government with FFFG, because deep down the alternative left are professional, masters of victimhood. They sustain themselves on the idea of being oppressed and would rather stay there, cheering on Boyd Barrets deranged howling, than see incremental growth. The reason FFFG are still comfrtable despite underperforming, is because the left will continue to eat itself.

In any case, that really is just the opinion of one fool on the internet. Should we be in a social setting or pub, Id happily get into it all and I bet we actually agree on about 95% of things. But as I said, Im going to tap out of current events, Ive written this as I didnt want to be dismissive of your posts.
 
That's not true. And can be argued against by precedent. It's pretty much impossible for a third party to split an established two party system in western country with a stable economy with a landslide. As far as I know it's never happened anywhere ever.

Change is slow and maybe it should be to a degree. Maybe not as slow as here though. As a new democracy our stability in the last 100 years, even with partition has been fairly unique and admirable overall. But it took until scarily recently to end the idea of Civil War politics. Thankfully that phrase is gone. So while we can ask SF to be better, we don't rush to change.
I don't disagree with your first paragraph, but it does completely ignore context. Yes precedent shows that it is bordering on impossible to break a two party system, but in the context of SF having most votes in the last election and thereby having a huge platform to build on, their performance has been disappointing. Again, I'm not sure how that can be argued against.

And the comparisons with the dems are lazy, but SF supporters do make those lazy comparisons easy. Initial reaction on this thread is to blame media, now you're talking as though the people are to blame - youve mentioned not ready for change, 5 more years of complaining but vote the same. All maybe true, but mirroring the dems, right?

SF need to reflect on themselves, not blaming others. Oddly, I think it's something they are relatively good at (unlike the dems).
 
All maybe true, but mirroring the dems, right?
No. Not even remotely. The Dems are not a left wing party in any sense. There is no mirror to be had. They also cannot blame the media for being against them when much of the media landscape is in their favour. The Democrats are as establishment as establishment gets in the US. There isn't a comparison to be had.