Presidential Election


appreciate the point T but I guess I was just equating one disparaging term with another! I mean why is the term "career politician" such a negative one? Someone who has spent their life serving the public? Ok I know the answer is because so many people think they are all serving themselves first and foremost but it's a shame that the actions of the minority colour the majority.
 
To be honest, I think the comparision is just ridiculous. We clearly need more entrepreneurs in this country. By definition, some entrepreneurs succeed and some fail. We won't incentivise new entrepreneurs by chastising and labelling those who fail.

We don't particularly need more career politicians.
 
Are we still talking about the presidential election here T? Or are you just off on a rant about getting the economy going? My points are in the context of who we want as President!
 
I'm not on a rant about anything. I just made the point that I was alarmed by your use of the term 'failed businessman' as a term of derision. Perhaps you could withdraw it and we could move on...
 
I most certainly won't withdraw it! If the term "career politician" is viewed as a negative to being a suitable President then I fully stand over using the term "failed businessman" as a negative to being a suitable President. Don't see why you are so alarmed at this personally. Now can we get back on topic?
 

Have I not explained why?

I would count being a 'failed businessman' as a good reason to vote for Gallagher above all other candidates. On the other hand, I would count his illegal directors loan as a very good reason to not to vote for him.
 
DB74 said:
Basic maths tells you that one is not a multiple!
Click to expand...
Ah I see now. So membership of one board - FÁS in particular - is a good thing, but membership of two or more boards is a bad thing.

T McGibney said:
There is no such thing as a closet FF supporter. FF didn't put up an official candidate this time around and its obvious that many/most FF supporters have openly plumped for Gallagher. At least that's what I'm hearing from people I'm talking to.
Click to expand...
The closet FF supporters are the ones who don't admit to being FF when opinion polls of party preference are taken, leading to readings of 10%-15% for FF. But when a presidential election comes along, they vote for the FF candidate.

As somebody pointed out in [broken link removed], you don't get to be on the National Executive of any political party without being deeply embedded in that party.
 
Complainer said:
The closet FF supporters are the ones who don't admit to being FF when opinion polls of party preference are taken, leading to readings of 10%-15% for FF. But when a presidential election comes along, they vote for the FF candidate.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of people out there who are Fianna Fail supporters but who, at least for the moment, won't vote or express a preference for FF until the dust has cleared from the scandalous carry-on of the Ahern/Cowen regimes. But they remain FF supporters.

Complainer said:
As somebody pointed out in [broken link removed], you don't get to be on the National Executive of any political party without being deeply embedded in that party.
Click to expand...

Ah sure we all know that. The more Gallagher's FF links have been publicised, the more his popularity has risen.
 
Coming into work this morning I found a Martin McGuinness flyer under my car.

Old habits die hard I guess.
 
T McGibney said:
By definition, some entrepreneurs succeed and some fail.
Click to expand...

I’d expand on that a little; I’d say that there are few entrepreneurs who haven’t both succeeded and failed.

I don’t think Gallagher is anywhere near the calibre of Mary McAleese or Mary Robinson but he’s probably better than any of the alternatives. It’s a shame that after a general election where I didn’t want any party in power I now have to vote in a Presidential election where I don’t want any of the candidates to win.

Here’s my view of the choices:
Dana – Christian right, Socially Conservative anti-EU. Not credible as a candidate. No pluses.

McGuiness – Former(?) IRA, represents a party that didn’t recognise our government as legitimate until recently. Very strongly far Left. Internationally will be seen as a former terrorist who supports current terrorists. On the plus side does have a story to tell in being a key figure in the peace process.

Mitchell – Unremarkable political career. No charisma and no charm. Bland in the extreme but would be competent and wouldn’t cause any problems.

Davis – Seems to rub people the wrong way. Comes across as an opportunist. Hard to see the upside.

Norris – Way too many skeletons in the closet, way too many unanswered questions. A loose cannon who couldn’t help using the office as a vehicle to forward his own agenda. Has shown very bad judgement in the past. Internationally would be seen as strongly anti-Israeli and anti-American.

Higgins – probably one of the most intellectually gifted men Ireland has ever produced. He knows just about everything about everything and has experience in just about every facet of life... at least that’s what he seems to think himself. Comes across as smug and arrogant. Will be seen internationally as anti-American.
On the positive side he does understand what the job entails and he has the experience to do the job properly. I don’t see him being a career politician as being a bad thing. While I disagree with some of his views is it unquestionable that he has dedicated his life to public service.

Gallagher – No experience and no real track record. The talk of being a President for job creation is nonsense. The stories about his business history are not worth talking about. They may seem like issues for people who have never set up or run a business (i.e. Labour Party supporters) but taking out a directors loan and repaying it as soon as your accountant tells you that you shouldn’t have done it is no big deal. Getting grants to set up and/or expand a business is also not a crime. Some may see attempts to create jobs as a good thing.
He’ll probably not make a balls of things but he’ll hardly go down in the history books as one of the countries greats.
He’s in the lead because he’s a clean vote for FF supporters and floating voters dislike his less than any of the rest.
It’s amazing that he’s doing so well despite the best efforts of the Labour Parties pamphlet (the Irish Times) and their TV station (RTE), not to mention the Indo (FG’s newspaper).
 
Personnely I'd consider Gallagher a businessman who had a failed business rather then a failed businessman. I've never met an entrepreneur that never had a failure and we should be praising people with some get up and go rather then picking holes in how well he's done

As for his FF links, if you don't like FF or don't want to vote for someone with FF connections, your options are limited. Basically if you don't want to vote for Gallagher then you can vote for

Mary Davis, appointed to loads of boards by FF
Michael D, once a member of FF in his youth and sat in cabinet in the 90s with Ahern and Cowan
Dana, who swoar an other rejecting allegiance to this country
McGuiness, former terrorist who was a member of a party that failed to recognise just about any Govt on these islands. Also seems to be running for president of someplace called "Down here". Can't wait to see him pinning medals on Irish soldiers in the Lebannon (like Mary Mc did last week) given that he knows who murdered their colleagues (or could at least find out with a couple of phone calls) and hasn't told the Gardai
Gay Mitchell

Personally, at this moment in time, Gallagher it probably is for me

Also the fact that the only 2 candiidates for which no "dirt" has appeared is Higgins and Mitchell. Given that FG have admitted that in the last election, they tried to smear McAleese as being a Sinn Fein sympathiser and tried to dig up any much they could on her, I think not voting for any of the Govt candidates might send a message that there should be more to politics then muckraking
 
Complainer said:
Ah I see now. So membership of one board - FÁS in particular - is a good thing, but membership of two or more boards is a bad thing.
Click to expand...

He's just joined the board of FAS. He applied for the position after seeing an advert in a national newspaper. He said that he's taking no salary from the post.
 
I look at this analysis and media analysis and debates and statements and wonder when the we started treating this as if we were looking for the next FDR (that's just an example of a president during hard times before that debate kicks off).

The role involves 90% of time opening schools, community centres and giving speeches at charity and buisness events. Once in a while you're asked to sign something into power. You don't even get to keep the pen.

So McGuinness can be a jobs ambassador and disagree with austerity measures, but it's futile. (but begs the question as to how much he is stopping the austerity measures in the North or creating jobs there, or is it a matter of those cuts are yet to fully come and he's jumping ship before he has to agree to them?)

All of them can talk about their respect abroad, who they can phone and all that tosh. Can you smile for a camera, can you use a pair of scissors, can you pull that cord, can you sign where we tell you to sign?

In reality the debate should be a series of ceremonial ribbons and see who can cut them the quickest before the ceremonial plaque revealing.
 
 
Latrade said:
The role involves 90% of time opening schools, community centres and giving speeches at charity and buisness events.
Click to expand...
The fact that this has generally been the role TO DATE does not mean that the role is limited to this. There are actually very few limitations on what the President can do. The limitations relate to speeches made abroad, afaik. The country badly need leadership to lead us out of our current disastrous situation. This role was an ideal opportunity to get someone who can do this.

Unless there is an Enterprise Ireland grant going, I can't see Gallagher providing inspirational leadership.
 

I was thinking about that after I wrote it. Michael D must be a rich man as things stand; Ministerial pension, TD pension, Lecturer and author.
 

The Irish President is not our leader.
That job falls to Enda.

Anyway, do you think that Michael Twee will suddenly become inspirational? If so he's been hiding that light under a bushel very successfully for quite some time.
 
Michael D's comments today, quoted on rte.ie, will go down like a lead balloon amongst the small-scale entrepreneurs and amateur property investors that have been flocking to Gallagher in recent weeks.

Its a very bad move in this campaign for any candidate to portray themselves as having been immune from the craziness of the bubble, and its consequences.

And nobody likes hearing anyone in authority say 'I told you so'
 
T McGibney said:
Its a very bad move in this campaign for any candidate to portray themselves as having been immune from the craziness of the bubble, and its consequences.

And nobody likes hearing anyone in authority say 'I told you so'
Click to expand...

True, but he is in the Labour Party so it’s in the blood.

I don’t remember Michael D railing against the excesses of the Celtic Tiger and I do try to keep up with politics and current affairs. That, for me, means one of two things;
1. Michael D is not being entirely accurate in what he’s saying, gilding the Lilly as it were.

Or

2. Nobody’s that interested in what he says and so it’s not reported. Hardly a ringing endorsement of his charisma and leadership qualities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register