|
Post by Young Ireland on Feb 26, 2016 23:14:09 GMT
The polls are now closed, and the Irish Times have released an exit poll:
FG 26.1% FF 22.9% Ind/Oth 16.1% SF 14.9% Lab 7.8% AAA-PBP 3.6% GP 3.5% Soc Dem 2.8% Renua 2.3%
This seems to be as good as it will get, as a FG-FF-Renua coalition to me seems to be the most viable option, which would command 51.3% of the vote. Given that such a government would be very wary of alienating any section of their support (and thus triggering another election), this to me would seem to indicate that the 8th Amendment is safe for now, if only for the short-term. The prospect of Enda being returned as Taoiseach is rather unappealing though...
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Feb 28, 2016 9:45:38 GMT
It looks as if I spoke too soon: Renua are having a disastrous election, with Lucinda losing her seat and none of the other TDs performing much better. I think that the long delay in forming the party probably did more harm than good in hindsight I think.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2016 13:06:42 GMT
The current results as of 104/158:
FG 19.62% FF 18.82% SF 8.86% IND 7.59% LAB 2.53% AAA-PBP 2.53% IND-ALL 2.53% SD 1.89% GP 1.26%
TBA 34.17%
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2016 13:29:21 GMT
Seems that Noel Rock has defeated Paul McAuliffe. I guess that's it for the 8th Amendment situation. Noel Rock supposedly took a neutral stance on it, but since he's part of Fine Gael who knows where it will lead? Not to hold Noel Rock responsible for what his party does or anything.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Feb 28, 2016 14:59:32 GMT
Seems that Noel Rock has defeated Paul McAuliffe. I guess that's it for the 8th Amendment situation. Noel Rock supposedly took a neutral stance on it, but since he's part of Fine Gael who knows where it will lead? Not to hold Noel Rock responsible for what his party does or anything. I'd personally disagree: Renua certainly have been disappointing, but the next government will be a lot less stable than the last one, so they would not want to alienate substantial portions of the electorate by holding a referendum on it, since it could collapse as a result. Also, there are a lot of positives that can be taken from this as well: The Healy-Raes, who are pro-life, won by a landslide in Kerry, while Michael Lowry did likewise in Tipperary. Meanwhile, Tim Jackson did extremely well for a first-time Independent, managing to save his expenses with over 3,500 votes in Donegal. I'd imagine that this will be the beginning rather than the end for him. The Catholic Democrats also outpolled DDI on average, with the latter having a stronger footprint nationwide. What I think that this election shows is that fusion conservatism does not work in Ireland, and that our focus ought to be on the rural constituencies where people are more likely to be pro-life, than in highly secularised urban constituencies where such a vote does not exist in large numbers.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Feb 28, 2016 15:14:22 GMT
One big downside though: Renua's defeat will almost scupper any chance of political reform during the lifetime of the next government. If anything, it will allow the party leaders to tighten their grip over the whip even further, since they will argue that otherwise they will not get elected...
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Feb 28, 2016 20:00:55 GMT
I'm not sure the rural constituencies are so promising as you think, Young Ireland. The voters there may be more pro-life but they are also more inclined to stick with their parties (and I don't think the urban-rural divide on these matters is as noticeable as in the 80s). Speaking as a pro-lifer and irrespective of considerations of conservatism or otherwise, the defeat of Renua is serious in that all the FG TDs who broke the whip on abortion are now gone (Peter Matthews, who went Independent not Renua, also lost, as did Fidelma HEaly-Eames, who was only a senator). This will discourage future rebellions on the issue and will support the perception that being pro-life doesn't win votes. Kate O'Connell ran a really savage campaign attacking Lucinda Creighton as out of touch with women on abortion, and it seems to have worked for FG. The demise of many of the most aggressive pro-abort Labour TDs may be a sign of hope, but the long-term position is still gloomy IMHO. We'll see what sort of government comes out of this. Enda, like his historical prototype HErod, has been eaten alive by worms, and now we have a Dail dominated by carnivorous worms. Pray for our country.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Feb 28, 2016 20:37:32 GMT
I'm not sure the rural constituencies are so promising as you think, Young Ireland. The voters there may be more pro-life but they are also more inclined to stick with their parties (and I don't think the urban-rural divide on these matters is as noticeable as in the 80s). Speaking as a pro-lifer and irrespective of considerations of conservatism or otherwise, the defeat of Renua is serious in that all the FG TDs who broke the whip on abortion are now gone (Peter Matthews, who went Independent not Renua, also lost, as did Fidelma HEaly-Eames, who was only a senator). This will discourage future rebellions on the issue and will support the perception that being pro-life doesn't win votes. Kate O'Connell ran a really savage campaign attacking Lucinda Creighton as out of touch with women on abortion, and it seems to have worked for FG. The demise of many of the most aggressive pro-abort Labour TDs may be a sign of hope, but the long-term position is still gloomy IMHO. We'll see what sort of government comes out of this. Enda, like his historical prototype HErod, has been eaten alive by worms, and now we have a Dail dominated by carnivorous worms. Pray for our country. Hibernicus, I'm not really sure that party loyalty is much of a factor in rural areas compared even to 2007. The recession has I think broken down a lot of barriers in that regard. The massive swing towards the Healy-Raes in North Kerry, where they had never run before (and the loss of Jimmy Deenihan's seat) would suggest that party loyalties are breaking down. Likewise, Tim Jackson in Donegal, who had no political experience whatsoever prior to this, came within one count of winning a seat. So I think that party loyalties are not a barrier to electing pro-life candidates. What is much more important in my view is professionalism: The campaigns of the candidates I mentioned were very slick and importantly, "family values" was only a part of their platforms. We need more candidates who are pro-life, not just pro-life candidates (not that this is synonymous with "family values" : increasingly it is not). Taking a broader view, I agree with your point on Renua. I also agree that our position is still gloomy, but also think that this result, Renua notwithstanding, gives us some bit of much-needed time and breathing space. Unfortunately, Enda may not be finished yet: FG are still the largest party, though it has certainly taken away much of his power.
|
|
|
Post by pugio on Feb 29, 2016 14:08:52 GMT
Renua are no big loss in and of themselves. They made it clear from the outset that (bizarrely) they had no position on abortion and that 'issues of conscience' would take a back seat to their real priority - trenchant economic liberalism. Fortunately there was not much appetite for that this time around.
I have a group of friends who get together every now and then and argue politics, including a very strong pro-lifer and a very strong pro-choicer, both of whom are clued-in people. On Friday last, the pro-lifer gave first preference to a candidate on the record in favour of appealing the 8th, while the pro-choicer gave first preference to a candidate who voted against the abortion act and is in favour of keeping the 8th. It's anecdotal of course, and I know from meeting people on doorsteps that there are exceptions, but I think that when push comes to shove most people won't cast their vote solely on the basis of abortion either way.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Feb 29, 2016 14:30:43 GMT
Renua are no big loss in and of themselves. They made it clear from the outset that (bizarrely) they had no position on abortion and that 'issues of conscience' would take a back seat to their real priority - trenchant economic liberalism. Fortunately there was not much appetite for that this time around. I have a group of friends who get together every now and then and argue politics, including a very strong pro-lifer and a very strong pro-choicer, both of whom are clued-in people. On Friday last, the pro-lifer gave first preference to a candidate on the record in favour of appealing the 8th, while the pro-choicer gave first preference to a candidate who voted against the abortion act and is in favour of keeping the 8th. It's anecdotal of course, and I know from meeting people on doorsteps that there are exceptions, but I think that when push comes to shove most people won't cast their vote solely on the basis of abortion either way. That's a very good point, Pugio, and reinforces the point that pro-life candidates need to develop a wider policy framework if they are to succeed. As for Renua, what were they thinking advocating such policies, given that we have already had plenty experience of neo-liberalism in the last decade: not much of it good.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Mar 2, 2016 20:15:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Mar 10, 2016 23:09:15 GMT
Another unusual admission by the IRISH TIMES, which has finally noticed the existence of a social-media mob of pro-abortion trolls who systematically harass pro-lifers online, as they have been doing for years. This unclean mob have been turning their attention to Jack Chambers, the newly-elected FF TD for Dublin West, whom they are sliming for having declared himself pro-life. Note BTW that the IT complains about this because Mr Chambers is a "moderate" on the subject, as if it would be perfectly Ok to slime him if he were an "extremist" as the IRISH TIMES defines extremism. Moderation has many crimes committed in its name; I suspect pro-lifers might keep a wary eye on Deputy Chambers - though he is entitled to the benefit of the doubt for now. Time will tell. www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/unsociable-media-comes-to-the-fore-in-election-campaign-1.2562218
|
|
|
Post by pugio on Mar 11, 2016 13:45:07 GMT
Harry McGee is a serious journalist so I wouldn't have expected him to be anything other than fair, regardless of what the IT's editorial line is regarding abortion.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Mar 13, 2016 18:15:47 GMT
I wasn't saying anything about the journalist - what surprises me is that this detail didn't perish on the editorial spike. The big issue about Catholic parties needing a wider policy platform is that there are a limited number available. Neo-liberalism and far-left Trotskyism both have a certain constituency and a certain vision of how Ireland should develop. Mid-century social Catholicism (internationally, not just in Ireland) was based on corporatist social protection, and the conditions which made that a viable agenda have changed. Insofar as it still exists, it has become a form of secularised bureaucratic absolutism. (There was a piece about Catholic euroscepticism in the CATHOLIC HERALD a few weeks ago which mentioned that although Robert Schumann's Euro-federalism was Catholic-inspired, he was afraid that if Catholicism failed to influence the institutions they would become aggressively anti-Catholic.) I am extremely wary of David Quinn's fusionist Catholic neoliberalism, because it seems to me to leave too many people behind. The way that Trumpism and Trot-ism appeal to the atomised and despairing shoUld remind us that even on the basis of expediency, not to mention morality, this can be very damaging. The sight of George Weigel and Co realising how little they speak for the blue-collars who are supporting Trump is a sobering experience. Ultra-republicanism and autarkic protectionism are dead ducks too, barring some sort of unimaginable cataclysm, which is not the sort of thing anyone ought to wish for.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Mar 13, 2016 19:52:20 GMT
I wasn't saying anything about the journalist - what surprises me is that this detail didn't perish on the editorial spike. The big issue about Catholic parties needing a wider policy platform is that there are a limited number available. Neo-liberalism and far-left Trotskyism both have a certain constituency and a certain vision of how Ireland should develop. Mid-century social Catholicism (internationally, not just in Ireland) was based on corporatist social protection, and the conditions which made that a viable agenda have changed. Insofar as it still exists, it has become a form of secularised bureaucratic absolutism. (There was a piece about Catholic euroscepticism in the CATHOLIC HERALD a few weeks ago which mentioned that although Robert Schumann's Euro-federalism was Catholic-inspired, he was afraid that if Catholicism failed to influence the institutions they would become aggressively anti-Catholic.) I am extremely wary of David Quinn's fusionist Catholic neoliberalism, because it seems to me to leave too many people behind. The way that Trumpism and Trot-ism appeal to the atomised and despairing shoUld remind us that even on the basis of expediency, not to mention morality, this can be very damaging. The sight of George Weigel and Co realising how little they speak for the blue-collars who are supporting Trump is a sobering experience. Ultra-republicanism and autarkic protectionism are dead ducks too, barring some sort of unimaginable cataclysm, which is not the sort of thing anyone ought to wish for. I too am rather leery towards neo-liberalism, even if I believe that there is greater scope for deregulation in certain areas, like the inter-city bus industry. The question is, as you say, what do we advocate? Given that both the far-left and far-right are both cynically using people's anger (think water charges) in different ways to push their own wider agenda, I would not co-operate with them as a matter of principle. I think that any new initiative, small as it would probably be, should try to hold the radical centre ground - that is, it has a set of principles which it would fearlessly uphold, but rejects extremism in both directions as counter-productive and dangerous. Renua could have been that party if they had not tried to emulate the PDs. There is clearly an appetite for change - many people in the west are fed up of the excessive centralisation of power in Dublin and the accompanying "Dublin first" economic policy, which has led to a housing crisis in the capital, while towns in the west like Buncrana, Ballinasloe and Carrick-on-Suir have effectively been left to fend for themselves. That's an area that any party could capitalise on with more than mere words. As for the Republicans, I feel for them, but perhaps if their attitude towards pro-lifers and other grassroots had been more than mere lip service, they wouldn't be in this mess. I agree that autarky has been tried and failed, while the problem with ultra-republicanism in my view is not its economics but that its proponents often advocate unilateral lethal force, which is very difficult to square with even the most liberal interpretations of Catholic just war theory IMHO.
|
|