The Race for the ARAS.....

[gallsman]

Fair post Whiskeysteve, some good points, perhaps i am over egging the pudding a little, but the general thrust off my argument still holds

No it doesn't.

Pangurban, when people down here either don't know or don't care about the north, it angers me. However, when see the amount of little gobshites who appear to represent the future of northern nationalism out in Belfast thinking they're hard as nails shouting "up the Ra" and striking sniper poses in the bot with a few bottles of buckfast in them I understand it more and more. More integrity your absolute hole. Catch yourself on.

The general populace of the south would never, ever vote to remove the rights of northerners to hold Irish passports. If you seriously believe this, you are deluded.

[Declan]

Hardy protests about being lectured to, by people who think they are better than them. We dont think it Hardy, we are. When it comes to trust,integrity and principle, any northener Unionist or Nationalist is superior to the products of the sentimental, pietistic, censorious society that was the Irish Free State and the pretend republic that evolved from it

There's been some unadulterated busllshit posted on this thread but this defies any analysis or logic whatsoever.

[Applesisapples]

As to the election, I voted for Gallagher in the poll above, if I had to vote again I would probably vote for McGuinness, mainly because I think he has been shabbily treated by the media. But also he has done the south a favour by exposing Gallagher for what he is.

So you'd vote for a candidate based on how they were treated by the media?
Surely your decision should be based on who you feel is the best person for the job?

If I was to do that it would be a spoilt vote. Poor field. McGuinness and Gallagher have been disappointing. The rest are a collection of non entities IMO.

[Applesisapples]

shame to see this become a north v south slagging match. pangurban your rage at the establishment parties/media etc is one thing but you are not seriously trying to tell us northerners are superior to southerners as people of integrity in general???

if anything there is a greater streak of dishonourable attitudes in certain republican areas in the north which is a carry over of the old attitude of 'cheating the crown' so to speak. I refer to folks who continue to evade tax, do the double, petty stuff like not paying tv license, etc.

I would concede that politicians in the north have, on the balance, been more personally 'honest' in their dealings outside of politics but solely down to 2 reasons, firstly the cut throat and tribal nature of politics in the north with the rabid Jim Allisters of the world just waiting to sink you was a greater deterrent than the relatively 'cosy' nature of pre bust politics in the south. Secondly, and more importantly the celtic tiger and easy credit boom brought so much more money into the political establishment in the south in terms of salaries, expenses and 'acceptable' accruement of wealth that a few thousand euros of impropriety here and there didn't seem so harmful to many people at the time. More money, more corruption, wherever it happens to reside.

The evidence for your assertion that NI politicians are more honest is shaky at best. Think of the whole furore surrounding expenses, the employment of family, the Robinsons connections with developers, the triple jobbing the junkets....need I go on. The only thing that has stopped politicians here being involved in issues surrounding planning etc... has been a lack of power. but thats about to change with planning powers being returned to councils. But in any event look at the record of all parties in their lobbying for development that that breaches planning law.

[Rossfan]

Despite the shafting of Ros Hospital under the current Government I am voting for Michaelín D mainly to stop FFGallagher getting in.
Would have voted Marty McG. as a gesture towards my belief in an All Ireland future but the need to stop another slíbhín FFer getting a big job from the public purse has to take precedence.

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

Rossfan, wouldn't dream about telling you how PR works but...

That's the whole point: if you put M Mc G @ No. 1, and Mickey D @ No. 2, once M Mc G is eliminated Mickey D will get his vote (assuming Gallagher doesn't get in on the first count, which he won't).

[Hardy]

Maybe that explains the strange voting patterns on the gaaboard exit poll.

[AQMP]

Rossfan, wouldn't dream about telling you how PR works but...

That's the whole point: if you put M Mc G @ No. 1, and Mickey D @ No. 2, once M Mc G is eliminated Mickey D will get his vote (assuming Gallagher doesn't get in on the first count, which he won't).

But could there be the case where a candidate is deemed elected before McGuinness is eliminated?  Is it the case then that your vote is not transferred or does it not work this way??  Say, for talk's sake, that Michael D gets 47% on the first count and the transfers from Davis/Dana take him over the 50% on the third count.  Then the election is over

[Hardy]

Yes - the first candidate to reach the quota is elected.

[whiskeysteve]

shame to see this become a north v south slagging match. pangurban your rage at the establishment parties/media etc is one thing but you are not seriously trying to tell us northerners are superior to southerners as people of integrity in general???

if anything there is a greater streak of dishonourable attitudes in certain republican areas in the north which is a carry over of the old attitude of 'cheating the crown' so to speak. I refer to folks who continue to evade tax, do the double, petty stuff like not paying tv license, etc.

I would concede that politicians in the north have, on the balance, been more personally 'honest' in their dealings outside of politics but solely down to 2 reasons, firstly the cut throat and tribal nature of politics in the north with the rabid Jim Allisters of the world just waiting to sink you was a greater deterrent than the relatively 'cosy' nature of pre bust politics in the south. Secondly, and more importantly the celtic tiger and easy credit boom brought so much more money into the political establishment in the south in terms of salaries, expenses and 'acceptable' accruement of wealth that a few thousand euros of impropriety here and there didn't seem so harmful to many people at the time. More money, more corruption, wherever it happens to reside.

The evidence for your assertion that NI politicians are more honest is shaky at best. Think of the whole furore surrounding expenses, the employment of family, the Robinsons connections with developers, the triple jobbing the junkets....need I go on. The only thing that has stopped politicians here being involved in issues surrounding planning etc... has been a lack of power. but thats about to change with planning powers being returned to councils. But in any event look at the record of all parties in their lobbying for development that that breaches planning law.

I definitely did not assert that NI politics was corruption free, to the contrary there have been plenty of strokes pulled as you summarised. But I would still maintain that the cute hoorism/corruption was on a somewhat grander scale in the southern establishment. Certainly in terms of the money involved. The likes of Michael Lowrys dealings with O'Brien and John O'Donoghues huge expenses would spring to mind.

Put it this way, for most of the bad examples of financial impropriety in the northern politics I think you could find 2 mirror images in the south with a bit more oomph! No one turned the junkets up to 11 quite like Mary Harney for example. For triple jobbing in the north I give you the astronomical amounts of money afforded to those serving on the boards of quangoes in the south.

Whether you like him or not, Fintan O'Tooles 'Ship of Fools' is a good account of how endemic the corruption became in the southern establishment, from Haughey to Bertie and beyond. The Cayman Islands accounts, the golden circle, etc

But as I said this is down to a more settled and money steeped political establishment than anything else and as you say there are plenty of indications that our representatives were catching up as the political climate settled down and the money flowed in up here!

And any assertion that the grassroots in the south have inherently less integrity than their counterparts in the north is plain wrong of course.

[Rossfan]

Rossfan, wouldn't dream about telling you how PR works but...

That's the whole point: if you put M Mc G @ No. 1, and Mickey D @ No. 2, once M Mc G is eliminated Mickey D will get his vote (assuming Gallagher doesn't get in on the first count, which he won't).

The point of my  voting Micín no.1 is to try and  get him more votes than FFGallagher in the first count or as near as possible to him anyway.
If I vote MMcG no1 I fear we could end up with a situation Gallagher could sneak up to the quota before Marty McG is eliminated.

[boojangles]

I have lived in and travelled extensively throughout the South over many years Gallsman. I assure you my statement is neither bigoted or misinformed. If there is anything specific i have said you disagree with, i am prepared to back it up. Whilst i may have used a wide,sweeping Brush, the picture i have painted is accurate

And the prize for the most deluded man in Ireland goes to Pangurban. A very close 2nd was our friend Bertie.

[Evil Genius]

Tubberman you and some others here seem to take the posts of a few Northern Posters on this site as representative of all. This is not the case no more than some of the views expressed on here by you and others represent the views of all southerners. Yes it is true that some southerners on here have displayed a lack of understanding of the northern situation and the experiences of Nationalists since partition and the feeling of isolation we felt. But not all. Some northern posters have also shown a lack of understanding both of the politics and the experiences of the south since partition. But there is more that unites us than divides us. We should however know from the experiences of German reunification that to wake up in a United Ireland one day would be a complete disaster for all. When it happens unity will come dropping slowly and will require patience, understanding and compromise on all sides.

All very well, I'm sure, but it completely fails to take into account the "elephant in the room" - namely 1 million NI Unionists, without whose willing co-operation, no-one will be going anywhere.

Don't hold your breath...

Well it does really. That's the whole "patience, understanding and compromise on all sides" part I'd imagine. Unless you don't consider the unionists to be a side I suppose.

Fair enough, I see your point.

What I was taking exception to was the implicit assumption that "it" (Irish political unity) will inevitably happen.

Imo, thanks to those 1 million Unionists,"it" won't happen in your or my lifetime*.


* - Beyond that timescale, who knows? I suppose we can leave that for the type of people who hark back to the days of Dan Breen or 1798 to speculate upon...

1 million unionists is a myth, just as SF's belief  that all Nationalists want an immediate 32 County Republic is a myth.

No "myth" whatever.
The population of NI is just over 1.8m. The overtly Nationalist vote (SF/SDLP) at elections has for over a decade plateaued at around 43%.
The remainder is made up of various Unionists or Independent Unionists, plus the (nominally non-aligned) Alliance and Greens. However, on the basis that the Alliance/Green vote comes overwhelmingly in Unionist majority areas (8 x times more support than in Nationalist-majority areas!), then Unionists only need 55.7% of the ballot to reflect a Unionist constituency of 1 million.
Now if you tell me that it's really only 53% (954k) or even 51% (918k), I'll not argue - it's all "as near as dammit" for me.

Unity will happen and for a number of reasons not just demographic. One thing is certain it will not bear any resemblance to current nationalist thinking.

We've been hearing that line for the 90 years since Partition...

And it probably won't happen in the next 25 years,

If I was sure I'd live for the next 25 years without pegging out, or becoming too senile to remember where I'd put the Betting Slip, I'd be down to Paddy Power like a shot!

For what people fail to take into account is that whilst the political parties in NI obviously reflect general feelings on the Border etc, people do vote in General Elections for other reasons than just that.

It is my firm conviction that if it ever came to the crunch, a Border Referendum would see many more SDLP/SF voters opt to retain the Border (or abstain), than would see Unionist voters opt to abolish it (or abstain).

My reasons for believing so are to be found in the various Surveys which have been conducted in recent years, eg:
http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2009/Political_Attitudes/NIRELND2.html
These indicate that there is overwhelming support in NI to retain the Border - presumably on the basis that people know on which side of it their "bread is buttered"!

... but look how far things have changed since 1990.

Oh but I am looking, I am!

The Republic has dropped its claim on NI.
The people of the Republic increasingly no longer give a damn about NI (at least since The Troubles stopped, Discrimination has been ended, and the GFA has come into force etc).
The "Armed Struggle" (Siege) against the British community in NI has been all-but ended.
The average Nationalist in NI is far more settled/content with his lot than ever.
The rest of the world (esp "Irish America") no longer gives a damn about Ireland, never mind uniting it.
The Republic's economy has crashed, whilst that of NI is being held up by the UK Treasury.
Oh, and instead of "Smashing Stormont", the Shinners are now firmly ensconsed in the "Big House on the Hill", from where they help to administer British Rule in Ireland!

Face up to reality, Apples, the Tide has Turned, and Republicans are not Waving but Drowning!   

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

Rossfan, wouldn't dream about telling you how PR works but...

That's the whole point: if you put M Mc G @ No. 1, and Mickey D @ No. 2, once M Mc G is eliminated Mickey D will get his vote (assuming Gallagher doesn't get in on the first count, which he won't).

The point of my  voting Micín no.1 is to try and  get him more votes than FFGallagher in the first count or as near as possible to him anyway.
If I vote MMcG no1 I fear we could end up with a situation Gallagher could sneak up to the quota before Marty McG is eliminated.

Fair enough, all depends on the transfer distributions of the lower order eliminations.

[Evil Genius]

EG - SF might have 15% in the republic but you do realise that all the major parties in the South are for a united Ireland, even FG. Likewise in the North more than just SF are also in favour, namely the SDLP. I hope, with some persuading, that a chunk of unionists might also be convinced. Not that mad when you consider in 1798 a large proportion of the rebels in the united Irishmen in Ulster were protestant and ancestors of settlers.

You might look back to 1798  for evidence that sufficient numbers of Unionists can be persuaded to renounce their identity, heritage, aspirations and current (relative) economic stability etc, for a UI.

But this particular Unionist prefers to restrict his search to, say, the last fifty years*. And ALL the evidence of that time indicates that far from Unionists abandoning their stance, they are actually as determined as ever to maintain it.

And insofar as there has been significant movement in political thinking on this island in recent times, it is that (a ) since their Civil and Economic Rights have been granted and recognised, Nationalists in NI have become increasingly less obsessed with the National Question, whilst (b ) Nationalists in the Republic have been increasingly disinclined to give a fcuk about anything that takes place North of the Border.

Happy Days! 



* - You know, a period which constitutes "living memory" for the vast majority of people

Being a unionist we should be used to you being unable to look too far back alright

However, the point I was making (as you know well) is that there were in certain periods of history sets of circumstances where large amounts of unionists favoured a separate country from the UK.

I suspect I may know my Irish history as well as you, therefore I do not need to be told about eg Wolfe Tone and the United Irishmen etc.

But if the Border is to be abolished anytime soon, it will only happen if a majority of the people alive in NI today  will it.

And as I pointed out in my reply to Apples (above), all the evidence indicates that insofar as there is movement on the issue, the current trend is towards retaining  the Border, not abolishing it.

It is up to nationalists, republicans to demonstrate why those reasons exists today. Thats all I am saying and your mocking tone does nothing but make you look foolish.

Well they're making a pretty crap job of it, I'll say!

It is also worth noting that while you imply people wishing a united Ireland are a small irrelevant proportion, that is not the case. Lets say 42% of Northern catholics wish a unit ireland, what % of protestants would have to be convinced to crossover the 50% threshold. You are the genius, all be it an evil one, so you can work out the maths.

Firstly, it is all very well saying that if, say,  8% of Unionist voters switched position over the Border, from voting figures in Elections that might give Nationalism a majority. Except that what evidence as there is indicates that Nationalists are retreating from their pro-Unity position at least as much as Unionists are from their pro-Union position.

Second, whilst 42% of the Electorate of NI may vote in Elections for Nationalist Parties like SF/SDLP, it simply cannot be extrapolated therefrom that that number would all vote for Unity in a Referendum.
In fact, there is sound evidence to believe that many fewer would actually do so, eg:
http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2009/Political_Attitudes/NIRELND2.html

Third, your casual use of the terms "Protestant" and "Catholic", when these should actually be "Unionist" and "Nationalist", denotes a mindset that remains rooted in the 20th, or even 19th, Century.
It's no wonder that you seem to use ancient history to support your case, even whilst it (history) is being made increasingly irrelevant by developments in the 21st Century.

You might want to start playing Catch-Up...