Stormont Assembly Elections 2017

[heganboy]

Read this carefully.in my opinion with no basis in fact whatsoever, as well as an abundance of non sequiturs and poor grammar,  and in spite of significant evidence to the contrary my ego wants you all to know that I think thatBritain does not want or regard Northern Unionists as their people.Dublin does not want or regard Northern nationalists as their people.Ulster unionism and Northern nationalism are redundant philosophies therefore I have taken the decision to stop posting nonsense on this board

Fixed that for you...

[6th sam]

The other major players in this are the British and Irish governments. The change from a labour to Tory government has not helped progress in recent years . The "green" community in the North have absolutely no affinity with Torys, who have been consistently antagonistic or apathetic towards them. Tory values and policies are in direct contrast to those of the 2 major nationalist parties. The Tories have Been in power for most of the last 50 years and it's no coincidence that the period of most progress in that time was under Labour's watch. It is obvious that the Torys can not be considered honest brokers in any negotiations, not least because they have a vested interest in looking after the DUP. Equally important is the role of the Irish government, with Fine Gael being vehement political opponents of Sinn Féin , never mind the fact that they originate from those who in the eyes of many "hung northern nationalists out to dry in 1921" . Ironically if you exclude supporters of the Torys and the DUP, and to a lesser extent UUP/Fine Gael, the vast majority of people on these two islands , would be strongly in favour of equality, and at the very least, close links between north and south. There is no doubt that we are heading towards some form of unity, and the challenge for nationalists is to try to convince the 5% of the island's population who voted unionist , that their strong British identity will be respected in any new institutions. At the same time politicians need to ensure that regardless of any short/medium/long term constitutional solutions, that our focus should be on health/education/employment/poverty in the meantime .

[vallankumous]

The other major players in this are the British and Irish governments. The change from a labour to Tory government has not helped progress in recent years . The "green" community in the North have absolutely no affinity with Torys, who have been consistently antagonistic or apathetic towards them. Tory values and policies are in direct contrast to those of the 2 major nationalist parties. The Tories have Been in power for most of the last 50 years and it's no coincidence that the period of most progress in that time was under Labour's watch. It is obvious that the Torys can not be considered honest brokers in any negotiations, not least because they have a vested interest in looking after the DUP. Equally important is the role of the Irish government, with Fine Gael being vehement political opponents of Sinn Féin , never mind the fact that they originate from those who in the eyes of many "hung northern nationalists out to dry in 1921" . Ironically if you exclude supporters of the Torys and the DUP, and to a lesser extent UUP/Fine Gael, the vast majority of people on these two islands , would be strongly in favour of equality, and at the very least, close links between north and south. There is no doubt that we are heading towards some form of unity, and the challenge for nationalists is to try to convince the 5% of the island's population who voted unionist , that their strong British identity will be respected in any new institutions. At the same time politicians need to ensure that regardless of any short/medium/long term constitutional solutions, that we our focus should be on health/education/employment/poverty in the meantime .

No party in the north, nationalist or unionist have affinity with the Tories. Of course some are closer in political terms but there's no affinity. The DUP and the UUP are political parties in their own right  equal to the right the Tories and Labour have.
Labour are no better or worse than the Tories when it comes to dealing with parties in the north. It's the Tory social position that nationalists rally against moreso than Labours. Labour have a bad history of treatment of northern nationalists too.
Labour took power at a time that things began to change in the north and the progress was made in the north. All credit for this is with the people of the north who seen a chance through a variety of leaders and began to demand things change. Labour were the ones that happened to be there. Add to that, we we lucky that they held power for long enough to see it through along with FF. If either of them had have lost an election around the time of the GFA we would be in a different place. A lot of things came together and lasted long enough to implement a change.

[Keyser soze]

The other major players in this are the British and Irish governments. The change from a labour to Tory government has not helped progress in recent years . The "green" community in the North have absolutely no affinity with Torys, who have been consistently antagonistic or apathetic towards them. Tory values and policies are in direct contrast to those of the 2 major nationalist parties. The Tories have Been in power for most of the last 50 years and it's no coincidence that the period of most progress in that time was under Labour's watch. It is obvious that the Torys can not be considered honest brokers in any negotiations, not least because they have a vested interest in looking after the DUP. Equally important is the role of the Irish government, with Fine Gael being vehement political opponents of Sinn Féin , never mind the fact that they originate from those who in the eyes of many "hung northern nationalists out to dry in 1921" . Ironically if you exclude supporters of the Torys and the DUP, and to a lesser extent UUP/Fine Gael, the vast majority of people on these two islands , would be strongly in favour of equality, and at the very least, close links between north and south. There is no doubt that we are heading towards some form of unity, and the challenge for nationalists is to try to convince the 5% of the island's population who voted unionist , that their strong British identity will be respected in any new institutions. At the same time politicians need to ensure that regardless of any short/medium/long term constitutional solutions, that our focus should be on health/education/employment/poverty in the meantime .

You can't seriously believe there will be a 6th Sam!!

[6th sam]

The other major players in this are the British and Irish governments. The change from a labour to Tory government has not helped progress in recent years . The "green" community in the North have absolutely no affinity with Torys, who have been consistently antagonistic or apathetic towards them. Tory values and policies are in direct contrast to those of the 2 major nationalist parties. The Tories have Been in power for most of the last 50 years and it's no coincidence that the period of most progress in that time was under Labour's watch. It is obvious that the Torys can not be considered honest brokers in any negotiations, not least because they have a vested interest in looking after the DUP. Equally important is the role of the Irish government, with Fine Gael being vehement political opponents of Sinn Féin , never mind the fact that they originate from those who in the eyes of many "hung northern nationalists out to dry in 1921" . Ironically if you exclude supporters of the Torys and the DUP, and to a lesser extent UUP/Fine Gael, the vast majority of people on these two islands , would be strongly in favour of equality, and at the very least, close links between north and south. There is no doubt that we are heading towards some form of unity, and the challenge for nationalists is to try to convince the 5% of the island's population who voted unionist , that their strong British identity will be respected in any new institutions. At the same time politicians need to ensure that regardless of any short/medium/long term constitutional solutions, that we our focus should be on health/education/employment/poverty in the meantime .

No party in the north, nationalist or unionist have affinity with the Tories. Of course some are closer in political terms but there's no affinity. The DUP and the UUP are political parties in their own right  equal to the right the Tories and Labour have.
Labour are no better or worse than the Tories when it comes to dealing with parties in the north. It's the Tory social position that nationalists rally against moreso than Labours. Labour have a bad history of treatment of northern nationalists too.
Labour took power at a time that things began to change in the north and the progress was made in the north. All credit for this is with the people of the north who seen a chance through a variety of leaders and began to demand things change. Labour were the ones that happened to be there. Add to that, we we lucky that they held power for long enough to see it through along with FF. If either of them had have lost an election around the time of the GFA we would be in a different place. A lot of things came together and lasted long enough to implement a change.

Would agree with a lot of that, but Both the DUP and UUP have espoused right wing policies for years. The poor showing of the Conservatives in 6 county elections, is not because the North has a strong left wing bias, but rather that most Northern Torys are assured that Tory politics will be predominant in the main unionist parties, and their desire to have their vote count in the sectarian headcount trumps their desire to vote for the Conservative party.

[vallankumous]

Would agree with a lot of that, but Both the DUP and UUP have espoused right wing policies for years. The poor showing of the Conservatives in 6 county elections, is not because the North has a strong left wing bias, but rather that most Northern Torys are assured that Tory politics will be predominant in the main unionist parties, and their desire to have their vote count in the sectarian headcount trumps their desire to vote for the Conservative party.

I don't think it's a sectarian head count. Republicanism and Unionism are perfectly ok political positions to hold. Unionism and Republicanism and bonuses for many voters and usually not enough to win a vote. If they were there'd be no need for more than two parties.
I doubt if more than a few idiots voted SF because they don't like protestants and I doubt if anyone voted DUP because they don't like catholics. Voting for republicanism or unionism for the sake of republicanism or unionism is not sectarian.

[east down gael]

You doubt if anyone voted for the DUP because they don't like Catholics?you're joking surely?

[Milltown Row2]

Would agree with a lot of that, but Both the DUP and UUP have espoused right wing policies for years. The poor showing of the Conservatives in 6 county elections, is not because the North has a strong left wing bias, but rather that most Northern Torys are assured that Tory politics will be predominant in the main unionist parties, and their desire to have their vote count in the sectarian headcount trumps their desire to vote for the Conservative party.

I don't think it's a sectarian head count. Republicanism and Unionism are perfectly ok political positions to hold. Unionism and Republicanism and bonuses for many voters and usually not enough to win a vote. If they were there'd be no need for more than two parties.
I doubt if more than a few idiots voted SF because they don't like protestants and I doubt if anyone voted DUP because they don't like catholics. Voting for republicanism or unionism for the sake of republicanism or unionism is not sectarian.

You really believe that a very tiny minority vote based on what part of the street the were born on?

[vallankumous]

Would agree with a lot of that, but Both the DUP and UUP have espoused right wing policies for years. The poor showing of the Conservatives in 6 county elections, is not because the North has a strong left wing bias, but rather that most Northern Torys are assured that Tory politics will be predominant in the main unionist parties, and their desire to have their vote count in the sectarian headcount trumps their desire to vote for the Conservative party.

I don't think it's a sectarian head count. Republicanism and Unionism are perfectly ok political positions to hold. Unionism and Republicanism and bonuses for many voters and usually not enough to win a vote. If they were there'd be no need for more than two parties.
I doubt if more than a few idiots voted SF because they don't like protestants and I doubt if anyone voted DUP because they don't like catholics. Voting for republicanism or unionism for the sake of republicanism or unionism is not sectarian.

You really believe that a very tiny minority vote based on what part of the street the were born on?

Even if they voted for their side of the street it is not sectarian.

I believe people vote for a certain party for many reason.
In this case there are the many social reasons but also the big national reason.
I think unionists decided to support a unionist party then decided which one for social or economic reasons. Also to oppose SF who are republican which in this case is the opposite to unionism. None of that is sectarian.
I do not believe for one second that anyone (or more than a few idiots) voted to oppose a religion they are not part of.
No party stood on a platform of sectarianism. A very common theme was Unionism and Republicanism. If anyone voted for these as their primary reason they are perfectly entitled to do so. They re not sectarian positions. I think many voted for a candidate who's religious views are in line with their own, be it on abortion or gay marriage etc. Again, not sectarian and a perfectly acceptable was to choose who to vote for.

As a catholic and a nationalist I know nobody who would decide to vote against protestantism. I afford that same respect in confidence that my protestant neighbours did not vote against me as I'm catholic. I give them more credit than that. Though, many pundits claim that it is the case by their references to sectarian head count.

[vallankumous]

You doubt if anyone voted for the DUP because they don't like Catholics?you're joking surely?

Honestly, ask yourself that question.

[Harold Disgracey]

I remember the last time there was a weak Tory government reliant on unionist support, it was 1996 and we got the shit kicked out of us to let the orangemen parade down the Garvaghy Road.

[imtommygunn]

You doubt if anyone voted for the DUP because they don't like Catholics?you're joking surely?

Honestly, ask yourself that question.

What was the dup policy? We're not them?

[vallankumous]

What was the dup policy? We're not them?

Was it we're not them or we're not Catholic?

[Milltown Row2]

Would agree with a lot of that, but Both the DUP and UUP have espoused right wing policies for years. The poor showing of the Conservatives in 6 county elections, is not because the North has a strong left wing bias, but rather that most Northern Torys are assured that Tory politics will be predominant in the main unionist parties, and their desire to have their vote count in the sectarian headcount trumps their desire to vote for the Conservative party.

I don't think it's a sectarian head count. Republicanism and Unionism are perfectly ok political positions to hold. Unionism and Republicanism and bonuses for many voters and usually not enough to win a vote. If they were there'd be no need for more than two parties.
I doubt if more than a few idiots voted SF because they don't like protestants and I doubt if anyone voted DUP because they don't like catholics. Voting for republicanism or unionism for the sake of republicanism or unionism is not sectarian.

You really believe that a very tiny minority vote based on what part of the street the were born on?

Even if they voted for their side of the street it is not sectarian.

I believe people vote for a certain party for many reason.
In this case there are the many social reasons but also the big national reason.
I think unionists decided to support a unionist party then decided which one for social or economic reasons. Also to oppose SF who are republican which in this case is the opposite to unionism. None of that is sectarian.
I do not believe for one second that anyone (or more than a few idiots) voted to oppose a religion they are not part of.
No party stood on a platform of sectarianism. A very common theme was Unionism and Republicanism. If anyone voted for these as their primary reason they are perfectly entitled to do so. They re not sectarian positions.

As a catholic and a nationalist I know nobody who would decide to vote against protestantism. I afford that same respect in confidence that my protestant neighbours did not vote against me as I'm catholic. I give them more credit than that. Though, many pundits claim that it is the case by their references to sectarian head count.

I know of no catholic nationalists that live in republican areas that voted unionists political parties...

If NI people did vote based on jobs economics health education welfare then we'd have a different leading party at Stormont... all I heard from this election was stop the nationalists from getting power and equality and corruption from the others. Not once did I hear about jobs education etc etc

[imtommygunn]

I would say it is the same thing in their eyes.