Adams weakness was Ahern’s opportunity…
CHRIS Thornton muses on whether Sinn Fein’s day may have come (in the north) and gone (in the south). Gerry Adams RTE performance – strong on the peace process, weak on the Republic’s economy – “may have reinforced notions that Sinn Fein is defined by the North. This may give Mr Adams pause for thought. Like some African dictator or Free Presbyterian moderator, there was an assumption that Adams was president for life, if he so chose.” Sinn Fein may have received a bounce in the south in the past by appearing reasonable beside the DUP, argues Thornton, but with the end of The Process and the start of Real Politics – coupled with a Taoiseach-friendly Paisley – maybe southern voters don’t feel the same need to shore up northern-centric SF-republicanism any more. Is it time SF looked for a new leader, in the south? With the election over, is it time for Adams to start his presidential campaign?
“Adams shouldn’t go near a presidential bid. It would be an exercise in nothing other than vanity, and it’s hard to see him winning.”
I never assumed the talk of an Adams Presidential bid had anything to do with a realistic prospect of Adams actually winning the vote. Rather, I assumed it would be part of the tactical long game. Let me explain:
SF have argued that the GFA guarantees the right of people of the north to identify themselves as Irish, and that this should be translated into the right to vote in the Presidential elections. (Also, MLAs should have certain speaking/voting rights in the Dail, presumably including nomination rights or Presidential candidates, thus allowing a northern candidate to more easily reach the 20 nomination threshold).
If the southern government honour this commitment of the GFA, then Adams would stand as a Presidential candidate in 2011.
Unionists would also have the right to vote and a certain proportion of them would do so in order to stop Adams, who would be expected to receive a sizeable vote from northern nationalists but would be unlkely to win as has been pointed out on this thread.
However, the outcome of this scenario is that northern unionists would be, almost subconsciously, drawn deeper into the political affairs of the Republic. This ties in with SF’s north-south agenda. You’re seeing a similar effect this week, with Unionist politicians, commentators and posters on Slugger getting highly excited about the results of the election in what they supposedly consider to be a foreign state. (Much more so than they did about the recent Scottish elections, which occurred within the same nation state.)
should read “nomination rights FOR Presidential candidates”
Adams for President? HaHa. Who would want the brains behind the ‘dissappeared’ as PRESIDENT. We are not living in South America. The Freestate voters have rightly declared Adams a buffoon. There is a greater chance of a UI by 2016 than there is of this bearded clown becoming president and thats no chance.
Not far of their wise- it has to be said I have heard Adams called many names in the past but his detractors always had enough regard for his ability on camera not to consider him a buffoon, but after his performances of late all that has changed utterly.
I would stress on top of that, that Adams demonstrated himself to be a buffoon referring to MRSI instead of MRSA bugs, getting slamdunked on the economy and then unbelievably quoting his candidates to be standing in the wrong constituencies. The electorate then merely followed suit.
It’s incredible that he waits for 13 years after the broadcasting ban to come to an end to offer his worst pile of gibberish yet!!
Truly incredible that he did not even bother to note a couple of figures on the back of a matchbox to cover himself on the economy with.
Tell me old learned legal eagle Chris Gaskin;- is this not a clear breach of his duty of care to the cause?….
Is there a clip anywhere of McDowell bitchslapping him over the Northern Bank thing (and not something with some idiot loyalist scrawling over)?
I had no time for McDowell’s politics beyond this – he understood as well as any democrat why the integrity of the Irish state had to be defended. He can be proud of the service he rendered to it on Prime Time
Indeed in a sense fair play to McD as he has actually demonstrated how the integrity of republicanism is defended and progressed- by exposing Adams as a ham fisted phoney.
What type of republican swaps a fully fledged army (not that it was commanded to achieve anything like it was under Michael Collins or Tom Barry) for the building of a political mass movement and then throws away the required inevitable electoral success by not acquainting himself with the key issues- then additionally dictates that he represents that party at the most important televised debate it has faced in decades and through his blatant ineptitude contributes to its ruination?