Jump to content

General Election 2011 - Douglas East


Recommended Posts

From what I understand, certainly the way you asked the question was moronic. More like a pathetic pansy would ask a question perhaps. You started off asking your pathetic question to all the candidates, then quickly whittled it down to the sitting candidates then pathetically tried to zoom in on Brenda Cannell. You spoke some bollocks about "in my job I am expected to attend meetings blah, blah, blah..." Beth Espey on the Manx Radio interview with Mrs Cannell (it's online, so take a listen and learn) came straight out with the question. Direct. To the point. No pussy footing about the bush for Beth. But councillor Faragher thought he'd try the clever clogs sneaky approach. To make you look like a parliamentay statesman maybe you thought? Well no, it made you look pathetic. I was told you were considering standing for MHK sometime. Go for it. I simply can't wait.

 

1, You where not even there.

2, I may not be the most confident of public speakers, but I had a fair question to ask.

3, I am of average intelligence, I do not try to be a clever clogs.

4, I am not a fully trained journalist, so excuse my lack of interview skills.

5, I not quire sure what you want to achieve by calling me a pansy, are you stating that I am weak? I am gay? or that I am a Flower? Do you feel there is another use of the word that applies to me.

Edited by Just John
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 240
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Well John, I apologise if you're offended. It was a bit of handy alliteration that seemed apt, in the course of the forum discussion.

 

It was used to make a comparison with how Beth Espey raised the subject.

Edited by carbon selector
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well John, I apologise if you're offended. It was a bit of handy alliteration that seemed apt, in the course of the forum discussion.

 

It was used to make a comparison with how Beth Espey raised the subject.

 

Fair enough, I just feel this has become the John asked a shit question thread, that then transformed into The John is a a crap public speaker and a little pansy thread.

 

When its not, its the "why we should elect a person" thread.

Edited by Just John
Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't we get back on track regarding the election on Thursday rather than a personal fued ?

 

Whilst I have not a big fan of any of the Douglas East candidates, the attendance issue is a big one for a lot of voters and giving an objective view rather than a subjective one, then Brenda comes off very badly.

 

There are people who immediately jump to her defence claiming this and that, but her attendance has always been poor even if you remove the time after her surgery, and she still could have attended if she wanted to. I believe Martyn Quayle attended in a wheelchair after his car crash.

 

Many people immediately quote that she is a great constituency MHK but surely she should be with all the spare time on her hands not attending Keys or Departmental meetings !!

 

People like a loudmouth government critic and that's where her strengths lie but the last 5 years have not painted her in the best of lights with relation to attendance, breast care argument and bus timetable resignation. The pay for an MHK is not enough based on the scrutiny they receive in my opinion, but if she is going to be a critic of government then at least stay out of a govt department as getting an exra £10K to never turn up kind of takes the pi$$.

 

Personally I would like to know what she has achieved over the last 5 years or even the last 15 years for that matter.

 

Saying that, she will still most likely get in, its going to depend on the female vote I think and if they have warmed to Geraldine or not.

 

I reckon it will pan out like so :

 

Robertshaw topping the poll.

Cannell second.

O'Neill third (probably not much behind Cannell).

Moulton fourth.

Kissack / Karran fifth or sixth.

 

However I could be wrong !!

 

Who Knows !

Edited by CableGuy
Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed.

Although recent posts may have deflected from the main DE election issues but they've helped me decide not to vote for two of the candidates based on what I've read here in the last couple of days.

 

I was undecided apart from a vote for CR based on the principal that he deserves a full term to prove his worth or otherwise.

 

Choice of one of two newbies or BC left now but as you say, apart from the bus timetable flounce and the Breast Cancer row, what has she actually achieved over the last term?

Edited by wheels
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a read of the supplement in todays examiner- interesting reading. You can quite clearly see who has put some thought and effort into their answers. I know who I will be voting for and it wont be either of the sitting members. It is time for some new blood and new ideas

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been a while since anyone got in on such a low vote in a General Election, although Phil Kermode clinched a seat in Douglas East with 252 votes in 1986.

 

By way of contrast, in the 1920s it wasn't unknown for a candidate to still not get in with over 3000 votes.

Edited by carbon selector
Link to post
Share on other sites

A question to Cliff Robertshaw.

 

At the moment, I'm minded to vote for you as a first choice. This is not because I think you are brilliant but you have shown some realisation of what a state this last monstrosity of a government has placed the IOM in and have publicly said so on more than one occasion.

 

You've also laid bare some serious shortcomings as regards the treatment of vulnerable children and their families.

 

And you haven't had a full term to show your colours.

 

Shortly and succinctly, can you tell me and anyone else interested what you will ACTUALLY do over the next term to dig the island out of the mess it's now in.

 

I ask ACTUALLY not 'will work for' 'will strive' 'will attempt' 'we need to' and so on.

 

What will you actually do?

Edited by wheels
Link to post
Share on other sites

But can any candidate say what they will ACTUALLY do?

 

If they do, chances are they are bullshitting you, because, they will need 12 of the other elected (plus 5 of the unelected) nodding donkeys to agree with them to get anywhere.

 

Therefore, they can only 'strive', 'attempt' and 'work for' pretty much everything.

 

Sadly, it won't really make that much difference who gets in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A question to Cliff Robertshaw.

 

At the moment, I'm minded to vote for you as a first choice. This is not because I think you are brilliant but you have shown some realisation of what a state this last monstrosity of a government has placed the IOM in and have publicly said so on more than one occasion.

 

You've also laid bare some serious shortcomings as regards the treatment of vulnerable children and their families.

 

And you haven't had a full term to show your colours.

 

Shortly and succinctly, can you tell me and anyone else interested what you will ACTUALLY do over the next term to dig the island out of the mess it's now in.

 

I ask ACTUALLY not 'will work for' 'will strive' 'will attempt' 'we need to' and so on.

 

What will you actually do?

 

You have asked me for a short answer.

 

Because of the way our system works - to actually promise to do something in a manifesto would be to lie so the words used are correct even if extremely frustrating (thats why I, like others, want to change the system so that you can vote for a policy direction and thereafter have some confidence it should happen).

 

There will have to be a significant mindset change in the House of Keys if the sort of thing I propose in my manifesto is going to happen but I believe this mindset change will be forced on it as a result of the economic and budgetary circumstances as they unfold and as reality dawns. I went into some detail so that if you do decide to send me back I will have the votes behind me to push hard.

 

To pick out two big issues - we have too many departments of government (too top heavy) and our model for economic growth is old fashioned. Both of these MUST CHANGE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...