- Oct 28, 2004
Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please us viua the Contact us link in the footer.
One thing I'm not sure you take into account is the effect of FF running too many candidates.
For example, in Cork East, if FF run two and get 18%, split the vote 10%-8% and only achieve a 65% internal transfer rate, they could fall short of FG2 if FG get their vote management bang on.
Possibly, they certainly poll better in RedC for some reason they averaged 7% (up to 8%) in them in the run up to the last GE, whereas MRBI , Lansdowne and Millward/Brown were all more accurate at 5 or 6% (they got 4.7%). Tommy O'Brien presumably would say this was RedC bing right, and the methodology of the others and the Dept of Local Govt using "flawed methodology"...!In reality the polls overstate the Green vote consistently because of its concentration in the younger age groups which then do not actually show up to vote in anything like the numbers of older voters. Consequently I reckon that in reality even at 4% in the poll they will actually return no seat.
From a SF point of view this is pretty encouraging. When you consider that SF are currently on 4 this is a good increase in percentage terms. It allows for a fresh intake of TDs, and, importantly, the formation of a technical group, without being such a large increase that it is too hard for the party to integrate with the existing team. The number (a rise of 3) is a sustainable rise - allowing SF to be able to devote the resources to put down roots in each of the constituencies concerned. Steady long term organic increases are better than the kind of unsustainable increases that other parties have achieved (in their cases by FF voters lending their vote on a temporary basis).