LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksShould we let blatant inaccuracy and deliberate misrepresentation go unchallenged?
Should we let blatant inaccuracy and deliberate misrepresentation go unchallenged?
Tonys,which recently disgraced and retired Fianna Fail Tribal Elder is a business partner of Charlie Chawke?Originally Posted by tonys
Just on the issue of Charlie Chawke. I was up on the Goat last night and I noticed a photo of himself and Mr Ahern framed by the door. Suddenly struck me, maybe it was taken at the dig out!Tonys,which recently disgraced and retired Fianna Fail Tribal Elder is a business partner of Charlie Chawke?
I wouldn’t know, you tell me and maybe explain why it matters.Tonys,which recently disgraced and retired Fianna Fail Tribal Elder is a business partner of Charlie Chawke?
It really irritates me that the figures quoted in the tribunal are not converted to their current values. £ 2500 sounds paltry to the layman, but conveted into euros at todays values would give everyone a more realistic impression of the amounts involved. I might carry, at times €2500 with me nowadays, but '£2500' in 1993..........
Yep, so like I said, the 'dig-out' never happened. The money came from elsewhere. That loudmouth idiot Harris must know this, hence the sidetracking down alleyways of 1930s appeasers etc. But give Harris a week and he'll be arguing against the position he holds today. Anyway, aside from Ahern, what will happen to the loudest political and journalistic cheerleaders for the Corner-Boy, will it all be forgotten?
Except that that isn't true! Ahern was virtually invisible for the last ten days of the campaign, and it was only then that FF's poll figures started to climb. And FG and FF's own daily polling research has shown that the swing back to FF was well underway BEFORE the debate even took place - basically from when Cowen started to scare voters about the economy. As long as the election focus was on Ahern, FF were losing. That is a FACT, and both FG and FF know it.
If they were irrelevant, how did FG gain 20 seats?The fact that FG and Labour didn't engage with the central figure in the campaign, cast them as irrelevant whingers.
Again, research from the main parties shows two things - one, that Ahern picked up some, but by no means all, swing voters after the debate - because Kenny's approval ratings also climbed post-debate. However what was noticeable in party research was that the small post-debate swing to FF came NOT in the immediate aftermath of the debate, but a few days after (and bear in mind both parties were carrying out DAILY tracking research) - which indicates that it was more FF's post-deate media management which boosted that swing, rather than the debate itself. In other words, FF got out their message (i.e that their man had effectively "trounced" Kenny, shown him up, etc) better than FG got theirs out (honourable draw, Kenny showed himself to be Taoiseach material, etc).Ahern mopped up the crucial five per cent swing vote with ease in the wake of the televised debate.
"Elite - a small superior group; esp one that has a power out of proportion to its size." (Oxford English Dictionary)
The majority cannot therefore be the elite.
Moron. And here it comes (yawn), "HBAP's arrogance, superiority complex, inability to accept anyone else's opinion, yada yada yada." I'd point out to you, Tonys, that it was YOU that introduced the phrase "relevant conversation" into this discussion (since that seems to be your problem with my earlier post). Its likely you were doing this to try and divert attention from my central point, which remains true - that McHugh, O'Connor and O'Brien were all in a room when this donation was discussed, and there was no doubt among them that a political donation had been sought. Now you can dress that up any way you like, but it doesn't change the fact that all you're doing trying to create distance between Ahern and his sleeveen little bagman Richardson. And that won't work. The fact that you then tried to turn my reference to one conversation into your opinion of another is your problem - as is your pathetic attempt to accuse me of dishonesty.
"Elite - a small superior group; esp one that has a power out of proportion to its size." (Oxford English Dictionary)
The majority cannot therefore be the elite.
Again, research from the main parties shows two things - one, that Ahern picked up some, but by no means all, swing voters after the debate - because Kenny's approval ratings also climbed post-debate. However what was noticeable in party research was that the small post-debate swing to FF came NOT in the immediate aftermath of the debate, but a few days after (and bear in mind both parties were carrying out DAILY tracking research) - which indicates that it was more FF's post-deate media management which boosted that swing, rather than the debate itself. In other words, FF got out their message (i.e that their man had effectively "trounced" Kenny, shown him up, etc) better than FG got theirs out (honourable draw, Kenny showed himself to be Taoiseach material, etc).[/quote:3f5xvowa]It's absolute nonsense to sugggest Ahern was invisible in the campaign - in fact Kenny was completely eclipsed. Nearly a million people watched the debate and people made their own minds up about it. Polling afterwards showed that 75 per cent thought Anern won it. In the bowels of Kenny's bunker, fingers are pointing at cookoos in the nest from Carr Communcations...Except that that isn't true! Ahern was virtually invisible for the last ten days of the campaign, and it was only then that FF's poll figures started to climb. And FG and FF's own daily polling research has shown that the swing back to FF was well underway BEFORE the debate even took place - basically from when Cowen started to scare voters about the economy. As long as the election focus was on Ahern, FF were losing. That is a FACT, and both FG and FF know it.
If they were irrelevant, how did FG gain 20 seats?The fact that FG and Labour didn't engage with the central figure in the campaign, cast them as irrelevant whingers.
[quote:3f5xvowa]Ahern mopped up the crucial five per cent swing vote with ease in the wake of the televised debate.
Look, there's not much point discussing this with you, if you're so hopelessly deluded. Ahern was centre-stage for the first fortnight - and during that period, FF were headed for disaster. It was only when Cowen effectively took over, and the focus was thus moved from Ahern's finances to the economy, that the swing back to FF started. And with the exception of the debate, Ahern was effectively hidden for the final ten days. That is TRUE, and was FF STRATEGY. Ask people higher up in your own party - they'll tell you. Now the rest of us are trying to have a mature debate about this - will you please stop peddling childish spin.
I'm well aware of that. But not everyone who thought that Ahern won it voted accordingly. Things are much more complicated than that. Furthermore, I'm not disputing that Ahern won the debate - I've said so already. However what you seem unable to accept is that the swing back to FF occurred largely in the four days BEFORE the debate. It largely petered out after that. I've seen the research, and the polling figures. In FG's figures FF had gone from 36% to 39/40% in the four days leading up to the debate - they subsequently polled 41%. And FF figures will tell you approximately the same thing. I'm dealing in facts here, will you please do the same?Nearly a million people watched the debate and people made their own minds up about it. Polling afterwards showed that 75 per cent thought Ahern won it.
In the bowels of Kenny's bunker, fingers are pointing at cookoos in the nest from Carr Communcations
"Elite - a small superior group; esp one that has a power out of proportion to its size." (Oxford English Dictionary)
The majority cannot therefore be the elite.
Reply With Quote