# Martin McGuiness for President?



## Liamos (19 Sep 2011)

Anybody got a problem with Martin McGuiness potentially becoming the next President of Ireland?

Personally I would be uncomfortable with the idea of the ex chief of staff of the IRA as Head of State. I know the counter arguments;

1) that he has worked for peace for the last 20 years;
2) if SF are in power in the North, why not here?
3) Wasn't De Valera in the old IRA?

Maybe its the fact that its still quite recently that the IRA were blowing up innocent. Also there was the small matter of the Northern Bank robbery. (This may explain why he can afford to only take the average industrial wage!).


----------



## Shawady (19 Sep 2011)

I think point number 2 is the most important one IMO.
The main parties in the republic (particularly FF) are forever patting themselves on the back for their role in the peace process. This process by it's nature means that people from paramilitary backgrounds will end up in government, yet they are uneasy about SF in government down here.
I think there is a lot of hyprocrisy in that regards.

I wouldn't vote SF based on their polices but the presidential election may be viewed differently as the president has no say in the running of the country.


----------



## Firefly (19 Sep 2011)

From today's Irish Times letters to the Ed 

Sir, Regarding the choice of Martin McGuinness as Sinn Féin’s  presidential candidate, perhaps he was their best shot. – Yours, etc,


----------



## Mpsox (19 Sep 2011)

There is a fundamental difference between the likes of Dev and Michael Collins and McGuiness and Adams. The Old IRA were far more open about their active involvement then the Provisionals have ever been. If McGuiness & Adams had the courage of their convictions to stand up and admit that they were in the IRA, admitted their role and what they had done, then I'd think a lot more of them. Regardless of that however, they do deserve credit for seeing the light and backing away from violence. 

There is also a large strand of hypocrisy in Sinn Fein, no matter what they say about the peace process and their actions there, they still raise funds through the sale of paraphanalia praising murderers. Whilst their actions calling for the killers of Ronan Kerr to be brought to justice are right, on the other hand they call for the release of the killers of Garda Gerry McCabe. Murder is murder and they can't have it both ways

I wouldn't vote for SF on grounds of polocies but I also simple do not trust them


----------



## Shawady (19 Sep 2011)

Looks like Dana is going to throw her hat in the ring.

I would start a new thread but if that happened every time there was a new candidate, Brendan would have to set up a new forum just for the presidential election!


----------



## terrontress (19 Sep 2011)

They take credit for moving their communities away from violence but don't forget, it was them who moved the communities toward it in the first place.

And they have left, and continue to support at a minor level, a culture of mistrust of authority and civil unrest, which has led to the rioting we see in Belfast every summer.

SF used to call goons out in the street to brick the police and set fire to buses. Now they are trying to get the kids of these same goons to back off but the kids won't listen to them. But SF sowed the seeds. Created the monster.

In spite of all that, I don't believe that McGuinness would do a bad job if we ignore the past. He has proven himself to be a capable stateman, worthy of an audience with the most powerful people on Earth.

I can't see where his motivation to do the job comes from though. He most likely started throwing stones himself, moved on to planting bombs, then told others to plant them and now makes decisions in the corridors of power. Action packed all the way.

The presidency is a largely ceremonial role, devoid of action.


----------



## Sunny (19 Sep 2011)

It is now officially a complete joke. McGuinness, Dana, Norris trying to get back in and some guy from FF that I never even heard of.........


----------



## Shawady (19 Sep 2011)

Sunny said:


> and some guy from FF that I never even heard of.........


 
Don't knock that guy. He said on the Pat Kenny show this morning he would do the job for free if elected!

Maybe AAM users should start a campaign to put Brendan's name forward!


----------



## Mpsox (19 Sep 2011)

Sunny said:


> It is now officially a complete joke. McGuinness, Dana, Norris trying to get back in and some guy from FF that I never even heard of.........


 
In fairness, how many of us had heard of Mary Mc 14 years ago? Having said that, I'd have issues with the policies of McGuinness, Norris, Dana and the FF Seantor, which leaves me with 2 independents I currently know little about, a has been (and very mediocre poet to add) and a never was.


----------



## orka (19 Sep 2011)

I would worry that McGuinness as president would be the thin of the wedge for Sinn Fein to gain respectability and acceptance with more of the electorate than they currently have.
I would have more concerns about Sinn Fein future policies and vision for the country than with Martin McGuinness's past.


----------



## Purple (19 Sep 2011)

orka said:


> I would have more concerns about Sinn Fein future policies and vision for the country than with Martin McGuinness's past.



+1
I can’t help admiring him and the journey he has taken throughout his life but the isolationist socialist policies of Sinn Fein are scary


----------



## liaconn (19 Sep 2011)

As another poster has said, it's way way too soon to have a SF President. There are so many people still suffering from the  consequences of the terrorist activities of the IRA and, whatever about his own personal journey, Martin McGuinness and SF are names that are still synonymous with those activities. 
I had said I wouldn't bother voting in this election because all the candidates are meh. But I think I will have to vote now because I just couldn't stand back and not make any opposition to his bid for Presidency.


----------



## Guest105 (19 Sep 2011)

Has anybody suggested for Mary Kenneddy to go forward? 

We would have another Mary and with her lovely personality I think she would be great for the job.


----------



## Sunny (19 Sep 2011)

I am actually beginning to feel a bit offended. No-one has offered me the Presidency. 

Who won the Rose of Tralee? Would they be interested?


----------



## liaconn (20 Sep 2011)

I think they should raffle the job. All proceeds to go towards the national debt.


----------



## Sunny (20 Sep 2011)

liaconn said:


> I think they should raffle the job. All proceeds to go towards the national debt.


 
I think there would be huge interest from Irish Americans. They would not only win an Certificate that certifies their Irish roots but would also win the Presidency. We could raffle off the role of Grand Master of the St Patricks Day parade as well.


----------



## Purple (20 Sep 2011)

liaconn said:


> I think they should raffle the job. All proceeds to go towards the national debt.



Lol


----------



## Shawady (20 Sep 2011)

Well it was just mentioned on the news that FF are not going to support any candidate so you are looking at Mitchell, Higgins, McGuinness, Davis and Gallagher as the candidates.
Not a very inspiring shortlist.

Anyone think McGuinness has a chance?


----------



## Pique318 (20 Sep 2011)

I reckon he has a pretty good chance, tbh.
Non-nationalists/republican voters will vote for one of the following:
Mitchell, Higgins, Davis, Dana(possibly), Norris(possibly) or Gallagher.

Nationalist/Republican voters will vote for the following:
McGuinness.

I think this gives him a fair to middling chance, if you ask me.


----------



## RonanC (20 Sep 2011)

And therein lies the problem of Irish politics and the so called democracy we live in.

Fianna Fail have just told their members that they are banned from supporting any Presidential candidate. 

The public clearly want certain people to be put forward as candidates but due to the decisions being made by a select few (Micheál Martin), we are left with such a small and uninspiring list to choose from.


----------



## horusd (20 Sep 2011)

I like McGuiness. Think he would be a fairly decent candidate. Can't see him winning tho.


----------



## Betsy Og (20 Sep 2011)

I wouldnt like McGuiness as president this time out. A couple of reasons but the main one is that this President will be in office for 2016, and if its McGuinness then Sinn Fein will hi-jack the centenary commerorations and "the troubles" will be lumped in with 1916 and we, in the Republic, will nearly end up having to either tacitly endorse the Provos, or just ignore the commemorations altogether (both of these would be unfortunate outcomes).

I dont think SF or a SF candidate represent what people in the Republic want to present to the world - of course we'll soon find out, thats democracy - but can you imagine the cringe factor of people refusing to meet him, protests against him etc.

As regards the argument that "if its good enough for the North why isnt it good enough for us" - basically the GF Agreement is a grand compromise to end terrorism (& also we cant ignore SF's electoral mandate with years) but basically there was a gain to be had by having SF inside the tent, much as many people found that hard to stomach. Whereas, in the South, there's no upside for us in having SF in politics at all, so why should we pretend we're happy about them?? If they get votes and elect TD's thats fair enough, again thats democracy, but I wouldnt criticse any other party for not wanting to touch them with a barge pole.

Overall I'm voting Michael D. He has wanted the job from the start, he has a good track record as a politician and on human rights internationally, he has a bit of personality (I cant warm to Mitchell) and he'll be a good statesman.

Not sure why Gallagher or Davis are there. Norris is damaged goods at this stage, why didnt he stay away?, Dana would be ok in a bland kind of way so Ml D is the best of whats going.


----------



## Bill Struth (21 Sep 2011)

Betsy Og said:


> I wouldnt like McGuiness as president this time out. A couple of reasons but the main one is that this President will be in office for 2016, and if its McGuinness then Sinn Fein will hi-jack the centenary commerorations and "the troubles" will be lumped in with 1916 and we, in the Republic, will nearly end up having to either tacitly endorse the Provos, or* just ignore the commemorations altogether* (both of these would be unfortunate outcomes)..


 
It's only become fashionable for 'you in the republic' to acknowledge the commemorations in the last few years anyway, you'll hardly be missed. 


Betsy Og said:


> I dont think SF or a SF candidate represent what people in the Republic want to present to the world - of course we'll soon find out, thats democracy - but can you imagine the cringe factor of people refusing to meet him, protests against him etc.


Who do you imagine will refuse to meet him?


Betsy Og said:


> As regards the argument that "if its good enough for the North why isnt it good enough for us" - basically the GF Agreement is a grand compromise to end terrorism (& also we cant ignore SF's electoral mandate with years) but basically there was a gain to be had by having SF inside the tent, much as many people found that hard to stomach. Whereas, in the South, there's no upside for us in having SF in politics at all, so why should we pretend we're happy about them?? If they get votes and elect TD's thats fair enough, again thats democracy, but I wouldnt criticse any other party for not wanting to touch them with a barge pole...


 
It's funny how for years Sinn Fein were told by 'you in the republic' to move on! Stop living in the past! Embrace politics! When they do embrace politics (and have been doing so for the best part of 20 years) Suddenly the past is where we want to be again.


Also, OIRA - Workers Party - Democratic Left - Labour? When did this continuum cease to matter? Or does it just not suit the agenda?

I'm no Sinn Fein supporter but the rank hypocrisy of sections of free state society and media is laughable at times.


----------



## Betsy Og (21 Sep 2011)

Bill Struth said:


> *It's only become fashionable for 'you in the republic' to acknowledge the commemorations in the last few years anyway, you'll hardly be missed.*
> 
> I refuse to be told by those from a foreign jurisdiction how I should commemorate national events. I think its gas how Nordy Republicans think there are on the road to "greening" the South - we had to listen to them for years because they held the threat of violence, now we just wish they'd go away and paint kerbstones or whatever it is they get their kicks from. Its like in the GAA, if we were waiting on the Ulster Council to move with opinion we'd be 'holding out' as the amateur sports organisation with a harder line than SF.
> 
> ...


Its quite simple, when you have a wildly dysfunctional state you sometimes do things you wouldnt otherwise do in order to improve things. So you have SF in power (yes I know people vote for them but the system is contrived to give power sharing and something for everyone - fair enough). So yes, its fair enough for us to ask Unionists to share power with them even if we dont want to, if Unionism hadnt made such a bags of it for the 65 years or so before their power got taken away, they would never have been put in that position - so suck it up. 

In the South we have no reason to give Shinners a free ride, if they want to throw their toys out of the cot when they dont get a cuddle by the 'Free State' media and society, then too bad. Its only a pity that Hume isnt well enough or interested enough to run - Seamus Mallon is another who could have been given an unreserved endorsement.


----------



## T McGibney (21 Sep 2011)

"Its like in the GAA, if we were waiting on the Ulster Council to move  with opinion we'd be 'holding out' as the amateur sports organisation  with a harder line than SF."

I suspect that this is a baseless comment. Show me one concrete example where the Ulster Council has been at fault in failing to "move with opinion". Under Danny Murphy's stewardship as Secretary, the Ulster Council has been remarkably progressive. It is not their fault if individual counties within Ulster have occasionally opposed various policy positions.


----------



## dereko1969 (21 Sep 2011)

T McGibney said:


> "Its like in the GAA, if we were waiting on the Ulster Council to move with opinion we'd be 'holding out' as the amateur sports organisation with a harder line than SF."
> 
> I suspect that this is a baseless comment. *Show me one concrete example where the Ulster Council has been at fault in failing to "move with opinion"*.


 
Most of them refusing to come to Croke Park to meet the Queen??

I thought it was very telling that on his very first day of canvassing McGuinness started slagging off "west-brit" media, hardly reconstructed now and is that really the type of person we want representing a fully inclusive non-sectarian republic?

He tried to change his tack later in the day saying it was an off-the-cuff remark, I don't want my President to be making snide comments.


----------



## notagardener (21 Sep 2011)

dereko1969 said:


> I thought it was very telling that on his very first day of canvassing McGuinness started slagging off "west-brit" media, hardly reconstructed now and is that really the type of person we want representing a fully inclusive non-sectarian republic?
> 
> He tried to change his tack later in the day saying it was an off-the-cuff remark, I don't want my President to be making snide comments.


 
Agree with this, the man is too volatile, too agressive to be our President. But then again when I look at the list of candidates


----------



## Shawady (21 Sep 2011)

Betsy Og said:


> Its quite simple, when you have a wildly dysfunctional state you sometimes do things you wouldnt otherwise do in order to improve things. So you have SF in power (yes I know people vote for them but the system is contrived to give power sharing and something for everyone - fair enough). So yes, its fair enough for us to ask Unionists to share power with them even if we dont want to, if Unionism hadnt made such a bags of it for the 65 years or so before their power got taken away, they would never have been put in that position - so suck it up.
> 
> In the South we have no reason to give Shinners a free ride, if they want to throw their toys out of the cot when they dont get a cuddle by the 'Free State' media and society, then too bad. Its only a pity that Hume isnt well enough or interested enough to run - Seamus Mallon is another who could have been given an unreserved endorsement.


 
I agree with you re: Hume and Mallon. Both would have made excellent candidates maybe the last time around. However, I don't understand what you mean by giving the shinners a free ride. Even McGuiness critics such as Fintan O'Toole have said they have argued for years to get SF on the politic route. Now they are here they are entitled to nominate someone for president. Maybe it is too soon for someone like McGuiness but it's up to the electorate to decide.
I suspect other parties (particularly FF and LAB) are more worried about conceding ground to SF in the future rather than the past.


----------



## Bill Struth (21 Sep 2011)

Betsy Og said:


> refuse to be told by those from a foreign jurisdiction how I should commemorate national events..


When you're standing proudly at the 2016 commemoration you can take comfort in the fact that those men died so that you could refer to some of your fellow Irish as foreigners.



Betsy Og said:


> If the past was where we wanted to be we'd be arresting people (if not debarred by the GF Agreement), but its a long way down the track to saying we want a former combatant as President. I respect the work that McGuinness has done over the last 20 years, but I think its a bit soon for this. ..


 
It's a pity 'you in the south' haven't shown the same zest in pursuing the misdeeds of the British government in your noble quest for justice. 



Betsy Og said:


> I dont remember Pat Rabbitte planting any bombs. Pronsias was the last one, as far as I recall, who was in any way involved, and that was donkeys years ago. ..


 
Ah, so it's ok if it was donkeys years ago. That clears that up.



Betsy Og said:


> In the South we have no reason to give Shinners a free ride, if they want to throw their toys out of the cot when they dont get a cuddle by the 'Free State' media and society, then too bad...


 
Free ride? No, some professional journalism without the agenda would do.


----------



## DB74 (21 Sep 2011)

RonanC said:


> And therein lies the problem of Irish politics and the so called democracy we live in.
> 
> Fianna Fail have just told their members that they are banned from supporting any Presidential candidate.
> 
> The public clearly want certain people to be put forward as candidates but due to the decisions being made by a select few (Micheál Martin), we are left with such a small and uninspiring list to choose from.



Fully agree with Ronan here

Why couldn't Micheál have said that although FF won't be putting forward a candidate, all FF TD's are free to support who they want.

It's a disgrace


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (21 Sep 2011)

*Paddy Power*

Michael D evens 
Martin McGuinness 9/4 
Gay Mitchell 4/1

This is real scary. If Martin McGuinness gets in Irish Bond yields will soar. As someone else pointed out this will greatly enhance SF's credibility with the electorate and with some pretty tough austerity ahead, one could see SF really advancing in the 2016 election.

Can't imagine Martin's 10 min chat with Queenie if she accepts Enda's return invite. "Sorry about the ol' uncle and all that..."

Also this is bad for the peace process. Northern unionists have come to acknowledge and appreciate the more broad minded approach of southern nationalists compared to their northern neighbours and the Queen's reception received rave reviews from no less than the Grand Master of the Orange Lodge. If the South put this guy as their head of state this will greatly undo the level of acceptance which the southern state has obtained with northen unionists.


----------



## Bill Struth (21 Sep 2011)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> *Paddy Power*
> 
> Michael D evens
> Martin McGuinness 9/4
> ...


 Ah don't worry, she's got plenty to be apologising for as well.


----------



## T McGibney (21 Sep 2011)

dereko1969 said:


> Most of them refusing to come to Croke Park to meet the Queen??



The Ulster Council President Aogan Ó Fearghail represented the Ulster Council at the reception for the Queen in Croke Park. It wasn't his or the Council's fault that several of the individual counties weren't represented. Quite a number of counties in the other provinces weren't there either.


----------



## Shawady (21 Sep 2011)

DB74 said:


> Why couldn't Micheál have said that although FF won't be putting forward a candidate, all FF TD's are free to support who they want.


 
Norris has 11 out of the required 20 votes. I think you are going to see FF come under huge pressure over the weekend to facilitate his nomination, particularly with Martin McGuiness's introduction in the race.


----------



## Betsy Og (21 Sep 2011)

Bill Struth said:


> *When you're standing proudly at the 2016 commemoration you can take comfort in the fact that those men died so that you could refer to some of your fellow Irish as foreigners.*
> That was just to wind you up, since you'd gone all "Free Stater" on it. We did have to jack Articles 2 &3 in order to sort ye out, thereby putting ye beyond the Republic, but sure wasnt it worth it overall.
> 
> *It's a pity 'you in the south' haven't shown the same zest in pursuing the misdeeds of the British government in your noble quest for justice. *
> ...


----------



## T McGibney (21 Sep 2011)

Betsy Og said:


> Bill Struth said:
> 
> 
> > *Ah, so it's ok if it was donkeys years ago. That clears that up.*
> ...


----------



## Betsy Og (21 Sep 2011)

*I don't understand what you mean by giving the shinners a free ride. Even McGuiness critics such as Fintan O'Toole have said they have argued for years to get SF on the politic route. Now they are here they are entitled to nominate someone for president. Maybe it is too soon for someone like McGuiness but it's up to the electorate to decide.*/QUOTE]

I agree totally with you, one of Jedward could run if they were old enough and had the 20 nominations, and then the voters vote as they see fit. It doesnt mean we cant express an opinion on whether we would like them as president or not. Re giving Shinners a free ride, they seem to be taking great umbrange at the notion that someone might consider a paramilitary past as an issue worthy of examination when considering a presidential candidate.


----------



## Betsy Og (21 Sep 2011)

T McGibney said:


> "I suspect that this is a baseless comment. Show me one concrete example where the Ulster Council has been at fault in failing to "move with opinion". Under Danny Murphy's stewardship as Secretary, the Ulster Council has been remarkably progressive. It is not their fault if individual counties within Ulster have occasionally opposed various policy positions.


 
Well there was strong Ulster opposition to removing the security forces rule, and the opening of Croke Park (ok the opposition wasnt exclusively in Ulster). 

Maybe I unfairly mentioned the Ulster Council as such, but put it this way, if Ulster counties were representative of the association as a whole, those changes wouldnt have been passed when they were passed. Maybe they'd be passed by now since SF supported the PSNI, but SF wanted to be the ones to make the step, and the GAA would be left looking like eejits scurrying in after SF - SF like to be seen as the agenda setters, whereas the GAA as a broad based organisation decided they wouldnt wait to be led by relative extremists with limited support in the Republic (especially at the time).


----------



## T McGibney (21 Sep 2011)

Betsy Og said:


> Well there was strong Ulster opposition to removing the security forces rule, and the opening of Croke Park (ok the opposition wasnt exclusively in Ulster).
> 
> Maybe I unfairly mentioned the Ulster Council as such, but put it this way, if Ulster counties were representative of the association as a whole, those changes wouldnt have been passed when they were passed. Maybe they'd be passed by now since SF supported the PSNI, but SF wanted to be the ones to make the step, and the GAA would be left looking like eejits scurrying in after SF - SF like to be seen as the agenda setters, whereas the GAA as a broad based organisation decided they wouldnt wait to be led by relative extremists with limited support in the Republic (especially at the time).



Funnily enough, the strongest opposition to the 'Opening up of Croke Park' emanated from Cork. Go figure  It even cost Christy Cooney the GAA Presidency in 2005. 

In relation to the 'admitting UK security forces members' debate, there was indeed strong opposition from within the Ulster counties to that proposal. However, that opposition was most certainly not universal within Ulster. There was also plenty of opposition within GAA county ranks in the 26 counties, enough to scupper moves in that direction on more than one occasion previously.  

Characterising these debates as 'backward Ulster GAA v everyone else' is rewriting history.


----------



## Shawady (22 Sep 2011)

Shawady said:


> Norris has 11 out of the required 20 votes. I think you are going to see FF come under huge pressure over the weekend to facilitate his nomination, particularly with Martin McGuiness's introduction in the race.


 
Norris now has 17 votes. He will get the nomination now. I can't see any of the remaining independents want to 'block' his right to run.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0922/president.html


----------



## csirl (22 Sep 2011)

McGuinness wont get enough votes to be elected, so not worth worrying about.


----------



## TarfHead (22 Sep 2011)

[broken link removed]



> “And I do think some people in the media down here, some elements... need to think about peacemaking and how they make their peace with me.”


 
So, Martin McGuinness is the SF candidate for the Presidency of '_down here_'  ?

And there was me thinking Nordies were demeaning my country by referring it to as a geographic abstraction (The South, or Sythe as they say it). "_Down here'_' makes The Sythe should respectful .


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (22 Sep 2011)

*Betfair*

Michael D  6/4
David Norris 3/1
Martin McGuinness 3/1
Gay Mitchell  5/1


----------



## Purple (22 Sep 2011)

Michael D would get my vote before Martin Mc or Norris


----------



## Bill Struth (22 Sep 2011)

TarfHead said:


> [broken link removed]
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
It's not like you'd ever hear anyone refer to 'The North' is it???

And 'Nordies'? Seriously? It's as idiotic as referring to all people from The 26 counties (or _sythe_ - can't say I've heard that before tbh) as Free Staters.


----------



## Purple (22 Sep 2011)

Why not just make Liz head of state? She's more popular down here and she's British as well.


----------



## horusd (22 Sep 2011)

Purple said:


> Why not just make Liz head of state? She's more popular down here and she's British as well.



Who? Liz Hurley ... is she runnin ?


----------



## levelpar (22 Sep 2011)

*Tiocfaid ar la*

Sorry ,Martin, your day has not yet come. Try in 50 years .

As my granny used to  say. "You may shatter and break the vase if you will , but the scent of the roses will lie around still"


----------



## Purple (22 Sep 2011)

levelpar said:


> Sorry ,Martin, your day has not yet come. Try in 50 years .
> 
> As my granny used to  say. "You may shatter and break the vase if you will , but the scent of the roses will lie around still"



Is Michael D your granny?


----------



## Bill Struth (23 Sep 2011)

Purple said:


> Is Michael D your granny?


  Ha ha!


----------



## horusd (23 Sep 2011)

Ya know O think Joe and Joanne Public is going to suprise us by electing McGuinness if Norris doesn't get nominated.


----------



## Shawady (23 Sep 2011)

The Norris nomination is crucial. If he doesn't get it, I could see McGuiness get a big first preference vote.
Hence the sudden urgency in support.


----------



## levelpar (23 Sep 2011)

> Is Michael D your granny?



Always wondered why her legs were so hairy


----------



## ninsaga (26 Sep 2011)

If Norris does not get nominated then there is a democratic failure in this country. Mattie McGrath basically holding the veto on wether a popular candidate does not get their name on the list is criminal to say the least.

If so then this election should be boycotted! ..... but lets reserve that until we see what happens by midday Wed.


----------



## Mpsox (26 Sep 2011)

ninsaga said:


> If Norris does not get nominated then there is a democratic failure in this country. Mattie McGrath basically holding the veto on wether a popular candidate does not get their name on the list is criminal to say the least.
> 
> If so then this election should be boycotted! ..... but lets reserve that until we see what happens by midday Wed.


 
Mattie McGrath doesn't hold the Veto, he just happened to be the last to make his mind up (finally). As for popular, let's not forget that 3 out of 4 people surveyed did not want Norris as President.


----------



## ninsaga (26 Sep 2011)

yet at this stage he is commanding a significant % of potential voters - thats why he needs to be on the ballot. Mattie McGrath did hold a veto as it came down to the fact that if Norris was 1 vote short then Lowry (I think it was him anyway) would have given the last vote to get him through.

Mattie McGrath is full of contradictions...... his comments....
"I do respect Senator Norris as a politician," Deputy McGrath said.

"I know he made mistakes, but who hasn't?"

"My feeling is that in the interests of democracy - let the people of Ireland decide who should be President." ...... there you have it... let the people of Ireland decide he say...and yet he failed to nominate him. To me - thats a veto!

At the same time FG did itself no favors today with the South Dub CC blocked his vote - because the FG councillors vote.

Overall disgraceful behavior by many.


----------



## Sunny (26 Sep 2011)

I think it is disgraceful that my County Council has backed him. I think it is disgraceful that he hasn't released the contents of all the other letters he wrote. I think it is disgraceful that he pulled out of the race but seems to have spent the time putting together a new campaign team after his previous team quit because of those letters. He seems to think that if he dropped put a while, the media storm would pass.


----------



## ninsaga (26 Sep 2011)

Let the people decide - isn't that what it's meant to be! Now its all about agenda's. Yes i know thats what politics is all about - but its outrageous.


----------



## Purple (26 Sep 2011)

I won't vote for him this time for the same reasons I wouldn't vote for him last time.


----------



## Sunny (26 Sep 2011)

ninsaga said:


> Let the people decide - isn't that what it's meant to be! Now its all about agenda's. Yes i know thats what politics is all about - but its outrageous.



The people are deciding. Political parties dont act in a vacum. If there was the public outrage that people seem to think there is over his exclusion, politians and councillors would have backed him. The parties are obviously not feeling the heat from the electorate on this issue. Mattie Mc Grath supported Norris First but was put back on his box by his voters.


----------



## onq (26 Sep 2011)

horusd said:


> Ya know O think Joe and Joanne Public is going to suprise us by electing McGuinness if Norris doesn't get nominated.



That's the sense I'm getting from talking to people.
Fine Gael misplayed their hand over Norris the first time around.

Now by failing to see the implications of a Norris bar - as South Dublin and Cavan showed - they have opened the door for McGuinness.
It would serve the pro-Unionist Fine Gael shills right if their homophobic and slanderous utterances about David Norris rebounded and slapped them in their pious political faces.


----------



## Sunny (26 Sep 2011)

onq said:


> That's the sense I'm getting from talking to people.
> Fine Gael misplayed their hand over Norris the first time around.
> 
> Now by failing to see the implications of a Norris bar - as South Dublin and Cavan showed - they have opened the door for McGuinness.
> It would serve the pro-Unionist Fine Gael shills right if their homophobic and slanderous utterances about David Norris rebounded and slapped them in their pious political faces.



Why should FG back another candidate when they are running their own? I was wondering how long it would take for someone to throw out the old homophobic argument. McGuinness is not going to win the race no matter who else runs.


----------



## ninsaga (26 Sep 2011)

Sunny said:


> The people are deciding. Political parties dont act in a vacum. If there was the public outrage that people seem to think there is over his exclusion, politians and councillors would have backed him. The parties are obviously not feeling the heat from the electorate on this issue. Mattie Mc Grath supported Norris First but was put back on his box by his voters.



...his voters? I thought it was his 'advisors'..... listening to him on the radio this morning he vindicated himself from 'their' decision.... can he not think for himself and do the right thing! Still disgraceful behavior


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (26 Sep 2011)

I would never vote for Martin McGuinness. All the same his main case is that if ever this country were to go to war he would be best placed to lead the troops. After all he is the only one in history who can claim to have actually defeated the Brits.

Alan Shatter's argument about our Presie being the commander in charge of our army is in fact McGuinness' USP.


----------



## Sunny (27 Sep 2011)

ninsaga said:


> ...his voters? I thought it was his 'advisors'..... listening to him on the radio this morning he vindicated himself from 'their' decision.... can he not think for himself and do the right thing! Still disgraceful behavior



What have you done about getting Norris on the ballot paper since you feel so strongly about it?


----------



## ninsaga (27 Sep 2011)

Sunny said:


> What have you done about getting Norris on the ballot paper since you feel so strongly about it?



I've bitched about it


----------



## Firefly (27 Sep 2011)

Bono....wherever you are...your country needs you


----------



## Mpsox (27 Sep 2011)

ninsaga said:


> Let the people decide - isn't that what it's meant to be! Now its all about agenda's. Yes i know thats what politics is all about - but its outrageous.


 
Then let's all run for President. 

Why not let the guy from Carlow who was seeking the nomination and wanted to move the capital to Moate (since it's in the middle of the country) run?

Reality is that the Constititution lays down the law for what is required to be nominated to run for President. If Norris was elected, then he would be expected to uphold the Constitution, he (and his supporters) shouldn't bitch about it if they don't get the noimination.

Norris looked for clemancy for a middle aged man who had sex with an underage boy. I wonder if Norris had been a priest or a Fianna Fail senator would people be so in favour of him campaigning like this? There's an awful smell of hypocrisy in his campaign


----------



## T McGibney (27 Sep 2011)

onq said:


> It would serve the pro-Unionist Fine Gael shills right if their homophobic and slanderous utterances about David Norris rebounded and slapped them in their pious political faces.



Pro-Unionist? Is this a bad thing?


----------



## Purple (27 Sep 2011)

onq said:


> It would serve the pro-Unionist Fine Gael shills right if their homophobic and slanderous utterances about David Norris rebounded and slapped them in their pious political faces.



Can you expand on that ONQ?
On what basis did you form that opinion?


----------



## horusd (27 Sep 2011)

Firefly said:


> Bono....wherever you are...your country needs you


 
Last seen in Amsterdam in clogs talking things over with his tax advisors. Going" Dutch" has been the makings of him. More money to spend on self-promotion and lambasting other rich people who have the temerity to pay tax in their home countries.


----------



## Firefly (27 Sep 2011)

horusd said:


> Last seen in Amsterdam in clogs talking things over with his tax advisors. Going" Dutch" has been the makings of him. More money to spend on self-promotion and lambasting other rich people who have the temerity to pay tax in their home countries.



There's a song in there somewhere


----------



## horusd (27 Sep 2011)

Still you have to hand it to the Shinners. From the widerness a few yrs ago to a strong "shot"  at the Aras. Not bad going.


----------



## Mpsox (27 Sep 2011)

horusd said:


> Still you have to hand it to the Shinners. From the widerness a few yrs ago to a strong "shot" at the Aras. Not bad going.


 
as opposed to actually having a real shot at Downing Street a few years back


----------



## horusd (27 Sep 2011)

Mpsox said:


> as opposed to actually having a real shot at Downing Street a few years back


 
They only have to be lucky once.


----------



## terrontress (27 Sep 2011)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> After all he is the only one in history who can claim to have actually defeated the Brits.


 

I am sure he takes great comfort in that defeat of his while he is sitting up in Stormont, looking out over the statue of Edward Carson, voting on laws by license from Westminster, getting paid a wage with the Queen's head on it, paying tax to Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs, PSNI providing personal security to him and his family.

The man is a military hero!


----------



## liaconn (27 Sep 2011)

I have to say it makes me laugh when people deride people who don't want to see McGuinness as President as failing to 'move on' from our past.

How on earth is electing a President who refused to come out and meet the Queen moving on from the past??


----------



## Latrade (27 Sep 2011)

Mpsox said:


> Norris looked for clemancy for a middle aged man who had sex with an underage boy. I wonder if Norris had been a priest or a Fianna Fail senator would people be so in favour of him campaigning like this? There's an awful smell of hypocrisy in his campaign


 
Couldn't agree more. Such as how asking for clemency by one candidate means they condone the crime too. But when a different candidate writes letters asking for clemency, it's ok and they don't support the crime.

But back on track with MMG and a semi-serious question; if he were President, could he give an official pardon to the murderers of Jerry McCabe?


----------



## micmclo (27 Sep 2011)

onq said:


> their homophobic and slanderous utterances about David Norris



I'm getting tired of that card being played

You almost can't ask questions about Norris without being called a homophobe

The man never fought a difficult election in his life, strolling into the comfy TCD seat which only a few of us ever get to vote for. Part of the elite, the old boys network

If he ever pushed himself forward and tried for a Dáil seat all the stories we hear now would have come out before
But he stayed safe and the first difficult election he ever does, his advisors leave him, he quits, comes back and is still struggling

But sure, play the card


----------



## Mpsox (27 Sep 2011)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> I would never vote for Martin McGuinness. All the same his main case is that if ever this country were to go to war he would be best placed to lead the troops. After all he is the only one in history who can claim to have actually defeated the Brits.
> 
> .


 
I was in Belfast yesterday and saw union jacks flying and had to use Sterling. Given that the aim of the IRA was a united Ireland, I'd say McGuiness failed miserably


----------



## RonanC (27 Sep 2011)

Mpsox said:


> I was in Belfast yesterday and saw union jacks flying and had to use Sterling. Given that the aim of the IRA was a united Ireland, I'd say McGuiness failed miserably


 
Eh it is still Fianna Fail's aim too... but does that mean they have failed also? 

McGuinness and Co. signed up for the Good Friday Agreement which allows for a united Ireland, if *the people* want it.


----------



## Purple (27 Sep 2011)

Mpsox said:


> Norris looked for clemancy for a middle aged man who had sex with an underage boy. I wonder if Norris had been a priest or a Fianna Fail senator would people be so in favour of him campaigning like this? There's an awful smell of hypocrisy in his campaign


Good point!



Latrade said:


> But back on track with MMG and a semi-serious question; if he were President, could he give an official pardon to the murderers of Jerry McCabe?


Another good point/question.


----------



## onq (27 Sep 2011)

Purple said:


> Can you expand on that ONQ?
> On what basis did you form that opinion?



FG/L sought to block Norris by playing the moral card.

Now they are faced with a credible challenger in the form of McGuinness.

Only Norris has a chance of definitely blocking McGuinness from the presidency.

Norris may be blocked from getting on the ballot by perfidious Fine Gael and Labour shills.

If thsi happens don't be too surprised to see McGuinness benefit from the support of a protest vote.


----------



## onq (27 Sep 2011)

Mpsox said:


> Norris looked for clemancy for a middle aged man who had sex with an underage boy.



I'm sure someone called me a "boy" when I was fifteen.

They didn't make that mistake twice.


----------



## onq (27 Sep 2011)

[broken link removed]

Now the real dirty fight begins - I hope Norris sues anyone who slanders him.


----------



## DB74 (27 Sep 2011)

onq said:


> I'm sure someone called me a "boy" when I was fifteen.
> 
> They didn't make that mistake twice.



What the hell does this mean?


----------



## T McGibney (28 Sep 2011)

onq said:


> [broken link removed]
> 
> Now the real dirty fight begins - I hope Norris sues anyone who slanders him.



You said yesterday that he had already been slandered by 'pro-Unionists' (whatever they are???? - please do illuminate us   ). Has he sued them yet?



onq said:


> It would serve the pro-Unionist Fine Gael shills right if their  homophobic and slanderous utterances about David Norris rebounded and  slapped them in their pious political faces.


----------



## onq (28 Sep 2011)

T McGibney said:


> You said yesterday that he had already been slandered by 'pro-Unionists' (whatever they are???? - please do illuminate us   ). Has he sued them yet?



Are you the only man in Ireland who doesn't know that Fine Gael are viewed as the most pro-Unionist party?

I was making the point that by preventing Norris run, they'd have played well into the hands of Sinn Féin - not their preferred choice.

Old news now that Norris is running.

Now FG have to play the "we're the best of the worst" card, but Michael D. Higgins has already spiked their ground by supporting Norris publicly (not that it achieved anything, given the late call after Carlow and South Dublin, and the numbers in Dublin City).

As for Norris suesing them - I'll keep you appraised.

They might realize the predicament they and their party shills are in if he fails to win the presidency.

If he intends to continue in public Life he really should sue - but he's a nice guy. Lucky for them.

ONQ.


----------



## T McGibney (28 Sep 2011)

onq said:


> Are you the only man in Ireland who doesn't know that Fine Gael are viewed as the most pro-Unionist party?


That may or may not be the case - Fianna Fail, to their credit, had an excellent working relationship with the DUP.

I really wonder though about the mentality of anyone who uses this adjective as a term of derision.


----------



## onq (28 Sep 2011)

DB74 said:


> What the hell does this mean?



I didn't consider myself a "boy" when I was fifteen, working abroad in the summer to support my secondary school education expenses.

I find the suggestion that fifteen year olds are "boys" condescending.
Current thinking in Israel (where the incident happened) Germany and Switzerland show a different approach. These are countries not renowned for licentious ways. Even the Vatican permits sex at 14, in line with Italy.

As for framing laws that mean fifteen year olds are "too young to consent" that's just the puritan adults taking the easy way out - again! Criminalizing sex is not working - the average age of sexual experience is around 14 and there is ample evidence of that in Ireland. Teens with kids have enough problems without being sent to prison for doing what comes naturally. Giving them other achievable goals and proper sex education and breaking the cycle of young pregnancy and unemployment should be the focus, not branding them for life!

Its as effective as waging a war on drugs without addressing the causes of drug use or who is promoting them, and seeking ways to manage it instead of criminalizing it. Criminalizing drug use is not working.

Its as effective as declaring a war on Terror, without first acknowledging that state sponsored terror is getting its just rewards - we've seen it here for 30 years. Fighting terrorism, as opposed to engaging in dialogue, doesn't prevent it, it recruits more terrorists - Ireland is proof of that.

These are all examples of fundamentalist first principle thinking with no feedback loop - their practitioners are more intent on asserting the moral superiority of their position as opposed to addressing the problem.


----------



## bullbars (28 Sep 2011)

onq said:


> I didn't consider myself a "boy" when I was fifteen, working abroad in the summer to support my secondary school education expenses.
> I find the suggestion that fifteen year olds are "boys" condescending.


 
I've met naive and childish people in there twenties but that doesn't mean they are not considered adults. Adolescent/youth/teen etc. called it what you want, the 15 year old was under the legal age of consent at the time and that is the fact.



onq said:


> Current thinking in Israel (where the incident happened) Germany and Switzerland show a different approach. These are countries not renowned for licentious ways. Even the Vatican permits sex at 14, in line with Italy.
> 
> As for framing laws that mean fifteen year olds are "too young to consent" that's just the puritan adults taking the easy way out - again!
> 
> These are all examples of fundamentalist first principle thinking with no feedback loop - their practitioners are more intent on asserting the moral superiority of their position as opposed to addressing the problem.


 
This isnt to do with current thinking. Sixteen was the legal age at the time. Ezra Yizhak was forty three years old the time was committed. This is not comparable to two young adults of similiar age. 

If this had been a 43 year old priest and a consenting alter boy of similiar age, the gallows would be called for. Yet we question the morality of defending this crime, and it was a crime, we are labelled homophobic.


----------



## Betsy Og (28 Sep 2011)

I'm glad God Norris got on the ticket, mainly to stop the whingeing about him not being on it. Also because it may help block McGuinness.

While I'm generally FG friendly (& btw would not consider myself a unionist in any sense!), I cant warm to Mitchell (bad choice by FG) so it's Michael D all the way. I think he'll be transfer friendly in the way McGuinness and Norris probably wont be, so I could see it coming down to Michael D Vs Mitchell. Dunno why Gallagher, Mary whats her name?? or even Dana are bothering.


----------



## Shawady (28 Sep 2011)

Don't rate Mitchell either. The FG leader wanted Pat Cox instead.
I would have prefered Finlay to Higgins myself.
I wonder if FF made a boo boo by not nominating Brian Crowley. He may not have won but with the field been so large he might have got a reasonable first preference vote.


----------



## Betsy Og (28 Sep 2011)

Shawady said:


> I wonder if FF made a boo boo by not nominating Brian Crowley. He may not have won but with the field been so large he might have got a reasonable first preference vote.


 
Definitely agree with you there. Micheal's "yes we're guilty, come kick us" is encouraging people to kick them, intentional self-marginalisation was something I never thought I'd see from a political party, least of all FF. No wonder their rank and file are despairing.

I think Brian Crowley would have gotten my #1, as a Euro politician he would be fairly immune to the "ye ruined the country" stuff, and making a good fist of Euro relations is obviously a big deal for the foreseeable future (not enough for me to endorse Mitchell though!), plus I've always been impressed by him on a personal level. As a general point I dont think party political should have a big role to play, after all its an individual above politics once they are elected. 

Lets face it the bar isnt at its highest on this occasion, and anti-FF factor or not it wouldnt have been a bad opportunity for Brian, if Michael had thrown off the sackcloth & ashes.


----------



## oldnick (28 Sep 2011)

A million people in Northern Ireland are strongly against union with the Republic  - and many in the so-called nationalist community in the North are not that strongly in favour of it at present.  
I even doubt if there's a vast majority in the Republic in favour of a United Ireland (except as some distant "well-one-day-it-may-be a -good-idea").

And yet the whole raison-d'etre of IRA-Sein Feinn is the "struggle" for a United Ireland.
Plus they combine this nationalism with a type of socialism that makes Higgins look conservative.

Many unionists will be delighted if a SF-IRA candidate is deemed a suitable leader of their nation by the voters in the south. 2016 with McG as President will be the best of times for hard-line unionists -and pretty uncomfortable for  very moderate ones like me.


----------



## Firefly (28 Sep 2011)

oldnick said:


> I even doubt if there's a vast majority in the Republic in favour of a United Ireland (except as some distant "well-one-day-it-may-be a -good-idea").



I agree and would expect the same thing from English people wanting NI to stay in the UK. It seems ironic that the two countries that these parties want to become part of aren't really bothered having them!


----------



## Purple (28 Sep 2011)

ONQ, who are these "FG shills"?
_Shill - One who poses as a satisfied customer or an enthusiastic gambler to dupe bystanders into participating in a swindle_

I wouldn't have voted for Norris before the letter/rape case incident. 
I'm not traditionally an FG supporter and I'm not pro-unionist (or anti-unionist for that matter).
I haven't read any comments here or in the media where Norris has been defamed. I don't think he'd sue because he’s a nice guy and also because he's not stupid and he knows that there's no case.

I also don’t buy how Norris will keep McGuiness out. Who would vote for a socially ultra-conservative, economically communist candidate and also support an ultra-liberal homosexual candidate?


----------



## TarfHead (28 Sep 2011)

They're having a bun fight on News at One today.

Is it just me or is Senator Norris' speech different, less precise in his enunciation  ?


----------



## MrMan (28 Sep 2011)

onq said:


> I'm sure someone called me a "boy" when I was fifteen.
> 
> They didn't make that mistake twice.



As a matter of intense curiousity, what happened to make them aware of there 'mistake'?


----------



## Mpsox (28 Sep 2011)

RonanC said:


> Eh it is still Fianna Fail's aim too... but does that mean they have failed also?
> 
> McGuinness and Co. signed up for the Good Friday Agreement which allows for a united Ireland, if *the people* want it.


 
yes to your first question

as to your second point, it's a shame they had to kill 1800 people to get to that stage. However it confirms that the original aim of the IRA failed and failed miserably


----------



## csirl (28 Sep 2011)

Is Sean Gallagher really a FF candidate in disguise ala the various 'Independent' FF gene pool candidates we've seen in the Dail? Wikipedia says he was a member of the FF National Executive.


----------



## TarfHead (29 Sep 2011)

I listened to the candidates on News at One.

I saw some of them on Prime Time last night.

I'm still in the 'meh' camp for all of them


----------



## liaconn (29 Sep 2011)

Anyone else think that Mary Davis looks awfully like Mary McAleese on her posters? Another effort to convince us we'll be getting an equally high calibre President if we vote for her?


----------



## Mpsox (29 Sep 2011)

liaconn said:


> Anyone else think that Mary Davis looks awfully like Mary McAleese on her posters? Another effort to convince us we'll be getting an equally high calibre President if we vote for her?


 
Same thought cross my mind

Also, why are they all suddenly putting full lenght pictures of themselves on their posters?

Haven't made my mind up yet (other then I know who I won't be voting for) but Sean Gallagher might get it since he promised not to put posters up, guess he is in pole position for my vote


----------



## Purple (29 Sep 2011)

Can't vote for Norris for the reasons I've outlined before.
Can't vote for Mary Davis; we can’t have three Mary’s in a row.
Can’t vote for McGuiness; he’s too much blood on his hands and isn’t honest about his past.
Can’t vote for Gallagher; I was very unimpressed when I heard him talking on Prime Time (I’ll create jobs... yea right you will)
.
.
.
.
Who are the other again?


----------



## Shawady (29 Sep 2011)

Whatever about the calibre of the candidates, the guys from Nob Nation are going to have a field day on them!
I've never seen such a diverse field.


----------



## TarfHead (29 Sep 2011)

Shawady said:


> I've never seen such a diverse field.


 
That's cos there has never been one  !


----------



## Betsy Og (29 Sep 2011)

Mpsox said:


> Sean Gallagher might get it since he promised not to put posters up, guess he is in pole position for my vote


 
Thats cos he's a businessman and he knows its a waste of money - though what he's hoping to get from the whole thing I dont quite know.


----------



## michaelm (29 Sep 2011)

Mickey D is odds-on favourite.  I'm giving him my number 6.

Michael D.Higgins                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 4/6                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
David Norris                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         7/2                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
Martin McGuinness                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         9/2                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
Gay Mitchell                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         8/1                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
Mary Davis                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          9/1                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
Sean  Gallagher                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         40/1                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
Dana Rosemary Scallon                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 50/1


----------



## Purple (29 Sep 2011)

If Fergus Finlay was running I’d definitely give him my number 1 (out of the candidates that are running) but I’ll find it hard to vote for any of them now.


----------



## Betsy Og (29 Sep 2011)

Why is Dana so far out of it?, she's not my cup of tea by a long shot but I thought she'd have a fair draw in the North West, the Badlands (country 'n' Irish belt from Carrickmacross to Birr) and God fearing places like Cork North West


----------



## hastalavista (29 Sep 2011)

Getting this thread back on track
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2041552/Family-IRA-victim-Frank-Hegarty-insist-Martin-McGuinness-lured-death.html


----------



## Liamos (30 Sep 2011)

I know the Mail have an agenda against SF and McGuinness, but that is a shocking report if it is true.


----------



## T McGibney (30 Sep 2011)

The IRA killing of Bernard Teggart was worse, a lot worse. It took the IRA 30 years to  for this atrocity.



> Bernard Teggart, 15 years, from New Barnsley Crescent, Belfast, N  Ireland, who was assassinated 13th November 1973 by the Provisional IRA.   His badly-beaten body was found near Bellevue Zoo on the outskirts of  the city. It bore a placard bearing the word Tout i.e an informer. His  twin brother who was abducted at the same time was released after being  given a coat and three shillings and told to take a bus home. The  abductions took place from St Patrick's Youth Detention Centre. Bernard  was said to have a mental age of 8 or 9 years. Although the IRA did not  admit responsibility it issued a statement in October 2004 saying that  after an investigation it offered its sincere apologies to the family  admitting the killing should not have happened.


----------



## liaconn (30 Sep 2011)

I honestly don't understand how anyone could even consider voting for Martin McGuinness. There are still so many families out there grieving for murdered members. How could anyone slap them in the face by making someone so closely tied with the IRA our first citizen?

Moving on is one thing, but things have to go at a sensitive pace.


----------



## DB74 (30 Sep 2011)

I will be voting for Michael D to keep MMcG out


----------



## AgathaC (30 Sep 2011)

liaconn said:


> I honestly don't understand how anyone could even consider voting for Martin McGuinness. There are still so many families out there grieving for murdered members. How could anyone slap them in the face by making someone so closely tied with the IRA our first citizen?
> 
> Moving on is one thing, but things have to go at a sensitive pace.


 +1. I haven't made up my mind yet who will get my vote, but definitely not Martin Mc Guinness.


----------



## Latrade (30 Sep 2011)

liaconn said:


> I honestly don't understand how anyone could even consider voting for Martin McGuinness. There are still so many families out there grieving for murdered members. How could anyone slap them in the face by making someone so closely tied with the IRA our first citizen?
> 
> Moving on is one thing, but things have to go at a sensitive pace.


 
I feel the same to an extent, but it's less the time gone by, I want full disclosure before considering him. Secrets etc be damned, if you're going to be president and represent the State, all figurative and literal skeletons need to be aired.


----------



## horusd (30 Sep 2011)

liaconn said:


> I honestly don't understand how anyone could even consider voting for Martin McGuinness. There are still so many families out there grieving for murdered members. How could anyone slap them in the face by making someone so closely tied with the IRA our first citizen?
> 
> Moving on is one thing, but things have to go at a sensitive pace.



I'm not a McG  supporter, but in fairness the Northerners have had to put up with him in power, not in a ceremonial position. Could be argued that what's good for the goose etc. Given his major contribution to ending the troubles we are being asked to move on I suppose. Today's most loved statesman, ie Nelson Mandela was yesterday's terrorist.


----------



## Mpsox (30 Sep 2011)

Latrade said:


> I feel the same to an extent, but it's less the time gone by, I want full disclosure before considering him. Secrets etc be damned, if you're going to be president and represent the State, all figurative and literal skeletons need to be aired.


 
It's the lack of honesty by McGuiness and Norris and their hiding of things that worry me about the pair of them. Last thing this country needs is to be distracted by some scandal erupting down the line. Both of them should be open, honest and transparent and then let people decide based on the facts.


----------



## Shawady (30 Sep 2011)

Apparently Sean Gallager has a proposal that instead of an election leaflet for each candidate being sent to every household in the country, there should just be one leaflet for all 7 candidates. He reckons it would save approx 10 million euro on postage.
Sounds good to me.


----------



## onq (30 Sep 2011)

Good thinking.

Therefore, two chances.


----------



## Firefly (30 Sep 2011)

The cynic in me tells me Sean Gallagher doesn't really think he's going to win anyway, so why bother spending his own money on posters etc when he can just go along for the ride and get all this free publicity. Perhaps he's a good businessman/entrpreneur but I'm not sure he has that statesman quality that IMO is required for head of state.


----------



## Latrade (30 Sep 2011)

Mpsox said:


> It's the lack of honesty by McGuiness and Norris and their hiding of things that worry me about the pair of them. Last thing this country needs is to be distracted by some scandal erupting down the line. Both of them should be open, honest and transparent and then let people decide based on the facts.


 
Couldn't agree more, full disclosure from them all if they're to represent the state.

Whatever about MMG representing in Stormont, both sides had to let a few things pass in order to work together. But he wants to represent this state as President. However ceremonial it is, he could have been (even if it was just tacitly) behind the murder of citizens of Ireland and even (again tacitly) involved in the murder of children.


----------



## RMCF (30 Sep 2011)

I think some of these candidates believe they will have more power in office than they actually will.

Sean Gallagher has said that he will work for employment. Would he not be better running in the General Election and trying to influence the jobs situation as a politician than a President?


----------



## DB74 (30 Sep 2011)

I've been impressed with Dana so far on LLS


----------



## One (1 Oct 2011)

I thought the Late Late Show tonight was quite good. I am glad that Martin McGuinness is in the race. I won't vote for him, but his presence is a cause for good worthwhile debate. I think it asks questions about the position of Irish people on where we stand regarding forgiving and forgetting the past, two qualities that Northen Ireland needed in order to reach a power sharing agreement. I can't quite forgive the IRA for atrocities such as the murder of Garda Jerry McCabe. I do think Martin McGuinness in his later role as a peacemaker is due some praise.


----------



## horusd (1 Oct 2011)

DB74 said:


> I've been impressed with Dana so far on LLS



I can't believe you said that.


----------



## RMCF (1 Oct 2011)

Also enjoyed the show last night.

Think that Mary Davis and probably Sean Gallagher are out of it now haven't listened to what they had to say.

I think its going to be between, in order, Michael D, Norris, MMG, Gay.


----------



## Guest105 (1 Oct 2011)

DB74 said:


> I've been impressed with Dana so far on LLS



We need to go forward not backwards.  Dana's ideology is very much dated.


----------



## Purple (1 Oct 2011)

RMCF said:


> Also enjoyed the show last night.
> 
> Think that Mary Davis and probably Sean Gallagher are out of it now haven't listened to what they had to say.
> 
> I think its going to be between, in order, Michael D, Norris, MMG, Gay.



I agree.

Someone pointed out that in his posters Mickey D looks a lot like the reverend from Postman Pat. (Not that I watch Postman Pat, I’m far too busy )


----------



## Shawady (3 Oct 2011)

RMCF said:


> I think its going to be between, in order, Michael D, Norris, MMG, Gay.


 
I think it is going to fall like that too but MMG might end up getting  abetter first preference than Norris.
FG have gone all out on McGuiness. They must be worried he'll finish ahead of their candidate.
The attacks over the weekend may backfire.


----------



## michaelm (3 Oct 2011)

IMHO Norris has little chance.  I think it's between Mickey D and MMG with Dana being the dark horse.





DB74 said:


> I've been impressed with Dana so far on LLS


She gets that the President's main job is to protect the Irish Constitution.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (3 Oct 2011)

Shawady said:


> FG have gone all out on McGuiness. They must be worried he'll finish ahead of their candidate.
> The attacks over the weekend may backfire.


I don't think so.  At 10/1 Mitchell has nothing to lose by differentiating himself from the others.  My guess is that the electoral attitudes to McGuinness are that a 20% disenfranchised class would be ardent supporters, a further 30% have been fooled by his peacemaker claims and the remaining 50% detest him.  The FG ploy will make the middle 30% think again.  But more importantly it might make many in the "detest" camp to support Mitchell as the only one prepared to call a spade a spade here.


----------



## onq (3 Oct 2011)

Latrade said:


> Couldn't agree more, full disclosure from them all if they're to represent the state.
> 
> Whatever about MMG representing in Stormont, both sides had to let a few things pass in order to work together. But he wants to represent this state as President. However ceremonial it is, he could have been (even if it was just tacitly) behind the murder of citizens of Ireland and even (again tacitly) involved in the murder of children.



Whereas we are in no doubt - because of the many, many uncontested revelations over the years - that Britain, represented by Banríon Eilís a Dó, has killed hundreds if not thousands of innocent nationalists in Northern Ireland and did so knowingly by passing on the names of innocent Catholics to Loyalist murder squads through the command of Brigadier General Gordon Kerr.

At least if Lizzie meets McGuinness in the Áras, she'll know what that red sticky substance on his hands is.

Norris wouldn't, and its his naivety that is my only concern about him - a touch of Champagne bubbles.

McGuinness OTOH is like a strong pint of stout - an acquired taste.

As for the rest of them -


Sean Gallagher is a young wine trying to become  vintage before his time
Davis is all Red Bull and Corporate but not easy to warm to
Gay Mitchell is sour grapes, salt and vinegar.
Dana has a touch of Hemlock about her
Michael D is arguably on the turn
So much for the Halloween Party.


----------



## onq (3 Oct 2011)

Purple said:


> I agree.
> 
> Someone pointed out that in his posters Mickey D looks a lot like the reverend from Postman Pat. (Not that I watch Postman Pat, I’m far too busy )




Busted!


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (4 Oct 2011)

I had a scary thought. Can't the Presi grant asylum. McGuinness would almost certainly grant asylum to his old pal Ghaddaffi, would even have have him as an indefinite Aras guest.


----------



## Mpsox (4 Oct 2011)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> I had a scary thought. Can't the Presi grant asylum. McGuinness would almost certainly grant asylum to his old pal Ghaddaffi, would even have have him as an indefinite Aras guest.


 
Another scary thought. I thought that under new proposed legislation from Alan Shatter ( the one obliging priests to tell the Gardai if someone admits to an offense in confession), that if people were aware crimes had been committed that they are legally required to tell the Gardai. If McG knows of IRA people living in the South and their crimes (which he probably does), would he be obliged to tell the Gardai? If not, would he have committed a crime and if he did tell the Gardai, would his Sinn Fein colleagues consider him a grass?


----------



## oldnick (4 Oct 2011)

Gosh ,Onq, ... so, _... we are in no doubt that the Britain killed hundreds  if not thousands of innocent nationalists by passing on the names of these innocent Catholics to Loyalist murder squads...._


Do you believe that ? Really?


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (4 Oct 2011)

oldnick said:


> Gosh ,Onq, ... so, _... we are in no doubt that the Britain killed hundreds if not thousands of innocent nationalists by passing on the names of these innocent Catholics to Loyalist murder squads...._
> 
> 
> Do you believe that ? Really?


ONQ believes that the way out of our current financial mess is to wipe the slate clean and let everybody off their current debts. So it is entirely possible that he does indulge that fantasy.


----------



## horusd (7 Oct 2011)

So Dana's a Yank and McGuinness is a Brit. Surely we should put our foot down and only buy Irish? Actually I've now decided that Gallagher is my man in the Dragon's Den, formally known as the Aras. He looks like a bloke that could slap the heads off those "Talk Talk" numbskulls and get out IDA money back.


----------



## Bill Struth (7 Oct 2011)

oldnick said:


> Gosh ,Onq, ... so, _... we are in no doubt that the Britain killed hundreds if not thousands of innocent nationalists by passing on the names of these innocent Catholics to Loyalist murder squads...._
> 
> 
> Do you believe that ? Really?


 You never hear of the Stevens Inquiries? Brian Nelson? He was just one British agent, there were many hundreds more.


----------



## T McGibney (7 Oct 2011)

Bill Struth said:


> You never hear of the Stevens Inquiries? Brian Nelson? He was just one British agent, there were many hundreds more.



A lot of people are wondering how many of these British agents are now in senior positions within Sinn Fein, and if any of them are standing for President.


----------



## Shawady (7 Oct 2011)

Well according to recent opinion poll, SF is now the second most popular party in the country. This was no doubt the objective of the presidential campaign - to promote the party rather than get their guy in the park.

[broken link removed]


----------



## Bill Struth (7 Oct 2011)

T McGibney said:


> A lot of people are wondering how many of these British agents are now in senior positions within Sinn Fein, and if any of them are standing for President.


 J118 anyone? 

Allegedly there's a tape somewhere of a conversation between a certain agent and his handler. Now that would be interesting listening.


----------



## Betsy Og (7 Oct 2011)

Bill Struth said:


> You never hear of the Stevens Inquiries? Brian Nelson? He was just one British agent, there were many hundreds more.


 
no doubt there was collusion, but looking at it from start to finish from 1969 riots, RUC in Derry, burning out of catholics, Operation Motorman/Rape of the Falls, Internment, Bloody Sunday its fair to say that there were some compelling reasons as to why the IRA emerged and had support - it hardly having existed around 1969.

However from around the mid 70's it was fairly clear that there was going to be no military victories on either side, and the IRA 'long war' was pointless and blood thirsty. So you got Kingsmill massacre (pick out the 1 catholic & shoot the 12 protestants), Le Mons (firebombing ordinary punters), Bloody Friday (spate of bombings across Belfast in civilian areas), Pub bombings in UK (maybe a suggestion these werent "official jobs"), Mountbatten, Hyde Park (famous for the horses....), Enniskillen and I'm sure another 10 or 12 that had no 'military' justification (and thats presuming you accept all military targets were justifiable in a "war"). Then there was The Dissappeared, torture, community control and punishment beatings, one could go on. So basically there was total disregard for civilian life and collusion came in the 80's - not that it was justifiable but its clear no-one was adopting Queensbury Rules, so to speak..... 

Why any of this is relevant is that McGuinness & other senior leaders have a lot to answer for, ok he was eventually cajoled into the peace process, but a couple of decades (at least) of pointless killing and then lying about your role in it are hardly the credentials you'd be looking for in your ideal candidate.


----------



## Firefly (7 Oct 2011)

Another beauty from todays Irish Times 

Sir, – Since we seem intent on dredging through the past  misdemeanours of the presidential candidates in order to diminish their  candidacy, I want to know, from the other six, if any of them ever  attended a Dana concert. – Yours, etc,
  JOHN MCDWYER,
 Summerhill,
 Carrick on Shannon,
 Co Leitrim.


----------



## onq (7 Oct 2011)

Indoctrination by Dana - subliminal pressures on who to vote in as President.

Could be a doctoral thesis on the benefits of media manipulation there


----------



## onq (7 Oct 2011)

Betsy Og said:


> Why any of this is relevant is that McGuinness & other senior leaders have a lot to answer for, ok he was eventually cajoled into the peace process, but a couple of decades (at least) of pointless killing and then lying about your role in it are hardly the credentials you'd be looking for in your ideal candidate.



No but then he'll be in good company if he meets Barack Obama or Banríon Eilís a Dó.
Add the head of any government that sent troops to Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya.

They all know what the sticky red stuff is on their hands.
The blood of innocents cannot be washed away.


----------



## Bill Struth (7 Oct 2011)

Betsy Og said:


> collusion came in the 80's


Oh come on. The Glennane gang operated from 1972 onwards. Their first killing was with a British army issued grenade. Miami Showband attacks and Dublin/Monaghan bombings amongst their other 'successes'.


----------



## Betsy Og (7 Oct 2011)

onq said:


> Banríon Eilís a Dó.
> They all know what the sticky red stuff is on their hands.


 
Could we give it a rest about Banríon Eilís a Dó, anyone with even half a brain knows that she has had no hand act or part in the British military during her lifetime (wielding a spanner in her role as a WWII mechanic excepted), maybe she's figurehead of the UK & Commonwealth and the UK Armed Forces but she makes no decisions, has no responsibility. It would be like blaming the Irish president for something our army might do, to all intents and purposes it has nothing to do with them, and attributing blame or responsibility to them is just plain daft.


----------



## Betsy Og (7 Oct 2011)

Bill Struth said:


> Oh come on. The Glennane gang operated from 1972 onwards. Their first killing was with a British army issued grenade. Miami Showband attacks and Dublin/Monaghan bombings amongst their other 'successes'.


 
The stuff you were talking about, if I'm not mistaken, was in the 1980's, but the general point is that collusion wasnt a catalyst to the whole problem - there were enough clearer reasons.


----------



## T McGibney (7 Oct 2011)

Betsy Og said:


> no doubt there was collusion, but looking at it from start to finish from 1969 riots, RUC in Derry, burning out of catholics, Operation Motorman/Rape of the Falls, Internment, Bloody Sunday its fair to say that there were some compelling reasons as to why the IRA emerged and had support - it hardly having existed around 1969.
> 
> However from around the mid 70's it was fairly clear that there was going to be no military victories on either side, and the IRA 'long war' was pointless and blood thirsty. So you got Kingsmill massacre (pick out the 1 catholic & shoot the 12 protestants), Le Mons (firebombing ordinary punters), Bloody Friday (spate of bombings across Belfast in civilian areas), Pub bombings in UK (maybe a suggestion these werent "official jobs"), Mountbatten, Hyde Park (famous for the horses....), Enniskillen and I'm sure another 10 or 12 that had no 'military' justification (and thats presuming you accept all military targets were justifiable in a "war"). Then there was The Dissappeared, torture, community control and punishment beatings, one could go on. So basically there was total disregard for civilian life and collusion came in the 80's - not that it was justifiable but its clear no-one was adopting Queensbury Rules, so to speak.....
> 
> Why any of this is relevant is that McGuinness & other senior leaders have a lot to answer for, ok he was eventually cajoled into the peace process, but a couple of decades (at least) of pointless killing and then lying about your role in it are hardly the credentials you'd be looking for in your ideal candidate.



Interesting perspective here from Kevin Myers, on the 'informer culture' that fed, and fed off, the Troubles.


----------



## Bill Struth (7 Oct 2011)

Betsy Og said:


> The stuff you were talking about, if I'm not mistaken, was in the 1980's, but the general point is that collusion wasnt a catalyst to the whole problem - there were enough clearer reasons.


Collusion did not 'come in the 80's', it was there long before. That is my point. What you think was a catalyst and what wasn't is your opinion. The notion that loyalists operated as a reaction to republican violence is wrong in my opinion. The birth of 'the troubles' and the increase in loyalist killings after the ceasefire show that.


----------



## Betsy Og (7 Oct 2011)

Bill Struth said:


> Collusion did not 'come in the 80's', it was there long before. That is my point.  *Fair Enough.* What you think was a catalyst and what wasn't is your opinion. *Indeed.* The notion that loyalists operated as a reaction to republican violence is wrong in my opinion. *I'd be inclined to agree, but dont know who's arguing.* The birth of 'the troubles' and the increase in loyalist killings after the ceasefire show that.


 
Anyway, back to the topic, would you concur with the view that Marty & the lads knocked 2 decades more out of it than were "necessary", commiting some awful deeds along the way, and as a result of that Marty is unsuitable for the role?


----------



## Bill Struth (7 Oct 2011)

Betsy Og said:


> Anyway, back to the topic, would you concur with the view that Marty & the lads knocked 2 decades more out of it than were "necessary", commiting some awful deeds along the way,?


 
I'm a firm believer that no political cause can justify the taking of human life. 


Betsy Og said:


> and as a result of that Marty is unsuitable for the role?


 Dunno about that. How do we measure unsuitability? As has been said before, Bush and Blair have the blood of many times more innocents on their hands.


----------



## Betsy Og (7 Oct 2011)

Bill Struth said:


> I'm a firm believer that no political cause can justify the taking of human life.


 
Noble, but sometimes its you or me pilgrim.........


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (7 Oct 2011)

Betsy Og

There is more social injustice and inequality in the RoI than there ever was in NI.  The terrorist uprising needed the support of a hostile foreign state.  Charles Haughey, Kevin Boland, Neil Blaney etc.  provided that support and then of course latterly so did Daffi duck.


----------



## horusd (8 Oct 2011)

Not wanting to be too picky Duke but isn't Daffi spelt Daffy?


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (8 Oct 2011)

horusd said:


> Not wanting to be too picky Duke but isn't Daffi spelt Daffy?


Different duck

Latest Betfair odds:

Michael D  1/2
Sean G  7/2
Martin McG 10/1
Mary Davis 30/1
Gay Mitchell 33/1
David Norris  70/1
Dana 230/1

2 horse race then.


----------



## onq (8 Oct 2011)

Betsy Og said:


> Anyway, back to the topic, would you concur with the view that Marty & the lads knocked 2 decades more out of it than were "necessary", commiting some awful deeds along the way, and as a result of that Marty is unsuitable for the role?



That's a reasonable argument, but I think its far more complex than that -


how much of their attitude was down to the intransigence of members who had suffered a loss of a friend or family due to the security forces or loyalist murder squads who just wanted payback?
how much of it was down to "stickie" and/or criminal elements in or associated with the IRA who wanted their authority within their communities to remain unquestioned?
how much was down to the British spies in their midst intent on keeping things going to justify the British Military budget?
how much of it was down to the intransigence of Unionists who wanted the status quo to be maintained at all costs?
 The situation in Northern Ireland was very complex.


----------



## Betsy Og (8 Oct 2011)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Betsy Og
> 
> There is more social injustice and inequality in the RoI than there ever was in NI.  The terrorist uprising needed the support of a hostile foreign state.  Charles Haughey, Kevin Boland, Neil Blaney etc.  provided that support and then of course latterly so did Daffi duck.



I think you're well off the mark there. Is there not 1 man 1 vote and transparent electoral system in ROI?, isnt social housing allocated on a needs basis?, dont the institutions of the State have general support and interact with citizens without sectarian bias? Contrast that to the position in Norn Iron in 1969. 

At the moment the Seanie Fitz circle are rightly seen as a point of injustice, but at the end of the day its the middle class are largely picking up the tab. SW in ROI is among the most generous around, and clearly better than NI since they have to police welfare tourists coming over the border. There's plenty of problems in ROI of course, like everywhere, but it isnt the State behind it, the absence of personal responsibility is the biggest thing - the state doesnt make anyone stick a needle in their arm, or raid a post office with a gun, or make their neighbourhood a misery for everyone there. 

I dont think a hostile foreign state was that big an issue either, the arms importation never worked. OK the ROI provided a hiding ground, and arms storage, but that was contrary to the efforts of the State. You may argue the State didnt try hard enough, but in no way (AFAI concerned) did the ROI State (i.e. the government) help create or sustain the conflict.


----------



## Betsy Og (8 Oct 2011)

onq said:


> how much of their attitude was down to the intransigence of members who had suffered a loss of a friend or family due to the security forces or loyalist murder squads who just wanted payback?



I agree with all your points, but I suppose thats where leadership comes in, you can let the nutters rule the roost. McGuinness is no doubt an intelligent man, so while you have to try to bring the movement with you, did he not realise it was all such a futile waste and why carry on so long. 

Like the point quoted above, Bernadette Sands McKevitt thinks her brother starving himself to death gives her the right to carry on a terror campaign that has miniscule support and huge opposition. Who's to say what Bobby Sands would now want, but I'm fairly sure it wasnt 29 innocents slaughtered in Omagh - and yes no doubt that wasnt their goal, but thats what can happen when you park a car full of  explosives in a busy town centre.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (9 Oct 2011)

_Betsy Og_

I can see you believe that version of events and it does sound plausible, but let me question a few of the mantras.

Unemployment in RoI has always been higher than in NI, including its catholics, except for the illusion of the Celtic Tiger.

Back in 1969 no way had the RoI a superior SW system. It has now for sure but that is a whole different folly.

My sense, having lived in both jurisdictions, but I stand to be corrected, is that there is far more upward mobility in NI even for catholics (these days especially for catholics). MC and WC went to the same grammar schools. WC kids could genuinely rise up through the social strata.

Ever go to a disadvantaged area of Dublin (I recommend Fettercairn). It is not pretty, these are practically no go areas.

But now my main point. No way could a successful and sophisticated terrorist campaign be launched and sustained from the housing estates of Belfast and BTW neither will it ever happen in Fettercairn either.

A successful terrorist campaign needs the support of very senior figures in the establishment of a hostile country if not quite in the government itself. CH et al founded and succoured the Provisional IRA, fact.

This State really let itself down over Sunningdale. It should have introduced internment in support of that initiative (Dev did to save the RoI from the IRA in the 30s). Instead the IRA were free to accelerate its bombing campaign to the point where the whole thing became intolerable for the protestant majority and they cried Halt.

Ironic thing is that 30 years and many deaths later Martin and the IRA are hailing a dispensation which is almost indistinguishable from Sunningdale as a victory.

If only our government had shown real guts back in 1973 we would now have fair governance of NI without ceding control to the IRA and we would have saved thousands of lives to boot.


----------



## oldnick (9 Oct 2011)

Whatever about events in the North - and as a unionist I will doubtless have different views from  some of the nationalist posters - may i ask those nationalists/pro-McGuiness posters ..

.... do you accept that members of your own state's security services were killed by the IRA in this state during the time that McG was the boss (or at least influential figure) in the IRA ?


----------



## PaddyBloggit (9 Oct 2011)

If McGuinness is good enough to be the North's Deputy First Minister why isn't he good enough to be President of Ireland?

The past is past .... we should be focussing on the future.


----------



## liaconn (10 Oct 2011)

As I have already said on this thread, McGuinness's stubborn refusal to meet Queen Elizabeth 11 when she paid a very symbolic 'moving on' visit to Ireland last May, hardly inspires confidence that he has truly put the past behind him. He still seems to be entrenched in bitterness towards our nearest neighbours at a time when the rest of us have truly 'moved on'. Therefore, I would not be happy having him represent the people of Ireland at home or abroad.


----------



## TarfHead (10 Oct 2011)

PaddyBloggit said:


> If McGuinness is good enough to be the North's Deputy First Minister why isn't he good enough to be President of Ireland?


 
Because there is no equivalence between some administrative role in the UK with being Head of State for this country.

The assembly in Northern Ireland is a regional assembly. They are like kids with pocket money deciding what to spend on comics and what to spend of sweets. The office of Deputy First Minister is an artificial construct to give the SDLP or Sinn Féin some credibility with their electorate. The UUP and DUP have to suck it down and deal with the reality of having to work alongside a Nationalist MLA, if they want to wield what little power has been devolved to them from London.

The President of the Republic of Ireland is a completely different job and presents an entirely different set of duties and responsibilities.

Martin McGiunness' candidacy to be President of Ireland seems, to me, to be based on the following.

*Deputy First Minister* - see above
*The Peace Process* - and why did we need a peace process ?
*He met Nelson Mandela*. So too did the Spice Girls.


----------



## PaddyBloggit (10 Oct 2011)

But there is (an equivalence)  .... it's that Joe Public won't see the difference between the two roles.

They'll see him jumping from one role as a leader to another role as a leader except than one is South, the other North.

The voters will decide on election day ..... if he wins we get on with life ... if he loses we get on with life.

The whole role of President is over rated at any rate and the race for the Áras this time round has turned the whole thing into a Keystone Cops type of farce.

...........  and to prove my point - David Norris is yelling his head off on the TV3 news at the moment! 

To allow for real choice on election day the ballot paper should have a box for 'None of the Above'.


----------

