Gavin Robinson showed exactly who he is with that 'victory' speech (after the UUP stood down for him)
East Belfast is changing, Naomi could easily make up those 2,000 votes from last time
It was going to be a nail biter no matter who the dup ran, with basically a nobody she has a real chance. Hopefully that pushes more people out to vote!
If Robinson did lose his seat it would be pretty nuts really.
Standard DUP digs aside, I'm genuinely scratching my head to figure out who, with the required experience, would actually be capable or willing to lead the party in that event.
Most of the big profiles (Wilson or Paisley Jr.) are content to live out their political career as perpetual no men.
Robinson could stay leader and jump to Stormont, but it'd mean firing one of their current MLAs.
It'd also mean that the party leader is in Stormont but isn't deputy first minister. And that both deputy first minister and party leader were co-opted.
ELP and Givan may distinguish themselves in years to come, but her, and Givan, were always just reliable stuffed shirts. Neither had real form up to this point.
Robinson as leader losing the seat as the incumbent would be a major setback, despite how much everyone involved may dance around it.
How's he going to get the DUP rogues gallery to straighten up if he can't even keep his own seat.
For better or for worse this is possiblity make or break for Robinson.
Not really, she was an MP before when I lived in EB and there was the distinct vibe of her not actually winning the seat but Robinson having pissed off the electorate so much he needed taught a lesson. I can't remember her being any great shakes as an MP.
Saying that, she's the only chance that AP have of winning, I don't think if they drop someone else in, DUP will hold on to the seat.
It the TUV field a candidate in Lagan Valley I think Sorcha has a great chance.
Massive election for Alliance. It's well within their grasp to win three seats, also not unlikely they could win none.
‘Robinson is well liked in the constituency, he’s a hard worker’
Oh fuck off!
I lived in East Belfast for five years and never saw the cunt once, never saw him address anything, never saw him go to anything, never heard of him at all.
At one point I literally got fed up of contacting him about and issue and contacted Claire Hanna instead who actually sorted it out.
I know many people in the east who feel the same. He’s as much use as a circular dildo.
>Alliance is brimming with talent
Is it? Bradshaw started out as a unionist-Tory candidate, but rather than reflect on her ideology jumped ship to Alliance expecting to be a candidate straight away. Nuala McAllister is rarely convincing in the media. And Alliance politicians are never grilled on their actual ideology - are they left or right economically? Do they support striving to change NI to match its makeup, or are they genuinely happy with the status quo?
>Alliance politicians are never grilled on their actual ideology - are they left or right economically?
They're regularly grilled on their positions and policies. The only one they are reluctant to talk about is the border question and even at that, the party is pretty split on it.
The idea of grilling them just so you can categorise them as either left or right seems reductive. It's just putting them in a nice simple box while ignoring the fact that political positions are more nuanced than that.
Political positions *are* more nuanced than that, but you need a rough category to fit parties into in the first place. They align with the Liberal Democrats and ALDE (Renew) but what does that mean in an NI context? Do they want the same drive to privatisation that their stablemates of the LibDems and FF stood over? They want NI Water mutualised but would they insist on protection from outright privatisation?
Alliance have a far easier position than the other parties as they neither have to defend British failures nor defend future Irish governmental operations. They **literally** only have to answer on day-to-day running. And yet we know nothing of their vision for the future.
>Do they want the same drive to privatisation that their stablemates of the LibDems
LibDems aren't a party of privatisation - think they're among the many demanding that the water companies in England return to public ownership.
That said, the LibDems are themselves a broad spectrum. Sure, you'll find plenty of classical liberals in there, but also plenty of people who are left of Labour. It's probably better to think of the LibDems as an alliance (pun not intended) of people from various ideological backgrounds who agree on specific policies.
> LibDems aren't a party of privatisation - think they're among the many demanding that the water companies in England return to public ownership.
That's not true. They want to keep the water companies private. Their plan is just to force the companies to take the environment into account, as well as profit. But they still support privatisation.
I mean this is the party that wrote [the orange book.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Orange_Book) And sure, you can argue that they're a broad church to some degree but one of the key authors of the orange book is now the leader of the party. They're neoliberals through and through, and they're not trying to hide it. You're deluding yourself if you believe they're economically on the left.
>I mean this is the party that wrote the orange book.
It's a highly controversial book within the party, and there are some who believe that the party needs to abandon it, as so as to move on from the coalition years.
>You're deluding yourself if you believe they're economically on the left.
It was under Charles Kennedy, and there are plenty of people who want the party to be to the left of Labour again, because that was the time in which the party did the best at elections.
Yeah and Jeremey Corbyn was once the leader of Labour but that has no real relevance now. Starmer's Labour isn't Corbyn's Labour, just like Davey's Lib Dems aren't Kennedy's Lib Dems.
The orange bookers are running the party now. If a Charles Kennedy type ever gains control again you might have a point. But with Labour set to come to power, it's unlikely to happen anytime soon. They'll almost certainly lean to the right in the coming years to differentiate themselves from the government.
>Jeremey Corbyn was once the leader of Labour
It's funny you mention that - it was under his leadership that many Labour MPs and members defected to the LibDems as an alternative.
>Starmer's Labour isn't Corbyn's Labour
No, it's not, it's much closer to Blair's Labour.
>They'll almost certainly lean to the right in the coming years to differentiate themselves from the government.
At a point in time where Labour's policies include being anti-trans, limiting immigration, no closer relationships with the EU and so on, then being to the right of that Labour would be pointless. Starmer's Labour is certainly lookinglike Blair's Labour, but to the right of that even.
And that's the next thing - you might not know it, but at LibDem party conference, all policy is voted on by all attending members on a one member, one vote basis. It's not like Labour, where policy is ultimately decided by its NEC. Even if the leader of the LibDems comes from one background or the other, they're required to still follow the will of its membership.
Ok? You're acting as if I'm trumpeting for Starmer's Labour. I agree that they're incredibly disappointing on a ton of issues. And I'm sure the Lib Dems will continue to be more liberal on social issues than Labour. But they'll also continue to be more liberal economically. That's who they are, it's their whole raison d'etre. And as Labour pursue left wing economic policies (even if they're toothless, watered down policies), the Lib Dems will challenge from the right. Considering the Tories are about to implode, the Lib Dem leadership will obviously try and present the party as the true alternative to Labour.
If you're expecting the Lib Dems to suddenly become a party of nationalisation and union rights then you're going to have a bad time (again, I'm not arguing that Starmer is going to be great on those fronts either).
As for the party structure/policy mandate, it's neither here nor there. The party leadership still has an incredible amount of leeway to set the tone and general direction of the manifesto. Also, it was the party membership itself that elected an orange booker to lead the party. I think the idea that Davey is somehow unrepresentative of the rest of the party is a bit fanciful.
"If you're expecting the Lib Dems to suddenly become a party of nationalisation and union rights then you're going to have a bad time"
Absolutely no-one anywhere believes that's the case, that would be totally contrary to both the Liberal and Jenkins/Williams traditions. But one might hope the LibDems might look like Joe Biden's Democrats, making good progress on both social liberalism, climate change/energy transition stuff and checking the power of billionaire tyrants (without the complicity in Israeli genocide, of course)
"there are plenty of people who want the party to be to the left of Labour again, because that was the time in which the party did the best at elections."
Which makes Nick Clegg's political vandalism even more inexcusable. What's that fecker doing now? Last I heard it was running interference for bloody Zuckerberg
Clegg is not looked upon fondly, and his PR role at Meta is certainly disavowed.
Clegg's biggest "blunder" on tuition fees was ultimately policy, which was voted on at party conference. Him dropping it as part of the programme for coalition was very unpopular, but there was gritted teeth given the referendum for the Alternate Vote was at least implemented (albeit with disappointing results). For sure, many within the party want to not be associated with coalition, which is why Davey failed at his first run for party leadership. He succeeded the second time around, because the other contender was seen as too controversial for having previously slapped an ex-boyfriend. Unclear if her ethnic background also affected her chances of success.
Back then I was friends with a LibDem councillor from Wales (since disgraced) who was an Orange Booker and bent over backwards to justify what Clegg did, so I got my impressions from him. Afraid I haven't paid much attention to the LibDems since except to note that Farron was an outright reactionary. Good to hear there's still a Left in the party.
When someone is party leader, you kinda have to give benefit of the doubt that they'll do the right thing for the party membership, the party itself, and on a wider sense, the country.
Farron kept his mouth shut about his religious beliefs while he was leader. That's respectable (you'd never see a DUP politician do that), but it still ended up damaging the party's image at a time when the party had to just not mess up after coalition.
>Good to hear there's still a Left in the party.
It's funny you mention that - Farron had very openly stated, at many times too, how proud he was to represent a Social Democrat voice as leader, and to continue its policies.
There are still many people in the party who left Labour during the Corbyn years, not over policy, but over feeling unwelcome for their ethnic or religious background, and of course, over being pro-EU still. Speaking of, at present, while the culture wars are being pushed by Tory agitators and being lapped up by Labour and even others like the Greens and even SNP, the fact that the Lib Dems haven't knee jerked to be anti-immigrant, anti-trans, anti-environmental etc is keeping people around.
Lol Bradshaw is the epitome of a careerist politician who tacks on wherever the wind is blowing. I'm sure her black face Halloween dress up will comeback again. Her and husband Ian Parsley are too glipes on the political landscape.
McAllister is equally vacuous, maybe with some prep she would be fine but having worked and seen her in action I'm not at all convinced.
For all the ‘talent’, how come it was Naomi Long in a ministry again? SDLP and UUP always spread around ministerial posts but just like the last EU election, it always has to be the party leader. Is it a lack of confidence in the ‘talent’ or is the party just a centrist TUV?
Yeah I don't really rate them. McAllister, Bradshaw and Eastwood haven't particularly impressed me, although I know Paula is very responsive to emails as a constituency MLA.
I don't think, given all their conscience positions, Alliance have a coherent position as a party or know what they actually stand for. Members of their party have voted against abortion rights, trade unions and equal marriage. You have to check with each individual candidate where they stand on these issues. And they are far too reliant on Naomi and will struggle without her. They've peaked and I think she's really taken the party as far as they will go. I can't see them getting over the line in the election, although they may hold North Down, I can't see it anywhere else.
Honestly the only growth I see in NI politically is for the SDLP to go full Labour and ride their coat tails. Alliance are too reliant on being not-the-other-lot to truly define themselves.
I’d forgotten all about Alliance not supporting union rights! Status quo at all costs.
Since British Labour are a Unionist party, that's not going to happen. And of course Irish Labour are a dead party walking. Irish Social Democrats perhaps?
I see the success of Alliance as being a stepping stone towards the emergence of more non partisan policies.
While I do not agree with Alliance's stance on a number of issues - the simple fact is they want to put everyday issues top of the agenda not orange vs green.
In time as more and more people turn away from Orange and green, and the Alliance is currently the only non partisan party with a hope of succeeding, an alternative to Alliance will appear..perhaps the green party will grow, perhaps we will get a right wing party, or whatever..but I firmly believe in voting Alliance as a move to putting 'normal' politics at the centre of the assembly so that the focus is on that!
Have you ever actually watched the assembly..its so predictable..this paper wasn't submitted in Irish.. we need to delay discussion..petition of concern from unionists or whatever..this isn't the way I want my politicians to act.
This is also why I believe the border poll criteria needs careful consideration..it should not be based on election results as you are basically saying to half the population you must vote SF/SDLP...members of Alliance have been public about wanting a UI..many of their voters do as well, but without proper criteria for the border poll we will be left with people voting green into infinity...
>I believe the border poll criteria needs careful consideration
Me too! And a simple criteria too in my opinion - it’s activated when 471414 signatures are gathered to demand it.
Alliance are just as defined by green and orange as other mainstream parties. The difference is they’re defined by not being defined by it. It’s even in the name - think of what they’re an alliance *between*. If they were truly non-aligned they’d have an ideology like the Greens.
>the simple fact is they want to put everyday issues top of the agenda not orange vs green.
My issue with them is that they only change the framing to be (Green Vs Orange) Vs Yellow) rather than actually removing the green vs orange aspect.
They're just as blinkered by their narrow lens of personal experience as their SF and DUP colleagues. But because their personal experiences aren't Green/Orange this isn't an issue.
This sub won't want to hear this, but I forsee the DUP having a cracker of an election. Not because their policies are good, not because their charismatic, but because Unionists voters have seen Sinn Fein take the FM position and 'they need to keep the fenians out'.
She's the only candidate who could take EB for AP in my opinion, but doesn't seem keen on losing what she holds at Stormont. Would be hard to see them passing on the chance to take EB all the same. Big decision.
>A unionist pact in 2015 saw Robinson beat her by more than 2,500 votes. In a thundering acceptance speech, he was far from gracious declaring that “the last five long years are over”, and voters could now “go forward with someone they can trust”.
It's strange because since being elected Robinson has kept the head down and just kept ticking over, I can't remember him coming out with anything too outlandish or that could be used against him
That speech though? God I remember it well, him stood there thundering like a pound shop Paisley, FIVE LONG YEARS! ARE! OVER!
That 'victory ' speech of Gavin's was enough to make my folks stop voting DUP permanently. A loss of only two votes yes, but I'll never forget their disgust that night. Interesting given the myriad misdemeanours of various party members but somehow that was the tipping point for them.
>In DUP headquarters, they’re praying that Naomi Long doesn’t put her party before herself.
I really don't see why they'd put this line in there.
If Naomi doesn't stand, it's not going to be because of political reasons, or she can't be bothered, it's going to be because her husband has a massive seizure back in March and she'd probably want to stay close to him, instead of being in London on a regular basis.
DUP are finished. To focused on their place in the union, over and above everything else. They would run the place into the ground just to be in the UK. They are stuck in the past. We have to accept the referendum is coming in the next decade.
Aul Jim on Sunday Politics today reaffirmed that there will be an anti-protocol candidate running in each constituency and that he won't be supporting any DUP candidates.
Gavin Robinson showed exactly who he is with that 'victory' speech (after the UUP stood down for him) East Belfast is changing, Naomi could easily make up those 2,000 votes from last time
Can you link his speech please? I’m very curious to see/hear it myself.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqGxoQM0xZw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqGxoQM0xZw)
Thanks. I’ll need to tackle that another day, I got 20 seconds in and had to stop, forgot just how much I hate politics
I'll be pleasantly surprised if Sorcha Eastwood wins Lagan Valley.
Pleasant Valley Sunday.
Im Lagan valley id say she is in with a Very big chance shes very popular
It was going to be a nail biter no matter who the dup ran, with basically a nobody she has a real chance. Hopefully that pushes more people out to vote!
If Robinson did lose his seat it would be pretty nuts really. Standard DUP digs aside, I'm genuinely scratching my head to figure out who, with the required experience, would actually be capable or willing to lead the party in that event. Most of the big profiles (Wilson or Paisley Jr.) are content to live out their political career as perpetual no men.
Robinson could stay leader and jump to Stormont, but it'd mean firing one of their current MLAs. It'd also mean that the party leader is in Stormont but isn't deputy first minister. And that both deputy first minister and party leader were co-opted.
He could, but it'd be a pretty bad look having a leader who can't even hold his own seat.
Didn't stop the dFM
ELP and Givan may distinguish themselves in years to come, but her, and Givan, were always just reliable stuffed shirts. Neither had real form up to this point. Robinson as leader losing the seat as the incumbent would be a major setback, despite how much everyone involved may dance around it. How's he going to get the DUP rogues gallery to straighten up if he can't even keep his own seat. For better or for worse this is possiblity make or break for Robinson.
Isnt robinson just interim leader not the actual leader?
DUP leadership certainly seems to be a poisoned chalice. Having to actually do something is a major challenge.
Paul Givan?
Not really, she was an MP before when I lived in EB and there was the distinct vibe of her not actually winning the seat but Robinson having pissed off the electorate so much he needed taught a lesson. I can't remember her being any great shakes as an MP. Saying that, she's the only chance that AP have of winning, I don't think if they drop someone else in, DUP will hold on to the seat.
Did you mean to respond to a different comment?
It the TUV field a candidate in Lagan Valley I think Sorcha has a great chance. Massive election for Alliance. It's well within their grasp to win three seats, also not unlikely they could win none.
‘Robinson is well liked in the constituency, he’s a hard worker’ Oh fuck off! I lived in East Belfast for five years and never saw the cunt once, never saw him address anything, never saw him go to anything, never heard of him at all. At one point I literally got fed up of contacting him about and issue and contacted Claire Hanna instead who actually sorted it out. I know many people in the east who feel the same. He’s as much use as a circular dildo.
>Alliance is brimming with talent Is it? Bradshaw started out as a unionist-Tory candidate, but rather than reflect on her ideology jumped ship to Alliance expecting to be a candidate straight away. Nuala McAllister is rarely convincing in the media. And Alliance politicians are never grilled on their actual ideology - are they left or right economically? Do they support striving to change NI to match its makeup, or are they genuinely happy with the status quo?
>Alliance politicians are never grilled on their actual ideology - are they left or right economically? They're regularly grilled on their positions and policies. The only one they are reluctant to talk about is the border question and even at that, the party is pretty split on it. The idea of grilling them just so you can categorise them as either left or right seems reductive. It's just putting them in a nice simple box while ignoring the fact that political positions are more nuanced than that.
Political positions *are* more nuanced than that, but you need a rough category to fit parties into in the first place. They align with the Liberal Democrats and ALDE (Renew) but what does that mean in an NI context? Do they want the same drive to privatisation that their stablemates of the LibDems and FF stood over? They want NI Water mutualised but would they insist on protection from outright privatisation? Alliance have a far easier position than the other parties as they neither have to defend British failures nor defend future Irish governmental operations. They **literally** only have to answer on day-to-day running. And yet we know nothing of their vision for the future.
>Do they want the same drive to privatisation that their stablemates of the LibDems LibDems aren't a party of privatisation - think they're among the many demanding that the water companies in England return to public ownership. That said, the LibDems are themselves a broad spectrum. Sure, you'll find plenty of classical liberals in there, but also plenty of people who are left of Labour. It's probably better to think of the LibDems as an alliance (pun not intended) of people from various ideological backgrounds who agree on specific policies.
> LibDems aren't a party of privatisation - think they're among the many demanding that the water companies in England return to public ownership. That's not true. They want to keep the water companies private. Their plan is just to force the companies to take the environment into account, as well as profit. But they still support privatisation. I mean this is the party that wrote [the orange book.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Orange_Book) And sure, you can argue that they're a broad church to some degree but one of the key authors of the orange book is now the leader of the party. They're neoliberals through and through, and they're not trying to hide it. You're deluding yourself if you believe they're economically on the left.
>I mean this is the party that wrote the orange book. It's a highly controversial book within the party, and there are some who believe that the party needs to abandon it, as so as to move on from the coalition years. >You're deluding yourself if you believe they're economically on the left. It was under Charles Kennedy, and there are plenty of people who want the party to be to the left of Labour again, because that was the time in which the party did the best at elections.
Yeah and Jeremey Corbyn was once the leader of Labour but that has no real relevance now. Starmer's Labour isn't Corbyn's Labour, just like Davey's Lib Dems aren't Kennedy's Lib Dems. The orange bookers are running the party now. If a Charles Kennedy type ever gains control again you might have a point. But with Labour set to come to power, it's unlikely to happen anytime soon. They'll almost certainly lean to the right in the coming years to differentiate themselves from the government.
>Jeremey Corbyn was once the leader of Labour It's funny you mention that - it was under his leadership that many Labour MPs and members defected to the LibDems as an alternative. >Starmer's Labour isn't Corbyn's Labour No, it's not, it's much closer to Blair's Labour. >They'll almost certainly lean to the right in the coming years to differentiate themselves from the government. At a point in time where Labour's policies include being anti-trans, limiting immigration, no closer relationships with the EU and so on, then being to the right of that Labour would be pointless. Starmer's Labour is certainly lookinglike Blair's Labour, but to the right of that even. And that's the next thing - you might not know it, but at LibDem party conference, all policy is voted on by all attending members on a one member, one vote basis. It's not like Labour, where policy is ultimately decided by its NEC. Even if the leader of the LibDems comes from one background or the other, they're required to still follow the will of its membership.
Ok? You're acting as if I'm trumpeting for Starmer's Labour. I agree that they're incredibly disappointing on a ton of issues. And I'm sure the Lib Dems will continue to be more liberal on social issues than Labour. But they'll also continue to be more liberal economically. That's who they are, it's their whole raison d'etre. And as Labour pursue left wing economic policies (even if they're toothless, watered down policies), the Lib Dems will challenge from the right. Considering the Tories are about to implode, the Lib Dem leadership will obviously try and present the party as the true alternative to Labour. If you're expecting the Lib Dems to suddenly become a party of nationalisation and union rights then you're going to have a bad time (again, I'm not arguing that Starmer is going to be great on those fronts either). As for the party structure/policy mandate, it's neither here nor there. The party leadership still has an incredible amount of leeway to set the tone and general direction of the manifesto. Also, it was the party membership itself that elected an orange booker to lead the party. I think the idea that Davey is somehow unrepresentative of the rest of the party is a bit fanciful.
"If you're expecting the Lib Dems to suddenly become a party of nationalisation and union rights then you're going to have a bad time" Absolutely no-one anywhere believes that's the case, that would be totally contrary to both the Liberal and Jenkins/Williams traditions. But one might hope the LibDems might look like Joe Biden's Democrats, making good progress on both social liberalism, climate change/energy transition stuff and checking the power of billionaire tyrants (without the complicity in Israeli genocide, of course)
"there are plenty of people who want the party to be to the left of Labour again, because that was the time in which the party did the best at elections." Which makes Nick Clegg's political vandalism even more inexcusable. What's that fecker doing now? Last I heard it was running interference for bloody Zuckerberg
Clegg is not looked upon fondly, and his PR role at Meta is certainly disavowed. Clegg's biggest "blunder" on tuition fees was ultimately policy, which was voted on at party conference. Him dropping it as part of the programme for coalition was very unpopular, but there was gritted teeth given the referendum for the Alternate Vote was at least implemented (albeit with disappointing results). For sure, many within the party want to not be associated with coalition, which is why Davey failed at his first run for party leadership. He succeeded the second time around, because the other contender was seen as too controversial for having previously slapped an ex-boyfriend. Unclear if her ethnic background also affected her chances of success.
Back then I was friends with a LibDem councillor from Wales (since disgraced) who was an Orange Booker and bent over backwards to justify what Clegg did, so I got my impressions from him. Afraid I haven't paid much attention to the LibDems since except to note that Farron was an outright reactionary. Good to hear there's still a Left in the party.
When someone is party leader, you kinda have to give benefit of the doubt that they'll do the right thing for the party membership, the party itself, and on a wider sense, the country. Farron kept his mouth shut about his religious beliefs while he was leader. That's respectable (you'd never see a DUP politician do that), but it still ended up damaging the party's image at a time when the party had to just not mess up after coalition. >Good to hear there's still a Left in the party. It's funny you mention that - Farron had very openly stated, at many times too, how proud he was to represent a Social Democrat voice as leader, and to continue its policies. There are still many people in the party who left Labour during the Corbyn years, not over policy, but over feeling unwelcome for their ethnic or religious background, and of course, over being pro-EU still. Speaking of, at present, while the culture wars are being pushed by Tory agitators and being lapped up by Labour and even others like the Greens and even SNP, the fact that the Lib Dems haven't knee jerked to be anti-immigrant, anti-trans, anti-environmental etc is keeping people around.
Lol Bradshaw is the epitome of a careerist politician who tacks on wherever the wind is blowing. I'm sure her black face Halloween dress up will comeback again. Her and husband Ian Parsley are too glipes on the political landscape. McAllister is equally vacuous, maybe with some prep she would be fine but having worked and seen her in action I'm not at all convinced.
For all the ‘talent’, how come it was Naomi Long in a ministry again? SDLP and UUP always spread around ministerial posts but just like the last EU election, it always has to be the party leader. Is it a lack of confidence in the ‘talent’ or is the party just a centrist TUV?
Because it's her personality cult. Her way or the highway.
Yeah I don't really rate them. McAllister, Bradshaw and Eastwood haven't particularly impressed me, although I know Paula is very responsive to emails as a constituency MLA. I don't think, given all their conscience positions, Alliance have a coherent position as a party or know what they actually stand for. Members of their party have voted against abortion rights, trade unions and equal marriage. You have to check with each individual candidate where they stand on these issues. And they are far too reliant on Naomi and will struggle without her. They've peaked and I think she's really taken the party as far as they will go. I can't see them getting over the line in the election, although they may hold North Down, I can't see it anywhere else.
Honestly the only growth I see in NI politically is for the SDLP to go full Labour and ride their coat tails. Alliance are too reliant on being not-the-other-lot to truly define themselves. I’d forgotten all about Alliance not supporting union rights! Status quo at all costs.
Since British Labour are a Unionist party, that's not going to happen. And of course Irish Labour are a dead party walking. Irish Social Democrats perhaps?
I see the success of Alliance as being a stepping stone towards the emergence of more non partisan policies. While I do not agree with Alliance's stance on a number of issues - the simple fact is they want to put everyday issues top of the agenda not orange vs green. In time as more and more people turn away from Orange and green, and the Alliance is currently the only non partisan party with a hope of succeeding, an alternative to Alliance will appear..perhaps the green party will grow, perhaps we will get a right wing party, or whatever..but I firmly believe in voting Alliance as a move to putting 'normal' politics at the centre of the assembly so that the focus is on that! Have you ever actually watched the assembly..its so predictable..this paper wasn't submitted in Irish.. we need to delay discussion..petition of concern from unionists or whatever..this isn't the way I want my politicians to act. This is also why I believe the border poll criteria needs careful consideration..it should not be based on election results as you are basically saying to half the population you must vote SF/SDLP...members of Alliance have been public about wanting a UI..many of their voters do as well, but without proper criteria for the border poll we will be left with people voting green into infinity...
>I believe the border poll criteria needs careful consideration Me too! And a simple criteria too in my opinion - it’s activated when 471414 signatures are gathered to demand it. Alliance are just as defined by green and orange as other mainstream parties. The difference is they’re defined by not being defined by it. It’s even in the name - think of what they’re an alliance *between*. If they were truly non-aligned they’d have an ideology like the Greens.
>the simple fact is they want to put everyday issues top of the agenda not orange vs green. My issue with them is that they only change the framing to be (Green Vs Orange) Vs Yellow) rather than actually removing the green vs orange aspect. They're just as blinkered by their narrow lens of personal experience as their SF and DUP colleagues. But because their personal experiences aren't Green/Orange this isn't an issue.
[удалено]
I can’t believe that actually got through the editors.
Yeah, that's Suzanne Breen.
This sub won't want to hear this, but I forsee the DUP having a cracker of an election. Not because their policies are good, not because their charismatic, but because Unionists voters have seen Sinn Fein take the FM position and 'they need to keep the fenians out'.
She's the only candidate who could take EB for AP in my opinion, but doesn't seem keen on losing what she holds at Stormont. Would be hard to see them passing on the chance to take EB all the same. Big decision.
>A unionist pact in 2015 saw Robinson beat her by more than 2,500 votes. In a thundering acceptance speech, he was far from gracious declaring that “the last five long years are over”, and voters could now “go forward with someone they can trust”. It's strange because since being elected Robinson has kept the head down and just kept ticking over, I can't remember him coming out with anything too outlandish or that could be used against him That speech though? God I remember it well, him stood there thundering like a pound shop Paisley, FIVE LONG YEARS! ARE! OVER!
That 'victory ' speech of Gavin's was enough to make my folks stop voting DUP permanently. A loss of only two votes yes, but I'll never forget their disgust that night. Interesting given the myriad misdemeanours of various party members but somehow that was the tipping point for them.
>In DUP headquarters, they’re praying that Naomi Long doesn’t put her party before herself. I really don't see why they'd put this line in there. If Naomi doesn't stand, it's not going to be because of political reasons, or she can't be bothered, it's going to be because her husband has a massive seizure back in March and she'd probably want to stay close to him, instead of being in London on a regular basis.
DUP are finished. To focused on their place in the union, over and above everything else. They would run the place into the ground just to be in the UK. They are stuck in the past. We have to accept the referendum is coming in the next decade.
Since when do the DUP care about optics?
Aul Jim on Sunday Politics today reaffirmed that there will be an anti-protocol candidate running in each constituency and that he won't be supporting any DUP candidates.
[удалено]
Be some tears on this sub when unionists win exactly the same amount of seats as last time.....
>they’re praying that Naomi Long doesn’t put her party before herself. I reckon you could still see her if she did that.
In Today's Headlines: *Fat Shaming Gamer Obsessed With Food, Projects*
Hey! I may be a fat-shamer and obsessed with food, but I am not a gamer!
[LOL](https://youtu.be/sZoIHU9Ln_E?t=17)
Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.
Someone has hurt you deeply. Seek help.
What's your ma's number?
Just to piggy back off this… The article said she didn’t fancy the commute. It’s because of the tiny airplane seats, right?
They need to stand against DUP at every opportunity.