Jump to content

And They're Off!


Donald Trumps
 Share

How would you vote  

117 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Max Power said:

I don't really understand the swing towards Christian to be honest, I don't know what she did to secure the votes other than a FB page for businesses looking for Covid support?

I think that helped her her known, for truley helping many people but my mate in Anagh Coar said she was one of the few who knocked on doors. He say saw at the start with a letter, she canvased and seems she got around tho whole area from what I hear. Quine did similar as did Josum. He said he never saw the others- and they were the top three. So it’s all about getting out there - meeting people and that gets you the votes. You all know I’m a fan but she looked more people in the eye and spoke to them and got the votes herself through that- doesn seem much more complicated, I think her maefesto was well written too compared to many others and out on time not late 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Rhumsaa said:

who are you thinking of?

with the exception of Phil Gawne (who seems to be doing ok down South as a clerk) I can't think of any "cast out" members and certainly not any people who I'd associate with some nefarious club

There were a few who failed to get re-elected in 2016 (Gawne, Gill, Houghton, Joughin, Quirk, and Singer), but, like you say, not really people you'd think are part of a nefarious club.  The main reason 2016 felt like a big change is because a large number of the most familiar names* from the 2011 cohort simply didn't stand again or had left before the election.

*Anderson, Bell, Cannell, Corkish, Cretney, Crookall, Karran, Shimmin, and Teare. The less well-known Hall and Rodan also didn't stand for re-election

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Chef Raekwon said:

It's kind of farcical to think about the difference between Karran and Josem's politics really, when you consider Josem is in theory under the same banner.  I mean has he literally just got in with LibVan and got to the position he holds with them through being more or less the only person to make the effort?  His actual politics were almost irrelevant aside from the fact that he posted lots of anti-government stuff on social media?  That was enough to get involved at that level in a matter of a year or two?

Lawrie Hooper posted this on Twitter a week or so ago. To be honest, it's hard to get a sense of what the statement actually means in practical terms, but it sounds like perhaps Liberal Vannin is becoming more or less a vehicle for applying pressure to the government on a few key issues (probably structural, procedural, or constitutional, if so) and individual politics are are largely secondary.  

If so, they could probably do with issuing a statement setting out exactly what being a member of Liberal Vannin means, both for their own benefit and that of people voting in the next election.

image.png.d45b5a14f2fdb2b4b7d7aacdd2e35889.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, VinnieK said:

There were a few who failed to get re-elected in 2016 (Gawne, Gill, Houghton, Joughin, Quirk, and Singer), but, like you say, not really people you'd think are part of a nefarious club.  The main reason 2016 felt like a big change is because a large number of the most familiar names* from the 2011 cohort simply didn't stand again or had left before the election.

*Anderson, Bell, Cannell, Corkish, Cretney, Crookall, Karran, Shimmin, and Teare. The less well-known Hall and Rodan also didn't stand for re-election

I'm glad I didn't use nefarious as an adjective, bit strong. Incompetent, nepotistic, incapable, repetitious, irresponsible, profligate, unaccountable would all have been OK !

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was not a partnership of individuals when Beecroft was in control, what she said went and no one could go against her that is why people stood as Lib Vans as they truly believed it was a shared ethos and then when they found out the truth they left getting a lot of undeserved flack.   If Hooper has any sense he will stand as an Independent in the next election.   I cannot see him and Josem agreeing both of them want to lead and they appear to have many different ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, hissingsid said:

It was not a partnership of individuals when Beecroft was in control, what she said went and no one could go against her that is why people stood as Lib Vans as they truly believed it was a shared ethos and then when they found out the truth they left getting a lot of undeserved flack

Oh the flack was well deserved.

I would add spineless, self-serving candidates for Dunning Kruger awards too.

Those people who stood as Lib Vans and then dumped them once they got elected had never even been to a Lib Van meeting before, such as the Malarkeys, Zac Hall, the woman who got into Douglas Council and became mayor. There were others. 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, VinnieK said:

There were a few who failed to get re-elected in 2016 (Gawne, Gill, Houghton, Joughin, Quirk, and Singer), but, like you say, not really people you'd think are part of a nefarious club.  The main reason 2016 felt like a big change is because a large number of the most familiar names* from the 2011 cohort simply didn't stand again or had left before the election.

*Anderson, Bell, Cannell, Corkish, Cretney, Crookall, Karran, Shimmin, and Teare. The less well-known Hall and Rodan also didn't stand for re-election

You probably meant Ronan rather than Rodan, who would be horrified to be described as 'less well-know'.  I couldn't remember Ronan's name either and had to look him up.  But Rodan also left the 2011 House late, being elected President a few months before (so no by-election in Garff).  Ronan actually said he would stand again and then clearly realised he was going to get humiliated and withdrew.

Gill had already lost his Rushen seat in 2011 and had then tried to get back in in the Douglas West by-election before standing in Douglas East in 2016.  If any one fitted the club description, he's probably be the closest, but the electorate weren't impressed (though the 'number of constituencies stood in' record probably goes to Jessopp).  I could see Quirk standing in Onchan again, if only out of habit.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, thesultanofsheight said:

I would imagine there is no way on earth that Karran would endorse MJs candidacy. LV member or not. There are very few grounds I would imagine they would agree on. In fact it’s pretty much commonly known Karran refused to be involved. 

I think there is literally not a single claim in this post which is true. Peter is a good friend of mine and he has an unchallengeable track record as being a wonderful advocate for the people of the Isle of Man. He gave a huge chunk of his life to public service for our community, and the people of Mann are much better for his service.

I would consider myself incredibly fortunate to be even half the person that Peter is.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

You probably meant Ronan rather than Rodan, who would be horrified to be described as 'less well-know'.  I couldn't remember Ronan's name either and had to look him up.  But Rodan also left the 2011 House late, being elected President a few months before (so no by-election in Garff).  Ronan actually said he would stand again and then clearly realised he was going to get humiliated and withdrew.

Gill had already lost his Rushen seat in 2011 and had then tried to get back in in the Douglas West by-election before standing in Douglas East in 2016.  If any one fitted the club description, he's probably be the closest, but the electorate weren't impressed (though the 'number of constituencies stood in' record probably goes to Jessopp).  I could see Quirk standing in Onchan again, if only out of habit.  

Houghton is both egotistical enough and sufficiently lacking in self-awareness (that is, has none) to possibly try again, despite the substantial arse-kicking delivered by the voters in ‘16.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, hissingsid said:

I cannot see him and Josem agreeing both of them want to lead and they appear to have many different ideas.

Obviously, I cannot be the leader since I am not a member of Tynwald. But if I had been elected, then Lawrie would 100%, completely, unreservedly, totally, been our leader to the election (and, hopefully, for a long-time after that!).

It's really bizarre to see people on this forum pronounce with such certainty what I think or what I want. As I think I said earlier in this thread, I am the world's leading expert on my own opinion. I just cannot comprehend how someone else (who, as far as I know, I have never even met!) can declare with such certainty about what I want. It's just plain weird for people to announce what I think, when I'm perfectly capable of doing so myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, VinnieK said:

There were a few who failed to get re-elected in 2016 (Gawne, Gill, Houghton, Joughin, Quirk, and Singer), but, like you say, not really people you'd think are part of a nefarious club.  The main reason 2016 felt like a big change is because a large number of the most familiar names* from the 2011 cohort simply didn't stand again or had left before the election.

*Anderson, Bell, Cannell, Corkish, Cretney, Crookall, Karran, Shimmin, and Teare. The less well-known Hall and Rodan also didn't stand for re-election

That was my thought process - a lot of people just stood down

And from the list of people who tried and failed well... Singer is unlikely to stand again at his age one would presume, Joughin was only in for a few months, Gill had been out for a term and tried somewhere new, Houghton was... well... not someone who fits the club description and I'd say neither was Gawne. Dunno Quirk really.

It's just a sort of spurious nod nod wink wink comment that's based on absolutely fuck all

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, VinnieK said:

Lawrie Hooper posted this on Twitter a week or so ago. To be honest, it's hard to get a sense of what the statement actually means in practical terms, but it sounds like perhaps Liberal Vannin is becoming more or less a vehicle for applying pressure to the government on a few key issues (probably structural, procedural, or constitutional, if so) and individual politics are are largely secondary.  

If so, they could probably do with issuing a statement setting out exactly what being a member of Liberal Vannin means, both for their own benefit and that of people voting in the next election.

image.png.d45b5a14f2fdb2b4b7d7aacdd2e35889.png

The 'Guernsey Partnership Of Independents' have got a pledge:

Image

Pledge together to act independently?

 

Edited by Donald Trumps
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Josem said:

It's really bizarre to see people on this forum pronounce with such certainty what I think or what I want. As I think I said earlier in this thread, I am the world's leading expert on my own opinion. I just cannot comprehend how someone else (who, as far as I know, I have never even met!) can declare with such certainty about what I want. It's just plain weird for people to announce what I think, when I'm perfectly capable of doing so myself.

Ever think politics isn't for you after all?

That's said partially in jest, and I don't mean that to sound as harsh as it probably does, but there's a serious point there to be considered.  If you do get in one day and rise to any kind of prominent position, you're probably going to find a whole lot more people are going to speculate on what you think and what you want. Hell, I'm willing to bet that you've even done the same to politicians and public figures now and again. Moreover, a fair few of them probably aren't going to believe you when you correct them either.

Best get used to it if you're in this for the long haul!

Edited by VinnieK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Donald Trumps said:

The 'Guernsey Partnership Of Independents' have got a pledge:

Image

Pledge together to act independently?

It's a nice, fluffy idea, but I wonder how long it will be until differences in opinion on what, say, 'protection and support of our people' start causing members to drop out.

Link to comment
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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...