I think they'll be tempted to play the responsible card until the next budget and see if FF will support it. Events permitting, of course.This is all in the realm of 'meh', until an election campaign begins and people engage and leaders and their policies are put under focus. Look how quickly FG's campaign collapsed, last time out.
That said, FG will rightly be delighted with this and it might influence the timing of an election.
If you don't understand the past, then you won't have a hope of understanding the present or what happens in the future. Then again, you could always become a political correspondent.Only on p.ie could a thread about an opinion poll in 2018 descend into a vicious fistfight about the 2002 GE.
The amount of people on here who only ever look backwards is quite frightening.
Fine. So by that logic FG won the 2016 election - under Kenny.Unless your memory is failing, FF/PDs/Greens were in government after the 2007 GE. As that PD Mary Harney said, even the worst day in government is better than the best day in opposition. You can talk of winning seats and all that but FG didn't win the election and didn't get into government.
Why?It was a quote from a gombeen school teacher/TD who was out of touch and out of time.
So every person's "era" is their early 20s? This is gas stuff.It sounded like something from the early 1970s (Kenny's era) but massively out of place in 2007.
And this shows yet again just how spectacularly clueless you are about politics. Nobody in FG thought they had the 2007 election won, at any stage, everyone knew it'd be a cliffhanger. And their internal polling showed them that too. But Rule 1 of politics when you're out canvassing and campaigning is to be optimistic about your chances - not complacent, but optimistic - because if you're not it can disillusion your supporters and cause them not to turn out, or cause your members and campaigners not to put in that final push - "sure if the party leader's saying we're in trouble, we must be truly ****ed", etc. That's why you had Labour TDs talking up their prospects in some seats which they ultimately didn't win in 2016, but of course you're too clueless about politics to see that, so you take them at face value.It also summed up the clueless anticipation of Bluebots in thinking that they had the election won.
No, it wouldn't. And I know a lot more about FG than you.Kenny was Flannery's creature. Once Kenny thought he could do it all himself, things started going wrong. Would that be a fair assessment?
:roll: It's a bit rich for someone who thinks third place out of twelve is "coming last" to describe anyone else as an idiot. Let's face it, if Kenny commiserated with some Irish athlete who came third in a race of 12 people for "coming last", you'd be first out of the traps on here to call him an idiot. But your own posts show that that is what YOU think. Idiot doesn't even begin to go there, does it? You've also obviously never canvassed or been at any public appearance around Kenny if you think he wasn't tech-savvy or familiar with how to use modern media.There you go again thinking that the perpetually dimwitted media knows everything. They don't. There was a shift away from the cult of the party in Irish politics to the cult of the leader in the late 1990s. It accelerated with Ahern. The problem was that your village idiot Kenny was a great politician for the 19th century but he was completely out of his depth in an environment dominated by televison and the Internet.
How about the 2011 debates? Same guy.Once people got a close look, as with that 2007 GE leaders debate, they saw Kenny's limitations.
But how exactly is a debate scored? It's not like there's a scorebox in the corner of the screen ticking up points for each candidate in a debate, is there? Who "won" a debate is entirely a matter of opinion, and you're so vain that you think your opinion is the only one that matters. You don't like Kenny, we get that. You didn't like him before the 2007 debate, and you didn't like him after it. But by no stretch of the imagination does that mean he lost it, or drew it, or won it. If you can't see that, then your level of self-regard is really off the charts. So much so that you continually refuse to look at the exit poll data from 2007, which shows that the debate had zero impact on the result. I repeat, from that exit poll - of voters who were undecided and made up their minds after the debate, those who saw the debate were LESS LIKELY to vote for FF than those who didn't. Got it?(He lost that debate too.)
Ethics had nothing to do with it. The FG organisation was dying on its feet, till Kenny revived it.Yes. But they were by people in the media rather than people who understood what was happening. The PDs were ethically FF moreso than FG.
No it won't. Abortion will not be a significant driver of general election votes. You might think otherwise, so let's hear your argument, which logically will have to include a revival in Labour support. But you're so biased against Labour that you'll find an excuse not to say that.And the referendum is about to split a lot of that demographic support base. Demographics change.
And neither did they - but of course they were talking themselves up. This shows again how monumentally ignorant you are of the basics of politics. Take your blinkers off, just for once, and THINK - what does it do for a Labour TD who's in a dogfight to cling onto his seat if his party leader goes on the radio or TV and says about him "yeah, it looks like he's gone, alright". Or if that Labour TD himself is asked about his prospects and says "yeah, I'm toast". What happens to his campaign team? What happens to the people who are out day and night trying to get him elected? What about the voters who were gonna vote for him but have now heard him effectively say a vote for himself is a wasted vote? As I said, you really are spectacularly, and I mean spectacularly, clueless about the basics of politics. Unfortunately most activists who used to post on this site have now left, if they hadn't you'd be ridiculed on here on a daily basis for the nonsense you post.Well they were talking themselves up as their electoral demolition loomed. As you know, I didn't expect them to get 15 seats.
I see you don't understand tenses, either. I asked you how FG are currently "FF's bitch"? See?FG did not get enough seats to form a government that had a majority over the opposition. It had to do a deal with FF to govern.
So how do you explain Kenny's decline from being an aging wunderkind from the 1970s who was going to fix everything to being an incompentent who couldn't open his mouth without making a gaff?No, it wouldn't. And I know a lot more about FG than you.
The aim of elections is to get seats. Hayes crawled into the third and last seat after the presstitutes assured people that he was going to lead the poll. Didn't an SFer actually lead the poll?:roll: It's a bit rich for someone who thinks third place out of twelve is "coming last" to describe anyone else as an idiot.
Remember the "words" fiasco? The spin to present Kenny as "the chairman of the board" failed when he turned out to be, in media terms, as thick as two short planks when a camera was pointed at him. He couldn't think on his feet and in a TV dominated news cycle, that's a fatal flaw. He was even outmanoeuvered by a flower pot. (Didn't some of you FGers claim that it had been planted by Sinn Fein? ) FG had to work hard to keep Kenny from making gaffs in the media.You've also obviously never canvassed or been at any public appearance around Kenny if you think he wasn't tech-savvy or familiar with how to use modern media.
Not quite. There was a hatred for FF that wasn't there in the 2007 GE and the 2007 leaders debate was really a head to head debate with Ahern. What you and most of the presstitutes didn't realise was that Kenny's performance in the 2007 debate gave people that moment of pause. That is a fatal hesitation that makes people question whether they are doing the right thing in voting for a party or candidate.How about the 2011 debates? Same guy.
One watches how the candidates act and react. The body language, (non-verbal communication) is extremely important and can influence people moreso than the spoken arguments. One of the HRC/Trump debates is a classic example of how people watching the NVC got things right and HRC supporters got things massively wrong. This is what you and most of the the presstitutes did not understand at the time. You thought that Kenny won because you are an FG supporter.But how exactly is a debate scored? It's not like there's a scorebox in the corner of the screen ticking up points for each candidate in a debate, is there? Who "won" a debate is entirely a matter of opinion, and you're so vain that you think your opinion is the only one that matters.
He was FF's best asset - its "Get Out of Hell Free" card. FG was in a sitation where it needed to reinvent itself as a party for the 21st century and a party for which the electorate should vote as a majority government. It needed to be able to use Social Media and TV to push its candidates. Instead, FG hired some bargain basement Social Media guru who is currently serving time in the US. Even FG's website got hacked because the software, according to reports, used default passwords. FG got nailed for buying Facebook "likes" from India and Pakistan. The electoral battlefield had changed and become more complex and FG was cycling into battle while SF and FF were being helicoptered in. As for Labour and its "Ashbourne Annie", it made FG look almost competent.You don't like Kenny, we get that. You didn't like him before the 2007 debate, and you didn't like him after it.
That moment of pause, that fatal hesitation created in the minds of voters was enough. Kenny lost the debate. Ahern may have appeared as a guttersnipe but Kenny looked incompetent. The electorate will forgive a politician if he appears to be a comptent guttersnipe but it will not tolerate an incompetent.But by no stretch of the imagination does that mean he lost it, or drew it, or won it.
You still don't understand what happened.So much so that you continually refuse to look at the exit poll data from 2007, which shows that the debate had zero impact on the result. I repeat, from that exit poll - of voters who were undecided and made up their minds after the debate, those who saw the debate were LESS LIKELY to vote for FF than those who didn't. Got it?
Ethics had everything to do with the PDs and its demise. It was ethically Fianna Fail and the gombeens even appointed Harney (another school teacher/TD gombeen as the successor to O'Malley instead of a populist like Cox). Then it elected McDowell, a manager rather than a leader. After electoral obliteration, it appointed yet another school teacher/TD to lead the PDs in to oblivion. McDowell, an FGer in an FFer party, was an anomaly. The cull of the FG gombeens in 2002 was a wonderful opportunity for FG to reinvent itself. Instead, Kenny turned it back into the gombeenarchy.Ethics had nothing to do with it. The FG organisation was dying on its feet, till Kenny revived it.
Labour is at at 3% core. The real opponent for FG in this is Sinn Fein. It has a middle class female leader who is a formidable media performer and Mary Lou McDonald is probably, for female voters, going to lead the debate on the referendum. FF seems to realise the threat that SF poses and this is partially, I think, behind Martin's cynical pro-choice conversion. Unless Martin is replaced by Lisa Chambers as the leader of FF's campaign on the referendum, it will cause more damage to FF in the polls. Vardkar is useless for this campaign as he is a gay man without children. He'll get an easy time from the presstitutes but the real battle will be vicious and fought elsewhere. FG and FF are badly positioned and SF will take every advantage of this indecision to attract the younger, pro-choice demographics.No it won't. Abortion will not be a significant driver of general election votes. You might think otherwise, so let's hear your argument, which logically will have to include a revival in Labour support. But you're so biased against Labour that you'll find an excuse not to say that.
Labour was infiltrated by Stickies pension tourists. They didn't give a damn about Labour or the Working Classes. They tried to make the party into Middle Class virtue signalling Social Justice Warriors. And the electorate just didn't buy it. The traditional Labour vote in the Working Class demographics shifted and, most lethally, the floating vote upon which Labour depended shifted and did not come back. Proper leadership, instead of that Stalinist democratic centralism shíte, could have saved the Labour party. Not going into government in 2011 could have saved the Labour party. But it was being run by Stickies pension tourists and their greed for ministerial salaries and pensions screwed Labour. You FGers just took advantage of the chumps knowing that they'd be the sacrificial victim when it came to the next election.And neither did they - but of course they were talking themselves up. This shows again how monumentally ignorant you are of the basics of politics. Take your blinkers off, just for once, and THINK - what does it do for a Labour TD who's in a dogfight to cling onto his seat if his party leader goes on the radio or TV and says about him "yeah, it looks like he's gone, alright".
I told you how the 2007 GE was going to turn out and which parties were going to be in government after it. I told you that Brexit would pass and that Trump was likely to be POTUS. I also stated what was about to happen in the 2016 GE. As for the "basics of politics", to Hell with them. You and all presstitutes wander around with your head up your arses recycling the same press releases but when someone explains what is about to happen, in simple terms, you refuse to accept it and get gutted in the elections. You then wander around making excuses for why your genius advisors and presstitutes didn't get things right while you sit down and hammer out confidence and supply agreements with Fianna Fail because you didn't get enough seats to govern.As I said, you really are spectacularly, and I mean spectacularly, clueless about the basics of politics.
If I had claimed that FG would have gotten 60 seats and everything would have gone well for FG and Labour, I would deserve to be ridiculed. FG were gutted. FF were, as I said, resurrected and Labour were demolished. FG had to agree a confidence and supply deal with FF to govern. That's not a victory. And the seeds of that defeat were sowed in 2002 with your election of Kenny and failure to make FG a party for the 21st century. Fianna Fail should offer your village idiot Kenny life membership for resurrecting it.Unfortunately most activists who used to post on this site have now left, if they hadn't you'd be ridiculed on here on a daily basis for the nonsense you post.
So...Varadkar is the most popular Taoiseach....since Bertie Ahern.
Taoiseach's approval rating is highest since Bertie Ahern...
Are there worrying parallels between the two men?
Both have been accused of being more about style than substance.
Both have focused on building a strong economy so that - sometime later, they promised they would focus on society.
Both are prone to mangling the truth.
So far only Ahern led his country over the edge at the end of an artificial bubble.
Varadkar has spent more time on his 'Image' than any other Taoiseach than I can recall
- in the Age of Social Media
- that has paid off handsomely...
Talking of housing:Consumer confidence is at its highest in two years despite the majority of householders expecting property prices and rents to rise further in the next year, writes Pádraig Hoare.
The Bank of Irelands latest economic pulse says that the majority of Dublin households expect house prices and rents to increase in the next year, with the same going for households outside of the capital.
The Housing Agency has published the 2017 social housing waiting list. 85,799 households on the list, which is, incredibly, down 6% from 2016. @EOBroin said in Nov-17 there were 99,555 on the list, a 9% increase.
Who do you believe?