6Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksSurprised this hasn't been picked up from yesterday's Examiner. Gilmore should come clean on this and have an open, honest debate within the party.
Labour sitting on
Surprised this hasn't been picked up from yesterday's Examiner. Gilmore should come clean on this and have an open, honest debate within the party.
Labour sitting on
Is ait an mac an saol.
In 2011 Labour had their best GE result ever and their candidate for the presidency was elected. I can see why the leadership would be against conducting a more public post mortem, which might end up portraying such a successful year in a more negative cloak of defeat and shortcomings. Its a question of reconciling unrealistic expectations with reality. 'Gilmore for Taoiseach' became less likely than an FG overall majority, so maybe they should be content with being in the position that they have achieved.Originally Posted by cricket
Perhaps the issue of election performance is becoming mixed up with the separate question of internal dissatisfaction at performance in government. The latter point should be the more pressing one.
Agreed
The election is long over and it is second element of the story - Burton challenging Gilmore and a TD being quoted as saying that a quarter of the PLP would be sufficient to oust Gilmore - this is the real story
http://www.irishexaminer.ie/features...ws-182561.html
Why am I not surprised?
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Lets get one thing clear here, ok?
I am not defending any labour party shyte here.
That story names two people, none of the so called TDs names are given, no proof of the story, no nothing. This is like something you would read in an in&m rag of a sunday. What is the matter with you?
I would be very surprised if there wasn't a post mortem on Labour performance during the election campaign, and I would be astounded if it wasn't witheringly negative.
I'd eat my hat if the Labour Leadership wanted it published.
And I'm broadly a Labour supporter.
The apparent lack of an effective focus group, for example, was just irresponsible, even with an admittedly hostile press.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
What is the matter with me ? Have you a day and a half to spare ?
In the meantime, Labour have commissioned a post election report. It has not been released, you'd wonder what it's purpose was if it was to be kept secret.
Is ait an mac an saol.
Mr Gilmore's problem, as I see it, stems from his decision to take the soft option of Foreign Affairs instead of one of the two portfolios occupied by Howlin and Burton. The work of the latter two is at the centre of what the government is doing in terms of the economy and reform, and they are helping to set the agenda in this core area. Minister Howlin even got his own budget day. This surely affects the balance within the parliamentary party.
The Vatican embassy debacle has been Mr Gilmore's only real headline grabbing move, and that could be seen as a reactionary attention-seeking move on his part. He might be better off, in terms of internal party politics, if he had a more weighty portfolio to go alongside his posts as Tanaiste and party leader. Unlike, Burton and Howlin, he doesn't really have a corner to fight.
com'n lads -all the signs from the quick fix grab at power and linking up with a right-wing austerity pushing party is that all the labour heads never had any intention of expecting to be around for a second term -so where is all the surprise coming from?
Although 2011 was one of Labour's most successful years in terms of results it seems, paradoxically, that they still managed to screw things up.
The problem for the leadership of the Labour Party is that many of their TDs are now getting it in the neck big time over cuts which they would not support in opposition and promised to oppose in the last days of the election campaign.
For many of these TDs they do not want 2016 to be a repeat of 1997 and they may get rid of Gilmore in this Dáil (and the other old grey beards of Quinn, Rabbitte & Howlin) if an alternative leader promises to freshen up the party with younger faces in Cabinet and offer to come clean with the electorate over promises they should never have made.
In the end the 2011 election for Labour is remarkably similar to 1992.
In both cases they betrayed those who voted for them (on going into power with FF in 1992 and with cuts they promised would not occur in 2011) and this is why the Labour party can never really be trusted.
Reply With Quote