Why won't NI Catholics/Nationalists vote Alliance?

[Evil Genius]

Another way you could interpret this is that the Alliance party have failed in their objective of moving past the unionist/nationalist binary to reach out to both sides of the community, and the accusation that they are unionist-lite has some substance. I see no evidence of how the Alliance party has done anything to progress towards a developing an all-Ireland dimension to their political perspective in a way which would demonstrate they are 'post-unionist'. In that sense they remain stuck in the past.

Fair enough, they may not be perceived by Nationalists to have moved sufficiently towards an "all-Ireland dimension" etc, but neither have they moved closer towards an "all-UK dimension", either - rather the contrary.
Yet over the years, their support in Unionist areas has grown.

Another important factor is that they act as a kind of spiritual salve to a certain type of liberal unionist. The other Unionist parties have sectarian baggage and/or open associations with the Conservative party in a way many find uncomfortable.

There may be something in what you say, but if there are significant numbers of Unionist voters who are disenchanted with the "baggage" of the mainstram Unionist parties etc, why wouldn't they either reform those parties from within, or switch instead to a more moderate Unionist party?
After all, Unionist voters have long had much more of a choice of parties, covering a broader spectrum etc, than Nationalist voters have had (effectively two).
Alternatively, with many (most?) people in NI being conservative (small "c"), you might have thought that rather more such people from the Unionist tradition would by now have switched to the Conservatives than has been the case?

Anyhow, as I've said earlier, this thread is not designed to be about the Unionist electorate.

I don't see any equivalent push factor driving Catholic voters away from the SDLP, which has its liberal-left ducks in a row as well as their notorious attempt to develop a post-nationalist perspective.

Yet Nationalist voters have clearly moved away from the SDLP, it's just that it has been towards SF rather than Alliance.
Which might (at least partly) be explained by some sort of "hardening" of attitudes amongst Nationalists, except that post-GFA, this is unlikely to be the case (as the recent NILT poll demonstrates).

Of course, it might just be that SF is attracting SDLP votes because its candidates and canvassing etc is better. Yet in Unionist constituencies, you could say the same for the DUP machine vis-a-vis  the UUP. Nonetheless, Alliance has not been squeezed in those constituencies, rather the reverse - they have managed to attract increased  support.

Nor can I believe that Alliance consistently fields poorer candidates in Nationalist areas than Unionist ones, and/or those candidates try less hard.

[boojangles]

From the coverage I seen of the election campaign in the North, David Forde struck me as the most progressive and foward thinking of all the leaders.
Obviously it is of no relevance to me living in the South but if his opinions represented the party as a whole then I would definitely consider voting for them.

[Evil Genius]

Id vote for them if they put forward a decent candidate.

Have you thought of standing* for them yourself, then?

Or are you no fecking use, either? 


* - It might be easier than moving to a Unionist area where, presumably, Alliance fields a better class of candidate 

[Evil Genius]

Also, wouldn't higher Alliance-vote share in majority unionist constituencies suggest tactical voting by Catholic/nationalists?

There is no evidence of tactical voting, for/against Alliance or any other party, by Nationalists that I can see.

By contrast, Unionists have (imo) proven more willing to vote tactically.

All of which would explain why over the last 40-odd years,the Unionist vote has invariably been "fractured" amongst several parties and Independents etc, whereas Nationalist voters has confined themselves to just two parties, albeit in varying proportions.

[glens abu]

Because they are a Unionist party and their record in City Hall for years{flying the butcher apron as an excample]says all there is to say about them.

[Big Puff]

Id vote for them if they put forward a decent candidate.

Have you thought of standing* for them yourself, then?

Or are you no fecking use, either? 


* - It might be easier than moving to a Unionist area where, presumably, Alliance fields a better class of candidate 

No thoughts of standing for them (or any political party for that matter).

I like to work for a living.

Did you want an answer to your thread, or was it a rhetorical question?

[hairierarea]

There may be something in what you say, but if there are significant numbers of Unionist voters who are disenchanted with the "baggage" of the mainstram Unionist parties etc, why wouldn't they either reform those parties from within, or switch instead to a more moderate Unionist party?

If you're a Guardian-reading, Iraq-war opposing, liberal, cosmopolitan, professional from a Protestant background (but now atheist or agnostic), which of the Unionist parties are you going to vote for? There may be more of them, but the most 'moderate' aligned itself with the Tories. You might stick around to try and transform the party, but that ambition is pretty hopeless in Northern Ireland and, let's face it, in our more consumerist age where people are less likely to want to knock on doors etc, we would all likely just switch to a party which offers us a better 'product'. That kind of person might feel guilty about feeling comfortable with the Union, what with the horrors of the first Stormont era and if they can vote for a party which can say it is genuinely non-sectarian and has no connection with Paisley, John Taylor et al, then they don't feel so bad when they are meeting up with their old college friends across the water.

If you are all of the above but from a Catholic background, you will have absolutely no problem voting for the SDLP; that is if you are on the continuum between being mildly enthusiastic about a United Ireland to indifferent or even attached to the present form of the Union, you can vote for them as a good liberal-lefty type without having to face any hard questions about the Kingsmill massacre and the like. There is absolutely no value added, as there certainly is for your Unionist counterpart, in switching to the Alliance party (unless you are voting tactically).

Yet Nationalist voters have clearly moved away from the SDLP, it's just that it has been towards SF rather than Alliance

I didn't say that there was no reason for voters to move from the SDLP, but rather that there was no reason for voters to move specifically towards Alliance. If we think of the SDLP as historically a kind of coalition between potential SF supporters and potential Alliance supporters, it is obvious why the first group have moved (ceasefire; strong on Irish unity), which makes it even less likely that the second group will move. Seriously, what reason would an SDLP voter have to move towards the Alliance party, other than in lending a tactical vote?

[hairierarea]

There is no evidence of tactical voting, for/against Alliance or any other party, by Nationalists that I can see.

As I said above, the Belfast East result suggests that more Catholics voted Alliance than voted for Irish nationalist parties; the latter's combined share almost halved while the turnout went up from c.30,000 to c.34,000. Would you not say that a disproportionate amount of Long's votes came from Catholics? Does that not count as tactical voting?

[AQMP]

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/alliance-european-candidate-favours-united-ireland-1.1732285

A gaffe or an election strategy?

Aine Iseal pro United Ireland??

Alliance European candidate favours united Ireland

Gerry Moriarty

Last Updated: Thursday, March 20, 2014, 15:25
Unionist parties moved quickly today to exploit what they viewed as a pre-election gaffe by Anna Lo, an Alliance South Belfast Assembly member and the party's candidate in the May European elections in Northern Ireland.

Ms Lo was upbraided by the DUP, the Ulster Unionists, the Traditional Unionist Voice party and the Northern Ireland Conservatives after she said she supported a united Ireland created by consent and further implied that Northern Ireland was a colony.

Ahead of Saturday's annual Alliance conference and also ahead of local and European elections in two months time she told today's Irish News that a united Ireland would be "better placed economically, socially and politically".

She said it was "very artificial" for Ireland to be divided up and for "the corner of Ireland to be part of the United Kingdom". She added that she was "anti colonial" while insisting unity could only be achieved through the consent of the people of Northern Ireland.

While Ms Lo is viewed as a straight-talking politician her comments did cause surprise and unease among several Alliance members. The party adopts a so-called "agnostic" position on the union with Britain, although the majority of its support is viewed as coming from centrist unionists.

Some of that vote has been threatened because of the decision by Alliance, which had the casting vote, to bring in a policy at Belfast City Council whereby the British union flag would only fly over City Hall on some 17 designated days rather than all year round as heretofore. This was the issue that triggered the flags controversy and disturbances and in a more long-term sense raised questions over whether the party could hold the East Belfast Westminster seat that Naomi Long won from DUP First Minister Peter Robinson in 2010.

While the official line from Alliance was that the party drew its support from a diverse range of constitutional opinion several members including former Assembly member Seamus Close viewed her remarks at the "politest" as "naive", particularly ahead of Saturday's annual conference and the May elections.

Unionist parties formed a line to condemn her remarks. DUP enterprise Minister Arlene Foster said Northern Ireland was neither a colony nor a mere "corner of Ireland" and that Ms Lo should apologise for her remarks.

"It is not entirely surprising to hear such clear Irish nationalist aspirations coming from within the Alliance party. Many people have commented for some time about a gradual drift within that party and the attitude amongst many members moving from being agnostic on the union to antagonistic," she added.

Ulster Unionist MEP and European candidate Jim Nicholson said Ms Lo's comments seemed "to be yet another attempt by the Alliance Party to distance Northern Ireland from the United Kingdom".

TUV leader Jim Allister said her comments shattered "the myth that Alliance was "agnostic" on the union. "The removal of the union flag from Belfast City Hall showed something of Alliance's true colours. Now Anna Lo has backed Irish unity - revealing that the tricolour are more her colours," he added.

The NI Conservatives European candidate Mark Brotherston said her remarks were "misguided and ignorant". He said the most worrying aspect of her comments was that "Ms Lo seems to be under the impression that Northern Ireland is a colony".

© 2014 irishtimes.com

[armaghniac]

DUP enterprise Minister Arlene Foster said Northern Ireland was neither a colony nor a mere "corner of Ireland"

Really, on what date was it decolonised and when did it move off the corner of Ireland?

Alliance represents the "in the UK for now, until the sums add up" perspective.
More Catholics do not vote for them as they have negligible organisation in many places where Catholics live.

[stew]

It's a fair question so I don't know why some of Ye are attacking eg on it. Maybe, nationalists  being a minority want 1 very strong party and hence don't want to dilute the power of the green "lobby" by voting for a relatively neutral party when it comes to the national question.

You are eg's bitch and a bit of a Lundy if you are to be believed!

The alliance party is a collective of well meaning people who are afraid of making their agenda known for fear of alienating one another' they stand for nothing and they get nothing in return, in fairness wully gets. As as much. Support as thdy do when they run in his constituency.

[thebigfella]

It's a fair question so I don't know why some of Ye are attacking eg on it. Maybe, nationalists  being a minority want 1 very strong party and hence don't want to dilute the power of the green "lobby" by voting for a relatively neutral party when it comes to the national question.

You are eg's bitch and a bit of a Lundy if you are to be believed!

The alliance party is a collective of well meaning people who are afraid of making their agenda known for fear of alienating one another' they stand for nothing and they get nothing in return, in fairness wully gets. As as much. Support as thdy do when they run in his constituency.

Why you responding to a post 3 years later?

[gallsman]

It's a fair question so I don't know why some of Ye are attacking eg on it. Maybe, nationalists  being a minority want 1 very strong party and hence don't want to dilute the power of the green "lobby" by voting for a relatively neutral party when it comes to the national question.

You are eg's bitch and a bit of a Lundy if you are to be believed!

The alliance party is a collective of well meaning people who are afraid of making their agenda known for fear of alienating one another' they stand for nothing and they get nothing in return, in fairness wully gets. As as much. Support as thdy do when they run in his constituency.

Why you responding to a post 3 years later?

Because he's an eejit who does it all too regularly.

[JPGJOHNNYG]

Not that big a shock. Contrary to the original post polls show 4/7 Alliance votes are from Catholics. There is no doubt that the party is pro-status quo ie pro-union but that doesnt prevent individual members having their own thoughts on the border. Gerry Lynch is another high profile Alliance figure who recently stated that he would vote for a United Ireland in a border poll. As demographics change I would expect the Alliance party in general to be more open to change

[qubdub]

Unionists are idiots, their reaction is pleasing however. They genuinely feel threatened by the AP.