gaaboard.com

Well following on from Zap's free state poll/thread, the posters have gone up here in the north, so who do you think will get elected?, and who will you be voting for?

Won't be voting for anyone.  Nicholson, Dodds and De Brun to be elected. though I think Allister will eat into the DUP vote but not enough to retain his seat.

Stick a poll up GDA. Wont be voting myself as they are all self obsessed clowns.

I think the Alliance are cute hoors, who many old people will get Ian Parsley confused with Ian Paisley - one letter of a difference!

Has Duffy confirmed that he is standing?

Noone there for me to vote for unfrtunately.

Is duffy really standing and why?

Quote from: Minder on May 06, 2009, 12:00:23 PM
Has Duffy confirmed that he is standing?

Not 100% sure, will check and get back to youse.

Quote from: The GAA on May 06, 2009, 12:02:35 PM

Noone there for me to vote for unfrtunately.

Is duffy really standing and why?

think he is,will that make you mind up who to vote for? 

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 06, 2009, 11:56:45 AM
I think the Alliance are cute hoors, who many old people will get Ian Parsley confused with Ian Paisley - one letter of a difference!

was thinking that myself GDA, not the confused elderly bit, but the selection of someone called Ian Parsley, a masterful stroke

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 06, 2009, 12:13:49 PM

Quote from: Minder on May 06, 2009, 12:00:23 PM
Has Duffy confirmed that he is standing?

Not 100% sure, will check and get back to youse.

According to todays Irish News they are having a press conference in Lurgan tonight and it is expected they will announce his intention to run then.

Can't say Duffy would do it for me either...

Quote from: The GAA on May 06, 2009, 12:19:39 PM

Can't say Duffy would do it for me either...

you thinking of forming a new party as all the others are there.

2. Nomination papers may be delivered to the Returning Officer at his office between 10.00am and 4.00pm on Tuesday 28 April
2009; Wednesday 29 April 2009; Thursday 30 April 2009; Friday 1 May 2009; Tuesday 5 May 2009; Wednesday 6 May 2009 and
Thursday 7 May 2009. They may be delivered only by the candidate or a person authorised in writing by the candidate.

Has until tomorrow to register himself hasn't done so as yet.

Quote from: Square Ball on May 06, 2009, 12:17:15 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 06, 2009, 11:56:45 AM
I think the Alliance are cute hoors, who many old people will get Ian Parsley confused with Ian Paisley - one letter of a difference!

was thinking that myself GDA, not the confused elderly bit, but the selection of someone called Ian Parsley, a masterful stroke

Square Ball having been involved in alot of elections myself, I know for a fact that the elderly can be very easily confused, it's a shame but thats the way of life, saying that some younger ones could be fooled/confused as well!

Quote from: glens abu on May 06, 2009, 12:21:27 PM

Quote from: The GAA on May 06, 2009, 12:19:39 PM

Can't say Duffy would do it for me either...

you thinking of forming a new party as all the others are there.

Nope - i haven't found anyone competent enough to vote for in quite a while in this god forsaken country

The Duffy family and supporters will be deciding tonight whether to put him forward or not.

If he stands will he be recognising the existence of the 6 Co Statelet ?

Quote from: Rossfan on May 06, 2009, 01:10:22 PM
If he stands will he be recognising the existence of the 6 Co Statelet ?

Considering that Duffy worked on many of Sinn Fein election campaigns through the 80's, 90's and into the 00's, that's a strange question to ask.

GDA stick a 'None of the above' in the poll.

The thread should really be called "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?" as I've read somewhere that MEPs can save (not make!) a million over the 5 year tenure! But obviously they are only interested in representing their constituents in Europe  ;)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5780599.ece (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5780599.ece)

de bruins posters are hideous looking :o :o

Quote from: T O Hare on May 06, 2009, 01:34:02 PM
de bruins posters are hideous looking :o :o

Unfortunately it's not the posters that are hideous looking!

Quote from: T O Hare on May 06, 2009, 01:34:02 PM
de bruins posters are hideous looking :o :o

Jim Nicholson must have got a new set of gnashers for his photo! In fairness we're not exactly tripping over looks in politics in this place. Silvio Berlusconi has the right idea! (http://img.metro.co.uk/i/pix/2007/02/yespica_450x200.jpg)

Quote from: T O Hare on May 06, 2009, 01:34:02 PM
de bruins posters are hideous looking :o :o

Handy for keeping the kids away from the fire.

Quote from: The GAA on May 06, 2009, 12:25:10 PM

Quote from: glens abu on May 06, 2009, 12:21:27 PM

Quote from: The GAA on May 06, 2009, 12:19:39 PM

Can't say Duffy would do it for me either...

you thinking of forming a new party as all the others are there.

Nope - i haven't found anyone competent enough to vote for in quite a while in this god forsaken country


how do you expect things to change if you dont get involved in a party or at least vote.

Colin Duffy will be removed from the poll (and arrested for something or other) if he decides not to stand.

I think it will be Babs, Jim Nicholson and Diane Dodds, but expect a fractured unionist vote, with Jim (the dino bigot) Allister and Ian flatleaf getting a fair few of the unionist votes.

I hope the Traditional Unionist Lisp candidate eats into the DUP suficiently to allow the Shinners to top the poll ;D

Thats why it is important to vote, a poll topping nationalist candidate will deal a mortal blow to unionism as well as boost nationalist morale

Wont be voting.

I hope Jim Allister gets in...









to severe breathing difficulties, resulting in death.  The man is the most depressing, downgrading bigot I have ever had the displeasure of listening to.

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 06, 2009, 11:56:45 AM
I think the Alliance are cute hoors, who many old people will get Ian Parsley confused with Ian Paisley - one letter of a difference!

Agreed. I actually had to do a double take. Initially i thought it was Ian Og.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/c4/Distinguished_gentleman.jpg/200px-Distinguished_gentleman.jpg)

Someone in alliance must have been watching eddie murphy recently

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 06, 2009, 02:07:32 PM
Colin Duffy will be removed from the poll (and arrested for something or other) if he decides not to stand.

Do I get my vote back if Collie is removed?

Quote from: Donagh on May 06, 2009, 03:39:25 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 06, 2009, 02:07:32 PM
Colin Duffy will be removed from the poll (and arrested for something or other) if he decides not to stand.

Do I get my vote back if Collie is removed?

Not sure, you shouldn't have be acting the wag in the first place though!

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 06, 2009, 04:04:40 PM
Not sure, you shouldn't have be acting the wag in the first place though!

Wasn't acting the wag. I'll vote for Duffy if he stands, knowing the transfer will go elsewhere when he is eliminated.

I think that strangly for once all the excitment is in the unionist camp. There is serious hatred with Jim Allister and the DUP, lots of old style unionists dont like Jim Nicholson because he did the dirty on his wife a few years back. As for the nationalist side babs wil be elected but alban will not get near third place

Nicholson's standing under the label Conservatives and Unionists, BTW ;)

Thats appropriate as he is a proper CU*t ;D

I would love to know form those who vote for none of the above,who would they like to stand or what would thier ideal candidate have to do or say for them to vote.

Duffy is gone.

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 07, 2009, 09:51:15 AM
Duffy is gone.

thats a pity,would have been good to see what sort of support he had.

Very little I would have thought.

Quote from: A Quinn Martin Production on May 06, 2009, 01:39:06 PM

Quote from: T O Hare on May 06, 2009, 01:34:02 PM
de bruins posters are hideous looking :o :o

Unfortunately it's not the posters that are hideous looking!

She looks like DeValera on those posters. Are they looking for the FF vote?

Quote from: Lecale2 on May 07, 2009, 10:06:04 AM

Quote from: A Quinn Martin Production on May 06, 2009, 01:39:06 PM

Quote from: T O Hare on May 06, 2009, 01:34:02 PM
de bruins posters are hideous looking :o :o

Unfortunately it's not the posters that are hideous looking!

She looks like DeValera on those posters. Are they looking for the FF vote?

FF dont stand in the north ;)yet

Quote from: Lecale2 on May 07, 2009, 10:06:04 AM
Are they looking for the FF vote?

Surely that's the SDLP.

Quote from: ziggysego on May 07, 2009, 10:15:51 AM

Quote from: Lecale2 on May 07, 2009, 10:06:04 AM
Are they looking for the FF vote?

Surely that's the SDLP.

Who are they Ziggy?  ;)

Quote from: Lecale2 on May 07, 2009, 10:06:04 AM

Quote from: A Quinn Martin Production on May 06, 2009, 01:39:06 PM

Quote from: T O Hare on May 06, 2009, 01:34:02 PM
de bruins posters are hideous looking :o :o

Unfortunately it's not the posters that are hideous looking!

She looks like DeValera on those posters. Are they looking for the FF vote?

Men don't make passes at women who wear glasses! However, I don't think that there is a man in the 32 who has ever made a pass at BDB.

3 votes for the DUP. Can we guess who these are from...or would that count as outing posters?   ;)

Quote from: cville on May 08, 2009, 11:15:32 PM
Men don't make passes at women who wear glasses! However, I don't think that there is a man in the 32 who has ever made a pass at BDB.

I don't think that would worry her too much.

On the subject of the posters, Bairbre's reminds me of my old school Principal, a stern old Sister of Mercy. A hateful oul bag she was, but very much in control of her world and commanding respect from all around her.

Quote from: stiffler on May 08, 2009, 11:19:22 PM
3 votes for the DUP. Can we guess who these are from...or would that count as outing posters?   ;)

I wouldn't regard the poll as too scientific!

Quote from: Maguire01 on May 09, 2009, 09:14:41 AM

Quote from: stiffler on May 08, 2009, 11:19:22 PM
3 votes for the DUP. Can we guess who these are from...or would that count as outing posters?   ;)

I wouldn't regard the poll as too scientific!

I'm somewhat surprised at the results none-the-less.

I'm afraid there's no-one really for me to vote for since the UUP joined the Tories.  Still haven't forgave those bastards after the A-I Agreement ;)

Anyway, agree with the comments about Barbara Brown - she's a right oul trout.

Quote from: Tonto on May 11, 2009, 06:13:58 PM
Anyway, agree with the comments about Barbara Brown - she's a right oul trout.

Who's that?

Quote from: Tonto on May 11, 2009, 06:13:58 PM
I'm afraid there's no-one really for me to vote for since the UUP joined the Tories.  Still haven't forgave those b**tards after the A-I Agreement ;)

Anyway, agree with the comments about Barbara Brown - she's a right oul trout.

Theres an option for none of the above   ::)

Quote from: Donagh on May 11, 2009, 06:17:16 PM

Quote from: Tonto on May 11, 2009, 06:13:58 PM
Anyway, agree with the comments about Barbara Brown - she's a right oul trout.

Who's that?

The candidate for Ourselves Alone.

Quote from: Tonto on May 11, 2009, 06:24:59 PM
The candidate for Ourselves Alone.

I still don't know who you are referring to but if you care to set aside that famous Portadown bigotry you tra mp around this Board like dog shit and have a little respect of the rights and culture of others we may be able to communicate a little better.

Quote from: Donagh on May 11, 2009, 06:29:36 PM

Quote from: Tonto on May 11, 2009, 06:24:59 PM
The candidate for Ourselves Alone.

I still don't know who you are referring to but if you care to set aside that famous Portadown bigotry you tra mp around this Board like dog shit and have a little respect of the rights and culture of others we may be able to communicate a little better.

Portadown?

'Fraid you have me mistaken for someone else, big man.  Maybe the intelligence network isn't what it once was. :D

Dog shit tends to smell the same wherever the mutt is kenneled. The brand you trail about with you is particularly obnoxious.

Quote from: Donagh on May 11, 2009, 06:42:39 PM
Dog shit tends to smell the same wherever the mutt is kenneled. The brand you trail about with you is particularly obnoxious.

The republican stuff smells just as bad, truth be told.  ;)

I was talking to a local sdlp man the other day who was pushing the line that Alban could sneak 3rd place with a split unionist vote. At first I told him he was talking out his ass but he kept arguing so I looked up the figure tonight from the 2004 election. After the first count the UUP were only about 4000 votes ahead of the SDLP but then picked up good transfers from Allister but not enough to push him over the finish line. At this point the Alliance/farmer candidate Gilliland, Eamon McCann and the green candidate were eliminated with Nicholson picking up 22000 votes and Morgan 20000. This was enough to push Nicholson over the line and the third seat, BDBs surplus was never distributed. What surprised me was that although we are always told the alliance are a unionist party and all the centrist votes are really unionist votes loaned out there was almost a 50/50 split in the transfers. Overall taking into account transfers we ended with about 53% unionist vote 47% nationalist. I still believe it will be an election too early for the SDLP this time although it may be closer than I first thought.

I see that the Ulster Unionist slogan for Europe is Vote For Change. They always get in, so are they saying give their vote to Ian Parsley?

As the DUP are in cahoots with their mortal enemy ("we will not sit in government with terrorists" etc.) will the Ulster Unionist party now get the hardline unionist vote or will they opt for Jim Allister?

Quote from: ziggysego on May 11, 2009, 11:42:28 PM
I see that the Ulster Unionist slogan for Europe is Vote For Change.

Bizarre.  What is the change, a link with the Conservatives?  Not much of a change given they fought the bit out about the name and couldn't agree to merge.

I wouldnt spit on any of them if they were on fire never mind voting for them.

Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 12, 2009, 12:48:43 AM
I wouldnt spit on any of them if they were on fire never mind voting for them.

If they were on fire, I'm sure they wouldn't appreciate you gobbing all over them Pints.

Quote from: Donagh on May 11, 2009, 06:42:39 PM
Dog shit tends to smell the same wherever the mutt is kenneled. The brand you trail about with you is particularly obnoxious.

:D :D :D

Dammit, quite disappointed (but not surprised) that Donagh was the only one dumb enough to take the bait. :D

(http://blog.syracuse.com/video/2008/05/050508_fishing.jpg)

Quote from: slow corner back on May 11, 2009, 11:30:53 PM
I was talking to a local sdlp man the other day who was pushing the line that Alban could sneak 3rd place with a split unionist vote. At first I told him he was talking out his ass but he kept arguing so I looked up the figure tonight from the 2004 election. After the first count the UUP were only about 4000 votes ahead of the SDLP but then picked up good transfers from Allister but not enough to push him over the finish line. At this point the Alliance/farmer candidate Gilliland, Eamon McCann and the green candidate were eliminated with Nicholson picking up 22000 votes and Morgan 20000. This was enough to push Nicholson over the line and the third seat, BDBs surplus was never distributed. What surprised me was that although we are always told the alliance are a unionist party and all the centrist votes are really unionist votes loaned out there was almost a 50/50 split in the transfers. Overall taking into account transfers we ended with about 53% unionist vote 47% nationalist. I still believe it will be an election too early for the SDLP this time although it may be closer than I first thought.

Sorry - regarding the SDLP - If Alban Maginnnnnneeeesss stood on shite - as opposed to standing for Europe - it would make no difference to anyone. SDLP - sons of the pig-owning class of Ireland ..

Things seem to be very quiet on the discuss/news front going into this election, haven't really heard from any of the candidates (except party political broadcasts from Sinn Féin and the DUP) and very little on the two main news websites from the north. This piece from Martina Purdy is almost two weeks old.


Northern Ireland's European agenda 

Elections to the European Parliament are being held on 4 June


BBC Northern Ireland political correspondent Martina Purdy looks ahead at the issues dominating June's European election.


POWERSHARING
Although this is a European election and some argue that it should not be a "sectarian vanity contest", the experience of past polls has been that voters regard the contest as a chance to pass a verdict on events in their own backyard.

The TUV candidate, Jim Allister, who is the only candidate opposed to the settlement at Stormont, would like to make this election a judgement on the DUP's decision to share power with Sinn Fein in 2007.

The Stormont parties will point to their united opposition to the recent dissident violence as proof that, despite its failings, the power sharing coalition is better than what went before.


THE EXECUTIVE
Some candidates, such as the SDLP's Alban Maginness, argue that this is a mid-term poll which gives voters the opportunity to pass a judgement on the policies pursued during the past two years by the Stormont Executive.

This means that arguments will range across the executive's response to the economic downturn, its decision to defer water charges and freeze rates and the continuing stand off over Sinn Fein's attempts to end academic selection in schools.


NORTHERN IRELAND WITHIN EUROPE
Over the past few troubled decades Northern Ireland has benefitted from £2 billion of funding from the European Union.

However, Brussels is now focussing increasingly on the newer EU members to the east. Candidates will debate how best to obtain financial and technical support from the EU in the changed climate.

A task force, appointed by the head of the EU Commission Jose Manuel Barroso, suggested ways in which the EU could help Northern Ireland to become more innovative.


AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES
Earlier this year, Northern Ireland farmers queued overnight for EU subsidy payments administered by the local agriculture department.

The method of handing the cash out was controversial, but the demand showed how reliant local farmers are on EU support.

All candidates will have to pay particular notice to the influential rural lobby - the Agricultural Show at Balmoral in Belfast is always seen as a key opportunity for canvassing.

Local dairy farmers are likely to press for support at a time the prices of their products have been flagging.

Poultry farmers may be concerned about tougher EU pollution controls. Local fishermen have pushed for greater regional control over the EU's fishing quotas.

The candidates will want to be seen as responsive to their concerns.


THE FUTURE OF THE EU
Northern Ireland politicians differ on the balance which should be struck between nation states and the EU, and that manifests itself in their approach to issues like the Lisbon treaty and the proposed European constitution.

The three outgoing MEPs are all sceptical to varying degrees about increased Euro federalism, and the DUP's Diane Dodds is likely to share that view.

By contrast, the SDLP founder John Hume was always a committed Europhile, and his party's candidate Alban Maginness is also a Euro enthusiast, a stance largely shared by the Alliance and the Greens.


CLIMATE CHANGE
In the European parliament Northern Ireland MEPs have taken very different perspectives on climate change with the TUV's Jim Allister sceptical about the view that it is man made, whilst Sinn Fein's Bairbre de Brun advocates radical action to tackle global warming.

The climate change sceptic Sammy Wilson has raised the profile of this issue during his controversial tenure as DUP Environment Minister.

However, this poses a dilemma for his party candidate Diane Dodds, does she side with Mr Wilson or her party leader Peter Robinson who does believe climate change is man made?

Curious to know if anybody on here who will be voting Babs number one, will be putting down a number two, three etc?

Heard a bizarre one. My father infomed me last night that for the first time in 50 years that he would be going to the polling booth to spoil his vote  :o

Quote from: Roger on May 24, 2009, 12:38:29 AM
Heard a bizarre one. My father infomed me last night that for the first time in 50 years that he would be going to the polling booth to spoil his vote  :o

None of the above is the second most popular option on this thread.

Quote from: TacadoirArdMhacha on May 24, 2009, 12:46:03 AM

Quote from: Roger on May 24, 2009, 12:38:29 AM
Heard a bizarre one. My father infomed me last night that for the first time in 50 years that he would be going to the polling booth to spoil his vote  :o

None of the above is the second most popular option on this thread.

Sorry but spoiling your vote is a cop out as far as I'm concerned, as bad as the elected reps maybe in your eyes, there are other options.
People fought and died to get you people the vote - use it!

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 24, 2009, 03:26:12 AM

Quote from: TacadoirArdMhacha on May 24, 2009, 12:46:03 AM

Quote from: Roger on May 24, 2009, 12:38:29 AM
Heard a bizarre one. My father infomed me last night that for the first time in 50 years that he would be going to the polling booth to spoil his vote  :o

None of the above is the second most popular option on this thread.

Sorry but spoiling your vote is a cop out as far as I'm concerned, as bad as the elected reps maybe in your eyes, there are other options.
People fought and died to get you people the vote - use it!

But what if none of the candidates float your boat? Is a spolit vote not better than not voting at all?

Quote from: TacadoirArdMhacha on May 24, 2009, 12:46:03 AM

Quote from: Roger on May 24, 2009, 12:38:29 AM
Heard a bizarre one. My father infomed me last night that for the first time in 50 years that he would be going to the polling booth to spoil his vote  :o

None of the above is the second most popular option on this thread.

In our elections you're not really voting for the best candidate. It's more like a vote for the least useless.

Quote from: Maguire01 on May 24, 2009, 07:58:24 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 24, 2009, 03:26:12 AM

Quote from: TacadoirArdMhacha on May 24, 2009, 12:46:03 AM

Quote from: Roger on May 24, 2009, 12:38:29 AM
Heard a bizarre one. My father infomed me last night that for the first time in 50 years that he would be going to the polling booth to spoil his vote  :o

None of the above is the second most popular option on this thread.

Sorry but spoiling your vote is a cop out as far as I'm concerned, as bad as the elected reps maybe in your eyes, there are other options.
People fought and died to get you people the vote - use it!

But what if none of the candidates float your boat? Is a spolit vote not better than not voting at all?

I believe candidates in the election get access to the register of voters, and a list of who voted and who hasnt.


If you really want to f**k them off them dont spoil the vote, at least then they will know that you never voted for them.

Watched the Politics show today, Babs did herself proud, came across very well, Unionists made a cnut of themselves by infighting and not discussing the real issues.
Will actually give Alban my 2nd preference as there is a slim chance he may get in on transfers.

hilarious when fitzpatrick told dodds to stop talking, got a big applause from the audience

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 31, 2009, 02:44:59 PM
Watched the Politics show today, Babs did herself proud, came across very well, Unionists made a cnut of themselves by infighting and not discussing the real issues.
Will actually give Alban my 2nd preference as there is a slim chance he may get in on transfers.

I know we tend to vote along tribal lines here but jesus that Dodds woman kept going on the other night that people had to get out and vote two unionists in to defeat the republican mandate. Is she not even going to pretend to run on European issues?!

Quote from: Tony Baloney on May 31, 2009, 09:18:03 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 31, 2009, 02:44:59 PM
Watched the Politics show today, Babs did herself proud, came across very well, Unionists made a cnut of themselves by infighting and not discussing the real issues.
Will actually give Alban my 2nd preference as there is a slim chance he may get in on transfers.

I know we tend to vote along tribal lines here but jesus that Dodds woman kept going on the other night that people had to get out and vote two unionists in to defeat the republican mandate. Is she not even going to pretend to run on European issues?!

She's not exactly Mensa material.

Talking about voting along tribal lines... how do you measure how good one of our MEPs are?

I was looking at Allister's pamphlet and he had some 'stats' from the last 5 years, showing that he attended more sittings, asked more questions and made more speeches than the 2 other MEPs. Significantly more in fact. Now i'm sure at least half of his speeches and questions were hot air, but how do you measure performance? Can anyone list any achievements in Europe by DeBrun, Nicholson or Allister over the past 5 years?

Quote from: Maguire01 on May 31, 2009, 10:11:21 PM
Talking about voting along tribal lines... how do you measure how good one of our MEPs are?

I was looking at Allister's pamphlet and he had some 'stats' from the last 5 years, showing that he attended more sittings, asked more questions and made more speeches than the 2 other MEPs. Significantly more in fact. Now i'm sure at least half of his speeches and questions were hot air, but how do you measure performance? Can anyone list any achievements in Europe by DeBrun, Nicholson or Allister over the past 5 years?

SISO.

Diane dodds is completely incapable of avoiding rhetoric. I know this is a common failing but she really does sound like a schoolgirl rhyming off a report.

Jim Allistair is some craic!

It amy mean something or it may mean nothing at all but yesterday I drove through bushmills on my way somewhere else, bushmills being arguably the staunchest DUP village in the north, and saw 3 or 4 posters of dodds vandalized with red paint. It may not mean anything or it may mean Allister is getting the reaction he wants, could be a surprise on the cards, if Allister polls 50,000 or above the DUP will sh*t themselves.

Quote from: slow corner back on May 31, 2009, 11:20:18 PM
It amy mean something or it may mean nothing at all but yesterday I drove through bushmills on my way somewhere else, bushmills being arguably the staunchest DUP village in the north, and saw 3 or 4 posters of dodds vandalized with red paint. It may not mean anything or it may mean Allister is getting the reaction he wants, could be a surprise on the cards, if Allister polls 50,000 or above the DUP will sh*t themselves.

I would guess the staunchest DUP supporters have no time for a party that has gone into government with Sinn Fein (or Sinn Fein/IRA to use their venacular) so it would come as no surprise if a hardline element fired a few warning shots across the bows.

Still can't really see past Dodds, Nicholson and Barbie.

Quote from: Tony Baloney on May 31, 2009, 11:35:21 PM
Still can't really see past Dodds, Nicholson and Barbie.

I can see the SDLP sneaking the third on transfers - Nicholson losing out.

Quote from: Tony Baloney on May 31, 2009, 10:52:46 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on May 31, 2009, 10:11:21 PM
Talking about voting along tribal lines... how do you measure how good one of our MEPs are?

I was looking at Allister's pamphlet and he had some 'stats' from the last 5 years, showing that he attended more sittings, asked more questions and made more speeches than the 2 other MEPs. Significantly more in fact. Now i'm sure at least half of his speeches and questions were hot air, but how do you measure performance? Can anyone list any achievements in Europe by DeBrun, Nicholson or Allister over the past 5 years?

SISO.

Eh?

Quote from: hardstation on May 31, 2009, 11:29:59 PM
Ah Bushmills. Jim Allister's posters were probably vandalised too. You simply can't be Unionist enough 'round there.

nor inbred enough

Quote from: Maguire01 on May 31, 2009, 11:40:51 PM

Quote from: Tony Baloney on May 31, 2009, 10:52:46 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on May 31, 2009, 10:11:21 PM
Talking about voting along tribal lines... how do you measure how good one of our MEPs are?

I was looking at Allister's pamphlet and he had some 'stats' from the last 5 years, showing that he attended more sittings, asked more questions and made more speeches than the 2 other MEPs. Significantly more in fact. Now i'm sure at least half of his speeches and questions were hot air, but how do you measure performance? Can anyone list any achievements in Europe by DeBrun, Nicholson or Allister over the past 5 years?

SISO.

Eh?

Sign in, slope off. Loads of MEPs including the boul Jim were busted a few years back for flying all the way to the European Parliament, signing in and then leaving straight away again. I think it is part of the culture there.

Quote from: hardstation on May 31, 2009, 11:29:59 PM
Ah Bushmills. Jim Allister's posters were probably vandalised too. You simply can't be Unionist enough 'round there.

Nah I had a look round and neither his nor Nicholsons were touched, obviously no papish puts up posters there or they would be burnt. Tis was speciffically directed at Dodds

Could Diane Dodds have a more condescending voice?

Quote from: AFS on June 02, 2009, 06:57:24 PM
Could Diane Dodds have a more condescending voice?

Met her once, she said "Oops a daisy"

I hear the DUP crying that they can't let Sinn Fein top the poll. Why? What differences does it make if they come 1st, 2nd or 3rd? They'll still get elected.

Quote from: ziggysego on June 02, 2009, 07:24:45 PM
I hear the DUP crying that they can't let Sinn Fein top the poll. Why? What differences does it make if they come 1st, 2nd or 3rd? They'll still get elected.

Ego. Simple as that.

I have to say, Dodds is brutal. - totally clueless. I watched the politics show in iplayer - Jim Alister is one hateful man (and would be impossible to listen to if he somehow managed to get elected), but he's a lot smarter and more competent than Dodds.

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 06, 2009, 02:07:32 PM
Colin Duffy will be removed from the poll (and arrested for something or other) if he decides not to stand.

I think it will be Babs, Jim Nicholson and Diane Dodds, but expect a fractured unionist vote, with Jim (the dino bigot) Allister and Ian flatleaf getting a fair few of the unionist votes.

If Allister is a bigot, what does that make Duffy? Just asking this as it was brought up at the start of the thread.

As for voting, they're all useless. I'll probably vote for Nicholson, because I can't bring myself to vote DUP and I personally think Jim Allister is an arsehole. The Alliance and Green party are a waste of time and sinn fein have zero chance of getting my vote.

SDLP are the only other possibility.

Quote from: Ari on June 02, 2009, 11:15:24 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 06, 2009, 02:07:32 PM
Colin Duffy will be removed from the poll (and arrested for something or other) if he decides not to stand.

I think it will be Babs, Jim Nicholson and Diane Dodds, but expect a fractured unionist vote, with Jim (the dino bigot) Allister and Ian flatleaf getting a fair few of the unionist votes.

If Allister is a bigot, what does that make Duffy? Just asking this as it was brought up at the start of the thread.

As for voting, they're all useless. I'll probably vote for Nicholson, because I can't bring myself to vote DUP and I personally think Jim Allister is an arsehole. The Alliance and Green party are a waste of time and sinn fein have zero chance of getting my vote.

SDLP are the only other possibility.

I was "trying" to be humourous with my reference to Duffy getting rearrested (as it seems to be the norm these days to arrest him when something happens), where other then that have I mentioned Duffy?

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 23, 2009, 04:36:40 PM
Curious to know if anybody on here who will be voting Babs number one, will be putting down a number two, three etc?

Still curious on this one, I'm wondering will SF voters be giving Alban Maginnis their number two? Given the slight chance that we could get him in as a second Nationalist MEP.

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 03, 2009, 10:30:40 AM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 23, 2009, 04:36:40 PM
Curious to know if anybody on here who will be voting Babs number one, will be putting down a number two, three etc?

Still curious on this one, I'm wondering will SF voters be giving Alban Maginnis their number two? Given the slight chance that we could get him in as a second Nationalist MEP.

Why wouldn't they?

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 03, 2009, 10:56:27 AM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 03, 2009, 10:30:40 AM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 23, 2009, 04:36:40 PM
Curious to know if anybody on here who will be voting Babs number one, will be putting down a number two, three etc?

Still curious on this one, I'm wondering will SF voters be giving Alban Maginnis their number two? Given the slight chance that we could get him in as a second Nationalist MEP.

Why wouldn't they?

Some in both parties wouldn't transfer to the other.

Right folks todays the day, make sure that you get out there and vote.

Transfer transfer transfer...

Well said already voted and transferred down to Nicholson at 5, couldnt stomach giving any support to Dodds or Allister. In an ideal ( and very unlikely ) world the unionist vote will split perfectly three ways allowing De Bruin and Magennis in with Nicholson scraping home third, cant see it happening though.

If you don't transfer pretty much all of the way down the paper then you are wasting your vote. The system is there, use it. If there are nationalists in the 6 counties, rather than SF cultists, some of them should have the cop on to vote McGuiness first and transfer to De Bruin. SF topping the poll is not important, this has often happened where the unionist vote is split, but two anti colonial MEPs would be a sign of the possible.

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 03, 2009, 10:26:03 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 02, 2009, 11:15:24 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 06, 2009, 02:07:32 PM
Colin Duffy will be removed from the poll (and arrested for something or other) if he decides not to stand.

I think it will be Babs, Jim Nicholson and Diane Dodds, but expect a fractured unionist vote, with Jim (the dino bigot) Allister and Ian flatleaf getting a fair few of the unionist votes.

If Allister is a bigot, what does that make Duffy? Just asking this as it was brought up at the start of the thread.

As for voting, they're all useless. I'll probably vote for Nicholson, because I can't bring myself to vote DUP and I personally think Jim Allister is an arsehole. The Alliance and Green party are a waste of time and sinn fein have zero chance of getting my vote.

SDLP are the only other possibility.

I was "trying" to be humourous with my reference to Duffy getting rearrested (as it seems to be the norm these days to arrest him when something happens), where other then that have I mentioned Duffy?

From my point of view, hopefully they won't have to arrest him in future as I hope he'll be sitting in Maghaberry for the rest of his life.

Duffy chose not to run as he knew his small support would have provided embarrassment to himself, and would have shown the people in this country (whatever you refer to it as, I'm not bothered) that people like him have virtually no support whatsoever, and that the majority of people living here ARE in fact decent people.

Quote from: Ari on June 04, 2009, 01:06:56 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 03, 2009, 10:26:03 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 02, 2009, 11:15:24 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 06, 2009, 02:07:32 PM
Colin Duffy will be removed from the poll (and arrested for something or other) if he decides not to stand.

I think it will be Babs, Jim Nicholson and Diane Dodds, but expect a fractured unionist vote, with Jim (the dino bigot) Allister and Ian flatleaf getting a fair few of the unionist votes.

If Allister is a bigot, what does that make Duffy? Just asking this as it was brought up at the start of the thread.

As for voting, they're all useless. I'll probably vote for Nicholson, because I can't bring myself to vote DUP and I personally think Jim Allister is an arsehole. The Alliance and Green party are a waste of time and sinn fein have zero chance of getting my vote.

SDLP are the only other possibility.

I was "trying" to be humourous with my reference to Duffy getting rearrested (as it seems to be the norm these days to arrest him when something happens), where other then that have I mentioned Duffy?

From my point of view, hopefully they won't have to arrest him in future as I hope he'll be sitting in Maghaberry for the rest of his life.

Duffy chose not to run as he knew his small support would have provided embarrassment to himself, and would have shown the people in this country (whatever you refer to it as, I'm not bothered) that people like him have virtually no support whatsoever, and that the majority of people living here ARE in fact decent people.

would you want him to spend the rest of his life in Maghaberry even though he has not yet been found guilty of anything.

Quote from: Ari on June 04, 2009, 01:06:56 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 03, 2009, 10:26:03 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 02, 2009, 11:15:24 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 06, 2009, 02:07:32 PM
Colin Duffy will be removed from the poll (and arrested for something or other) if he decides not to stand.

I think it will be Babs, Jim Nicholson and Diane Dodds, but expect a fractured unionist vote, with Jim (the dino bigot) Allister and Ian flatleaf getting a fair few of the unionist votes.

If Allister is a bigot, what does that make Duffy? Just asking this as it was brought up at the start of the thread.

As for voting, they're all useless. I'll probably vote for Nicholson, because I can't bring myself to vote DUP and I personally think Jim Allister is an arsehole. The Alliance and Green party are a waste of time and sinn fein have zero chance of getting my vote.

SDLP are the only other possibility.

I was "trying" to be humourous with my reference to Duffy getting rearrested (as it seems to be the norm these days to arrest him when something happens), where other then that have I mentioned Duffy?

From my point of view, hopefully they won't have to arrest him in future as I hope he'll be sitting in Maghaberry for the rest of his life.

Duffy chose not to run as he knew his small support would have provided embarrassment to himself, and would have shown the people in this country (whatever you refer to it as, I'm not bothered) that people like him have virtually no support whatsoever, and that the majority of people living here ARE in fact decent people.

Guilty until proven innocent.




BBC Northern Ireland's political editor, Mark Devenport said nationalists and unionists were reporting a steady turnout in rural areas.

Electoral Office sources describe the morning as fairly quiet, in line with previous elections.

Figures were posted up in individual polling stations at noon showing how many people had voted so far, but the statistics aren't being collected centrally.

No one that I spoke to today is bothering to vote, is this likely to be repeated throughout the 6 counties?

Quote from: Trevor Hill on June 04, 2009, 02:17:37 PM
No one that I spoke to today is bothering to vote, is this likely to be repeated throughout the 6 counties?

No.
You'll get a lot of people who talk away about not bothering, but before 10pm will slip down to the polling station and cast their 1 2 3...

Don't forget to TRANSFER your vote

Quote from: armaghniac on June 04, 2009, 01:01:51 PM
If you don't transfer pretty much all of the way down the paper then you are wasting your vote. The system is there, use it. If there are nationalists in the 6 counties, rather than SF cultists, some of them should have the cop on to vote McGuiness first and transfer to De Bruin. SF topping the poll is not important, this has often happened where the unionist vote is split, but two anti colonial MEPs would be a sign of the possible.

How do you figure? Surely, if you are of the inclination to give both a preference, it doesn't matter in what order of 1 & 2 you put Maginness & DeBrun - DeBrun, according to Paddy Power, will top the poll and DeBrun's transfers will be distributed to the SDLP (well, normally 85-90% of them at least) unless she doesn't meet the quota on the 1st count which is unlikely.

Not always the case tyrone 86 nationalist transfers are generally poor in the region of 60% compared to 90% transferring from Aliister to Nicholson last time on the unionist side of the house ( exceptionally high figure). I hope everyone does vote down the ticket and cut out this cant be bothered to vote spoil your ballot nonsense.

Quote from: glens abu on June 04, 2009, 02:12:13 PM

Quote from: Ari on June 04, 2009, 01:06:56 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 03, 2009, 10:26:03 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 02, 2009, 11:15:24 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 06, 2009, 02:07:32 PM
Colin Duffy will be removed from the poll (and arrested for something or other) if he decides not to stand.

I think it will be Babs, Jim Nicholson and Diane Dodds, but expect a fractured unionist vote, with Jim (the dino bigot) Allister and Ian flatleaf getting a fair few of the unionist votes.

If Allister is a bigot, what does that make Duffy? Just asking this as it was brought up at the start of the thread.

As for voting, they're all useless. I'll probably vote for Nicholson, because I can't bring myself to vote DUP and I personally think Jim Allister is an arsehole. The Alliance and Green party are a waste of time and sinn fein have zero chance of getting my vote.

SDLP are the only other possibility.

I was "trying" to be humourous with my reference to Duffy getting rearrested (as it seems to be the norm these days to arrest him when something happens), where other then that have I mentioned Duffy?

From my point of view, hopefully they won't have to arrest him in future as I hope he'll be sitting in Maghaberry for the rest of his life.

Duffy chose not to run as he knew his small support would have provided embarrassment to himself, and would have shown the people in this country (whatever you refer to it as, I'm not bothered) that people like him have virtually no support whatsoever, and that the majority of people living here ARE in fact decent people.

would you want him to spend the rest of his life in Maghaberry even though he has not yet been found guilty of anything.

Uh huh.

The dogs in the street know what Duffy is. And it is certainly NOT a decent, hardworking law abiding citizen.

Quote from: Ari on June 04, 2009, 04:15:40 PM
The dogs in the street know what Duffy is. And it is certainly NOT a decent, hardworking law abiding citizen.

So why don't you tell us then?

Quote from: Donagh on June 04, 2009, 04:29:32 PM

Quote from: Ari on June 04, 2009, 04:15:40 PM
The dogs in the street know what Duffy is. And it is certainly NOT a decent, hardworking law abiding citizen.

So why don't you tell us then?

I'm not looking to get banned or start the same old boring arguments, but Colin Duffy is a and it is heartening to know that people like him have virtually no support. It's good to see there are enough decent people on this island that don't want to be dragged back to the dark days by Duffy, Ó Brádaigh and his terror supporting party.

Now I'm no hard line unionist, I'm as lenient as they come. I wouldn't even vote DUP. But men like Duffy, and those like him who support terrorism, have no place in this society and either need to take a good long look at themselves and sort their lives out, or continue with their little tirade and end up in a prison cell.

Quote from: Ari on June 04, 2009, 05:29:30 PM

Quote from: Donagh on June 04, 2009, 04:29:32 PM

Quote from: Ari on June 04, 2009, 04:15:40 PM
The dogs in the street know what Duffy is. And it is certainly NOT a decent, hardworking law abiding citizen.

So why don't you tell us then?

I'm not looking to get banned or start the same old boring arguments, but Colin Duffy is a and it is heartening to know that people like him have virtually no support. It's good to see there are enough decent people on this island that don't want to be dragged back to the dark days by Duffy, Ó Brádaigh and his terror supporting party.

Now I'm no hard line unionist, I'm as lenient as they come. I wouldn't even vote DUP. But men like Duffy, and those like him who support terrorism, have no place in this society and either need to take a good long look at themselves and sort their lives out, or continue with their little tirade and end up in a prison cell.

it really is a pity he didnt stand, i dont believe he'd have got any vote and that would have shown them up to the world for the tiny minority they are

And that's exactly why he didn't stand.

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 04, 2009, 06:59:16 PM
And that's exactly why he didn't stand.

Exactly. They can dress it up however they like, but Duffy didn't stand because he knows what the people of this place think of him.

i went to my Polling station and they were doing a free barbecue. was bloody raging, had my dinner before heading round >:(

cant wait till next time

Quote from: slow corner back on June 04, 2009, 04:02:20 PM
Not always the case tyrone 86 nationalist transfers are generally poor in the region of 60% compared to 90% transferring from Aliister to Nicholson last time on the unionist side of the house ( exceptionally high figure). I hope everyone does vote down the ticket and cut out this cant be bothered to vote spoil your ballot nonsense.

Useless and all as they are, what's the best sequence of voting to give Alban all the help he needs to get the second nationalist ticket?

Is/Was there any point in giving your #2 to DeBrun if she wasn't your #1? Assuming, as is likely, that she'll get the quota on first preferences, she's unlikely to need the second preferences.

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 04, 2009, 08:57:35 PM
Is/Was there any point in giving your #2 to DeBrun if she wasn't your #1? Assuming, as is likely, that she'll get the quota on first preferences, she's unlikely to need the second preferences.

You talking to me?

Quote from: Tony Baloney on June 04, 2009, 09:09:09 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 04, 2009, 08:57:35 PM
Is/Was there any point in giving your #2 to DeBrun if she wasn't your #1? Assuming, as is likely, that she'll get the quota on first preferences, she's unlikely to need the second preferences.

You talking to me?

Anyone really. I can't see reason to vote Maginness #1, DeBrun #2 - if DeBrun is likely to get the quota on first preferences, she'll not need the transfers. Am i missing something or is this the case? Maginness is likely to need the transfers - and it's probably the case that at least 2 of the Unionists will rely on the transfers too.

You can't take anything for granted in an election.  Unionists will transfer to the man and its always the same!  Sinn Feiners are tending to transfer this time for pragmatic reasons, do you not think its simply manners that it is reciprocated? :P

Quote from: Aoise on June 04, 2009, 09:28:25 PM
You can't take anything for granted in an election.  Unionists will transfer to the man and its always the same!  Sinn Feiners are tending to transfer this time for pragmatic reasons, do you not think its simply manners that it is reciprocated? :P

Manners? It's about personal choice. Ther's no obligation to vote for or transfer to anyone.

Strangely enough though, I didn't hear either the SF or SDLP talking about transferring to the other Nationalists the way some of the Unionsits were.

Quote from: magickingdom on June 04, 2009, 06:57:18 PM
it really is a pity he didnt stand, i dont believe he'd have got any vote and that would have shown them up to the world for the tiny minority they are

magickingdom you are making the same mistake as that Ari fella, in that I assume by "tiny minority" you mean the dissidents. What makes you think Duffy is associated with them?

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 04, 2009, 06:59:16 PM
And that's exactly why he didn't stand.

Maguire, he didn't stand because firstly he didn't have the £5k for the deposit and secondly he didn't have the money, transport or organisaiton needed to run a campaign over the six counties.

Quote from: Donagh on June 04, 2009, 09:38:13 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 04, 2009, 06:59:16 PM
And that's exactly why he didn't stand.

Maguire, he didn't stand because firstly he didn't have the £5k for the deposit and secondly he didn't have the money, transport or organisaiton needed to run a campaign over the six counties.

Yes, so he didn't have the support to run a campaign in the first place.

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 04, 2009, 09:35:27 PM

Quote from: Aoise on June 04, 2009, 09:28:25 PM
You can't take anything for granted in an election.  Unionists will transfer to the man and its always the same!  Sinn Feiners are tending to transfer this time for pragmatic reasons, do you not think its simply manners that it is reciprocated? :P

Manners? It's about personal choice. Ther's no obligation to vote for or transfer to anyone.

Strangely enough though, I didn't hear either the SF or SDLP talking about transferring to the other Nationalists the way some of the Unionsits were.

Obviously its about personal choice, but even though De Brun is expected to sail in, it just seems the SDLPers are happy enough to receive the transfers but are then saying sure De Brun's in anyway, there is no point transferring.  How do you know that the turnout in Nationalist areas is going to be great enough for De Brun to get in?  I know its unlikely she won't but there's a hell of alot of apathy about at the minute - nothings certain!

Quote from: Roger on May 24, 2009, 12:38:29 AM
Heard a bizarre one. My father infomed me last night that for the first time in 50 years that he would be going to the polling booth to spoil his vote  :o

guess he doesnt want to be one of the mythical stay at home unionists ;) actually roger i can relate to spoiling your vote with the shower of thicks on my ballot paper

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 04, 2009, 09:47:16 PM
Yes, so he didn't have the support to run a campaign in the first place.

You said he didn't stand because he wouldn't get a vote. I'm saying he didn't stand because he didn't have the money or support to run a campaign and neither would any other private citizen I know never mind one who is locked up in jail. If anything his decision not to stand only supports his claim to innocence in that he doesn't have a group behind him to front up the resources needed.

Quote from: Donagh on June 04, 2009, 09:36:36 PM

Quote from: magickingdom on June 04, 2009, 06:57:18 PM
it really is a pity he didnt stand, i dont believe he'd have got any vote and that would have shown them up to the world for the tiny minority they are

magickingdom you are making the same mistake as that Ari fella, in that I assume by "tiny minority" you mean the dissidents. What makes you think Duffy is associated with them?

just a hunch... what do you think donagh

Was chatting to Maskey senior outside the polling station earlier. He seems to think the turnout will come in at a very low 40%. None committal about who this would favour.

Quote from: magickingdom on June 04, 2009, 09:54:25 PM
just a hunch... what do you think donagh

I know he has a huge disdain for the Lurgan brand of dissidents and don't see the logic of him throwing his lot in with them. But hey if you want to suck in unionist propaganda without question, feel free but expect to be challenged on it.

Quote from: Ari on June 02, 2009, 11:15:24 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 06, 2009, 02:07:32 PM
Colin Duffy will be removed from the poll (and arrested for something or other) if he decides not to stand.

I think it will be Babs, Jim Nicholson and Diane Dodds, but expect a fractured unionist vote, with Jim (the dino bigot) Allister and Ian flatleaf getting a fair few of the unionist votes.

If Allister is a bigot, what does that make Duffy? Just asking this as it was brought up at the start of the thread.

As for voting, they're all useless. I'll probably vote for Nicholson, because I can't bring myself to vote DUP and I personally think Jim Allister is an arsehole. The Alliance and Green party are a waste of time and sinn fein have zero chance of getting my vote.

SDLP are the only other possibility.

Surprised you are on a GAA Board with chat like this.

Quote from: Mid Down Gael on June 04, 2009, 10:04:56 PM
Surprised you are on a GAA Board with chat like this.

Was thinking the same thing myself. Why do these people sign up to a GAA discussion board if they have no interest in Gaelic games?

Well thats it, job done for another 5 years.
Have to wait til Monday now for the results!  :(

Quote from: Donagh on June 04, 2009, 10:00:42 PM

Quote from: magickingdom on June 04, 2009, 09:54:25 PM
just a hunch... what do you think donagh

I know he has a huge disdain for the Lurgan brand of dissidents and don't see the logic of him throwing his lot in with them. But hey if you want to suck in unionist propaganda without question, feel free but expect to be challenged on it.

Perhaps you'd like to elaborate on the reasoning for this apparent disdain?

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 12:04:01 AM
Perhaps you'd like to elaborate on the reasoning for this apparent disdain?

Why?

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 04, 2009, 02:24:55 PM

Quote from: Trevor Hill on June 04, 2009, 02:17:37 PM
No one that I spoke to today is bothering to vote, is this likely to be repeated throughout the 6 counties?

No.
You'll get a lot of people who talk away about not bothering, but before 10pm will slip down to the polling station and cast their 1 2 3...

Very low turnout according to www.sluggerotoole.com some areas as low as 35%

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 12:13:48 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 12:04:01 AM
Perhaps you'd like to elaborate on the reasoning for this apparent disdain?

Why?

Because it would be interesting to know why Duffy doesn't like Lurgans dissidents. Is it for the reason that any right minded individual wouldn't like them for (being terrorists), or as I suspect, for something else.

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 09:02:41 AM
Because it would be interesting to know why Duffy doesn't like Lurgans dissidents. Is it for the reason that any right minded individual wouldn't like them for (being terrorists), or as I suspect, for something else.

Go on then tell us your suspicions.

Can't make libellous posts.  :)

But I suspect he doesn't dislike them for being dissident terrorists.  ;)

I think the most incredible thing I find here is you trying to make him out to be a decent guy. That's... insane.

Quote from: Trevor Hill on June 05, 2009, 01:12:55 AM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 04, 2009, 02:24:55 PM

Quote from: Trevor Hill on June 04, 2009, 02:17:37 PM
No one that I spoke to today is bothering to vote, is this likely to be repeated throughout the 6 counties?

No.
You'll get a lot of people who talk away about not bothering, but before 10pm will slip down to the polling station and cast their 1 2 3...

Very low turnout according to www.sluggerotoole.com some areas as low as 35%

Turnout for european elections is notoriously low at the best of times, I'd still say the final turnout will be about 45%.

Looking like turnout down in unionist and working class areas.

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 09:30:08 AM
Can't make libellous posts.  :)

But I suspect he doesn't dislike them for being dissident terrorists.  ;)

I think the most incredible thing I find here is you trying to make him out to be a decent guy. That's... insane.

You're oul hole. You know f**k all about Duffy except from the lies you've picked up in the press and OWC.

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 09:35:56 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 09:30:08 AM
Can't make libellous posts.  :)

But I suspect he doesn't dislike them for being dissident terrorists.  ;)

I think the most incredible thing I find here is you trying to make him out to be a decent guy. That's... insane.

You're oul hole. You know f**k all about Duffy except from the lies you've picked up in the press and OWC.

Yes, however you seem reluctant to tell me otherwise. Which indicates that he has something to hide, which is unsurprising.

The man is scum. The fact he is (was) a free man for so long is an embarrassment to the judicial system here.

I don't expect he will be again though. I think his latest antics has meant his past etc have finally caught up with him and he has finally screwed himself over.

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 09:57:05 AM

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 09:35:56 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 09:30:08 AM
Can't make libellous posts.  :)

But I suspect he doesn't dislike them for being dissident terrorists.  ;)

I think the most incredible thing I find here is you trying to make him out to be a decent guy. That's... insane.

You're oul hole. You know f**k all about Duffy except from the lies you've picked up in the press and OWC.

Yes, however you seem reluctant to tell me otherwise. Which indicates that he has something to hide, which is unsurprising.

The man is scum. The fact he is (was) a free man for so long is an embarrassment to the judicial system here.

I don't expect he will be again though. I think his latest antics has meant his past etc have finally caught up with him and he has finally screwed himself over.

It's people like you that would have had the Birmingham 6, Guildford 4 and Maguire 7 all executed after their sham trials!  >:(
If your going to condemn anyone at least have some shred of evidence to back up your allegations and insults!

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 05, 2009, 09:34:16 AM

Quote from: Trevor Hill on June 05, 2009, 01:12:55 AM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 04, 2009, 02:24:55 PM

Quote from: Trevor Hill on June 04, 2009, 02:17:37 PM
No one that I spoke to today is bothering to vote, is this likely to be repeated throughout the 6 counties?

No.
You'll get a lot of people who talk away about not bothering, but before 10pm will slip down to the polling station and cast their 1 2 3...

Very low turnout according to www.sluggerotoole.com some areas as low as 35%

Turnout for european elections is notoriously low at the best of times, I'd still say the final turnout will be about 45%.

Looking like turnout down in unionist and working class areas.

yeah we had turnout of around 45% with about 33% of the green vote getting out so very optimistic that Bairbre should be fine,turnout in unionist areas very low so that might help the stoops,just hope things go well today for Mary Lou and Toireasa.  

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 05, 2009, 10:04:44 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 09:57:05 AM

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 09:35:56 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 09:30:08 AM
Can't make libellous posts.  :)

But I suspect he doesn't dislike them for being dissident terrorists.  ;)

I think the most incredible thing I find here is you trying to make him out to be a decent guy. That's... insane.

You're oul hole. You know f**k all about Duffy except from the lies you've picked up in the press and OWC.

Yes, however you seem reluctant to tell me otherwise. Which indicates that he has something to hide, which is unsurprising.

The man is scum. The fact he is (was) a free man for so long is an embarrassment to the judicial system here.

I don't expect he will be again though. I think his latest antics has meant his past etc have finally caught up with him and he has finally screwed himself over.

It's people like you that would have had the Birmingham 6, Guildford 4 and Maguire 7 all executed after their sham trials!  >:(
If your going to condemn anyone at least have some shred of evidence to back up your allegations and insults!

Time will tell.  :)

I'm against capital punishment by the way.

The Birmingham 6 etc all took innocent life, executing them would have let them off easy.

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 10:15:37 AM
The Birmingham 6 etc all took innocent life, executing them would have let them off easy.

I think that statement says all we need to know about you.

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 10:15:37 AM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 05, 2009, 10:04:44 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 09:57:05 AM

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 09:35:56 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 09:30:08 AM
Can't make libellous posts.  :)

But I suspect he doesn't dislike them for being dissident terrorists.  ;)

I think the most incredible thing I find here is you trying to make him out to be a decent guy. That's... insane.

You're oul hole. You know f**k all about Duffy except from the lies you've picked up in the press and OWC.

Yes, however you seem reluctant to tell me otherwise. Which indicates that he has something to hide, which is unsurprising.

The man is scum. The fact he is (was) a free man for so long is an embarrassment to the judicial system here.

I don't expect he will be again though. I think his latest antics has meant his past etc have finally caught up with him and he has finally screwed himself over.

It's people like you that would have had the Birmingham 6, Guildford 4 and Maguire 7 all executed after their sham trials!  >:(
If your going to condemn anyone at least have some shred of evidence to back up your allegations and insults!

Time will tell.  :)

I'm against capital punishment by the way.

The Birmingham 6 etc all took innocent life, executing them would have let them off easy.

Are you for real or just an idiot!  >:(

Fcuk away off back to OWC you asshole.


I'm amending this post as I don't want to lower myself to someone elses standards.

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 10:15:37 AM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 05, 2009, 10:04:44 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 09:57:05 AM

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 09:35:56 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 09:30:08 AM
Can't make libellous posts.  :)

But I suspect he doesn't dislike them for being dissident terrorists.  ;)

I think the most incredible thing I find here is you trying to make him out to be a decent guy. That's... insane.

You're oul hole. You know f**k all about Duffy except from the lies you've picked up in the press and OWC.

Yes, however you seem reluctant to tell me otherwise. Which indicates that he has something to hide, which is unsurprising.

The man is scum. The fact he is (was) a free man for so long is an embarrassment to the judicial system here.

I don't expect he will be again though. I think his latest antics has meant his past etc have finally caught up with him and he has finally screwed himself over.

It's people like you that would have had the Birmingham 6, Guildford 4 and Maguire 7 all executed after their sham trials!  >:(
If your going to condemn anyone at least have some shred of evidence to back up your allegations and insults!

Time will tell.  :)

I'm against capital punishment by the way.

The Birmingham 6 etc all took innocent life, executing them would have let them off easy.

your true colours are starting to show,that is an awful statement to make but it just shows the problems we had when this was a one party statelet and bigots like you ran the police and courts here.

Ari is no different to the hate mobs in Coleraine, Ballymena, North Belfast, Derry that have attacked and killed innocent Catholics in recent years.  He has shown today what he really thinks of innocent Catholics, the guard has slipped.

Your man deserves a ban for a statement like that.

The low turn out brings an element of uncertainty to the final result but I'd still expect DeBruin, Dodds & Nicholson to be elected (in that order).

Quote from: Lecale2 on June 05, 2009, 10:35:07 AM
Your man deserves a ban for a statement like that.

The low turn out brings an element of uncertainty to the final result but I'd still expect DeBruin, Dodds & Nicholson to be elected (in that order).

Wife was saying yesterday as we went to the polling station that all the unionists in her work (of which there are many), were saying that they would all be voting Nicholson as they felt Dodds and Allister made a pigs ear of thte campaign and concentrated solely on SF and heckling each other.

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 10:15:37 AM


The Birmingham 6 etc all took innocent life, executing them would have let them off easy.

Someone in birmingham took an innocent life, but was it the birmingham 6?
Your attitude is as bad as people assuming that every cop is a uvf supporter or other such attitudes that im sure youd disagree with.

Quote from: nifan on June 05, 2009, 11:17:50 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 10:15:37 AM


The Birmingham 6 etc all took innocent life, executing them would have let them off easy.

Someone in birmingham took an innocent life, but was it the birmingham 6?
Your attitude is as bad as people assuming that every cop is a uvf supporter or other such attitudes that im sure youd disagree with.

Indeed, Nifan.

Further, one of the "collateral" tragedies of the whole Birmingham Six miscarriage of justice is that it allowed the real perpetrators of the original attack to escape full condemnation for the carnage which saw 21 innocent people murdered and nearly 200 more injured, many of them horribly mutilated. Indeed, I believe that if the identity of those who ordered and planned the attacks, then sat by silently whilst the Six served 16 years etc, were ever revealed publicly, they would be rather familiar to us all.  :o

Plus, of course, the miscarriage also took attention away from the bomb victims themselves, who as usual, are the forgotten ones in all this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_pub_bombings

I see the beeb are reporting anecdotal evidence of greater voter apathy in unionist and working class areas.

Rumours are the DUP are getting trounced by Jim Alistair. SDLP seem to have a respectable showing (leading south Belfast). What odds on the DUP and TUV cancelling each other out to let the SDLP and UUP in? Now that would be funny.

It depends on whether unionists have this no transfer nonsense. The SDLP guy is not going to get many transfers from either Allister or Dodds, but if either of these is eliminated then the other should get a fair few, unless they are plumpers.  McGuiness will pick up some transfers the elimination of Parsley and Nicholson will benefit from this too.

Getting way, way, way ahead of things here, but on the off chance that Maginness does get the 3rd seat, how will that effect the dynamic in North Belfast in the General Election? Surely Gerry Kelly will never have a better chance, and if the TUV get involved...

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 01:30:33 PM
Rumours are the DUP are getting trounced by Jim Alistair. SDLP seem to have a respectable showing (leading south Belfast).

What are you talking about? Vote counting doesn't take place until Monday.

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 01:49:37 PM
What are you talking about? Vote counting doesn't take place until Monday.

The verifications are happening at the minute. All political parties have representatives there and with the low turnout it's easy enough to see who's coming in ahead of who on first preferences.

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 01:49:37 PM

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 01:30:33 PM
Rumours are the DUP are getting trounced by Jim Alistair. SDLP seem to have a respectable showing (leading south Belfast).

What are you talking about? Vote counting doesn't take place until Monday.

The political parties have their people in the Kings Hall and they will all be hovering over the tables doing tick counts on the ballots as there being verified.

Fair enough - am not familiar with the ins and outs of this process.

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 01:56:54 PM
Fair enough - am not familiar with the ins and outs of this process.

Its a fairly rough yardstick normally, but with the low turnout in some areas they can sometimes get good enough figures.

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 01:56:54 PM
Fair enough - am not familiar with the ins and outs of this process.

In fairness on the SF returns I saw last night, it doesn't look like there is a second nationalist seat but am now hearing turnout in nationalist areas is significantly better. South Armagh, West Belfast and Mid Ulster having the best turnout so far, so still all to play for on Monday.

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 02:00:17 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 01:56:54 PM
Fair enough - am not familiar with the ins and outs of this process.

In fairness on the SF returns I saw last night, it doesn't look like there is a second nationalist seat but am now hearing turnout in nationalist areas is significantly better. South Armagh, West Belfast and Mid Ulster having the best turnout so far, so still all to play for on Monday.

Do you mean the SF vote wasn't transferring?

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 02:01:48 PM

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 02:00:17 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 01:56:54 PM
Fair enough - am not familiar with the ins and outs of this process.

In fairness on the SF returns I saw last night, it doesn't look like there is a second nationalist seat but am now hearing turnout in nationalist areas is significantly better. South Armagh, West Belfast and Mid Ulster having the best turnout so far, so still all to play for on Monday.

Do you mean the SF vote wasn't transferring?

I did.  ;D

Just on the radio news there now from Kings Hall - early indications that Allister is going to seriously "shock" the DUP, Babs looking good to top the poll.

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 02:01:48 PM
Do you mean the SF vote wasn't transferring?

No just in relation to the turnout in nationalist areas as a percentage of the overall electorate. On the face of it last night, it was looking like there wasn't enough people voting to take a second seat but now it's looking like the the quota will be significantly lower because unionist turnout is also way down then. The way I see it Maginness is still in with a fighting chance depending on how transfers split.

Early figures confirm low turnout in North

05/06/2009 - 13:32:18
Early figures for voter turnout for the European Parliament election have confirmed fears of a huge drop in the numbers voting.

The initial tallies point to a major drop in turnout on the last Euro poll of 51.72%, with today's figures as low as 38.9% in some areas.

Figures are emerging from the King's Hall count centre in Belfast as the votes are verified ahead of the counting process which is to begin on Monday.

As the first sets of ballot boxes were opened today, the turnout for six constituencies were confirmed as:

:: Belfast South: 42.1%

:: Belfast West: 46.6%

:: Lagan Valley: 38.86%

:: South Down: 44.97%

:: Mid Ulster: 52.83%

:: North Antrim 43.7%

http://breaking.tcm.ie/ireland/early-figures-confirm-low-turnout-in-north-413647.html#ixzz0HYqK8wEC&D

It could get interesting but I'll stand by my earlier prediction.

Quote from: tyrone86 on June 05, 2009, 01:42:24 PM
Getting way, way, way ahead of things here, but on the off chance that Maginness does get the 3rd seat, how will that effect the dynamic in North Belfast in the General Election? Surely Gerry Kelly will never have a better chance, and if the TUV get involved...

yeah we are expecting Kelly to push very hard for that North Belfast seat next time also boundary changes should help us a little and we are winning over more sdlp voters in that area,a splip in the dup vote would be the icing on the cake.

Counting hopes

Just back from the Kings Hall where the votes from Thursday's Euro election are being verified.
Ken Reid: Friday, 05 June 2009
Tags:

* Politics

So far six constituencies have been processed and the tallymen have been keeping a close eye on the numbers.

All agree Sinn Fein is on course to top the poll.

But the real story may be the downturn in the DUP vote and the impressive performance from the TUV's Jim Allister.

The turn-out so far is just under 45 per cent.
Article Continues Click here

Sinn Fein on the early evidence could be the only party to reach the quota.

The DUP should win the second seat but is unlikely to cross the quota line.

Indeed the party's vote could well drop from 32 per cent in the 2007 assembly election to around 20 per cent this time.

The Conservative-Unionists Jim Nicholson has polled well particularly in Jeffrey Donaldson's Lagan Valley.

But the real story may be the vote for Jim Allister who is in the mix for the third seat.

With the SDLP vote holding reasonably firmly, the battle for the third seat is likely to be the most interesting when the votes are counted on Monday.

We will have a greater handle on things when all 18 constituencies are verified.
Views: 16

© UTV News

Rumours from the Kings Hall now are that the DUP have been trounced by the TUV in almost every box opened so far. Possibility now that they might not even get a seat. SF will be comfortably above quota on the first count (the only to do so). 

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 10:15:37 AM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 05, 2009, 10:04:44 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 09:57:05 AM

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 09:35:56 AM

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 09:30:08 AM
Can't make libellous posts.  :)

But I suspect he doesn't dislike them for being dissident terrorists.  ;)

I think the most incredible thing I find here is you trying to make him out to be a decent guy. That's... insane.

You're oul hole. You know f**k all about Duffy except from the lies you've picked up in the press and OWC.

Yes, however you seem reluctant to tell me otherwise. Which indicates that he has something to hide, which is unsurprising.

The man is scum. The fact he is (was) a free man for so long is an embarrassment to the judicial system here.

I don't expect he will be again though. I think his latest antics has meant his past etc have finally caught up with him and he has finally screwed himself over.

It's people like you that would have had the Birmingham 6, Guildford 4 and Maguire 7 all executed after their sham trials!  >:(
If your going to condemn anyone at least have some shred of evidence to back up your allegations and insults!

Time will tell.  :)

I'm against capital punishment by the way.

The Birmingham 6 etc all took innocent life, executing them would have let them off easy.

How long will this imbicile last ?  ::)

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 03:55:04 PM
Rumours from the Kings Hall now are that the DUP have been trounced by the TUV in almost every box opened so far. Possibility now that they might not even get a seat. SF will be comfortably above quota on the first count (the only to do so). 

I heard the same. DUP very worried.

Quote from: Lecale2 on June 05, 2009, 03:59:01 PM

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 03:55:04 PM
Rumours from the Kings Hall now are that the DUP have been trounced by the TUV in almost every box opened so far. Possibility now that they might not even get a seat. SF will be comfortably above quota on the first count (the only to do so). 

I heard the same. DUP very worried.

:D    :D

Monday's going to be fun.

Quote from: Lecale2 on June 05, 2009, 03:59:01 PM

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 03:55:04 PM
Rumours from the Kings Hall now are that the DUP have been trounced by the TUV in almost every box opened so far. Possibility now that they might not even get a seat. SF will be comfortably above quota on the first count (the only to do so). 

I heard the same. DUP very worried.

Don't be getting the balloons out just yet, have a feeling on Monday when transfers come into play DUP will poss just scrape in ahead of Alban.

McGuinness requires one of Allister or Dodds to be quite a bit ahead of the other.
If de Briun gets a significant surplus and if these people have the gumption to transfer to McGuiness then he could be ahead of Dodds, but you could then have Allister and Nicholson elected.

What do we draw from unionist support for Allister, protest vote in an election that doesn't matter too much or a real opposition to progress?   

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 05, 2009, 04:01:21 PM

Quote from: Lecale2 on June 05, 2009, 03:59:01 PM

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 03:55:04 PM
Rumours from the Kings Hall now are that the DUP have been trounced by the TUV in almost every box opened so far. Possibility now that they might not even get a seat. SF will be comfortably above quota on the first count (the only to do so). 

I heard the same. DUP very worried.

Don't be getting the balloons out just yet, have a feeling on Monday when transfers come into play DUP will poss just scrape in ahead of Alban.

Still be funny to see diana dodds with egg on her face :D

Quote from: fred the red on June 05, 2009, 04:11:52 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 05, 2009, 04:01:21 PM

Quote from: Lecale2 on June 05, 2009, 03:59:01 PM

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 03:55:04 PM
Rumours from the Kings Hall now are that the DUP have been trounced by the TUV in almost every box opened so far. Possibility now that they might not even get a seat. SF will be comfortably above quota on the first count (the only to do so). 

I heard the same. DUP very worried.

Don't be getting the balloons out just yet, have a feeling on Monday when transfers come into play DUP will poss just scrape in ahead of Alban.

Still be funny to see diana dodds with egg on her face :D

Funny and an improvement!  ;D

Belfast South: 42.1%
Belfast West: 46.6%
Belfast East: 38.82%
Belfast North: 40.98%
Lagan Valley: 38.86%
South Down: 44.97%
North Down: 34.48%
Mid Ulster: 52.83%
North Antrim: 43.7%
East Antrim: 34.53%
South Antrim: 38.03%
Strangford: 34.24%

Quote from: armaghniac on June 05, 2009, 04:10:24 PM
What do we draw from unionist support for Allister, protest vote in an election that doesn't matter too much or a real opposition to progress?   

Difficult to know what way to read it. You'd hope it's not the latter, but given what happened to the Ulster Unionists, it could well be history repeating itself.

As much as Allister is a hateful ****, it would be highly entertaining if he pushed out Dodds. I wonder how much the DUP are regretting not putting up a credible candidate - it would be interesting to know how many people stayed away from Dodds because she doesn't have a clue.

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 05, 2009, 04:50:30 PM
Belfast South: 42.1%
Belfast West: 46.6%
Belfast East: 38.82%
Belfast North: 40.98%
Lagan Valley: 38.86%
South Down: 44.97%
North Down: 34.48%
Mid Ulster: 52.83%
North Antrim: 43.7%
East Antrim: 34.53%
South Antrim: 38.03%
Strangford: 34.24%

Interesting reading. A definite pattern of low turnout in Unionist constituencies. West Belfast is surprisingly low.

http://www.votematch.co.uk/europe/

A very interesting tool - asks you where you stand on a load of European issues and then matches you to the candidate who best represents your views. If you answer the questions honestly, it should take the tribal element of voting out of it and show whether you're really voting for the right candidate for you.

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 07:36:09 PM
http://www.votematch.co.uk/europe/

A very interesting tool - asks you where you stand on a load of European issues and then matches you to the candidate who best represents your views. If you answer the questions honestly, it should take the tribal element of voting out of it and show whether you're really voting for the right candidate for you.

Mmmh, the Green Party.

TUV wasn't even listed in the final tally....  ;D

Quote from: Ari on June 05, 2009, 10:15:37 AM


The Birmingham 6 etc all took innocent life, executing them would have let them off easy.

thicks like you are beneath contempt for statements like that

Quote from: ziggysego on June 05, 2009, 07:52:07 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 07:36:09 PM
http://www.votematch.co.uk/europe/

A very interesting tool - asks you where you stand on a load of European issues and then matches you to the candidate who best represents your views. If you answer the questions honestly, it should take the tribal element of voting out of it and show whether you're really voting for the right candidate for you.

Mmmh, the Green Party.

TUV wasn't even listed in the final tally....  ;D

Mine was Greens as well. Then SDLP, Alliance and Sinn Fein.

Hadn't realised, but Northern Ireland will be the last to count its votes - apparently due to the fact that some of the politicians and electoral staff won't work on a Sunday.  ::)

Last of the turnouts:

East Derry 42.34%
Foyle 44.35%
Ferm Sth Tyrone 51.52%
West Tyrone 50.27%
U Bann 41.81%
Newry Armagh 49.05%

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 07:36:09 PM
http://www.votematch.co.uk/europe/

A very interesting tool - asks you where you stand on a load of European issues and then matches you to the candidate who best represents your views. If you answer the questions honestly, it should take the tribal element of voting out of it and show whether you're really voting for the right candidate for you.

http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=12425.0 (http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=12425.0)

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 08:14:55 PM
Hadn't realised, but Northern Ireland will be the last to count its votes - apparently due to the fact that some of the politicians and electoral staff won't work on a Sunday.  ::)

this is a disgrace....how can we let a religious sect play such a major role in the running of this place?!

surely religion and politics should be 2 seperate issues  >:(

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 07:12:55 PM

Quote from: armaghniac on June 05, 2009, 04:10:24 PM
What do we draw from unionist support for Allister, protest vote in an election that doesn't matter too much or a real opposition to progress?   

Difficult to know what way to read it. You'd hope it's not the latter, but given what happened to the Ulster Unionists, it could well be history repeating itself.

OK, I'll be honest.  I am normally a UUP voter but I'm not a Tory, I dislike the DUP and think that Jim Allister is a bit of a dinosaur so I went to the ballot box not knowing who to vote for.

I have to say that I have been very impressed with Jim Allister's campaign and he, I think, is infinitely better than Dodds as a politician.  As such, I gave Allister my first preference simply because he, from what I see, has been our best MEP over the last 5 years and deserves to keep his seat.  I would never vote for the TUV in Assembly or Westminster elections but in this instance felt Jim Allister deserved it.

Quote from: Tonto on June 06, 2009, 09:38:05 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 07:12:55 PM

Quote from: armaghniac on June 05, 2009, 04:10:24 PM
What do we draw from unionist support for Allister, protest vote in an election that doesn't matter too much or a real opposition to progress?   

Difficult to know what way to read it. You'd hope it's not the latter, but given what happened to the Ulster Unionists, it could well be history repeating itself.

OK, I'll be honest.  I am normally a UUP voter but I'm not a Tory, I dislike the DUP and think that Jim Allister is a bit of a dinosaur so I went to the ballot box not knowing who to vote for.

I have to say that I have been very impressed with Jim Allister's campaign and he, I think, is infinitely better than Dodds as a politician.  As such, I gave Allister my first preference simply because he, from what I see, has been our best MEP over the last 5 years and deserves to keep his seat.  I would never vote for the TUV in Assembly or Westminster elections but in this instance felt Jim Allister deserved it.

fair play tonto, cant argue with your logic. guys like jim allister scare me tho

Allister is a bigot pure and simple.

Represents the old guard of Unionism who calls himself a democratic yet  believes that Sinn Fein should not be in government even though they were democratically elected.

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 08:24:17 PM
Last of the turnouts:

East Derry 42.34%
Foyle 44.35%
Ferm Sth Tyrone 51.52%
West Tyrone 50.27%
U Bann 41.81%
Newry Armagh 49.05%

Final figures are here... http://www.eoni.org.uk/turnout_-_website-3.pdf (http://www.eoni.org.uk/turnout_-_website-3.pdf)
Yet again electorate in predominantly unionist areas staying at home in greater proportion to those in predominantly nationalist constituencies.  I notice also disproportionately greater numbers of proxy and postal votes in nationalist dominated constituencies.

Any talk now about King Canute, Yeti's, garden centre bullshit etc etc etc like on that other thread about unionists in the minority?

Quote from: Roger on June 07, 2009, 01:08:06 AM

Quote from: Donagh on June 05, 2009, 08:24:17 PM
Last of the turnouts:

East Derry 42.34%
Foyle 44.35%
Ferm Sth Tyrone 51.52%
West Tyrone 50.27%
U Bann 41.81%
Newry Armagh 49.05%

Final figures are here... http://www.eoni.org.uk/turnout_-_website-3.pdf (http://www.eoni.org.uk/turnout_-_website-3.pdf)
Yet again electorate in predominantly unionist areas staying at home in greater proportion to those in predominantly nationalist constituencies.  I notice also disproportionately greater numbers of proxy and postal votes in nationalist dominated constituencies.

Any talk now about King Canute, Yeti's, garden centre bullshit etc etc etc like on that other thread about unionists in the minority?

Roger the vote in nationalist areas dropped more than the vote unionist areas but SF will still top the poll and a fair chance the SDLP will take a seat. Turnout has dropped on both sides but the crucial factor is that those who don't vote don't count. As many Fenians will appear for the next, presumably more important, election as will Prods, so that is irrelevant. What is relevant in the trends of the past 20 years, which say the garden centre Prod doesn't exist and if it does, it doesn't matter anyway.   

Quote from: Donagh on June 07, 2009, 01:48:36 AM
Roger the vote in nationalist areas dropped more than the vote unionist areas but SF will still top the poll and a fair chance the SDLP will take a seat. Turnout has dropped on both sides but the crucial factor is that those who don't vote don't count. As many Fenians will appear for the next, presumably more important, election as will Prods, so that is irrelevant. What is relevant in the trends of the past 20 years, which say the garden centre Prod doesn't exist and if it does, it doesn't matter anyway.   

They mattered at the last referendum.  Any border referendum I believe they'd be out again.  Now that's just opinion but you can see it has some precendent. I suppose even commenting is now cue for a torrent of abuse, insults and aggro from some quarters.  Oh well.

Btw, I don't think SDLP will get the third seat but this time last week I would have thought they would. One thing for sure is that Monday's results will be an interesting read.   

Quote from: Roger on June 07, 2009, 02:04:36 AM
They mattered at the last referendum.  Any border referendum I believe they'd be out again.  Now that's just opinion but you can see it has some precendent. I suppose even commenting is now cue for a torrent of abuse, insults and aggro from some quarters.  Oh well.

Btw, I don't think SDLP will get the third seat but this time last week I would have thought they would. One thing for sure is that Monday's results will be an interesting read.   

Roger they will be an interesting read but bear in mind this election has had a more balanced turnout between the two sides of the community which hasn't been seen in 20 years. So if anything the results are probably going to be a more accurate reflection of how things may turn out if the referendum was held now. It would be defeated but I'm guessing SF and SDLP will probably have about 42%-44% between them. That's going to increase by 1% every couple of years which makes it about 12 years at the outside to an absolute majority (not including soft green Alliance voters). What happens then?

There is little point in SF polling big in the sectarian head-count which passes for democracy in the north, if they can not translate this success to the the arena of real politic in the republic, where they are polling worse than expected in a political climate which is ripe for radical protesting left wing parties, as evidenced by the growth in the labour, socialist and independent vote.

Quote from: Tonto on June 06, 2009, 09:38:05 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 07:12:55 PM

Quote from: armaghniac on June 05, 2009, 04:10:24 PM
What do we draw from unionist support for Allister, protest vote in an election that doesn't matter too much or a real opposition to progress?   

Difficult to know what way to read it. You'd hope it's not the latter, but given what happened to the Ulster Unionists, it could well be history repeating itself.

OK, I'll be honest.  I am normally a UUP voter but I'm not a Tory, I dislike the DUP and think that Jim Allister is a bit of a dinosaur so I went to the ballot box not knowing who to vote for.

I have to say that I have been very impressed with Jim Allister's campaign and he, I think, is infinitely better than Dodds as a politician.  As such, I gave Allister my first preference simply because he, from what I see, has been our best MEP over the last 5 years and deserves to keep his seat.  I would never vote for the TUV in Assembly or Westminster elections but in this instance felt Jim Allister deserved it.

But what about the fact that he won't deal with Babs in Europe, even on issues of common concern to NI? That's hardly the best was to work when we only have 3 MEPs.

Ms Ferris has a shout at last seat in Munster according to tallys.

You're on the wrong thread.

See pangurban above sam.

Quote from: Donagh on June 07, 2009, 02:14:40 AM
Roger they will be an interesting read but bear in mind this election has had a more balanced turnout between the two sides of the community which hasn't been seen in 20 years. So if anything the results are probably going to be a more accurate reflection of how things may turn out if the referendum was held now. It would be defeated but I'm guessing SF and SDLP will probably have about 42%-44% between them. That's going to increase by 1% every couple of years which makes it about 12 years at the outside to an absolute majority (not including soft green Alliance voters). What happens then?

The figures still show a disproportionally lower turnout in unionist dominated areas.  I had a brief look at East Belfast (personal interest) and the turnout in the Short Strand was in the 50s which shows that the only predominantly area in the constituency that is republican / nationalist is yet again massively disproportional to all the other polling stations. East Belfast ended up at 38%.  Didn't really pay much attention to other constituencies but I believe this is probably reasonably representative across the constiuencies.  Look at the turnout in unionist dominated constituencies for the last referendum. An estimated 150k people came out to vote in 1998 who don't usually vote and most commentators agree this was disproportionately in unionist areas.  Leaving aside any other considerations, on the basis that unionsts seem to feel referendums important even if somewhat disengaged from the current run-of-the-mill ballix, I believe a border poll in 12 years time would show an endorsement of Northern Ireland remaining in the UK.

Babs in on tthe first count.

First count totals:

Greens - 15764
TUV - 66,197
Sinn Fein - 126,184
DUP - 88,346
SDLP - 78,489
UUP - 82,893
Alliance - 26,699

SDLP very unlikely then. Unless the Unionists didn't transfer between themselves.

The only way there would have been a second nationalist seat is if SF/SDLP had split the nationalist vote very evenly.
I think the third seat will be unionist but short of a quota (maybe 105,000 - 115,000).

In that case SF/SDLP could have grabbed two seats if they both finished ahead of the second unionist but both short of the quota.

Quote from: Donagh on June 07, 2009, 02:14:40 AM

Quote from: Roger on June 07, 2009, 02:04:36 AM
They mattered at the last referendum.  Any border referendum I believe they'd be out again.  Now that's just opinion but you can see it has some precendent. I suppose even commenting is now cue for a torrent of abuse, insults and aggro from some quarters.  Oh well.

Btw, I don't think SDLP will get the third seat but this time last week I would have thought they would. One thing for sure is that Monday's results will be an interesting read.   

Roger they will be an interesting read but bear in mind this election has had a more balanced turnout between the two sides of the community which hasn't been seen in 20 years. So if anything the results are probably going to be a more accurate reflection of how things may turn out if the referendum was held now. It would be defeated but I'm guessing SF and SDLP will probably have about 42%-44% between them. That's going to increase by 1% every couple of years which makes it about 12 years at the outside to an absolute majority (not including soft green Alliance voters). What happens then?

Steven Agnew     GRN      15,764      3.3%      +2.4%     
Jim Allister    TUV    66,197    13.7%    -    
Bairbre de Brún    SF    126,184    26%    -0.3%    Elected
Diane Dodds    DUP    88,346    18.2%    -13.8%    
Alban Maginness    SDLP    78,489    16.2%    +0.3%    
Jim Nicholson    UCUNF    82,893    17.1%    +0.5%    
Ian James Parsley    AP    26,699    5.5%    -    


Nationalists running at 42.2 %, SF down 0.3 % and SDLP up 0.3 % so no overall change in the share of the vote.

Unionists running at 49 % of the vote, up 0.4 % overall on the previous election.

Sinn fein topped the vote with 26 %, but if TUV hadn't stood and one assumes his votes were picked up by the DUP then the percentage would have been 31.9 % of the vote.

Looking at those figures the only parties to make any change were the greens up 2.4%, TUV obviously coming from nowhere and DUP dropping due to TUV rise. Other four all within 1% of where they were last time. Magennis not close enough to be elected needed another 10,000 first preference Allister will get no transfers so will not make it so Babs, Nicholson then Dodds me thinks, Dodds to fail to make quota??

Nicholson in, in second spot after third count.

Will this be the end of Dodds, or will she come back bigger, stronger and mouthier than before?

Quote from: delboy on June 08, 2009, 03:26:41 PM

Steven Agnew     GRN      15,764      3.3%      +2.4%     
Jim Allister    TUV    66,197    13.7%    -    
Bairbre de Brún    SF    126,184    26%    -0.3%    Elected
Diane Dodds    DUP    88,346    18.2%    -13.8%    
Alban Maginness    SDLP    78,489    16.2%    +0.3%    
Jim Nicholson    UCUNF    82,893    17.1%    +0.5%    
Ian James Parsley    AP    26,699    5.5%    -    

28%  of Unionists still want to return to 1922 - 1967

Quote from: Rossfan on June 08, 2009, 06:33:40 PM

Quote from: delboy on June 08, 2009, 03:26:41 PM

Steven Agnew     GRN      15,764      3.3%      +2.4%     
Jim Allister    TUV    66,197    13.7%    -    
Bairbre de Brún    SF    126,184    26%    -0.3%    Elected
Diane Dodds    DUP    88,346    18.2%    -13.8%    
Alban Maginness    SDLP    78,489    16.2%    +0.3%    
Jim Nicholson    UCUNF    82,893    17.1%    +0.5%    
Ian James Parsley    AP    26,699    5.5%    -    

28%  of Unionists still want to return to 1922 - 1967

What  ???

Quote from: delboy on June 08, 2009, 06:41:44 PM

Quote from: Rossfan on June 08, 2009, 06:33:40 PM

Quote from: delboy on June 08, 2009, 03:26:41 PM

Steven Agnew     GRN      15,764      3.3%      +2.4%     
Jim Allister    TUV    66,197    13.7%    -    
Bairbre de Brún    SF    126,184    26%    -0.3%    Elected
Diane Dodds    DUP    88,346    18.2%    -13.8%    
Alban Maginness    SDLP    78,489    16.2%    +0.3%    
Jim Nicholson    UCUNF    82,893    17.1%    +0.5%    
Ian James Parsley    AP    26,699    5.5%    -    

28%  of Unionists still want to return to 1922 - 1967

What  ???

66,197 votes of 66,197+88,346+82,893

Disappointing that Maginness didn't manage to get the third seat.

Noticeable that Dodds hasn't been taking any of the interviews on BBC or UTV.

Quote from: Roger on June 07, 2009, 02:04:36 AM

Quote from: Donagh on June 07, 2009, 01:48:36 AM
Roger the vote in nationalist areas dropped more than the vote unionist areas but SF will still top the poll and a fair chance the SDLP will take a seat. Turnout has dropped on both sides but the crucial factor is that those who don't vote don't count. As many Fenians will appear for the next, presumably more important, election as will Prods, so that is irrelevant. What is relevant in the trends of the past 20 years, which say the garden centre Prod doesn't exist and if it does, it doesn't matter anyway.   

They mattered at the last referendum.  Any border referendum I believe they'd be out again.  Now that's just opinion but you can see it has some precendent. I suppose even commenting is now cue for a torrent of abuse, insults and aggro from some quarters.  Oh well.

Btw, I don't think SDLP will get the third seat but this time last week I would have thought they would. One thing for sure is that Monday's results will be an interesting read.   

roger, turnout thursday 42.8% down from 51.2% (2004).... total unionist vote 237,436 (2009) as against 266,925 (04) down 29,489. unionist vote down 11.05%.... total nationalist vote 204,673 (09) as against 232,100 (04) down 27,427 nationalist vote down 11.82%. percent of total vote unionist 49%  (2004 - 48.60%)  nationalist 42.26% (2004 - 42.34%). the drop in the turnout from 2004 is made up equally of unionists/nationalists. also the nationalist vote has for sometime now been in the 42-44% range. the overall point i'm making is the stay at home unionists who didnt come out in 2004 or any year are matched by stay at home nationalists based on any number of elections you want to use because in a large pop sample as big as 1.5m unionists/nationalists are equally motivated/lazy/interested/uninterested

Quote from: Tonto on June 06, 2009, 09:38:05 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 07:12:55 PM

Quote from: armaghniac on June 05, 2009, 04:10:24 PM
What do we draw from unionist support for Allister, protest vote in an election that doesn't matter too much or a real opposition to progress?   

Difficult to know what way to read it. You'd hope it's not the latter, but given what happened to the Ulster Unionists, it could well be history repeating itself.

OK, I'll be honest.  I am normally a UUP voter but I'm not a Tory, I dislike the DUP and think that Jim Allister is a bit of a dinosaur so I went to the ballot box not knowing who to vote for.

I have to say that I have been very impressed with Jim Allister's campaign and he, I think, is infinitely better than Dodds as a politician.  As such, I gave Allister my first preference simply because he, from what I see, has been our best MEP over the last 5 years and deserves to keep his seat.  I would never vote for the TUV in Assembly or Westminster elections but in this instance felt Jim Allister deserved it.

tonto 29% of the pop in the north voted against the good friday agreement in the referendum while the tuv (the only party against it in todays election) got 13.67% of the vote. Jim mcallister won nothing today and there is no route for him to achieve anything except split unionism

Quote from: delboy on June 08, 2009, 06:41:44 PM

Quote from: Rossfan on June 08, 2009, 06:33:40 PM

Quote from: delboy on June 08, 2009, 03:26:41 PM

Steven Agnew     GRN      15,764      3.3%      +2.4%     
Jim Allister    TUV    66,197    13.7%    -    
Bairbre de Brún    SF    126,184    26%    -0.3%    Elected
Diane Dodds    DUP    88,346    18.2%    -13.8%    
Alban Maginness    SDLP    78,489    16.2%    +0.3%    
Jim Nicholson    UCUNF    82,893    17.1%    +0.5%    
Ian James Parsley    AP    26,699    5.5%    -    

28%  of Unionists still want to return to 1922 - 1967

What  ???

Allister and his supporters have nothing to offer the future ...all they are doing is hankering after a return to the nightmare years of 1922-1967. Does he really think the Nationalist people,the Irish and Brit Governments will wear that kind of blinkered bigoted nonsense?

1) Is Coleraine about to assume the hate centre of owc? They say that that is where Jim Allister's vote was the highest.

2) Nice but pathetic little gesture by Mrs Dodds refusing to shake the hand of Babs de Bruin after the erection election. I guess thats the start of the DUP fight back, to, ahem, "Smash Sinn Fein". The strategy will be to work together but not allow any bodily contact between the two women (oh i've just had a horrible thought... barf... hurl.... bark... hurl... barf... hurl...)

Quote from: magickingdom on June 08, 2009, 07:48:51 PM

Quote from: Tonto on June 06, 2009, 09:38:05 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 07:12:55 PM

Quote from: armaghniac on June 05, 2009, 04:10:24 PM
What do we draw from unionist support for Allister, protest vote in an election that doesn't matter too much or a real opposition to progress?   

Difficult to know what way to read it. You'd hope it's not the latter, but given what happened to the Ulster Unionists, it could well be history repeating itself.

OK, I'll be honest.  I am normally a UUP voter but I'm not a Tory, I dislike the DUP and think that Jim Allister is a bit of a dinosaur so I went to the ballot box not knowing who to vote for.

I have to say that I have been very impressed with Jim Allister's campaign and he, I think, is infinitely better than Dodds as a politician.  As such, I gave Allister my first preference simply because he, from what I see, has been our best MEP over the last 5 years and deserves to keep his seat.  I would never vote for the TUV in Assembly or Westminster elections but in this instance felt Jim Allister deserved it.

tonto 29% of the pop in the north voted against the good friday agreement in the referendum while the tuv (the only party against it in todays election) got 13.67% of the vote. Jim mcallister won nothing today and there is no route for him to achieve anything except split unionism

Even yesterdays result shows that vast majority of U nionists support Stormont cos they voted Ulster Unionist or DUP. but,  history has shown us , that the small minority of Unionists (13.67% in this case) who are opposed to sharing power with Nationalists rule the roost and will dictate future Unionist policy. Robinson must not do a Trimble. Robinson must take these people head on and make it clear to them that , the will of the majority of Unionists will prevail.

Very enjoyable watching how bitter Diane Dodds is, showed herself up badly not shaking barbaras hand.

I just can't get over the attitude of a large proportion of unionists in northern ireland, the TUV are just another no party, what do their supporters think they are going to achieve by electing them, unionism is stuck in the past, their attitudes are outdated. Do they really think we can have a government without half the population being represented, it really is crazy. I think Jim Allister and the likes just look ridiculous with their no compromise stance, singing god save the queen. I know im looking at this as a nationalist but i think Sinn Fein come across a lot better in the media compared to them other clowns.

I noticed that Jim Nicholson shook Barbara's hand. Is this the first time an Ulster Unionist, or whatever they're calling themselves now, has shaken a Sinn Fein's hand in public?

As for the Unionist community going on about the sad day in Ulster and slabber like that like, I have to agree with Mario when he said that Sinn Fein came over better in the media.

Have the DUP now realised they chose the wrong candidate for Europe, as Mrs. Dodds was not seen on television since Sinn Fein topped the polls.

Quote from: magickingdom on June 08, 2009, 07:48:51 PM

Quote from: Tonto on June 06, 2009, 09:38:05 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 05, 2009, 07:12:55 PM

Quote from: armaghniac on June 05, 2009, 04:10:24 PM
What do we draw from unionist support for Allister, protest vote in an election that doesn't matter too much or a real opposition to progress?   

Difficult to know what way to read it. You'd hope it's not the latter, but given what happened to the Ulster Unionists, it could well be history repeating itself.

OK, I'll be honest.  I am normally a UUP voter but I'm not a Tory, I dislike the DUP and think that Jim Allister is a bit of a dinosaur so I went to the ballot box not knowing who to vote for.

I have to say that I have been very impressed with Jim Allister's campaign and he, I think, is infinitely better than Dodds as a politician.  As such, I gave Allister my first preference simply because he, from what I see, has been our best MEP over the last 5 years and deserves to keep his seat.  I would never vote for the TUV in Assembly or Westminster elections but in this instance felt Jim Allister deserved it.

tonto 29% of the pop in the north voted against the good friday agreement in the referendum while the tuv (the only party against it in todays election) got 13.67% of the vote. Jim mcallister won nothing today and there is no route for him to achieve anything except split unionism

I know and I am pro-Agreement btw.  I voted for Jim Allister because I thought he was the best man for the job in Brussels (well out of the way!!) but will restate I would "never, never, never" vote for him or his party as 1st preference in an Assembly/Westminster election.  I suppose that's a dilemma I face at the next election depending no whether or not the UUP are still aligned to the Tories or if the DUP are still c*nts. 

Maybe I'll vote for the SDLP... again. :o

According to the BBC, a lot of Green's and Alliance's second preferences went to TUV. A sizeable amount of the TUV's second preference went to the SDLP.

Quote from: Tonto on June 09, 2009, 12:49:07 AM
I know and I am pro-Agreement btw.  I voted for Jim Allister because I thought he was the best man for the job in Brussels (well out of the way!!) but will restate I would "never, never, never" vote for him or his party as 1st preference in an Assembly/Westminster election.  I suppose that's a dilemma I face at the next election depending no whether or not the UUP are still aligned to the Tories or if the DUP are still c*nts. 

Maybe I'll vote for the SDLP... again. :o

Thats like those who lent their vote to Sinn Fein, most of them are still voting for Sinn Fein.
I didn't really know much about Allister until today, saw him interviewed on the BBC after he was eliminated. He is a horrible little man, if he is the future of Unionism then I think the future is going to be a repeat of the past. It seems than many of our neighbours are content to live in the late 17th century.
What must the outside world think when they see people like that on TV representing NI ???

Quote from: ziggysego on June 09, 2009, 12:54:01 AM
According to the BBC, a lot of Green's and Alliance's second preferences went to TUV. A sizeable amount of the TUV's second preference went to the SDLP.

Additional votes after second count (with Alliance and Greens eliminated):
SDLP - 16,325
UUP - 11,392
TUV - 4,284
DUP - 2,914

What happened the SF surplus? Is that included in the SDLP's 16,325?

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 09, 2009, 09:22:30 AM

What happened the SF surplus? Is that included in the SDLP's 16,325?

Wasn't distributed as far as I know.

Why do you think Allister is the best man for europe tonto?
He is a dinosaur and would take us back to the days where the most notable thing our esteemed leaders did in europe was complain about the union jack being upside down.

Listening to Allistar on Radio Ulster this morning. Not a fan of that wee tr**p at all.

Quote from: magickingdom on June 08, 2009, 07:42:27 PM

Quote from: Roger on June 07, 2009, 02:04:36 AM

Quote from: Donagh on June 07, 2009, 01:48:36 AM
Roger the vote in nationalist areas dropped more than the vote unionist areas but SF will still top the poll and a fair chance the SDLP will take a seat. Turnout has dropped on both sides but the crucial factor is that those who don't vote don't count. As many Fenians will appear for the next, presumably more important, election as will Prods, so that is irrelevant. What is relevant in the trends of the past 20 years, which say the garden centre Prod doesn't exist and if it does, it doesn't matter anyway.   

They mattered at the last referendum.  Any border referendum I believe they'd be out again.  Now that's just opinion but you can see it has some precendent. I suppose even commenting is now cue for a torrent of abuse, insults and aggro from some quarters.  Oh well.

Btw, I don't think SDLP will get the third seat but this time last week I would have thought they would. One thing for sure is that Monday's results will be an interesting read.   

roger, turnout thursday 42.8% down from 51.2% (2004).... total unionist vote 237,436 (2009) as against 266,925 (04) down 29,489. unionist vote down 11.05%.... total nationalist vote 204,673 (09) as against 232,100 (04) down 27,427 nationalist vote down 11.82%. percent of total vote unionist 49%  (2004 - 48.60%)  nationalist 42.26% (2004 - 42.34%). the drop in the turnout from 2004 is made up equally of unionists/nationalists. also the nationalist vote has for sometime now been in the 42-44% range. the overall point i'm making is the stay at home unionists who didnt come out in 2004 or any year are matched by stay at home nationalists based on any number of elections you want to use because in a large pop sample as big as 1.5m unionists/nationalists are equally motivated/lazy/interested/uninterested

The stats do show a downturn in turnout compared to 2004 more or less equal in both communities. However this is the downturn only and does not represent that a greater % of nationalists still vote than compared to unionists. If a referendum took place (ie on the continuance of British sovereignty as per other thread) then more unionists, I believe, would turnout and there is reason to believe that they would as this is more important and can be seen by the turnout in 1998 when an additional 150k voters came out, the majority of whom most commentators agree were considered to be unionists.

Quote from: Gaffer on June 08, 2009, 11:52:14 PM

Even yesterdays result shows that vast majority of U nionists support Stormont cos they voted Ulster Unionist or DUP. but,  history has shown us , that the small minority of Unionists (13.67% in this case) who are opposed to sharing power with Nationalists rule the roost and will dictate future Unionist policy. Robinson must not do a Trimble. Robinson must take these people head on and make it clear to them that , the will of the majority of Unionists will prevail.

Thats 13.67 % of the total but just shy of 28 % of the unionist vote. Robinson will almost certainly 'do a trimble' that 28 % of the unionist vote is enough to get robinson and his party reduced from the largest to possibly the 3rd/4th largest overall and the second largest in unionism. He will want to pick up those votes and the only way he can is to give representation to those 28 % of the unionist voters by taking a much tougher stance.

Quote from: delboy on June 09, 2009, 10:38:20 AM

Quote from: Gaffer on June 08, 2009, 11:52:14 PM

Even yesterdays result shows that vast majority of U nionists support Stormont cos they voted Ulster Unionist or DUP. but,  history has shown us , that the small minority of Unionists (13.67% in this case) who are opposed to sharing power with Nationalists rule the roost and will dictate future Unionist policy. Robinson must not do a Trimble. Robinson must take these people head on and make it clear to them that , the will of the majority of Unionists will prevail.

Thats 13.67 % of the total but just shy of 28 % of the unionist vote. Robinson will almost certainly 'do a trimble' that 28 % of the unionist vote is enough to get robinson and his party reduced from the largest to possibly the 3rd largest overall and the second largest in unionism. He will want to pick up those votes and the only way he can is to give representation to those 28 % of the unionist voters by taking a much tougher stance.

Foster on radio this morning and was saying the opposite - we can only hope, otherwise the dinosaurs win again.

Quote from: Roger on June 09, 2009, 10:24:05 AM
The stats do show a downturn in turnout compared to 2004 more or less equal in both communities. However this is the downturn only and does not represent that a greater % of nationalists still vote than compared to unionists. If a referendum took place (ie on the continuance of British sovereignty as per other thread) then more unionists, I believe, would turnout and there is reason to believe that they would as this is more important and can be seen by the turnout in 1998 when an additional 150k voters came out, the majority of whom most commentators agree were considered to be unionists.

Roger they do not show an equal downturn in both communities. The figures below show the turnouts, and variations from the mean, for each constituency in 2007 and 2009. The least worst performing places, in terms of relative turnout, are North Antrim, East Derry, East Antrim, Upper Bann and North Down.

BE 38.8% -4.0% 60.0% -3.5%
BN 41.0% -1.8% 60.9% -2.6%
BS 42.1% -0.7% 62.4% -1.1%
BW 46.6% 3.8% 67.4% 3.9%
EA 34.5% -8.3% 53.5% -10.0%
ED 42.3% -0.5% 60.9% -2.6%
FST 51.5% 8.7% 71.2% 7.7%
Foy 44.3% 1.5% 63.9% 0.4%
LV 38.9% -3.9% 60.0% -3.5%
MU 52.8% 10.0% 73.1% 9.6%
N&A 49.1% 6.3% 70.8% 7.3%
NA 43.2% 0.4% 61.3% -2.2%
ND 34.5% -8.3% 53.8% -9.7%
SA 38.0% -4.8% 58.6% -4.9%
SD 45.0% 2.2% 65.0% 1.5%
Str 34.2% -8.6% 54.5% -9.0%
UB 41.8% -1.0% 61.1% -2.4%
WT 50.3% 7.5% 71.7% 8.2%
42.8% 63.5%

So what these show are that even when the differential was less in unionist areas i.e. their areas dropped less than the drop in nationalist areas, the nationalist vote still held and we even had a SFer coming in first. This only points to the trend drifting away from unionism, so just as you may expect unionist turnout to go up for more serious elections and or referendum, so to will be expect the nationalist vote to do the same but it will not affect the trend which are point to a majority of people voting for pro-unity parties with in a decade or so. That reality will have to be faced in the next Assembly election when SF take the First Minister title.

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 09, 2009, 10:40:39 AM

Quote from: delboy on June 09, 2009, 10:38:20 AM

Quote from: Gaffer on June 08, 2009, 11:52:14 PM

Even yesterdays result shows that vast majority of U nionists support Stormont cos they voted Ulster Unionist or DUP. but,  history has shown us , that the small minority of Unionists (13.67% in this case) who are opposed to sharing power with Nationalists rule the roost and will dictate future Unionist policy. Robinson must not do a Trimble. Robinson must take these people head on and make it clear to them that , the will of the majority of Unionists will prevail.

Thats 13.67 % of the total but just shy of 28 % of the unionist vote. Robinson will almost certainly 'do a trimble' that 28 % of the unionist vote is enough to get robinson and his party reduced from the largest to possibly the 3rd largest overall and the second largest in unionism. He will want to pick up those votes and the only way he can is to give representation to those 28 % of the unionist voters by taking a much tougher stance.

Foster on radio this morning and was saying the opposite - we can only hope, otherwise the dinosaurs win again.

I'd be amazed if the DUP didn't go for those voters, they didn't spend the last few decades plotting and strategising to become the biggest party in unionism to throw all that away after a mere few years at the top. I would suspect that many in the party will think trimble failed because he didn't go far enough!!

The only other strategy is to bury there head in the sand and hope nicholson and his vote dissapears into the ether come the assembly and westminster elections.  

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 10:47:59 AM
This only points to the trend drifting away from unionism, so just as you may expect unionist turnout to go up for more serious elections and or referendum, so to will be expect the nationalist vote to do the same but it will not affect the trend which are point to a majority of people voting for pro-unity parties with in a decade or so. That reality will have to be faced in the next Assembly election when SF take the First Minister title.

Donagh what happened to your much touted trend of the inexorable rise of the nationalist/republican vote by 1 % every few years, by that reckoning the vote should have been up by the order of 2-2.5 %, instead it remained constant with the previous outing. That puts a bit of a dent in your spurious extrapolations.

Quote from: delboy on June 09, 2009, 10:57:40 AM
Donagh what happened to your much touted trend of the inexorable rise of the nationalist/republican vote by 1 % every few years, by that reckoning the vote should have been up by the order of 2-2.5 %, instead it remained constant with the previous outing. That puts a bit of a dent in your spurious extrapolations.

Delboy, I meant the population changes by 1% every two years but that doesn't necessarily translate into votes immediately. As far as the Euro election is concerned I've shown above that the drop in turnout was bigger nationalist areas and the nationalist vote still held, when you would have expected the unionist share of the vote to increase - it didn't. I don't see how that puts a dent in my "extrapolations" whatever the f**k they are.

Quote from: delboy on June 09, 2009, 10:49:00 AM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 09, 2009, 10:40:39 AM

Quote from: delboy on June 09, 2009, 10:38:20 AM

Quote from: Gaffer on June 08, 2009, 11:52:14 PM

Even yesterdays result shows that vast majority of U nionists support Stormont cos they voted Ulster Unionist or DUP. but,  history has shown us , that the small minority of Unionists (13.67% in this case) who are opposed to sharing power with Nationalists rule the roost and will dictate future Unionist policy. Robinson must not do a Trimble. Robinson must take these people head on and make it clear to them that , the will of the majority of Unionists will prevail.

Thats 13.67 % of the total but just shy of 28 % of the unionist vote. Robinson will almost certainly 'do a trimble' that 28 % of the unionist vote is enough to get robinson and his party reduced from the largest to possibly the 3rd largest overall and the second largest in unionism. He will want to pick up those votes and the only way he can is to give representation to those 28 % of the unionist voters by taking a much tougher stance.

Foster on radio this morning and was saying the opposite - we can only hope, otherwise the dinosaurs win again.

I'd be amazed if the DUP didn't go for those voters, they didn't spend the last few decades plotting and strategising to become the biggest party in unionism to throw all that away after a mere few years at the top. I would suspect that many in the party will think trimble failed because he didn't go far enough!!

The only other strategy is to bury there head in the sand and hope nicholson and his vote dissapears into the ether come the assembly and westminster elections.  

Allister had a strong personal vote (because of his supposed good work in Europe), this will not transfer into other elections, Allisters had his day and will do a Bob McCartney and fade away into the background given time, imo.

They picked up a simialr proportion of the vote in a recent bi-election so its not a one off, the DUP will still be alarmed but we'll find out in the next year one way or the other. Personally i hope you are right, i hate this crass polarisation of politics that abounds in NI.

Quote from: nifan on June 09, 2009, 09:54:17 AM
Why do you think Allister is the best man for europe tonto?

Well, like most people I suppose, I don't really follow the affairs of the European Parliament so was just going on information I had read over the last couple of weeks:

Allister the best UK MEP: http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/MEPAssessments.pdf (http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/MEPAssessments.pdf)
Allister 5th best UK MEP: http://www.openeurope.org.uk/research/mepranking.xls (http://www.openeurope.org.uk/research/mepranking.xls)

Allister participation actually seems to be helping unionist turnout as he caused a bit of excitement and debate in that camp. I'd actually been hoping Collie Duffy would have done the same on the nationalist side, to a lesser extent. An extra percent or two and the Stoops would have taken the second seat.

What's also interesting was the redistribution of the Alliance and Green votes. After the redistribution 52.8% went to Unionist parties and 45.6% went to Nationalist parties. That probably gives us an indication of the state of play in terms of the divide between the two blocks. That is, if the last census was accurate and using the rough standard that Catholics are nationalist then the nationalist vote yesterday would be amazing in that every Catholic voted for nationalist parties. However as we are constantly told, there are many Catholics who are not nationalist so that means the Catholic population must be a lot higher and that their votes are hidden elsewhere i.e. in Alliance and Green - 45% of their transfers went to the Stoops and SF. This is not even taking into consideration that a fair section of the population that has the Catholic majority is still under-age and can't vote, so the trends will continue for the foreseeable future.

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 11:41:46 AM
Allister participation actually seems to be helping unionist turnout as he caused a bit of excitement and debate in that camp. I'd actually been hoping Collie Duffy would have done the same on the nationalist side, to a lesser extent. An extra percent or two and the Stoops would have taken the second seat.

What's also interesting was the redistribution of the Alliance and Green votes. After the redistribution 52.8% went to Unionist parties and 45.6% went to Nationalist parties. That probably gives us an indication of the state of play in terms of the divide between the two blocks. That is, if the last census was accurate and using the rough standard that Catholics are nationalist then the nationalist vote yesterday would be amazing in that every Catholic voted for nationalist parties. However as we are constantly told, there are many Catholics who are not nationalist so that means the Catholic population must be a lot higher and that their votes are hidden elsewhere i.e. in Alliance and Green - 45% of their transfers went to the Stoops and SF. This is not even taking into consideration that a fair section of the population that has the Catholic majority is still under-age and can't vote, so the trends will continue for the foreseeable future.

Still with the 'trends' and wild extrapolations i see, ffs over 2 and a half thousand of TUVs transfers went to the SDLP, what nonsense can you read into that for instance  ???

What trend are you talking about anyway, the trend that a significant proportion of catholics don't vote for nationalist parties, i don't see why that seems to make you so happy?

Quote
Still with the 'trends' and wild extrapolations i see, ffs over 2 and a half thousand of TUVs transfers went to the SDLP, what nonsense can you read into that for instance  ???

Anyone but the DUPs.

Quote
What trend are you talking about anyway, the trend that a significant proportion of catholics don't vote for nationalist parties, i don't see why that seems to make you so happy?

Trends towards the majority of people voting for parties who support ending the partition of the country.

Quote from: delboy on June 09, 2009, 11:52:13 AM

Still with the 'trends' and wild extrapolations i see, ffs over 2 and a half thousand of TUVs transfers went to the SDLP, what nonsense can you read into that for instance  ???

Strange indeed. The 2.5k either
a) registered it as a protest at the swish Family Robinson
b) are plain stupid

I reckon its (b).

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 12:04:06 PM

Quote
Still with the 'trends' and wild extrapolations i see, ffs over 2 and a half thousand of TUVs transfers went to the SDLP, what nonsense can you read into that for instance  ???

Anyone but the DUPs.

Quote
What trend are you talking about anyway, the trend that a significant proportion of catholics don't vote for nationalist parties, i don't see why that seems to make you so happy?

Trends towards the majority of people voting for parties who support ending the partition of the country.

Over 26000 of his transfers went to the DUP.

So alliance and the green party support a united ireland, thats not my understanding, from what i've read of their mainfestos they support the belfast agreement, end of.

Quote from: delboy on June 09, 2009, 12:11:46 PM
Over 26000 of his transfers went to the DUP.

Obviously as they are from the same gene pool, but you asked by some went to the Stoops and I offered and explanation.

Quote from: delboy on June 09, 2009, 12:11:46 PM
So alliance and the green party support a united ireland, thats not my understanding, from what i've read of their mainfestos they support the belfast agreement, end of.

I didn't say that as we all know they are officially neutral on the issue. I said 45% of their transfers went to nationalist parties, read into that what you will.

How bad a candidate was diane dodds? brutal

Quote from: Aghdavoyle on June 09, 2009, 12:49:43 PM

How bad a candidate was diane dodds? brutal

Horrendously bad.

Quote from: Aghdavoyle on June 09, 2009, 12:49:43 PM

How bad a candidate was diane dodds? brutal

It does however illustrate the dearth of talent outside the DUP top table. Will be interesting to see of Robinson can replace the double-jobbers with people having an IQ higher than a mentally challenged snooker ball.

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 01:03:09 PM

Quote from: Aghdavoyle on June 09, 2009, 12:49:43 PM

How bad a candidate was diane dodds? brutal

It does however illustrate the dearth of talent outside the DUP top table. Will be interesting to see of Robinson can replace the double-jobbers with people having an IQ higher than a mentally challenged snooker ball.

The dearth of talent across all parties is evident. We are over governed and have too many parties and too few decent people in Politics right across the spectrum.  None of the best three candidates got elected imo. I don't think De Brun is much better than Dodds albeit she didn't rant on in that Politics Show, but she does come across pretty poorly too.

Quote from: Roger on June 09, 2009, 01:08:52 PM
None of the best three candidates got elected imo.

I'm guessing you mean Agnew, Allister and Maginness?

Quote from: Roger on June 09, 2009, 01:08:52 PM

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 01:03:09 PM

Quote from: Aghdavoyle on June 09, 2009, 12:49:43 PM

How bad a candidate was diane dodds? brutal

It does however illustrate the dearth of talent outside the DUP top table. Will be interesting to see of Robinson can replace the double-jobbers with people having an IQ higher than a mentally challenged snooker ball.

The dearth of talent across all parties is evident. We are over governed and have too many parties and too few decent people in Politics right across the spectrum.  None of the best three candidates got elected imo. I don't think De Brun is much better than Dodds albeit she didn't rant on in that Politics Show, but she does come across pretty poorly too.

Yeah, the cheak of her trying to shake hands with Dodds!

Would you care to elaborate on where and when Babs came across poorly?
Also would love to know who you think the 3 best candidates are and why?

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 11:41:46 AM
What's also interesting was the redistribution of the Alliance and Green votes. After the redistribution 52.8% went to Unionist parties and 45.6% went to Nationalist parties.

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 11:41:46 AM
Alliance and Green - 45% of their transfers went to the Stoops and SF.

How are you getting these calculations?

I'm working it out that of the Alliance & Greens transfers, 46.76% went to the SDLP (not SDLP and SF) with 53.24% going to the 3 Unionists.

Do you have insider info on what Alliance & Greens transferred to SF? I didn't see it published as SF obviously didn't require the transfer. 7,548 Alliance & Green votes weren't counted in the transfer for the second count - presumably these are split between second preferences for SF and votes that weren't transferred. If some of these would have transferred to SF, then the split would be more like 50/50 between Nationalist and Unionist parties.

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 12:44:07 PM
I didn't say that as we all know they are officially neutral on the issue. I said 45% of their transfers went to nationalist parties, read into that what you will.

Well obviuously the 'trend' is that greenies tend to be nationalist but that they think hugging trees is more important than a united ireland  ;)

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 09, 2009, 01:22:44 PM

How are you getting these calculations?

I'm working it out that of the Alliance & Greens transfers, 46.76% went to the SDLP (not SDLP and SF) with 53.24% going to the 3 Unionists.

Do you have insider info on what Alliance & Greens transferred to SF? I didn't see it published as SF obviously didn't require the transfer. 7,548 Alliance & Green votes weren't counted in the transfer for the second count - presumably these are split between second preferences for SF and votes that weren't transferred. If some of these would have transferred to SF, then the split would be more like 50/50 between Nationalist and Unionist parties.

I might be wrong, but if SF were a 2 on an Alliance/Green transfer then it would have went to the 3. I presume the 7548 voted either 1 Alliance or Green and stopped or voted 1/2 in an Alliance/Green combination and stopped

Quote from: tyrone86 on June 09, 2009, 01:27:36 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 09, 2009, 01:22:44 PM

How are you getting these calculations?

I'm working it out that of the Alliance & Greens transfers, 46.76% went to the SDLP (not SDLP and SF) with 53.24% going to the 3 Unionists.

Do you have insider info on what Alliance & Greens transferred to SF? I didn't see it published as SF obviously didn't require the transfer. 7,548 Alliance & Green votes weren't counted in the transfer for the second count - presumably these are split between second preferences for SF and votes that weren't transferred. If some of these would have transferred to SF, then the split would be more like 50/50 between Nationalist and Unionist parties.

I might be wrong, but if SF were a 2 on an Alliance/Green transfer then it would have went to the 3. I presume the 7548 voted either 1 Alliance or Green and stopped or voted 1/2 in an Alliance/Green combination and stopped

Maybe - i'm no expert in these things.

Quote from: tyrone86 on June 09, 2009, 01:27:36 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 09, 2009, 01:22:44 PM

How are you getting these calculations?

I'm working it out that of the Alliance & Greens transfers, 46.76% went to the SDLP (not SDLP and SF) with 53.24% going to the 3 Unionists.

Do you have insider info on what Alliance & Greens transferred to SF? I didn't see it published as SF obviously didn't require the transfer. 7,548 Alliance & Green votes weren't counted in the transfer for the second count - presumably these are split between second preferences for SF and votes that weren't transferred. If some of these would have transferred to SF, then the split would be more like 50/50 between Nationalist and Unionist parties.

I might be wrong, but if SF were a 2 on an Alliance/Green transfer then it would have went to the 3. I presume the 7548 voted either 1 Alliance or Green and stopped or voted 1/2 in an Alliance/Green combination and stopped

As far as I remember thats correct.

Quote from: delboy on June 09, 2009, 01:24:11 PM
Well obviuously the 'trend' is that greenies tend to be nationalist but that they think hugging trees is more important than a united ireland  ;)

delboy what it means is that the 'Castle Kethlics' aren't going to save unionism from the inevitable, nor will the hope that all those Alliance voters will swing in behind unionism.

Maguire, sorry of course you're right, I overlooked that and just lumped the SDLP transfers in the SF but forgot had already went over quota.


The final figures from yesterday after transfers were 52.3% for unionism and 46.1% for nationalism and 1.6% non-transferable. This was marginally better for unionism as their turnout didn't drop as much as did it within nationalist areas, but that could be down to the Allistair factor of livening things up. A the turnout was so low, I doubt there is anything we can read into the figures except that the gap continues to close. A 2.5% swing from one side to the other will exceed the 50%+1 requirement of the GFA - the EU poll being 'cleaner' due to the non-involvement of independents. That is very achievable within a decade.  

I thought any surpluses were also transferred - what happened SF's extra 5,000 odd votes?

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 02:14:21 PM

Quote from: delboy on June 09, 2009, 01:24:11 PM
Well obviuously the 'trend' is that greenies tend to be nationalist but that they think hugging trees is more important than a united ireland  ;)

delboy what it means is that the 'Castle Kethlics' aren't going to save unionism from the inevitable, nor will the hope that all those Alliance voters will swing in behind unionism.

Maguire, sorry of course you're right, I overlooked that and just lumped the SDLP transfers in the SF but forgot had already went over quota.


The final figures from yesterday after transfers were 52.3% for unionism and 46.1% for nationalism and 1.6% non-transferable. This was marginally better for unionism as their turnout didn't drop as much as did it within nationalist areas, but that could be down to the Allistair factor of livening things up. A the turnout was so low, I doubt there is anything we can read into the figures except that the gap continues to close. A 2.5% swing from one side to the other will exceed the 50%+1 requirement of the GFA - the EU poll being 'cleaner' due to the non-involvement of independents. That is very achievable within a decade.  

Tell me, Donagh, were you far into your (post-Election) "United Ireland by 2016" Victory Speech before Monday's results caused you to have to tear it up and start again?  :D

And as for your present attempt at "whistling past the graveyard" to keep your own spirits up, are you really managing to kid yourself, because it sure as Hell isn't fooling the rest of us?

For you can spoof all you like eg about the relative drop in Nationalist turnout being greater since 2004, or about Colin Duffy's standing increasing the Nationalist vote, or about Green Party transfers ya-di-ya-di-ya, but none of it conceals the essential facts.

Namely, this was an Election where the 2 Nat Parties fielded sound candidates, with genuine aspirations of both getting returned. Whereas Unionism was more split than it has been in years. Meanwhile, the largest Unionist Party fielded an utterly hopeless candidate, even though mired in Expenses/Double Jobbing controversy, and the UUP were experimenting with a new Conservative Alliance, which is clearly a matter of contention amongst its supporters. And in the Election itself, it is undeniable that turnout was lower in traditionally Unionist areas than in their Nationalist counterparts.

So remind me how did the results pan out again? Well in 2004, SF/SDLP gained 42.2% of the 1st Preference vote. And even if you include Eamonn McCann's vote as Nationalist, that still only brings it up to 43.8%. Whereas the combined DUP/UUP vote was 48.5%. As for the remaining 7.5% Independent/Green vote, their transfers at the 3rd count to the remaining UUP and SDLP candidates reflected the overall Unionist/Nationalist split.

Compare that with 2009. SF/SDLP took an identical 42.2% of the 1st preference votes, whereas the DUP/UUP/TUV combined total was higher than 2004, at 49.9%. Meanwhile, the 3rd count transfers from Alliance and Greens was 16,325 to the SDLP, but 18,590 to DUP/UUP/TUV, so at the very least we can say that Alliance voters reflect the current Unionist/Nationalist split*. (This despite Alban McGuinness's personal credibility/appeal far outweighing that of the 3 Unionist candidates, btw).

All of which goes to show that despite the circumstances in 2009 being notably more favourable for Nationalism vis-a-vis Unionism than in 2004, not only did the Nationalist vote fail to rise, but if anything, it actually fell. And at the same time, the Unionist vote actually rose slightly.

So much for the inexorability of your "1% per annum rise in the Catholic birthrate", which was going to see us all off some time in the near future!  :D


* - Don't forget that Alliance are a (self-defined) Unionist party, in that they are so registered at Stormont and support the constitutional status quo; therefore if their 5.5% were counted as Unionist votes, it would take the overall 2009 Unionist vote up to 54.5%.  

The election proved once again that there are more prods in taigs in the six counties, what a surprise. ::)

Nevertheless if Jwin Wallister's Traditional Unionst Voice (aka "we can't stand a fenian and won't have one about the place") stands in the next six county assembly elections, it should result in Martin Mc Guinness becoming First Minister, and for me that would  be as good as, if not better, than  partition ending ;D

PS Its the first time my first preference  vote went to a candidate that actually topped the poll, so it was a landmark election for me personally ;D

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 09, 2009, 03:24:13 PM

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 02:14:21 PM

Quote from: delboy on June 09, 2009, 01:24:11 PM
Well obviuously the 'trend' is that greenies tend to be nationalist but that they think hugging trees is more important than a united ireland  ;)

delboy what it means is that the 'Castle Kethlics' aren't going to save unionism from the inevitable, nor will the hope that all those Alliance voters will swing in behind unionism.

Maguire, sorry of course you're right, I overlooked that and just lumped the SDLP transfers in the SF but forgot had already went over quota.


The final figures from yesterday after transfers were 52.3% for unionism and 46.1% for nationalism and 1.6% non-transferable. This was marginally better for unionism as their turnout didn't drop as much as did it within nationalist areas, but that could be down to the Allistair factor of livening things up. A the turnout was so low, I doubt there is anything we can read into the figures except that the gap continues to close. A 2.5% swing from one side to the other will exceed the 50%+1 requirement of the GFA - the EU poll being 'cleaner' due to the non-involvement of independents. That is very achievable within a decade.  

Tell me, Donagh, were you far into your (post-Election) "United Ireland by 2016" Victory Speech before Monday's results caused you to have to tear it up and start again?  :D

And as for your present attempt at "whistling past the graveyard" to keep your own spirits up, are you really managing to kid yourself, because it sure as Hell isn't fooling the rest of us?

For you can spoof all you like eg about the relative drop in Nationalist turnout being greater since 2004, or about Colin Duffy's standing increasing the Nationalist vote, or about Green Party transfers ya-di-ya-di-ya, but none of it conceals the essential facts.

Namely, this was an Election where the 2 Nat Parties fielded sound candidates, with genuine aspirations of both getting returned. Whereas Unionism was more split than it has been in years. Meanwhile, the largest Unionist Party fielded an utterly hopeless candidate, even though mired in Expenses/Double Jobbing controversy, and the UUP were experimenting with a new Conservative Alliance, which is clearly a matter of contention amongst its supporters. And in the Election itself, it is undeniable that turnout was lower in traditionally Unionist areas than in their Nationalist counterparts.

So remind me how did the results pan out again? Well in 2004, SF/SDLP gained 42.2% of the 1st Preference vote. And even if you include Eamonn McCann's vote as Nationalist, that still only brings it up to 43.8%. Whereas the combined DUP/UUP vote was 48.5%. As for the remaining 7.5% Independent/Green vote, their transfers at the 3rd count to the remaining UUP and SDLP candidates reflected the overall Unionist/Nationalist split.

Compare that with 2009. SF/SDLP took an identical 42.2% of the 1st preference votes, whereas the DUP/UUP/TUV combined total was higher than 2004, at 49.9%. Meanwhile, the 3rd count transfers from Alliance and Greens was 16,325 to the SDLP, but 18,590 to DUP/UUP/TUV, so at the very least we can say that Alliance voters reflect the current Unionist/Nationalist split*. (This despite Alban McGuinness's personal credibility/appeal far outweighing that of the 3 Unionist candidates, btw).

All of which goes to show that despite the circumstances in 2009 being notably more favourable for Nationalism vis-a-vis Unionism than in 2004, not only did the Nationalist vote fail to rise, but if anything, it actually fell. And at the same time, the Unionist vote actually rose slightly.

So much for the inexorability of your "1% per annum rise in the Catholic birthrate", which was going to see us all off some time in the near future!  :D


* - Don't forget that Alliance are a (self-defined) Unionist party, in that they are so registered at Stormont and support the constitutional status quo; therefore if their 5.5% were counted as Unionist votes, it would take the overall 2009 Unionist vote up to 54.5%.  

For once I did actually read your post and everything contained within are answered and refuted by my previous posts re the differential turnout. Oh and don't be putting quotes around phrases in some sort of pretence that you are quoting me - I said nothing of the sort. 

Edit: Alliance are not designated as unionist at Stormont, they are designated "others". But that's irrrelevant, if you see my previous posts I was referring to their transfers from the misguided souls that give them a vote.

Quote from: T Fearon on June 09, 2009, 03:36:21 PM
Nevertheless if Jwin Wallister's Traditional Unionst Voice (aka "we can't stand a fenian and won't have one about the place") stands in the next six county assembly elections, it should result in Martin Mc Guinness becoming First Minister, and for me that would  be as good as, if not better, than  partition ending ;D

1) No differences between First Minister and Deputy First Minister, they both have equal authority. The Deputy title was just added to placate the Unionist politicians and to pretend there was an distinction between the two offices.

2) You'd rather Sinn Fein top the poll, than an end to partition? ::) Fair enough, but I'd rather see a 32 county Irish Republic.

31 Ziggy- you don't really want to keep Fermanagh do you?  :-[

Quote from: ziggysego on June 09, 2009, 04:11:40 PM
1) No differences between First Minister and Deputy First Minister, they both have equal authority. The Deputy title was just added to placate the Unionist politicians and to pretend there was an distinction between the two offices.

Yes, that's true... but just watch the reaction from the DUP should that happen. It wouldn't surprise me if they walked. They wanted Deputy in the title so that a Nationalist politician would be their Deputy; as such they would then be the Deputy for a SF First Minister.

Quote from: T Fearon on June 09, 2009, 03:36:21 PM
The election proved once again that there are more prods in taigs in the six counties, what a surprise. ::)

Nevertheless if Jwin Wallister's Traditional Unionst Voice (aka "we can't stand a fenian and won't have one about the place") stands in the next six county assembly elections, it should result in Martin Mc Guinness becoming First Minister, and for me that would  be as good as, if not better, than  partition ending ;D

PS Its the first time my first preference  vote went to a candidate that actually topped the poll, so it was a landmark election for me personally ;D

I must say you're easily pleased.

Quote from: delboy on June 09, 2009, 04:47:42 PM

Quote from: T Fearon on June 09, 2009, 03:36:21 PM
The election proved once again that there are more prods in taigs in the six counties, what a surprise. ::)

Nevertheless if Jwin Wallister's Traditional Unionst Voice (aka "we can't stand a fenian and won't have one about the place") stands in the next six county assembly elections, it should result in Martin Mc Guinness becoming First Minister, and for me that would  be as good as, if not better, than  partition ending ;D

PS Its the first time my first preference  vote went to a candidate that actually topped the poll, so it was a landmark election for me personally ;D

I must say you're easily pleased.

Indeed.  It's a case of anything that might be more anti-Prod/Unionist is preferred to anything that might be considered positive.  Infantile and mindless bigotry.

Quote from: Roger on June 09, 2009, 05:11:37 PM
Indeed.  It's a case of anything that might be more anti-Prod/Unionist is preferred to anything that might be considered positive.  Infantile and mindless bigotry.

Considering the DUP's attitude in government to anything that is perceived to be on the Nationalist/Republican agenda is exactly the same,   it is merely a case of "monkey see, monkey do"

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 09, 2009, 02:56:20 PM
I thought any surpluses were also transferred - what happened SF's extra 5,000 odd votes?

There was no need to transfer SF's surplus as at no stage would 5,000 extra votes have changed anything (i.e. those eliminated were always more than 5,000 behind those who made the next stage).

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 09, 2009, 03:24:13 PM

And in the Election itself, it is undeniable that turnout was lower in traditionally Unionist areas than in their Nationalist counterparts.


* - Don't forget that Alliance are a (self-defined) Unionist party, in that they are so registered at Stormont and support the constitutional status quo; therefore if their 5.5% were counted as Unionist votes, it would take the overall 2009 Unionist vote up to 54.5%.  

eg, ni was one constituency for the euro election, nationalists also live in traditional unionist areas and may not have voted. what is undeniable based on a basic understanding of maths is that the unionist block in ni is around 48-54% while the nationalist is in the 42-45%. the 150k extra that showed up at the gfa ref would have divided like that

alliance reg as unionist at stormont under duress to save the assembly. as can be seen by the distribution of their votes they broke down along similar % to the unionist/nationalist blocks

The alliance party are not unionists look at the way the transfers from them and the greens went 52% unionist 48% nationalist, discounting those that did not transfer. There is one simple fact from this election, for the first time unionism could not muster up two quotas end of story. Even with a proportionally greater downturn in nationalist turnout this time as opposed to 2004 the unionist share of the vote still fell as it has fallen at every election since about 1981. By the way the alliance party are non aligned at stormont do not believe all the crap EG posts on here.

Quote from: slow corner back on June 09, 2009, 09:19:16 PM
By the way the alliance party are non aligned at stormont do not believe all the crap EG posts on here.

Don't mind Eg too much he's been living abroad for so long now he much of a clue what goes on in Ireland. Unfortunately for him in this case the Alliance Wiki article neglects to mention how Alliance designates. 

Quote from: longrunsthefox on June 09, 2009, 04:13:28 PM
31 Ziggy- you don't really want to keep Fermanagh do you?  :-[

Lovin It

Quote from: magickingdom on June 09, 2009, 08:28:04 PM
eg, ni was one constituency for the euro election, nationalists also live in traditional unionist areas and may not have voted. what is undeniable based on a basic understanding of maths is that the unionist block in ni is around 48-54% while the nationalist is in the 42-45%. the 150k extra that showed up at the gfa ref would have divided like that

It is generally considered that the 150k extra were disproportionately from unionist areas.  How they would vote in a border poll is open to suggestion though. 

This thread has made great reading, and of course the result with the national party topping the poll adding more pleasure.  What I do find very disheartening is the pathetic turn-out in this election.  Here in Oz it is obligatory to vote and failure to do so is a not insubstantial fine.  Yours truly recently missed the vote on the retention of daylight saving time (major, major issue indeed) and is awaiting the bill from the State Govt.

I, therefore, feel it should be mandatory to vote and failure to do so without a very valid reason should result in a fine.  Most pointedly is the low turn-out among Nationalists.  Is this as a result of general apathy or a clever campaign by unionists downplaying the role of the European elections in their everyday lives, thus clearing the way for a unionist majority?

I'm with TF when he stated that the first time his preferred candidate came top of the poll.  It would have been the same for me too, TF. :)

Laughable to suggest the Alliance Party are non unionists. Whether they designate themselves so or not the simple fact is that they support the union, they don't even sit on the fence on that issue unlike every other major issue. End of story

Quote from: Aerlik on June 10, 2009, 06:45:21 AM
This thread has made great reading, and of course the result with the national party topping the poll adding more pleasure. 

Topping the poll means very little, other than egg on the face of the DUP. It would have been more significant had SF and SDLP scraped second and third places.

Quote from: Aerlik on June 10, 2009, 06:45:21 AM
Is this as a result of general apathy or a clever campaign by unionists downplaying the role of the European elections in their everyday lives, thus clearing the way for a unionist majority?

There is a unionist majority. That's pretty much accepted by everyone. And i don't think anyone could accuse the unionist parties of running a clever campaign!

Quote from: T Fearon on June 10, 2009, 08:56:45 AM
Laughable to suggest the Alliance Party are non unionists. Whether they designate themselves so or not the simple fact is that they support the union, they don't even sit on the fence on that issue unlike every other major issue. End of story

Firstly, their official Party policy is that they are neutral on the issue and will allow a free vote. Secondly, when their candidate was eliminated the transfers broke equally for nationalists and unionists, so it doesn't really matter whether they are unionist or not as most likely their voters will divide up equally on the border issue.

Quote from: Maguire01 on June 10, 2009, 09:01:43 AM
And i don't think anyone could accuse the unionist parties of running a clever campaign!

Sadly, I find that actually quite funny  :D ???

I agree with Aerlik, voting should be mandatory here, as should registration.
I would concede that if this were the case we may have to include a "none of the above" box on the ballot paper though.

Registration to vote is mandatory GDA and it is an offence not to register to vote (I think), I do't think voting itself should be mandatory though, people who don't want to vote have to be respected, I vote always and am disappointed when people tell me they don't bother.  But can you blame them when you see the mess our politiicans are continually creating.

Quote from: Doogie Browser on June 10, 2009, 11:25:25 AM
Registration to vote is mandatory GDA and it is an offence not to register to vote (I think), I do't think voting itself should be mandatory though, people who don't want to vote have to be respected, I vote always and am disappointed when people tell me they don't bother.  But can you blame them when you see the mess our politiicans are continually creating.

Doogie I know it's supposed to be mandatory, but it's not enforced even slightly strongly at all, granted they are starting to chase people through estate agents, solicitors, banks, mortgage advisors, gov depts (benefits, housing etc...) to date I think only one person has been taken to court.

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 10, 2009, 11:59:22 AM

Quote from: Doogie Browser on June 10, 2009, 11:25:25 AM
Registration to vote is mandatory GDA and it is an offence not to register to vote (I think), I do't think voting itself should be mandatory though, people who don't want to vote have to be respected, I vote always and am disappointed when people tell me they don't bother.  But can you blame them when you see the mess our politiicans are continually creating.

Doogie I know it's supposed to be mandatory, but it's not enforced even slightly strongly at all, granted they are starting to chase people through estate agents, solicitors, banks, mortgage advisors, gov depts (benefits, housing etc...) to date I think only one person has been taken to court.

I did electoral canvassing for the electoral office years ago and you would be amazed at the amount of people who would tell you to feck off and that did not want to register, you had to then explain that it was their legal obligation to register and that the electoral office would be in touch to get them to register, but you are right it looks like they don't follow this up at all.

Quote from: Doogie Browser on June 10, 2009, 12:07:37 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 10, 2009, 11:59:22 AM

Quote from: Doogie Browser on June 10, 2009, 11:25:25 AM
Registration to vote is mandatory GDA and it is an offence not to register to vote (I think), I do't think voting itself should be mandatory though, people who don't want to vote have to be respected, I vote always and am disappointed when people tell me they don't bother.  But can you blame them when you see the mess our politiicans are continually creating.

Doogie I know it's supposed to be mandatory, but it's not enforced even slightly strongly at all, granted they are starting to chase people through estate agents, solicitors, banks, mortgage advisors, gov depts (benefits, housing etc...) to date I think only one person has been taken to court.

I did electoral canvassing for the electoral office years ago and you would be amazed at the amount of people who would tell you to feck off and that did not want to register, you had to then explain that it was their legal obligation to register and that the electoral office would be in touch to get them to register, but you are right it looks like they don't follow this up at all.

Would that have any effect on their benefits? Would a few untruths told on benefit forms be identified?

Quote from: saffron sam2 on June 10, 2009, 12:15:28 PM

Quote from: Doogie Browser on June 10, 2009, 12:07:37 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 10, 2009, 11:59:22 AM

Quote from: Doogie Browser on June 10, 2009, 11:25:25 AM
Registration to vote is mandatory GDA and it is an offence not to register to vote (I think), I do't think voting itself should be mandatory though, people who don't want to vote have to be respected, I vote always and am disappointed when people tell me they don't bother.  But can you blame them when you see the mess our politiicans are continually creating.

Doogie I know it's supposed to be mandatory, but it's not enforced even slightly strongly at all, granted they are starting to chase people through estate agents, solicitors, banks, mortgage advisors, gov depts (benefits, housing etc...) to date I think only one person has been taken to court.

I did electoral canvassing for the electoral office years ago and you would be amazed at the amount of people who would tell you to feck off and that did not want to register, you had to then explain that it was their legal obligation to register and that the electoral office would be in touch to get them to register, but you are right it looks like they don't follow this up at all.

Would that have any effect on their benefits? Would a few untruths told on benefit forms be identified?

Atm no, but it was something being looked into by the EONI, it's a bit of a legal minefield though.

Quote from: saffron sam2 on June 10, 2009, 12:15:28 PM

Quote from: Doogie Browser on June 10, 2009, 12:07:37 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 10, 2009, 11:59:22 AM

Quote from: Doogie Browser on June 10, 2009, 11:25:25 AM
Registration to vote is mandatory GDA and it is an offence not to register to vote (I think), I do't think voting itself should be mandatory though, people who don't want to vote have to be respected, I vote always and am disappointed when people tell me they don't bother.  But can you blame them when you see the mess our politiicans are continually creating.

Doogie I know it's supposed to be mandatory, but it's not enforced even slightly strongly at all, granted they are starting to chase people through estate agents, solicitors, banks, mortgage advisors, gov depts (benefits, housing etc...) to date I think only one person has been taken to court.

I did electoral canvassing for the electoral office years ago and you would be amazed at the amount of people who would tell you to feck off and that did not want to register, you had to then explain that it was their legal obligation to register and that the electoral office would be in touch to get them to register, but you are right it looks like they don't follow this up at all.

Would that have any effect on their benefits? Would a few untruths told on benefit forms be identified?

Possibly, a lot of married couples 'separate' and 'live' in different addresses to sqeeze more money out of the public purse.

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 03:39:05 PM
For once I did actually read your post and everything contained within are answered and refuted by my previous posts re the differential turnout.

From past form, had you been able to pick holes in any of my argument, you would have done so, so a general claim by you that all my points were "answered" or "refuted" is weak, even by your standards.
In particular, you are entirely unable to deny my central thesis, namely: "All of which goes to show that despite the circumstances in 2009 being notably more favourable for Nationalism vis-a-vis Unionism than in 2004, not only did the Nationalist vote fail to rise, but if anything, it actually fell. And at the same time, the Unionist vote actually rose slightly."

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 03:39:05 PM
Oh and don't be putting quotes around phrases in some sort of pretence that you are quoting me - I said nothing of the sort. 

OK, then, do you care to reprise your observation on the Catholic/Protestant birthrate in NI, and its implications for voting patterns? I could have gone back through your past posts for a direct quotation, but frankly, I couldn't be arsed.

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 03:39:05 PM
Edit: Alliance are not designated as unionist at Stormont, they are designated "others". But that's irrrelevant, if you see my previous posts I was referring to their transfers from the misguided souls that give them a vote.

Really? I thought they had registered at Stormont with the Unionist bloc (for legislative purposes).
In any case, they must be considered to be a "Unionist Party" in that they support the status quo i.e. NI being part of the Union. Granted, they do not campaign to retain the link, but unlike the SDLP and SF, neither do they actively campaign to break it, either.

Quote from: magickingdom on June 09, 2009, 08:28:04 PM
what is undeniable based on a basic understanding of maths is that the unionist block in ni is around 48-54% while the nationalist is in the 42-45%. the 150k extra that showed up at the gfa ref would have divided like that

Wrong. What is undeniable is that the Unionist bloc which votes is 48-54%.

And since Roger and others have clearly demonstrated is that turnout in Unionist areas is consistently lower than in Nationalist areas, then the proportion of the "missing 150k" at Elections which is Unionist may be assumed to be greater than 48-54%.

Therefore, only two valid questions remain, namely whether the medium-to-long term trend is veering towards Unionism or Nationalism, also whether those Unionists who don't vote at Elections could be persuaded to come out and vote in a Border Poll.

Regarding the former, any perceptible trend towards Nationalism is still so glacial as not to worry me. And as regards the second, I am confident that when it comes to the crunch, Unionists would turn out at similar rates to Nationalists in any such Poll.

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 01:11:47 PM

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 03:39:05 PM
For once I did actually read your post and everything contained within are answered and refuted by my previous posts re the differential turnout.

From past form, had you been able to pick holes in any of my argument, you would have done so, so a general claim by you that all my points were "answered" or "refuted" is weak, even by your standards.
In particular, you are entirely unable to deny my central thesis, namely: "All of which goes to show that despite the circumstances in 2009 being notably more favourable for Nationalism vis-a-vis Unionism than in 2004, not only did the Nationalist vote fail to rise, but if anything, it actually fell. And at the same time, the Unionist vote actually rose slightly."

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 03:39:05 PM
Oh and don't be putting quotes around phrases in some sort of pretence that you are quoting me - I said nothing of the sort. 

OK, then, do you care to reprise your observation on the Catholic/Protestant birthrate in NI, and its implications for voting patterns? I could have gone back through your past posts for a direct quotation, but frankly, I couldn't be arsed.

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 03:39:05 PM
Edit: Alliance are not designated as unionist at Stormont, they are designated "others". But that's irrrelevant, if you see my previous posts I was referring to their transfers from the misguided souls that give them a vote.

Really? I thought they had registered at Stormont with the Unionist bloc (for legislative purposes).
In any case, they must be considered to be a "Unionist Party" in that they support the status quo i.e. NI being part of the Union. Granted, they do not campaign to retain the link, but unlike the SDLP and SF, neither do they actively campaign to break it, either.

1. See my previous posts re the differential - turnout favoured unionism this time out and their share of the vote didn't change.
2. Then as I said, don't attribute your makey uppy statements to me
3. Yes you were wrong on that one, but we'll not dwell on it because as I pointed out in my previous posts, their transfers indicate the possible direction of their voters.

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 01:24:34 PM

Quote from: magickingdom on June 09, 2009, 08:28:04 PM
what is undeniable based on a basic understanding of maths is that the unionist block in ni is around 48-54% while the nationalist is in the 42-45%. the 150k extra that showed up at the gfa ref would have divided like that

Wrong. What is undeniable is that the Unionist bloc which votes is 48-54%.

And since Roger and others have clearly demonstrated is that turnout in Unionist areas is consistently lower than in Nationalist areas, then the proportion of the "missing 150k" at Elections which is Unionist may be assumed to be greater than 48-54%.

Therefore, only two valid questions remain, namely whether the medium-to-long term trend is veering towards Unionism or Nationalism, also whether those Unionists who don't vote at Elections could be persuaded to come out and vote in a Border Poll.

Regarding the former, any perceptible trend towards Nationalism is still so glacial as not to worry me. And as regards the second, I am confident that when it comes to the crunch, Unionists would turn out at similar rates to Nationalists in any such Poll.

Yup the garden centre Prods are going to ride to the rescue. Will you be returning home for that vote EG, or will you not be eligible?

Quote from: slow corner back on June 09, 2009, 09:19:16 PM
The alliance party are not unionists look at the way the transfers from them and the greens went 52% unionist 48% nationalist, discounting those that did not transfer.

By its support for the constitutional status quo, the Alliance Party is quite evidently a Unionist Party (albeit a particularly "watery orange", as some wag once noted!).
Of course, it draws support reasonably equally from the two traditional camps in NI, but it is important to distinguish between a Party and its voters, since no Party can ever draw up a Manifesto which exactly reflects the views of all its supporters. In any case, no one may plausibly claim that when people vote Alliance they are voting for a Nationalist  Party.
As for the transfer of AP votes, the fact that the Unionist candidates received more of these than McGuinness, despite his being undeniably a more appealing candidate than either Dodds or Allister, must be moderately encouraging for Unionism generally.

Quote from: slow corner back on June 09, 2009, 09:19:16 PM
There is one simple fact from this election, for the first time unionism could not muster up two quotas end of story.

It is only "end of story" in your one-eyed narrative. The important part of the "story" which it suits you to ignore, is that the only reason Unionism could not muster two full quotas was because this was the first time the Unionist vote was split fairly evenly between three candidates with strong support, rather than two.
In fact, the Election results offer greater comfort to Unionists than to Nationalists, since the circumstances surrounding the election (Unionist disunity, more credible Nationalist candidates than Unionist ones, DUP discomfort over double-jobbing/expenses/nepotism etc) gave many Nationalists to believe the SDLP could have taken a seat, yet this hope was not realised.

Quote from: slow corner back on June 09, 2009, 09:19:16 PM
Even with a proportionally greater downturn in nationalist turnout this time as opposed to 2004

Banging on about "a proportionately greater downturn in nationalist turnout" is clutching at straws, for the clear fact remains that turnout in Unionist areas is consistently lower at elections than in Nationalist areas.
Indeed if I were a Nationalist, I would not be trumpeting any fall in turnout in Nationalist areas as some sort of "good thing" - how could it be?  ??? Rather. as a Unionist I find this actually to be a reassurance (if anything), insofar as it may be evidence that greater numbers of Nationalists may now be accepting of the position of NI within the UK.

Quote from: slow corner back on June 09, 2009, 09:19:16 PM
the unionist share of the vote still fell as it has fallen at every election since about 1981.

Not so. For with the nearest like-for-like comparison (EU elections), the overall Unionist share of the vote increased in 2009 over that of 2004. End of story.  ;)

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 01:58:37 PM
For with the nearest like-for-like comparison (EU elections), the overall Unionist share of the vote increased in 2009 over that of 2004. End of story.  ;)

The unionist vote was up by only 0.5% and the nationalist share stayed the same while the turnout in nationalist areas dropped by more than it did in unionist areas. If that's the best can do in a low overall turnout considering how much the combined unionist parties threw at this election, yiz are fecked.

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 09:50:32 PM

Quote from: slow corner back on June 09, 2009, 09:19:16 PM
By the way the alliance party are non aligned at stormont do not believe all the crap EG posts on here.

Don't mind Eg too much he's been living abroad for so long now he much of a clue what goes on in Ireland.

"Living abroad"? Not me, Donagh, since when last I was in NI (earlier this month, in fact), I did not cross any international boundaries or have to show my Passport to anyone. I am pleased to say I have lived all my life in the same country, and expect to die in it, too, (in whichever region).

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 09:50:32 PM
Unfortunately for him in this case the Alliance Wiki article neglects to mention how Alliance designates.  

You seem to enjoy your little digs at my occasional citing of Wiki, but they don't bother me (if that's your intention). For you see, whilst Wiki is often unreliable or contentious, it is also often capable of being authoritative.
Therefore, the real point is not that I sometimes use Wiki, but that I always acknowledge it with a link, so that anyone who considers the reference to be unreliable may say so.
Then again if your posts are anything to go by, you often seem unable to distinguish between Message and Messenger. Perhaps you might like to look this one up?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_Hominem
;)

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 02:10:23 PM

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 09:50:32 PM

Quote from: slow corner back on June 09, 2009, 09:19:16 PM
By the way the alliance party are non aligned at stormont do not believe all the crap EG posts on here.

Don't mind Eg too much he's been living abroad for so long now he much of a clue what goes on in Ireland.

"Living abroad"? Not me, Donagh, since when last I was in NI (earlier this month, in fact), I did not cross any international boundaries or have to show my Passport to anyone. I am pleased to say I have lived all my life in the same country, and expect to die in it, too, (in whichever region).

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 09:50:32 PM
Unfortunately for him in this case the Alliance Wiki article neglects to mention how Alliance designates.  

You seem to enjoy your little digs at my occasional citing of Wiki, but they don't bother me (if that's your intention). For you see, whilst Wiki is often unreliable or contentious, it is also often capable of being authoritative.
Therefore, the real point is not that I sometimes use Wiki, but that I always acknowledge it with a link, so that anyone who considers the reference to be unreliable may say so.
Then again if your posts are anything to go by, you often seem unable to distinguish between Message and Messenger. Perhaps you might like to look this one up?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_Hominem
;)

Having been through Latin classes as a boy I don't need to Wiki 'Ad Hominem', though I don't see why you think it's relevant in this case simply because I enquired as to whether you have a vote overseas. All the better if you do, as I'm sure your fellow countrymen across the water couldn't get rid of us quick enough. 

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 01:30:15 PM
Yup the garden centre Prods are going to ride to the rescue.

It is always unwise to commit all your forces to the attack - far better to have a reserve, when needed.
Speaking of which, you and others have cited a greater rate of fall in turnout by Nationalists vis-a-vis Unionists in the recent Election*. Where do you think they might have been instead? At their local garden centre, perhaps?

* - As if that is some sort of comfort... ???

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 01:30:15 PM
Will you be returning home for that vote EG, or will you not be eligible?

No idea, though I guess my having died of old age will likely make it difficult!  ;)

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 01:27:54 PM

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 01:11:47 PM

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 03:39:05 PM
For once I did actually read your post and everything contained within are answered and refuted by my previous posts re the differential turnout.

From past form, had you been able to pick holes in any of my argument, you would have done so, so a general claim by you that all my points were "answered" or "refuted" is weak, even by your standards.
In particular, you are entirely unable to deny my central thesis, namely: "All of which goes to show that despite the circumstances in 2009 being notably more favourable for Nationalism vis-a-vis Unionism than in 2004, not only did the Nationalist vote fail to rise, but if anything, it actually fell. And at the same time, the Unionist vote actually rose slightly."

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 03:39:05 PM
Oh and don't be putting quotes around phrases in some sort of pretence that you are quoting me - I said nothing of the sort. 

OK, then, do you care to reprise your observation on the Catholic/Protestant birthrate in NI, and its implications for voting patterns? I could have gone back through your past posts for a direct quotation, but frankly, I couldn't be arsed.

Quote from: Donagh on June 09, 2009, 03:39:05 PM
Edit: Alliance are not designated as unionist at Stormont, they are designated "others". But that's irrrelevant, if you see my previous posts I was referring to their transfers from the misguided souls that give them a vote.

Really? I thought they had registered at Stormont with the Unionist bloc (for legislative purposes).
In any case, they must be considered to be a "Unionist Party" in that they support the status quo i.e. NI being part of the Union. Granted, they do not campaign to retain the link, but unlike the SDLP and SF, neither do they actively campaign to break it, either.

1. See my previous posts re the differential - turnout favoured unionism this time out and their share of the vote didn't change.
2. Then as I said, don't attribute your makey uppy statements to me
3. Yes you were wrong on that one, but we'll not dwell on it because as I pointed out in my previous posts, their transfers indicate the possible direction of their voters.

1. Who do you mean by "their"? If you are referring to Unionists, the DUP/UUP share of 1st preference votes in 2004 was 48.5%, in 2009 the DUP/UUP/TUV share was 49%. Considering the divided state of Unionism this time around, plus the poor candidates fielded and the disarray in the DUP etc, this must be encouraging for Unionism (imo);
2. We both know which point of yours I was referring to. And we also both know that if my reference to it was a significant distortion of it, you would have been quick to provide me with an original quotation of yours. Your bluff is called...
3. And I am entirely happy with the pattern of AP transfers, namely three Unionist candidates (inc at least two of them crap) receiving more transfers than McGuinness*.

* - Incidentally, whilst the evidence is only anecdotal, I suspect McGuinness would have received a significant number of transfers from UUP voters (i.e. ahead of Dodds), had Nicholson been eliminated first.

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 02:25:09 PM
It is always unwise to commit all your forces to the attack - far better to have a reserve, when needed.
Speaking of which, you and others have cited a greater rate of fall in turnout by Nationalists vis-a-vis Unionists in the recent Election*. Where do you think they might have been instead? At their local garden centre, perhaps?

Doesn't matter where they are because the nationalist share of the vote stayed the same. Even if they don't appear again and the trends continue, they'll be replaced by new nationalist voters. As I said previously nationalism only needs to increase it's share of the vote between the two blocks by 2.5% to exceed 50%+1. That will happen within 10 or 12 years at the latest and probably a lot sooner.

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 02:43:57 PM
1. Who do you mean by "their"? If you are referring to Unionists, the DUP/UUP share of 1st preference votes in 2004 was 48.5%, in 2009 the DUP/UUP/TUV share was 49%. Considering the divided state of Unionism this time around, plus the poor candidates fielded and the disarray in the DUP etc, this must be encouraging for Unionism (imo);
2. We both know which point of yours I was referring to. And we also both know that if my reference to it was a significant distortion of it, you would have been quick to provide me with an original quotation of yours. Your bluff is called...
3. And I am entirely happy with the pattern of AP transfers, namely three Unionist candidates (inc at least two of them crap) receiving more transfers than McGuinness*.

* - Incidentally, whilst the evidence is only anecdotal, I suspect McGuinness would have received a significant number of transfers from UUP voters (i.e. ahead of Dodds), had Nicholson been eliminated first.

1. To get a more accurate view on the state of play, I've been judging the size of the two blocs after all transfers have found a home but anyway a 0.5% increase in a low turnout is nothing to be optimistic for because of (i) the amount of effort the unionist parties put into this election and (ii) more interest in unionism due to the Alistair factor.
2. I have no idea what you are talking about but feel free to quote me accurately and then come back with a point, not some silly notion of what you think I said.
3. I'm not sure what you are going on about here (was Marty standing without telling anyone?) but I'm glad you are happy that the notion of the 'Castle Kethlics' saving the union has been put to bed.   

Prof Brendan O'Leary from the University of Pennsylvania apparently studies, among other things, voting trends in Northern Ireland (from Cork, lived in the north for a while and was once a political advisor to the UK Labour party), and as such was invited to speak at the annual conference of the Institute of British-Irish studies which took place in Dublin yesterday.

The Irish Times reports today that he said the following:

"Growth in the nationalist vote in Northern Ireland had stabilised and it was unlikely there would be a nationalist majority in the next 30 years to vote for a united Ireland"

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 02:20:13 PM
Having been through Latin classes as a boy I don't need to Wiki 'Ad Hominem', though I don't see why you think it's relevant in this case simply because I enquired as to whether you have a vote overseas. All the better if you do, as I'm sure your fellow countrymen across the water couldn't get rid of us quick enough. 

Wrong on four counts, I think.
First, you made your Wiki dig in reference to your Alliance Party point, not my voting eligibility.
Second, you referred to my living "abroad", not "overseas" and as I'm sure you know, "abroad" is generally taken to mean in a foreign country, whereas I live in the same country as I've always lived in, merely a different region.
Third, why wouldn't I have a vote where I live? (Incidentally, I voted* for the same bloc as 82,893 people in NI  ;))
Fourth, if my GB countrymen really are set on getting rid of NI, then they've a bloody funny way of showing it, since after 88 years, the constitutional position of NI within the UK is stronger than ever, inter alia being recognised worldwide, underwritten by the UK government, and administered by 5 of the 6 main political parties in NI, including your (former?) buddies in Sinn Fein!

* - Not a bad day, as Thursdays go...

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 02:46:10 PM

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 02:25:09 PM
It is always unwise to commit all your forces to the attack - far better to have a reserve, when needed.
Speaking of which, you and others have cited a greater rate of fall in turnout by Nationalists vis-a-vis Unionists in the recent Election*. Where do you think they might have been instead? At their local garden centre, perhaps?

Doesn't matter where they are because the nationalist share of the vote stayed the same. Even if they don't appear again and the trends continue, they'll be replaced by new nationalist voters. As I said previously nationalism only needs to increase it's share of the vote between the two blocks by 2.5% to exceed 50%+1. That will happen within 10 or 12 years at the latest and probably a lot sooner.

You wish!  :D

In fact, why don't you go down to Paddy Power and place a bet on it, since you'll get good odds for what by your use of "will", you must consider to be a racing certainty? And with interest rates being so low, even the full 10 or 12 years will give a much better return than sticking it in a bank.

P.S. How much sooner is "a lot"? Seven years would have a nice ring to it (though 12 might also have resonance for you, too, I'd have thought!)

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 02:54:13 PM
1. To get a more accurate view on the state of play, I've been judging the size of the two blocs after all transfers have found a home but anyway a 0.5% increase in a low turnout is nothing to be optimistic for because of (i) the amount of effort the unionist parties put into this election and (ii) more interest in unionism due to the Alistair factor.

We must agree to disagree, then, for this Unionist was encouraged by the voting patterns, all things considered;

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 02:54:13 PM
2. I have no idea what you are talking about but feel free to quote me accurately and then come back with a point, not some silly notion of what you think I said.

If you say so. Or don't...

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 02:54:13 PM
3. I'm not sure what you are going on about here (was Marty standing without telling anyone?)

Sorry, incorrect spelling of the SDLP candidate's name (but somehow I suspect you knew that). Oh and btw, you might also have a word with GDA, who it was misled me over the correct spelling in his Poll at the top of the page. Or do you not take up your fellow Republicans when they originally make an error?

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 02:54:13 PM
but I'm glad you are happy that the notion of the 'Castle Kethlics' saving the union has been put to bed.   

"Castle Kethlics" or "Garden Centre Prods" aren't really the issue, here, it's votes which count. On which point I must choose between eg "your 50%+1 within 10 or 12 years, if not a lot sooner" and the opinion of Prof. O'Leary, as quoted just now by Hound.

Hmmm, tricky choice that... :D

Quote from: Hound on June 10, 2009, 02:58:28 PM
Prof Brendan O'Leary from the University of Pennsylvania apparently studies, among other things, voting trends in Northern Ireland (from Cork, lived in the north for a while and was once a political advisor to the UK Labour party), and as such was invited to speak at the annual conference of the Institute of British-Irish studies which took place in Dublin yesterday.

The Irish Times reports today that he said the following:

"Growth in the nationalist vote in Northern Ireland had stabilised and it was unlikely there would be a nationalist majority in the next 30 years to vote for a united Ireland"

Am always suspicious of stats and people using them, or more correctly people can twist stats/figures etc to suit any arguement, as far as I'm concerned results are the only way to say for sure that this/that thing occured/happened etc...

I think this thread proves that stats can be used by different people to "prove" different points.

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 03:01:04 PM
First, you made your Wiki dig in reference to your Alliance Party point, not my voting eligibility.
Second, you referred to my living "abroad", not "overseas" and as I'm sure you know, "abroad" is generally taken to mean in a foreign country, whereas I live in the same country as I've always lived in, merely a different region.
Third, why wouldn't I have a vote where I live? (Incidentally, I voted* for the same bloc as 82,893 people in NI  ;))
Fourth, if my GB countrymen really are set on getting rid of NI, then they've a bloody funny way of showing it, since after 88 years, the constitutional position of NI within the UK is stronger than ever, inter alia being recognised worldwide, underwritten by the UK government, and administered by 5 of the 6 main political parties in NI, including your (former?) buddies in Sinn Fein!

* - Not a bad day, as Thursdays go...

1. Who cares?
2. Abroad, overseas - tis all the same to me.
3. No idea, you tell me
4. Your opinion doesn't really count for much in such debates.

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 03:10:32 PM
You wish!  :D

In fact, why don't you go down to Paddy Power and place a bet on it, since you'll get good odds for what by your use of "will", you must consider to be a racing certainty? And with interest rates being so low, even the full 10 or 12 years will give a much better return than sticking it in a bank.

P.S. How much sooner is "a lot"? Seven years would have a nice ring to it (though 12 might also have resonance for you, too, I'd have thought!)

I already posted my reasons for saying this in previous posts on other threads, which you obviously read, but refused to take part in. If you would like to open that debate again I'm only happy to do so, but don't expect me to repeat everything I've posted elsewhere - go read them and come back to me.

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 03:23:24 PM
"Castle Kethlics" or "Garden Centre Prods" aren't really the issue, here, it's votes which count. On which point I must choose between eg "your 50%+1 within 10 or 12 years, if not a lot sooner" and the opinion of Prof. O'Leary, as quoted just now by Hound.

Hmmm, tricky choice that... :D

Prof O'Leary is entitled to his opinion (though Hound incorrectly attributes a direct quote to him) but if you are alluding to the 'Prof' title bestowing some sort of mythical authority on him, I can dig up many more 'Profs' that would disagree with him.

Anyone could be forgiven for cynicism given that in 1972 the provisional republican movement claimed it would be the year for victory and have been making claims and predictions ever since.  One by one they have been dieing off, even the young bearded leader and his Garfunkel looky-likey seem a bit grey around the gills and a bit like has-beens these days.  In the meantime republicans seem to get excited about something, agrieved about most things, and generally have bad blood pressure about something or other.  If that's how they want to live then so be it. Life goes on for everyone else but none of us on here will ever live in an all-island Republic of Ireland.

The voting stats are interesting mind   ;D

Quote from: Roger on June 10, 2009, 03:58:43 PM
Anyone could be forgiven for cynicism given that in 1972 the provisional republican movement claimed it would be the year for victory and have been making claims and predictions ever since.  One by one they have been dieing off, even the young bearded leader and his Garfunkel looky-likey seem a bit grey around the gills and a bit like has-beens these days.  In the meantime republicans seem to get excited about something, agrieved about most things, and generally have bad blood pressure about something or other.  If that's how they want to live then so be it. Life goes on for everyone else but none of us on here will ever live in an all-island Republic of Ireland.

The voting stats are interesting mind   ;D

Unfortunately Roger, until you are prepared to back up your opinions with some supporting evidence they carry as much weight as EGs and to be honest there's not much weight in a smilie.  ::)

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 03:48:59 PM
Prof O'Leary is entitled to his opinion (though Hound incorrectly attributes a direct quote to him) but if you are alluding to the 'Prof' title bestowing some sort of mythical authority on him, I can dig up many more 'Profs' that would disagree with him.

I'd be interested to know more, any chance of supplying something to back this up?

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 03:44:57 PM

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 03:10:32 PM
You wish!  :D

In fact, why don't you go down to Paddy Power and place a bet on it, since you'll get good odds for what by your use of "will", you must consider to be a racing certainty? And with interest rates being so low, even the full 10 or 12 years will give a much better return than sticking it in a bank.

P.S. How much sooner is "a lot"? Seven years would have a nice ring to it (though 12 might also have resonance for you, too, I'd have thought!)

I already posted my reasons for saying this in previous posts on other threads, which you obviously read, but refused to take part in. If you would like to open that debate again I'm only happy to do so, but don't expect me to repeat everything I've posted elsewhere - go read them and come back to me.

I have indeed read your reasons why you think a UI "will happen within 10-12 years or maybe a lot sooner", but the reason why I generally decline to engage with them is that they appear to me to be tosh - a product of wishful thinking.

However, I have taken exception to your posts on this particular thread, since you appeared confident that the EU Election would provide further "evidence" for your claim, then attempted to "spin" the actual results when they failed to meet your hopes/expectations.

Anyhow, why don't you "fill your boots" with Paddy Power? The odds must be very tempting, for what is effectively a "two horse race":

http://www.irishvisit.com/ireland-reviews/united-ireland-by-2027-what-are-the-odds.html
United Ireland by 2027? What are the odds?

Ten to one by the year 2027, according to Paddy Power.

Yes, one of the many cultural twists that still befuddles me is the legality and casual practice of gambling in Ireland. There are gambling shops everywhere in this country and, apparently, one can simply walk into one of these places and bet on . . . well, anything.

Case in point is latest bet on offer: a United Ireland. Think about it - people have fought, died and argued for the cause . . . why not try betting?

Whichever way you bet, Paddy Power has it at 10/1 for a United Ireland by 2027, 14/1 by 2022, 20/1 by 2017 and, for those who think Britain will actually change over to the euro in the next few years: 25/1 by 2012.


Indeed, you could make it a double, with this one:

"For example, Ladbrokes reckon the odds of finding the Loch Ness monster alive and well are 66-1..."
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6331-biggest-bets-in-the-universe-unveiled.html
:D

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 04:11:09 PM

Quote from: Roger on June 10, 2009, 03:58:43 PM
Anyone could be forgiven for cynicism given that in 1972 the provisional republican movement claimed it would be the year for victory and have been making claims and predictions ever since.  One by one they have been dieing off, even the young bearded leader and his Garfunkel looky-likey seem a bit grey around the gills and a bit like has-beens these days.  In the meantime republicans seem to get excited about something, agrieved about most things, and generally have bad blood pressure about something or other.  If that's how they want to live then so be it. Life goes on for everyone else but none of us on here will ever live in an all-island Republic of Ireland.

The voting stats are interesting mind   ;D

Unfortunately Roger, until you are prepared to back up your opinions with some supporting evidence they carry as much weight as EGs and to be honest there's not much weight in a smilie.  ::)

The evidence has been there every year since 1972.  Republicans predictions have year-on-year-on-year been consistently all load of balls.

The new prediction of 12 years is just yet another republican prediction.  There is a lot of weight in my smile, I've been doing it all my life despite republican predictions and believe I will be doing it for the rest of my life too  ;D

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 03:48:59 PM
Prof O'Leary is entitled to his opinion (though Hound incorrectly attributes a direct quote to him) but if you are alluding to the 'Prof' title bestowing some sort of mythical authority on him, I can dig up many more 'Profs' that would disagree with him.

You may agree or disagree with O'Leary's politics (Left-Wing, Irish Nationalist, anti-Israeli etc), but his academic credentials and experience in the field are highly impressive:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_O%27Leary (Yep, it's Wiki again!)

http://www.polisci.upenn.edu/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=33&Itemid=73

http://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n88-665077

Frankly, if he of all people is putting a United Ireland on the backburner for the next 30 years+, then I am enormously reassured  :D

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 05:00:42 PM

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 03:44:57 PM

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 03:10:32 PM
You wish!  :D

In fact, why don't you go down to Paddy Power and place a bet on it, since you'll get good odds for what by your use of "will", you must consider to be a racing certainty? And with interest rates being so low, even the full 10 or 12 years will give a much better return than sticking it in a bank.

P.S. How much sooner is "a lot"? Seven years would have a nice ring to it (though 12 might also have resonance for you, too, I'd have thought!)

I already posted my reasons for saying this in previous posts on other threads, which you obviously read, but refused to take part in. If you would like to open that debate again I'm only happy to do so, but don't expect me to repeat everything I've posted elsewhere - go read them and come back to me.

I have indeed read your reasons why you think a UI "will happen within 10-12 years or maybe a lot sooner", but the reason why I generally decline to engage with them is that they appear to me to be tosh - a product of wishful thinking.

However, I have taken exception to your posts on this particular thread, since you appeared confident that the EU Election would provide further "evidence" for your claim, then attempted to "spin" the actual results when they failed to meet your hopes/expectations.

Anyhow, why don't you "fill your boots" with Paddy Power? The odds must be very tempting, for what is effectively a "two horse race":

http://www.irishvisit.com/ireland-reviews/united-ireland-by-2027-what-are-the-odds.html
United Ireland by 2027? What are the odds?

Ten to one by the year 2027, according to Paddy Power.

Yes, one of the many cultural twists that still befuddles me is the legality and casual practice of gambling in Ireland. There are gambling shops everywhere in this country and, apparently, one can simply walk into one of these places and bet on . . . well, anything.

Case in point is latest bet on offer: a United Ireland. Think about it - people have fought, died and argued for the cause . . . why not try betting?

Whichever way you bet, Paddy Power has it at 10/1 for a United Ireland by 2027, 14/1 by 2022, 20/1 by 2017 and, for those who think Britain will actually change over to the euro in the next few years: 25/1 by 2012.


Indeed, you could make it a double, with this one:

"For example, Ladbrokes reckon the odds of finding the Loch Ness monster alive and well are 66-1..."
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6331-biggest-bets-in-the-universe-unveiled.html
:D

Sorry, did you write all of that just to say you have nothing to challenge what I said on another thread? Is this the part where I should insert a smilie  ::)

Quote from: Roger on June 10, 2009, 05:12:04 PM
The evidence has been there every year since 1972.  Republicans predictions have year-on-year-on-year been consistently all load of balls.

The new prediction of 12 years is just yet another republican prediction.  There is a lot of weight in my smile, I've been doing it all my life despite republican predictions and believe I will be doing it for the rest of my life too  ;D

Firstly I don't know what 'republicans predictions' you are talking about and secondly I haven't said anywhere there will be a united Irish Republic within 12 years.

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 05:20:33 PM

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 03:48:59 PM
Prof O'Leary is entitled to his opinion (though Hound incorrectly attributes a direct quote to him) but if you are alluding to the 'Prof' title bestowing some sort of mythical authority on him, I can dig up many more 'Profs' that would disagree with him.

You may agree or disagree with O'Leary's politics (Left-Wing, Irish Nationalist, anti-Israeli etc), but his academic credentials and experience in the field are highly impressive:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_O%27Leary (Yep, it's Wiki again!)

http://www.polisci.upenn.edu/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=33&Itemid=73

http://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n88-665077

Frankly, if he of all people is putting a United Ireland on the backburner for the next 30 years+, then I am enormously reassured  :D

I'm quite aware of whoBrendan O'Leary is, so again you've no need to be providing Wiki links for me thanks. So again, if you have anything to challenge anything I've posted on the Board I'd like to hear it. I can only assume from your avoidance that you don't.

Quote from: delboy on June 10, 2009, 05:00:01 PM
I'd be interested to know more, any chance of supplying something to back this up?

Interested to know what exactly? If it's population trends your after you could try Cormac ó'Gráda, Paul Doherty or Malcom Macourt.

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 10, 2009, 01:24:34 PM

Quote from: magickingdom on June 09, 2009, 08:28:04 PM
what is undeniable based on a basic understanding of maths is that the unionist block in ni is around 48-54% while the nationalist is in the 42-45%. the 150k extra that showed up at the gfa ref would have divided like that

Wrong. What is undeniable is that the Unionist bloc which votes is 48-54%.

And since Roger and others have clearly demonstrated is that turnout in Unionist areas is consistently lower than in Nationalist areas, then the proportion of the "missing 150k" at Elections which is Unionist may be assumed to be greater than 48-54%.

Therefore, only two valid questions remain, namely whether the medium-to-long term trend is veering towards Unionism or Nationalism, also whether those Unionists who don't vote at Elections could be persuaded to come out and vote in a Border Poll.

Regarding the former, any perceptible trend towards Nationalism is still so glacial as not to worry me. And as regards the second, I am confident that when it comes to the crunch, Unionists would turn out at similar rates to Nationalists in any such Poll.

i give up eg, what percentage of the total population in ni do you believe to be unionist/nationalist

Donagh, now, I'm not trying to be confrontational but just state my view of what might happen in a referendum for a United Ireland.

I think those who equate voting for the SDLP/Sinn Fein as voting for a united Ireland are mistaken.

Ask yourself: why have nationalists, north or south, never even attempted to draw up a blue-print for what a united Ireland would look like?  After all, such a blue print would, IMO, have to be forthcoming before the electorate were ever seriously asked to state a choice; united Ireland or United Kingdom?

It's only speculation, of course, but I think that the reason is simple; to do so would alienate a great many SF/SDLP voters because all of a sudden "shit, my job in the Civil Service is under threat"; or "shit my job within that British company will go" or "we'll have to pay to go to hospital" or whatever would be what would turn so many "nationalists" off.  And turkeys wouldn't vote for Christmas.

Now people on here might say this is a typical unionist with his "comfort blanket" or whatever.  But nationalists, if they want to be taken seriously, should stop dealing in concepts and romantic images of a "32 county Irish Republic" bla bla bla.  Lay your cards on the table and then let the people decide.

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 06:15:06 PM

Quote from: delboy on June 10, 2009, 05:00:01 PM
I'd be interested to know more, any chance of supplying something to back this up?

Interested to know what exactly? If it's population trends your after you could try Cormac ó'Gráda, Paul Doherty or Malcom Macourt.

Ok the first one is a historian studying 'historical' irish demographics, its not entirely obvious looking at his publication record how he would have much to add to matter in discussion (recent population trends). From what i can gather Paul Doherty wrote about ethnic residential segragation and seems to have fallen off the radar sometime ago, again its not entirely obvious how he fits into the picture. Malcom Macourt was an elusive character that i couldn't pin down in relation to being an expert in irish population studies.


I did notice that none of them were deemed important enough to warrant having a wiki page set up about them unlike the previously quoted academic and as i've said its difficult to see how they are qualified to speak about recent population trends. Maybe you can point me in the right direction though.

Quote from: Tonto on June 10, 2009, 07:35:10 PM
Donagh, now, I'm not trying to be confrontational but just state my view of what might happen in a referendum for a United Ireland.

I think those who equate voting for the SDLP/Sinn Fein as voting for a united Ireland are mistaken.

Ask yourself: why have nationalists, north or south, never even attempted to draw up a blue-print for what a united Ireland would look like?  After all, such a blue print would, IMO, have to be forthcoming before the electorate were ever seriously asked to state a choice; united Ireland or United Kingdom?

It's only speculation, of course, but I think that the reason is simple; to do so would alienate a great many SF/SDLP voters because all of a sudden "shit, my job in the Civil Service is under threat"; or "shit my job within that British company will go" or "we'll have to pay to go to hospital" or whatever would be what would turn so many "nationalists" off.  And turkeys wouldn't vote for Christmas.

Now people on here might say this is a typical unionist with his "comfort blanket" or whatever.  But nationalists, if they want to be taken seriously, should stop dealing in concepts and romantic images of a "32 county Irish Republic" bla bla bla.  Lay your cards on the table and then let the people decide.

Without dwelling on your rather crass argument that those Fenians too fond of the Queen's shilling, the answer to your question is that there are no blueprints because it  needs the input of unionists and the Irish/Brit governments and so far for their owns reasons they've refused to do so. That'll change as we progress and the inevitable becomes visible.   

Quote from: delboy on June 10, 2009, 08:16:34 PM
I did notice that none of them were deemed important enough to warrant having a wiki page set up about them unlike the previously quoted academic and as i've said its difficult to see how they are qualified to speak about recent population trends. Maybe you can point me in the right direction though.

Or maybe you could do your own research.

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 08:23:23 PM

Quote from: delboy on June 10, 2009, 08:16:34 PM
I did notice that none of them were deemed important enough to warrant having a wiki page set up about them unlike the previously quoted academic and as i've said its difficult to see how they are qualified to speak about recent population trends. Maybe you can point me in the right direction though.

Or maybe you could do your own research.

Or maybe you could do yours and not just pull out a few random names with tenous or non-existent links to the discussion matter in the hope that no will notice.

Quote from: delboy on June 10, 2009, 08:33:03 PM
Or maybe you could do yours and not just pull out a few random names with tenous or non-existent links to the discussion matter in the hope that no will notice.

Eh? I've placed my arguments and supporting evidence on this Board for anyone to refute and all I've gotten from yourself, Eg and  in response are groundless opinions. At least Roger, God love him, has the garden centre Prods to support him. Now if you'll forgive me, I'm on sabbatical for the next few days doing some research overseas again and I must find my passport. I'll pass on your regards to Billy and Jack in Greenwich after I get though passport control.

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 08:44:50 PM

Quote from: delboy on June 10, 2009, 08:33:03 PM
Or maybe you could do yours and not just pull out a few random names with tenous or non-existent links to the discussion matter in the hope that no will notice.

Eh? I've placed my arguments and supporting evidence on this Board for anyone to refute and all I've gotten from yourself, Eg and  in response are groundless opinions. At least Roger, God love him, has the garden centre Prods to support him. Now if you'll forgive me, I'm on sabbatical for the next few days doing some research overseas again and I must find my passport. I'll pass on your regards to Billy and Jack in Greenwich after I get though passport control.

Well done most remember that tatic, pull out a few random names from the internet and when challenged, spout some irrelevant nonsense and exit stage left  :D

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 08:20:56 PM

Quote from: Tonto on June 10, 2009, 07:35:10 PM
Donagh, now, I'm not trying to be confrontational but just state my view of what might happen in a referendum for a United Ireland.

I think those who equate voting for the SDLP/Sinn Fein as voting for a united Ireland are mistaken.

Ask yourself: why have nationalists, north or south, never even attempted to draw up a blue-print for what a united Ireland would look like?  After all, such a blue print would, IMO, have to be forthcoming before the electorate were ever seriously asked to state a choice; united Ireland or United Kingdom?

It's only speculation, of course, but I think that the reason is simple; to do so would alienate a great many SF/SDLP voters because all of a sudden "shit, my job in the Civil Service is under threat"; or "shit my job within that British company will go" or "we'll have to pay to go to hospital" or whatever would be what would turn so many "nationalists" off.  And turkeys wouldn't vote for Christmas.

Now people on here might say this is a typical unionist with his "comfort blanket" or whatever.  But nationalists, if they want to be taken seriously, should stop dealing in concepts and romantic images of a "32 county Irish Republic" bla bla bla.  Lay your cards on the table and then let the people decide.

Without dwelling on your rather crass argument that those Fenians too fond of the Queen's shilling, the answer to your question is that there are no blueprints because it  needs the input of unionists and the Irish/Brit governments and so far for their owns reasons they've refused to do so. That'll change as we progress and the inevitable becomes visible.   

I think you reveal your own "crassness" with your use of the "F" word in an attempt to feign oppression.

And yes, I happen to think that many, many people are motivated by material things.  Some nationalists/Catholics/republicans or whatever aren't and will undoubtedly go to the polling booth all misty-eyed that they are striking a blow for mother Ireland against the Saxon oppressor if there ever is a referendum on the issue.  But I think you underestimate what you consider your own community if you think that they all follow the simplistic notion that "32 county Ireland = good, UK = bad".

Good luck with convincing unionists to draw up a plan for a UI, btw :D

The Before and After...

(http://www.irishnews.com/webimages/20090429/ian.jpg)

(http://www.irishnews.com/webimages/20090609/ianknox.jpg)

:D

I notice that in about three pages of EGs posting he has not addressed the fact that for the first time unionism could not cobble together two quotas and that he was completly and utterly wrong about the alliance party designation at stormont. Keep up the BS EG you are very good at it.

Unionism = Ostrich = Simple truth = Things are a changing

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 12:29:34 AM
Unionism = Ostrich = Simple truth = Things are a changing

:o

Yes, we all have our head in the sand. :D

Meanwhile, Sinn Fein continue to administer British rule, support a British police service, the Union Flag still flies above Belfast City Hall and the border still exists.  Sorry, who's delusional? ???

:D

Ian Paisley Snr and Jim McAllistar are squaring up to each other in the news. Ian has challenging Jim to take him on it Antrim at the Westminister elections to be ready for a spankin'.

Quote from: slow corner back on June 10, 2009, 11:45:18 PM
I notice that in about three pages of EGs posting he has not addressed the fact that for the first time unionism could not cobble together two quotas

Pay attention at the back of the class!

In post #293, I posted the following:

Quote from: slow corner back on June 09, 2009, 09:19:16 PM
"There is one simple fact from this election, for the first time unionism could not muster up two quotas end of story"
My reply:
"It is only 'end of story' in your one-eyed narrative. The important part of the 'story' which it suits you to ignore, is that the only reason Unionism could not muster two full quotas was because this was the first time the Unionist vote was split fairly evenly between three candidates with strong support, rather than two"

Quote from: slow corner back on June 10, 2009, 11:45:18 PM
he was completly and utterly wrong about the alliance party designation at stormont.

Not so. For in the past, the Alliance Party has designated itself "Unionist" in order to ensure Resolutions which require a minimum level of cross-community support go through at Stormont.
They are, however, generally opposed to such a procedure requirement, since they believe it serves only to entrench sectarianism within the system, so they now classify themselves as "Other" (to be consistent).
The Alliance Party has never designated itself as Nationalist.

Late Edit: I have just noticed that during the Border Poll in 1973, despite a Nationalist boycott, and their own reservations over the wording of the Poll etc, the official Alliance Party policy was to vote to retain the Union...

Quote from: slow corner back on June 10, 2009, 11:45:18 PM
Keep up the BS EG you are very good at it.

Er, if I was "very good at it", surely it wouldn't be so obviously BS?  :D

Quote from: Donagh on June 10, 2009, 05:53:38 PM
So again, if you have anything to challenge anything I've posted on the Board I'd like to hear it. I can only assume from your avoidance that you don't.

Oh right, if I choose to let certain of your numerous posts pass, it must be that I am deliberately "avoiding" them, presumably on the basis that I am incapable of rebutting them, then?
No conceit on your part, there... ::)

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 11, 2009, 11:22:10 AM
Quote from: slow corner back on June 09, 2009, 09:19:16 PM
"There is one simple fact from this election, for the first time unionism could not muster up two quotas end of story"
My reply:
"It is only 'end of story' in your one-eyed narrative. The important part of the 'story' which it suits you to ignore, is that the only reason Unionism could not muster two full quotas was because this was the first time the Unionist vote was split fairly evenly between three candidates with strong support, rather than two"

There are 2 ways of looking at this:

1 - The 3 Unionist candidates combined got 237,436 first preference votes. Divide that by 2 and you fall short of 2 quotas.

2 - At stage 3, (following transfers from Alliance, Greens and Allister,) the 2 remaining Unionists (Dodds and Nicholson) had 247,943 votes between them - which is just over 2 quotas, even if it wasn't split evenly to allow both to reach the quota.

Quote from: magickingdom on June 10, 2009, 06:31:36 PM
i give up eg, what percentage of the total population in ni do you believe to be unionist/nationalist

In terms of voting at NI-wide elections, I am happy to go by the most recent EU Election, whereby the 3 main Unionist Parties polled 49% of the vote between them and the 2 Nationalist Parties 42.2%. And from their transfers, I would guess that Alliance Party voters reflect a similar percentage split, if pushed on the constitutional issue.

However, since such elections are invariably skewed by issues such as Party loyalty, effective/ineffective campaigning, individual personalities etc, they should not be taken as definitive on the question of whether NI people are "Unionist" or "Nationalist" in the sense of wanting to retain or abolish the Union.

Were there to be a simple Border Poll, I am confident that the pro-Union vote would be several points above the 50%+1 mark required to maintain the Union. So that if forced to put a figure on it, I'd guess the slpit would be 55-45% in favour of the Union. I say this for several reasons.

Firstly, it is pretty much undeniable that more of the Unionist population stays at home on Election day than Nationalists; however, I am confident that many of the "stayaways" would come out to vote in a Border Poll.

Second, in the EU election, the Unionist party campaigns were divided, internecine, badly organised and with unappealing candidates, compared with their Nationalist counterparts. Such factors would not be relevant to a simple Border Poll.

Third, I believe that a certain proportion of those who vote for Nationalist parties at normal elections might be reluctant to vote for a United Ireland in a Border Poll, essentially for economic reasons. If I had to guess, some SF voters may either abstain or spoil their votes, with some SDLP voters possibly even voting to maintain the Union. Of course, I could be wrong about that, or the actual numbers may be inconsequential, but I have no doubt that there are virtually no people who vote for Unionist candidates in elections who would vote for a United Ireland in a Poll.

In support of such an opinion, I would point to two pieces of evidence. On the last occasion when we had such a Poll, the pro-Union vote came to 57.5% of the total electorate. Granted, that was far back in 1973, and the total turnout represented only 58.1% of the electorate. That said, however, with the Nationalist parties all boycotting the Poll, it was always absolutely certain that the result would bepro-Union, so individual Unionists will not have faced the fear of defeat, or even a close vote, to provide an incentive for turning out.

The second piece of evidence came with an ESRC Opinion Poll conducted as recently as 2007:
http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2007/Political_Attitudes/NIRELND2.html
This indicates that 66% of the population favour NI remaining within the UK in the long-term, whether by direct rule/integration, or with devolution. A mere 23% favoured a United Ireland as a long term solution, with the remaining 11% favouring either Independence for NI, or "Other", or "Don't Know".
Of course, such a hypothetical exercise has little of the immediacy or direct consequences of an actual Border Poll, so it cannot be taken as proof of anything. That said, however, it was also conducted when the Celtic Tiger was "roaring" (as opposed to the present "roaring drunk!"  ;)).
I strongly suspect that changes in the UK and ROI Economies since, might persuade some moderate Nationalists to "vote with their wallet" were a new Border Poll to be conducted today.

that survey, however reliable it is, shows the youth support a united ireland, and thus support for reunification should continue to rise

Quote from: dodgy umpire on June 11, 2009, 01:24:10 PM
that survey, however reliable it is, shows the youth support a united ireland, and thus support for reunification should continue to rise

It is incorrect to claim that "the youth" of NI "support a united ireland", rather that support for a UI is more prevalent amongst young people than the elderly.

However, there are a number of reasons why Unionism might hope to "get over the hump" presented by that particular problem. For one thing, people are living longer than ever before, so the clear Unionist majority amongst the older generations can hope to cling on until something else changes the demographics.

And that something else could well be one or both of two things, namely an equalisation of the birth rates between Catholics and Prods (something which has already happened elsewhere in Europe), plus a rebalancing of the emigration deficit from NI, whereby more Prods emigrate permanently to GB (often following university study there) than do their RC counterparts.

On top of which, there is no doubt that the young are generally more radical than the general population; conversely, people tend to become more conservative (small "c") as they get older, as well as being much more likely to vote in elections.

Finally, if we did manage to maintain the present relatively peaceful and stable settlement, it may just be that people will settle down generally, and the Border Question may fade from peoples' consciousness, as it has done in the Republic? (In that sense, Sinn Fein's collusion co-operation in helping administer British Rule local government in NI the Occupied Six might actually work against them, by removing Nationalists' enduring sense of grievance over their treatment in the "Statelet" etc!  :D)

Of course, demographers and psephologists have often been wrong before now when attempting to forecast too far into the future; however, when stating that he cannot see a Nationalist majority arising in NI before the next 30 years, perhaps Prof. O'Leary is acknowledging that Unionism is now just over the "hump", ready to ease down the other side?

Quote from: Tonto on June 11, 2009, 12:47:03 AM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 12:29:34 AM
Unionism = Ostrich = Simple truth = Things are a changing

:o

Yes, we all have our head in the sand. :D

Meanwhile, Sinn Fein continue to administer British rule, support a British police service, the Union Flag still flies above Belfast City Hall and the border still exists.  Sorry, who's delusional? ???

:D

What, you'd prefer the alternative and we went back to war?

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 03:22:56 PM

Quote from: Tonto on June 11, 2009, 12:47:03 AM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 12:29:34 AM
Unionism = Ostrich = Simple truth = Things are a changing

:o

Yes, we all have our head in the sand. :D

Meanwhile, Sinn Fein continue to administer British rule, support a British police service, the Union Flag still flies above Belfast City Hall and the border still exists.  Sorry, who's delusional? ???

:D

What, you'd prefer the alternative and we went back to war?

Why on earth would any sensible* Unionist like Tonto want any alternative to local political parties (inc SF) helping administer British rule and a British police service, whilst the UF flies and the Border remains, still less one which meant a rebirth of terrorism?

Certainly "things are a changing", but they're changing in our direction; the ostrich-like delusion comes from those who claim that they are going in the direction of a United Ireland!   ;)

* - And before you say it, I don't consider the TUV to be very sensible...

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 11, 2009, 03:54:45 PM
Certainly "things are a changing", but they're changing in our direction; the ostrich-like delusion comes from those who claim that they are going in the direction of a United Ireland!   ;)

Who's our?

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 11, 2009, 03:54:45 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 03:22:56 PM

Quote from: Tonto on June 11, 2009, 12:47:03 AM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 12:29:34 AM
Unionism = Ostrich = Simple truth = Things are a changing

:o

Yes, we all have our head in the sand. :D

Meanwhile, Sinn Fein continue to administer British rule, support a British police service, the Union Flag still flies above Belfast City Hall and the border still exists.  Sorry, who's delusional? ???

:D

What, you'd prefer the alternative and we went back to war?

Why on earth would any sensible* Unionist like Tonto want any alternative to local political parties (inc SF) helping administer British rule and a British police service, whilst the UF flies and the Border remains, still less one which meant a rebirth of terrorism?

Certainly "things are a changing", but they're changing in our direction; the ostrich-like delusion comes from those who claim that they are going in the direction of a United Ireland!   ;)

* - And before you say it, I don't consider the TUV to be very sensible...

I find it quite amusing to watch the "unionists" on this board trying to convince themselves that everything is rosy and the "ulster raj" is still strong (and getting stronger according to EG).
Will the unionist population is aging and their youth get educated and bugger off to the motherland.

There is no direction for Unionism. Absolutely none. They are in a black and white situation whereby they either are part of the union or they aren't. There is no means of mediating between the two.

Nationalists, by contrast, are waiting for a United Ireland free from British rule. No matter how far the unionists 'strengthen' the union in terms of red tape and legislation, the fact that the principle of consent in terms of a United Ireland exists means that the state has a built in obsolescence. Short of every Unionist fathering/mothering a slew of illegitimate children, there isn't really anything that solidly stops the recession of the Union--furthermore, you can't control what may happen in Scotland or Wales, or even England.

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 03:22:56 PM

Quote from: Tonto on June 11, 2009, 12:47:03 AM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 12:29:34 AM
Unionism = Ostrich = Simple truth = Things are a changing

:o

Yes, we all have our head in the sand. :D

Meanwhile, Sinn Fein continue to administer British rule, support a British police service, the Union Flag still flies above Belfast City Hall and the border still exists.  Sorry, who's delusional? ???

:D

What, you'd prefer the alternative and we went back to war?

I really don't know what to say to that truly bizarre question. ???

Quote from: ziggysego on June 11, 2009, 03:57:30 PM

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 11, 2009, 03:54:45 PM
Certainly "things are a changing", but they're changing in our direction; the ostrich-like delusion comes from those who claim that they are going in the direction of a United Ireland!   ;)

Who's our?

Those of us like Tonto and myself who prefer a United Kingdom to a United Ireland aka Unionists.

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 04:11:55 PM
I find it quite amusing to watch the "unionists" on this board trying to convince themselves that everything is rosy and the "ulster raj" is still strong (and getting stronger according to EG).

I'm glad it amuses you, but whether it does or it doesn't, I have genuinely been persuaded that for all its flaws, the present constitutional arrangement secures the Union better than virtually any arrangement since Partition. This is because it is internationally recognised and accepted by Treaty that the future of the Union is now firmly in the hands of the people of NI, which is all I could ever reasonably have asked for in the first place.

And as for how secure those hands are:

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 04:11:55 PM
Will the unionist population is aging and their youth get educated and bugger off to the motherland.

I have already given my opinion on the demographic future ahead of NI in Posts #336 and #338, above. Of course, you may disagree totally with the conclusions I drew in those Posts (and others), but at least they were coherently argued, with evidence and examples. So that when you try to rebut them with nothing more cheap jibes and sloganeering such as the above, it does nothing for your credibility (imo).

Quote from: stibhan on June 11, 2009, 04:17:51 PM
There is no direction for Unionism. Absolutely none. They are in a black and white situation whereby they either are part of the union or they aren't. There is no means of mediating between the two.

What do you mean by "no direction"? If you mean that we are content with the status quo, then well spotted! On which point, despite Economic Depression, the 2nd World War and three bloody terrorist insurrections, the last one lasting 30 years, the status of NI within the UK is now stronger than ever (imo).

Quote from: stibhan on June 11, 2009, 04:17:51 PM
Nationalists, by contrast, are waiting for a United Ireland free from British rule. No matter how far the unionists 'strengthen' the union in terms of red tape and legislation, the fact that the principle of consent in terms of a United Ireland exists means that the state has a built in obsolescence.

How do you figure there is a "built-in obsolescence", stemming from the consent principle?  ??? Are you claiming that a Catholic/Nationalist majority is somehow an inevitability? If so, I'd like to see your evidence, with statistics and data etc.

Quote from: stibhan on June 11, 2009, 04:17:51 PM
Short of every Unionist fathering/mothering a slew of illegitimate children, there isn't really anything that solidly stops the recession of the Union

So the only way Unionists will preserve the Union is by outbreeding Nationalists/Catholics then, eh? How do you account for the evidence I quoted which indicates that a significant minority of the Catholic population of NI are happy enough to see the Union preserved, namely:
http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2007/Political_Attitudes/NIRELND2.html
Do you not believe in the power of argument and persuasion, then? In any case, do not make the mistake of believing that all of your fellow Nationalists are blindly impervious to reason and logic, just because you appear to be.
(And btw, why should such new children be "illegitimate"? Does this slip subconsciously betray your real attitude towards Unionists?  :o)

Quote from: stibhan on June 11, 2009, 04:17:51 PM
-furthermore, you can't control what may happen in Scotland or Wales, or even England.

You clearly fail to graps the concept of a Union. Namely, it is like a Club, where so long as you pay your subscription and obey the club's rules, no other Member may exclude you, simply because he does not approve of, or agree with you. That is the position NI has secured via the GFA/SAA, namely that unless or until we decide to resign our Membership, it is ours in perpetuity, just like every other Member, so long as the club remains.
On which point, of course, a majority of the Membership might decide to disband the club and sell up. However, despite all the rumblings of a (mainly) recalcitrant few Scottish Nationalist Members, I really can't see that happening anytime soon.
If anything, the tide is flowing in our favour, with both the main political parties in England vying with each other to prove their pro-UK credentials, the Conservatives making a comeback in Wales (and Scotland) and the SNP still utterly unable to persuade a majority of their countrymen to take the plunge and exit the Union. In fact, they are frightened even to ask the question - presumably because they fear the answer they'll get.
Meanwhile, the first tentative steps towards increasing NI's representation and influence on the Membership Committee of the "Club" (i.e. via the UUP/Conservative link-up), may be beginning to take hold, if Jim Nicholson's (moderately encouraging) performance in the EU Election is anything to go by.

Quote from: Tonto on June 11, 2009, 04:18:53 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 03:22:56 PM

Quote from: Tonto on June 11, 2009, 12:47:03 AM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 12:29:34 AM
Unionism = Ostrich = Simple truth = Things are a changing

:o

Yes, we all have our head in the sand. :D

Meanwhile, Sinn Fein continue to administer British rule, support a British police service, the Union Flag still flies above Belfast City Hall and the border still exists.  Sorry, who's delusional? ???

:D

What, you'd prefer the alternative and we went back to war?

I really don't know what to say to that truly bizarre question. ???

'Tontos Law': The less confidence a poster has in his opinion will have a positive correlation to the amount of emoticons he will use on the same post.

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 11, 2009, 03:54:45 PM

Why on earth would any sensible* Unionist like Tonto want any alternative to local political parties (inc SF) helping administer British rule and a British police service, whilst the UF flies and the Border remains, still less one which meant a rebirth of terrorism?

Certainly "things are a changing", but they're changing in our direction; the ostrich-like delusion comes from those who claim that they are going in the direction of a United Ireland!   ;)

* - And before you say it, I don't consider the TUV to be very sensible...

the best way for unionists to stay in the uk is to get guys like you (and the dup/tuv) to show a bit of empathy towards the other side. headcounts are a disaster for ni and if a border poll was held and the vote ended up 55/45 (your figures) for the union how much would that rack up the tension? imagine 45% voting to dissolve the state mixed with rhetoric like yours above?

Quote from: Donagh on June 11, 2009, 07:39:07 PM

Quote from: Tonto on June 11, 2009, 04:18:53 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 03:22:56 PM

Quote from: Tonto on June 11, 2009, 12:47:03 AM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 12:29:34 AM
Unionism = Ostrich = Simple truth = Things are a changing

:o

Yes, we all have our head in the sand. :D

Meanwhile, Sinn Fein continue to administer British rule, support a British police service, the Union Flag still flies above Belfast City Hall and the border still exists.  Sorry, who's delusional? ???

:D

What, you'd prefer the alternative and we went back to war?

I really don't know what to say to that truly bizarre question. ???

'Tontos Law': The less confidence a poster has in his opinion will have a positive correlation to the amount of emoticons he will use on the same post.

:D

"Donagh's Law":  The more uncomfortable a poster feels about the facts of a situation will have a direct impact on what he chooses to comment on.  This usually results in side-swipes at a poster rather than addressing the issue.

;)

Sorry, one more smiley. :D

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 11, 2009, 05:22:03 PM

Quote from: stibhan on June 11, 2009, 04:17:51 PM
There is no direction for Unionism. Absolutely none. They are in a black and white situation whereby they either are part of the union or they aren't. There is no means of mediating between the two.

What do you mean by "no direction"? If you mean that we are content with the status quo, then well spotted! On which point, despite Economic Depression, the 2nd World War and three bloody terrorist insurrections, the last one lasting 30 years, the status of NI within the UK is now stronger than ever (imo).

The 'strength' of the position of 'NI' in the Union isn't something that can be measured, least of all by you (or me, for that matter). Sinn Fein being the biggest party in the North is probably a major contention to your claims, but again--it's a black and white situation. Strength doesn't come into it. There is no direction to remove the principle of consent. If consent is removed then lives will be removed. It's as simple as that.

Quote

Quote from: stibhan on June 11, 2009, 04:17:51 PM
Nationalists, by contrast, are waiting for a United Ireland free from British rule. No matter how far the unionists 'strengthen' the union in terms of red tape and legislation, the fact that the principle of consent in terms of a United Ireland exists means that the state has a built in obsolescence.

How do you figure there is a "built-in obsolescence", stemming from the consent principle?  ??? Are you claiming that a Catholic/Nationalist majority is somehow an inevitability? If so, I'd like to see your evidence, with statistics and data etc.

A state that provides a means of the destruction of that state in legislature is by definition one with a built-in obsolescence.

Quote

Quote from: stibhan on June 11, 2009, 04:17:51 PM
Short of every Unionist fathering/mothering a slew of illegitimate children, there isn't really anything that solidly stops the recession of the Union

So the only way Unionists will preserve the Union is by outbreeding Nationalists/Catholics then, eh? How do you account for the evidence I quoted which indicates that a significant minority of the Catholic population of NI are happy enough to see the Union preserved, namely:
http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2007/Political_Attitudes/NIRELND2.html
Do you not believe in the power of argument and persuasion, then? In any case, do not make the mistake of believing that all of your fellow Nationalists are blindly impervious to reason and logic, just because you appear to be.
(And btw, why should such new children be "illegitimate"? Does this slip subconsciously betray your real attitude towards Unionists?  :o)

Elections are perhaps more important than the studies or polls, and as such do not reflect your figures. Calling me 'blind to reason and logic' is again representative of a unionist tendency to attack Nationalism, which is a coherent, reasonable and logical ideology, with insults rather than fact. Furthermore, do not try and read anything into me using one word, I merely meant that the numbers required would be befitting of such promiscuity as would be incompatible with monogamy, irrespective of religious or political disposition.

Quote

Quote from: stibhan on June 11, 2009, 04:17:51 PM
-furthermore, you can't control what may happen in Scotland or Wales, or even England.

You clearly fail to graps the concept of a Union. Namely, it is like a Club, where so long as you pay your subscription and obey the club's rules, no other Member may exclude you, simply because he does not approve of, or agree with you. That is the position NI has secured via the GFA/SAA, namely that unless or until we decide to resign our Membership, it is ours in perpetuity, just like every other Member, so long as the club remains.
On which point, of course, a majority of the Membership might decide to disband the club and sell up. However, despite all the rumblings of a (mainly) recalcitrant few Scottish Nationalist Members, I really can't see that happening anytime soon.
If anything, the tide is flowing in our favour, with both the main political parties in England vying with each other to prove their pro-UK credentials, the Conservatives making a comeback in Wales (and Scotland) and the SNP still utterly unable to persuade a majority of their countrymen to take the plunge and exit the Union. In fact, they are frightened even to ask the question - presumably because they fear the answer they'll get.
Meanwhile, the first tentative steps towards increasing NI's representation and influence on the Membership Committee of the "Club" (i.e. via the UUP/Conservative link-up), may be beginning to take hold, if Jim Nicholson's (moderately encouraging) performance in the EU Election is anything to go by.

Comparing a political system to a club is perhaps indicative of a naivety which sums up the worst kind of unionist intransigence. No matter what you say about Scotland and Wales, unionists have conceded that the position of NI in the Union would be extremely difficult without them--they are fundamental members of the 'club' because they form a 'celtic' cultural bond with the statelet that is British-Occupied Ireland. The rest of your post is just ridiculous bullshit that has no bearing on what we're talking about. The fact that the Conservative Unionists are in the 'club' of Parliament's prospective ruling body won't mean anything but a gimmick. European Elections, incidentally, have no direct bearing on Westminister ones. I'm not sure that the 'protest vote' of this election will do anything other than protest either. Joining Westminster no more increases the representation and influence of 'NI' than joining the Dail. Both major parties must surely secretly want rid of us.

Quote from: Evil Genius on June 11, 2009, 04:50:11 PM

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 04:11:55 PM
I find it quite amusing to watch the "unionists" on this board trying to convince themselves that everything is rosy and the "ulster raj" is still strong (and getting stronger according to EG).

I'm glad it amuses you, but whether it does or it doesn't, I have genuinely been persuaded that for all its flaws, the present constitutional arrangement secures the Union better than virtually any arrangement since Partition. This is because it is internationally recognised and accepted by Treaty that the future of the Union is now firmly in the hands of the people of NI, which is all I could ever reasonably have asked for in the first place.

And as for how secure those hands are:

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 11, 2009, 04:11:55 PM
Will the unionist population is aging and their youth get educated and bugger off to the motherland.

I have already given my opinion on the demographic future ahead of NI in Posts #336 and #338, above. Of course, you may disagree totally with the conclusions I drew in those Posts (and others), but at least they were coherently argued, with evidence and examples. So that when you try to rebut them with nothing more cheap jibes and sloganeering such as the above, it does nothing for your credibility (imo).

All you have done in those two posts is give your OPINION, as I have done mine.
The stats you give are in relation to voting and not demographics. 
Anyway keep telling yourself that the union is safer now then ever, as you have said it's now in the peoples hands and not a unionist stormont gov or brit gov, therefore can be dissolved when the people decide, personally I would have thought that, that makes it less solid and more unsecure.

I would say that evil myles opinion that a portion of nationalists would wish to remain under british juristiction is correct....at least initially.

however this opinion again does not cover off what will take people to change their minds (and has been seen in recent years to easily presuade unionists to ditch their 'principles') and that again is money/economics.

It has been said (and I have often re-iterated) that the british gov wish to ditch the money haemorraging North of Ireland.
they are also known to have said that thy know they will have to pay initially some money annually for the upkeep of the northern counties once re-patriated.

its no great mystery.

The british government are the real modern day 'republican heroes' !

Something which I believe that no-one has touched on yet is the impact of the "possible" breakup of the union (Scotland going it's own way, and to a lesser extent Wales) and what teffect this would have on attitude of the population of England towards the 6 counties.

The great unknown surely is in the potential voting preferences of the extremely large section who don't vote. It would be silly to project these as "unionist" voters who don't come out but would at crunch times.

Quote from: T Fearon on June 12, 2009, 12:44:19 PM
The great unknown surely is in the potential voting preferences of the extremely large section who don't vote. It would be silly to project these as "unionist" voters who don't come out but would at crunch times.

Exactly. Nationalists have more reason to be disenchanted with voting than Unionists, after all.

Quote from: stibhan on June 12, 2009, 01:48:56 PM

Quote from: T Fearon on June 12, 2009, 12:44:19 PM
The great unknown surely is in the potential voting preferences of the extremely large section who don't vote. It would be silly to project these as "unionist" voters who don't come out but would at crunch times.

Exactly. Nationalists have more reason to be disenchanted with voting than Unionists, after all.

Nationalists seem more Politically aware and motivated.  Maybe they are encouraged by stuff like the predicted 'uncontrollable chain of events'. How long that encouragement can last it is hard to predict, but it probably thrives on unrealistic predictions of the Utopian State being in sight to keep some momentum. As no one knows what that state would mean to anyone, other than the romantic notion of it, it is hard to fathom.  Full marks for perseverance, mind.

Quote from: Roger on June 12, 2009, 02:09:19 PM

Quote from: stibhan on June 12, 2009, 01:48:56 PM

Quote from: T Fearon on June 12, 2009, 12:44:19 PM
The great unknown surely is in the potential voting preferences of the extremely large section who don't vote. It would be silly to project these as "unionist" voters who don't come out but would at crunch times.

Exactly. Nationalists have more reason to be disenchanted with voting than Unionists, after all.

Nationalists seem more Politically aware and motivated.  Maybe they are encouraged by stuff like the predicted 'uncontrollable chain of events'. How long that encouragement can last it is hard to predict, but it probably thrives on unrealistic predictions of the Utopian State being in sight to keep some momentum. As no one knows what that state would mean to anyone, other than the romantic notion of it, it is hard to fathom.  Full marks for perseverance, mind.

I presume you are either talking about yourself or the british gov here !
yourself in continuing the delusion that the status quo will remain or
the british gov in that they will keep this on the boil until they can hand back the counties to the rest of Ireland a la 'Hong Kong' to china a few years ago

money talks and the utopian state you are referring to is the state of mind that is ultimately selfish, and people will always go with the 'whats in it for me' ideal.
This was demonstrated by 'unionists' that would 'never' (never never) cross the border ...
along came the Celtic tiger and the lure of good money in Dublin and all of a sudden these princples were cast off and william, gregory and peter headed south in pursuit of the riches that the southern Irish were getting - to find that the prejudices they had were in their own minds and there is no catch or problem or impasse with integration at all !!

Some day you will find out the same ! The look on your face would be priceless I'd say !

sure next time yer in Dublin give me a shout and I'll buy you a pint !

Roge, it is more likely that nationalists have had to fight tooth and nail for even basic human and civil right for decades, therefore the effort to get out and vote is miniscule by comparison.

Perhaps some unionists would never have crossed the border but many, many would have regularly done so.

Quote from: nifan on June 12, 2009, 02:20:01 PM
Perhaps some unionists would never have crossed the border but many, many would have regularly done so.

Agree that more now would travel down south, but you'd be amazed at the numbers that still have never been there, in my last job, in an office of 9 people (I was the only Catholic) three of them had never been to the south and they were in their 30's, 50's and on was 60+ they were well travelled in the sense that they had all be to the European mainland on more then one occasion and to England and Scotland numerous times.
Obviously this is not a great yardstick to measure things by, but I was amazed at the time.

Quote from: lynchbhoy on June 12, 2009, 02:17:08 PM

Quote from: Roger on June 12, 2009, 02:09:19 PM

Quote from: stibhan on June 12, 2009, 01:48:56 PM

Quote from: T Fearon on June 12, 2009, 12:44:19 PM
The great unknown surely is in the potential voting preferences of the extremely large section who don't vote. It would be silly to project these as "unionist" voters who don't come out but would at crunch times.

Exactly. Nationalists have more reason to be disenchanted with voting than Unionists, after all.

Nationalists seem more Politically aware and motivated.  Maybe they are encouraged by stuff like the predicted 'uncontrollable chain of events'. How long that encouragement can last it is hard to predict, but it probably thrives on unrealistic predictions of the Utopian State being in sight to keep some momentum. As no one knows what that state would mean to anyone, other than the romantic notion of it, it is hard to fathom.  Full marks for perseverance, mind.

I presume you are either talking about yourself or the british gov here !
yourself in continuing the delusion that the status quo will remain or
the british gov in that they will keep this on the boil until they can hand back the counties to the rest of Ireland a la 'Hong Kong' to china a few years ago

money talks and the utopian state you are referring to is the state of mind that is ultimately selfish, and people will always go with the 'whats in it for me' ideal.
This was demonstrated by 'unionists' that would 'never' (never never) cross the border ...
along came the Celtic tiger and the lure of good money in Dublin and all of a sudden these princples were cast off and william, gregory and peter headed south in pursuit of the riches that the southern Irish were getting - to find that the prejudices they had were in their own minds and there is no catch or problem or impasse with integration at all !!

Some day you will find out the same ! The look on your face would be priceless I'd say !

sure next time yer in Dublin give me a shout and I'll buy you a pint !

Your view of Northern Ireland and unionists seems outdated. Unionists have long been talking about cross-border co-operation and relations with the Republic have thawed generally and in no small amount to the Republic having changed so much over the last 20 years. I don't really disagree with you citing materialism being a good motivator for voting trends, but I would suggest it is a better driver for maintaining the Union.  

If your citing of principles is important to you, then you must think that nationalists haven't got any principles as there have been more of them living in England than in Ireland for years. Sure the UK even annually pays the ROI money for the pensions of some of those in the Republic of Ireland.  Principles? Comical.

I'm in Dublin usually 3 or 4 times a year, thanks for the pint offer but I'll pass on it.

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 12, 2009, 02:28:36 PM

Quote from: nifan on June 12, 2009, 02:20:01 PM
Perhaps some unionists would never have crossed the border but many, many would have regularly done so.

Agree that more now would travel down south, but you'd be amazed at the numbers that still have never been there, in my last job, in an office of 9 people (I was the only Catholic) three of them had never been to the south and they were in their 30's, 50's and on was 60+ they were well travelled in the sense that they had all be to the European mainland on more then one occasion and to England and Scotland numerous times.
Obviously this is not a great yardstick to measure things by, but I was amazed at the time.

This is something that has been diluted over the years.  At one time the abhorrence for the ROI state would have meant that many in Northern Ireland never crossed the border.  I have heard people advise "don't spend any money" to those crossing the border in the past. It seems to be an older generational thing. The reciprocal thing in the Republic during those times would probably have been "burn everything of their's but their coal". Attitudes have changed greatly over the years. 

QuoteAgree that more now would travel down south, but you'd be amazed at the numbers that still have never been there

True enough, slightly different scenario but id find the same amongst some people down south who have not been to the north, though the fear of the troubles would have significantly affected that.

I grew up in a middle class area so it was probably a vastly different story in other areas, but wed have gone to galway, kerry, cork etc for holidays, and with the scouts achill etc.

Also being so close to donegal wed have had the misfortune of spending some time there too. That would probably affect the chances of crossing the border for short hops anyway.

Quote from: T Fearon on June 12, 2009, 02:18:34 PM
Roge, it is more likely that nationalists have had to fight tooth and nail for even basic human and civil right for decades, therefore the effort to get out and vote is miniscule by comparison.

How does that explain unionists lacking interest in voting even after having the tenacity to face down a prolonged and vicious campaign of murder by a highly sophisticated terrorist organisation to drive them out of the country?

More likely that unionists are just more content with their identity and are getting on with their lives. They just don't seem to need to put a number or x on a piece of paper as it appears to simply elect a host of muppets to be overpaid to argue about the colour of shite. Hard to blame them.

Quote from: nifan on June 12, 2009, 02:35:51 PM

QuoteAgree that more now would travel down south, but you'd be amazed at the numbers that still have never been there

True enough, slightly different scenario but id find the same amongst some people down south who have not been to the north, though the fear of the troubles would have significantly affected that.

I grew up in a middle class area so it was probably a vastly different story in other areas, but wed have gone to galway, kerry, cork etc for holidays, and with the scouts achill etc.

Also being so close to donegal wed have had the misfortune of spending some time there too. That would probably affect the chances of crossing the border for short hops anyway.

Cheeky barsteward, your not welcome back!  :)

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 12, 2009, 02:41:52 PM
Cheeky barsteward, your not welcome back!  :)

:P
Actually had a weekend with the family a month or 2 back in Malin, very pleasant too.

Quote from: Roger on June 12, 2009, 02:09:19 PM

Quote from: stibhan on June 12, 2009, 01:48:56 PM

Quote from: T Fearon on June 12, 2009, 12:44:19 PM
The great unknown surely is in the potential voting preferences of the extremely large section who don't vote. It would be silly to project these as "unionist" voters who don't come out but would at crunch times.

Exactly. Nationalists have more reason to be disenchanted with voting than Unionists, after all.

Nationalists seem more Politically aware and motivated.  Maybe they are encouraged by stuff like the predicted 'uncontrollable chain of events'. How long that encouragement can last it is hard to predict, but it probably thrives on unrealistic predictions of the Utopian State being in sight to keep some momentum. As no one knows what that state would mean to anyone, other than the romantic notion of it, it is hard to fathom.  Full marks for perseverance, mind.

Perhaps the reason nationalists are politically aware is that the state in which they live was in every respect a 'cold house' for Catholics, and continues to demonstrate aspects of that coldness on a daily basis. My point is, however, that Nationalists who refuse to recognise the state are probably apathetic to voting in its elections--unionists are motivated by the irrational fear of unification. I don't really think your supposed 'uncontrollable chain of events' comes into it.

Quote from: stibhan on June 12, 2009, 03:16:33 PM
Perhaps the reason nationalists are politically aware is that the state in which they live was in every respect a 'cold house' for Catholics, and continues to demonstrate aspects of that coldness on a daily basis.

How on earth is it a cold house for Catholics?   

QuoteMy point is, however, that Nationalists who refuse to recognise the state are probably apathetic to voting in its elections--unionists are motivated by the irrational fear of unification. I don't really think your supposed 'uncontrollable chain of events' comes into it.

Why do unionists have 'irrational fear' of unification?

There are many on here who refuse to recognise the state and write in cartwheels trying to even mention the correct name of the state yet they were rather enthusiastic about this election as witnessed on this thread.  Maybe they aren't representative of the republican/nationalist community but I never noticed any enthusiasm in other quarters anywhere else.

Quote from: Roger on June 12, 2009, 02:30:15 PM

Quote from: lynchbhoy on June 12, 2009, 02:17:08 PM

Quote from: Roger on June 12, 2009, 02:09:19 PM

Quote from: stibhan on June 12, 2009, 01:48:56 PM

Quote from: T Fearon on June 12, 2009, 12:44:19 PM
The great unknown surely is in the potential voting preferences of the extremely large section who don't vote. It would be silly to project these as "unionist" voters who don't come out but would at crunch times.

Exactly. Nationalists have more reason to be disenchanted with voting than Unionists, after all.

Nationalists seem more Politically aware and motivated.  Maybe they are encouraged by stuff like the predicted 'uncontrollable chain of events'. How long that encouragement can last it is hard to predict, but it probably thrives on unrealistic predictions of the Utopian State being in sight to keep some momentum. As no one knows what that state would mean to anyone, other than the romantic notion of it, it is hard to fathom.  Full marks for perseverance, mind.

I presume you are either talking about yourself or the british gov here !
yourself in continuing the delusion that the status quo will remain or
the british gov in that they will keep this on the boil until they can hand back the counties to the rest of Ireland a la 'Hong Kong' to china a few years ago

money talks and the utopian state you are referring to is the state of mind that is ultimately selfish, and people will always go with the 'whats in it for me' ideal.
This was demonstrated by 'unionists' that would 'never' (never never) cross the border ...
along came the Celtic tiger and the lure of good money in Dublin and all of a sudden these princples were cast off and william, gregory and peter headed south in pursuit of the riches that the southern Irish were getting - to find that the prejudices they had were in their own minds and there is no catch or problem or impasse with integration at all !!

Some day you will find out the same ! The look on your face would be priceless I'd say !

sure next time yer in Dublin give me a shout and I'll buy you a pint !

Your view of Northern Ireland and unionists seems outdated. Unionists have long been talking about cross-border co-operation and relations with the Republic have thawed generally and in no small amount to the Republic having changed so much over the last 20 years. I don't really disagree with you citing materialism being a good motivator for voting trends, but I would suggest it is a better driver for maintaining the Union.  

If your citing of principles is important to you, then you must think that nationalists haven't got any principles as there have been more of them living in England than in Ireland for years. Sure the UK even annually pays the ROI money for the pensions of some of those in the Republic of Ireland.  Principles? Comical.

I'm in Dublin usually 3 or 4 times a year, thanks for the pint offer but I'll pass on it.

outdated?
certainly not in 1998/99 and ever since !
- these are the first years whne the multitude of unionists decided to head south (sure there wasnt much point before then anyhow - although a couple obv made their way to Dublin and were far better off for it).
Cross border co-operation has nothing to do with it,sure this can still be done from the comfort of your own area without travelling north or south! ! I did a bit of work for co-operation north in 1993/94 and this is the bizarre observation I could make from having participated !
Unionists would talk about it but in general refused to travel south or actually integrate !(the adults anyhow).

Cant see any logic in citing nationalists principles- we are discussing principles that unionists shouted from the rooftops - never never never (cross the border) and various IRA type dublin scenarions etc etc
so after these lofty and loud protestations against crossing the border, by doing so for the shekels proves my point.

the problem with my view of the general unionist population not having changed is that they still have their old colonial ways entrenched in their minds. They have become dinosaurs. They need to move along into this millenium or face the dismal prospect of being perpetually unhappy with whats coming down the line.

Yes the current status quo is obviously financially better than a move to a united Ireland right now as the finances cannot sustain a re-patriation.
However as britain wish to get rid of the six counties, the majority of Irish people would be happy enough to absorb the six counties (in the right financial climate with proper financial structures in place) the 'utopia ' you talk about will happen, there is no defense to say why it can or would remain past a decade or so.

pity you refuse to meet for a pint, its another missed opportunity for you to see how normal and ameniable folks in the south are !

Do you think Rodger is that curious to find out what his final pint will taste like?

Quote from: Roger on June 12, 2009, 03:23:26 PM

Quote from: stibhan on June 12, 2009, 03:16:33 PM
Perhaps the reason nationalists are politically aware is that the state in which they live was in every respect a 'cold house' for Catholics, and continues to demonstrate aspects of that coldness on a daily basis.

How on earth is it a cold house for Catholics?   

QuoteMy point is, however, that Nationalists who refuse to recognise the state are probably apathetic to voting in its elections--unionists are motivated by the irrational fear of unification. I don't really think your supposed 'uncontrollable chain of events' comes into it.

Why do unionists have 'irrational fear' of unification?

There are many on here who refuse to recognise the state and write in cartwheels trying to even mention the correct name of the state yet they were rather enthusiastic about this election as witnessed on this thread.  Maybe they aren't representative of the republican/nationalist community but I never noticed any enthusiasm in other quarters anywhere else.

Oh f**k off. It seemed to be a particularly cold house for Catholics whenever members of its police force decided to allow a loyalist mob to beat a man to death in celebration of Rangers' SPL victory a few weekends ago. The fact that there is no Irish language act as well seems to suggest as much.

On your second point, I don't think the GAAboard could be used as proper evidence for your 'representation'.

Why do the people of Crossmaglen have to live in a State to which at least 98% of them have absolutely no allegiance(sp?) ?

Because the Free State government rejected the Boundary Commission report :P

Quote from: Roger on June 12, 2009, 02:40:15 PM

Quote from: T Fearon on June 12, 2009, 02:18:34 PM
Roge, it is more likely that nationalists have had to fight tooth and nail for even basic human and civil right for decades, therefore the effort to get out and vote is miniscule by comparison.

How does that explain unionists lacking interest in voting even after having the tenacity to face down a prolonged and vicious campaign of murder by a highly sophisticated terrorist organisation to drive them out of the country?

More likely that unionists are just more content with their identity and are getting on with their lives. They just don't seem to need to put a number or x on a piece of paper as it appears to simply elect a host of muppets to be overpaid to argue about the colour of shite. Hard to blame them.

or perhaps no such animal exists, like big foot or the loch ness monster. or maybe they'll always stay at home which is the same as not existing if you get my drift. if a ui is voted in will it be.... 'why didnt they come out this time'. if it helps you get thru the day roger keep believing in the stay ay home unionist

As it stands though the stay at home unionist 'yeti' has as much credence as the 'baby machine catholic mother'. Both are rarely sited  ;)

Quote from: lynchbhoy on June 12, 2009, 03:35:11 PM
pity you refuse to meet for a pint, its another missed opportunity for you to see how normal and ameniable folks in the south are !

The way in which you have discussed things with me to date have shown me enough of the normal and ameniable manner on offer.  Thanks anyway.