Further to this morning’s story in the Irish Daily Mail by Jennifer Bray, about the leaking of a Labour Party secret guide for its election candidates, Ms Bray spoke on RTÉ’s Today with Seán O’Rourke about the 30-page document.
She explained Labour party canvassers have been told to tell their constituents the following about other parties on the doorstep:
On Fianna Fáil:
‘They offer nothing new and the economy shouldn’t be handed back to them.’
‘Fianna Fáil were the ones who signed the country up to water charges.
‘They practically abandoned social housing.’
On Sinn Féin:
‘People should be very afraid of them serving in Government, they won’t be able to stick to their policies, if in fact they were in Government.’
‘They’ve more u-turns than a dodgy plumber.’
On Social Democrats:
‘The Social Democrats can’t agree on a leader. They’re not social democrats at all and they must be the only social democrats in the world that don’t believe in property tax.’
‘Magic beans only work in fairytales.’
On Renua:
‘They’re two right-wing for even Donald Trump.’
On Fine Gael:
‘If Fine Gael were to go into government by themselves, they’d be a very different party without the balance of Labour.’
Listen back in full here
Agree with this but still would not vote labour.
The only Labour document worth reading is this:
“look what Fine Gael have in store for you”
€50 hike in car tax
23% vat
€238 per annum water tax
€1 increase in wine tax
child benefit cut
30% tax on savings
Labour have implemented all of the above with the exception of saving tax which is higher than 30%
Liars and thieves Ted, liars and thieves.
+ Every little hurts
“‘The Social Democrats can’t agree on a leader.”
Jayzus, that’s weak.
Unlike Labour’s strong and popular leadership over the last five years.
the Soc Dems firmly have a leader. While the leader of the labour party had Alan Kelly tell the Sunday Indo/Beano that he has no boss. It’s labour who are all over the place.
Secret election guide. FFS. This is all common knowledge and every party produces one for candidates and campaign teams. It’s not a secret if it’s shared by hundreds of people.
Doesn’t sound as dramatic to say run-of-the-mill election guide though, does it?
On Labour:
‘We will promise you the world and lie, lie, lie to your face in order to steal your vote, it’s what Pat Rabbitte would do.’
So like every other party come election time then?
They should give all their canvassers a “WWPD?” wrist band to remind them.
it’s not really an election strategy, rather it’s what labour hide behind when asked a direct question from an opposition TD.
Two Right
You were two quick for me, I wanted to comment on this one thing, and be the first one to comment on thsi one thing but alas I was two late.
^thsi
Further to FG following and copying lock, stock and barrell the Conservatives Crosby-written campaign strategy, Labour are flat-out following the Lib Dem line of ‘we’re the moderators, we moderate the big party we’re parasitically attached to’.
We all know where that ended for the Lib Dems, looking forward to history repeating ^_^
And an unexpected FG majority government?
I’m hoping our lack of a ludicrously undemocratic voting system will prevent that!
That said, I’m being totally Machiavellian in wishing for an FG/FF coalition, which is basically analogous to a majority government for either of them since they’re the same party ;o)
I have a feeling that combination would end with Enda Kenny and Micheál Martin walking hand in hand, stark naked and smeared in lamb’s blood anticlockwise around the Black Church at midnight in order to summon the devil.
If they tie the knot does that make them Sinn Fein again? What’ll the current Sinn Fein do?!
Rename as The Real Sinn Fein/Continuity Sinn Fein…
I’ll never vote Labour but I admire Eric Byrne for canvassing on his own with no handlers.
I wouldn’t vote Labour, but most of the above is valid. I imagine that a lot of voters, even those that haven’t been hugely impressed with Labour, might still give them a preference to avoid a FG/FF coalition.
God this is ridiculous. Every party has something like this and if they don’t they are cowboys who shouldn’t be in the running for any say in power.
You think parties should have soundbites attacking their opponents as a pre-requsite for running for office?
Seriously?
Parties have things called Policies and Strategies. They also like to make sure they are all singing from the same hymn sheet to get their message across. I would fully expect every party to behave like this. You are naieve if you think they don’t.
I’m not talking about them having policies and strategies. I’m talking about that strategy having a section on things to say to attack the other party.
and?
Use your imagination rotide
And you don’t see a problem with that?
I think it would be obvious to even the most casual reader that no, i don’t have a problem with it.
Right you are then, Ted.
Higher motor tax rates = more dosh for Irish warter.
Incorrect.
Higher motor tax rates = higher central tax pot as it always has been.
The motor tax was never ring-fenced as being for water, it always went into the central pot.
Don’t plumbers put in u-bends? Or are dodgy plumbers notorious for bad driving?
Emmet Stagg said that a Plumber is better paid than he is.
plumbers don’t get sworn at us much, either.
Labour party promises will forever be followed by the whispering of Pat Rabbitte “isnt that what you tend to do in elections”….. most folk will see through this carry-on.
This is what Labour plans to tell people on the doorstep? Is this a joke? Doorstep? No Labour candidate in their right mind should risk darkening anyones doorstep and slagging off all the other parties. I’d set the dog on ’em.
these days it seems this is all politics are about in ireland .. each party bad-mouthing the others.. only coz theyre all dry on ideas and have nothing else to contribute other than smear campaigns. its pathetic. bunch of children arguing over who makes decisions that effect us all.. its terrifying.
I know, right?
I’m sorry, Where is this utopia where election candidates say things like ‘My opponent is correct and has the right idea for running the country’?
If your argument for running the country is “the other guy is crap”, then you’re not telling me why you should run the country. It means that while the other guy might have a bad policy, you have no policy.
Every political candidate IN HISTORY’S argument boils down to ‘the other guy is crap’.
As I mentioned above , parties have things like Manifestos and Policies. All parties have these. All Parties claim that theirs is the best way to move forward and that the other guys are just crap.
pcguy’s sweeping generalisation based on nothing but the IRISH DAILY MAIL seems to imply that actually, all Irish parties have given up on the policy business and just gone straight to the mud slinging business.
The sad thing is that there’s no shortage of commenters here that are more than willing to believe that and repeat it enough so that in their own minds its a reality.
“The sad thing is that there’s no shortage of commenters here that are more than willing to believe that and repeat it enough so that in their own minds its a reality.”
Yeah, you’re definitely not like that.
That’s an incredibly blinkered view and one I’m glad I don’t share with you.
“Every political candidate IN HISTORY’S argument boils down to ‘the other guy is crap……..pcguy’s sweeping generalisation based on nothing”
Sorry, I missed that the first time.
Are we really debating that “im right and you’re wrong” isn’t the basic nature of elections?
You might be. But if you are then you’re totally missing the point that everyone esle is making.
I think Lorcan’s point was that, even if that were true, it’s not the right way to go about things. And anyway, I wasn’t. I was just pointing out someone making a huge sweeping statement and then talking about someone making a huge sweeping statement a couple of sentences later.
The point PC Guy is making is that parties don’t have policies or manifestos and spend all their time making attack ads. This is incorrect.
You were making some sort of vague point about candidates needing attack soundbites as a ‘pre-requisite’ for running for office which is also incorrect.
Moyest has just been following me around like a lost puppy as usual.
I’m actually not sure what point either of you are trying to make. I think I’ve been pretty clear.
“I’m actually not sure what point either of you are trying to make. I think I’ve been pretty clear.”
Well it’s clear that you’re unwilling or unable to understand the point.
“I’m actually not sure what point either of you are trying to make.”
I’m saying you lack self awareness.
Explain it to me then.
So far you’ve just said things like “well im glad i dont share your opinions’ and ‘do you REALLY think that’.
So what exactly is your point?
I wrote more than those two lines, you know.
You wrote this:
If your argument for running the country is “the other guy is crap”, then you’re not telling me why you should run the country. It means that while the other guy might have a bad policy, you have no policy.
This paragraph was neatly refuted by the simple hyperlink that Big Apple Kieran provided below.
Again, whats your point?
So, before I continue, do I really need to explain that I was talking about using attacks as talking points in general there, and not literally Labour’s specific ones?
Here ya go
https://www.labour.ie/policy/overview.html
All true, and a good set of reasons to vote Fine Gael.
Not in millions years. Spineless, corrupt & self serving
How are we to understand that?
Quality of messaging = quality of Labour candidates
or
quality of messaging = quality of voters?
Disturbing $h!t€ ! :-)
quality of voters as Labour sees it this year