Advertise
-
Books
-
The Imperfectionists (Tom Rachman) – an insight into a newspaper that’s maybe not so fictional
‘news’ is often a polite way of saying ‘editor’s whim’ Given the shift from print to online and e-ink, maybe Tom Rachman’s The Imperfectionists was a suitable first first book for me to finish reading on the Kindle. Considering the economic pressures on the newspaper industry, his novel perhaps captures the spirit and soul of [...] read our review »
-
Lessons in Cute Hoorism: “Graft was accepted, for you were taking from the British…”
I’ve been catching up on some reading, recently. Most pleasantly surprised by John Drennan’s latest opus from Gill and Macmillan, Cute Hoors and Pious Protestors… It’s early days yet, but I was struck by this paragraph, part of a dissection of Fianna Fail near the beginning: One of the more fatal consequences of our colonial [...] read our review »
-
“Unionism Decayed 1997-2007″ by David Vance: book review
I initially wrote this when the book was first published three years ago; whilst certain elements of it now sound dated, its basic premise that the period of 1997-2007 was a period of irreversible decay for Northern Irish Unionism can still be argued as a valid opinion. My own feeling is that it did indeed [...] read our review »
-
Comment on Robinson attacks Equality Commission
on 27 July 2009 at 5:52 pm
If the shoe was on the other foot and the Equality Commission had a 34% and falling Catholic workforce, what would the reaction be?
Go to comment
Comment on UUP: progress, stagnation or decline?
on 15 June 2009 at 4:37 pm
Turgon,
An intriguing analysis. On the “who voted for the UUP?” question I have heard a few different scenarios. No one knows, but a plausible one is that the voter profile of the UUP is assumed to be the older generation – and they vote. Therefore in a lower turnout, UUP turn out would not be affected as much as others.
For those who have more of a voter base in the 30-50 range would be more affected. Not sure if it holds any weight, but it is fun to speculate.
Go to comment
Comment on Irish Euro Election blogburst: 1, Northern Ireland…
on 12 June 2009 at 12:43 am
[i]Ignited (another UCU blogger, hmmm… doesn’t that say something?)[/i]
What ever do you mean Mick?!
Go to comment
Comment on Two sure bets for the DUP re-shuffle…
on 11 June 2009 at 12:06 am
The DUP are moving quickly….
Go to comment
Comment on TUV turnout to scupper Stormont?
on 6 June 2009 at 4:22 pm
Well lets the say the TUV (Jim Allister) did not stand – would it be fair enough to say that a significant percentage who voted for Allister would not have voted at all? Surely Jim Allister standing increased the unionist options and thus increased voter turnout. And he has been the most forceful in advising his supporters to transfer within the ‘unionist family’.
Where’s the splitting? He’s the incumbent. Significantly, come 2011 Assembly, this could benefit overall unionist voting and transferring down the ticket.
If you want to blame anyone – you blame the parties choice of candidate if they cannot attract enough votes – and you blame that parties message/policy.
Go to comment
Comment on Election: a litmus test of Unionist futures?
on 2 June 2009 at 7:18 pm
O’Neill,
?? is a soothsayer I hear, but I do like his mimic question mark question mark! You don’t have to read many of the other slugger threads to see predictions of Jim Nicholson topping the poll or how exceptionally well UCUNF are doing – it is as bad as the DUP in that respect. A bit of humility would go a long way.
Bar a future boarder poll, ‘unionist’ parties running in PR elections will want to have a reflection of support in bodies they are elected to. If you don’t transfer it won’t be reflective of that. In particular if only 1 unionist gets elected, people will be asking questions about the transfers between so-called unionist parties.
Go to comment
Comment on Election: a litmus test of Unionist futures?
on 2 June 2009 at 6:14 pm
In your opinion Seymour, is it not important to increase the total pro-union vote? I thought that was one of the lynchpins of the UCUNF strategy. Which would translate as “vote UCUNF 1 but continue down the paper for other pro-union parties”. All you can do is advise people to do this, if they don’t they don’t.
Go to comment
Comment on Election: a litmus test of Unionist futures?
on 2 June 2009 at 4:07 pm
A litmus test indeed. I think many people will be watching the results very carefully and will try to extrapolate as much information as is possible from it. But it seems quite probable that there is going to be some unhappy party HQs next week.
In particular the DUP insistence on making ‘topping the poll’ a priority may well hurt them more in narrative terms if they fail to deliver that. They can’t blame Allister or Nicholson – they can only blame their candidate and party machinery. How can they ‘stop Sinn Fein’ in 2011/2012 if they couldn’t do it in Europe?
The UCUNF seems guilty of the same hubris – a bit of arrogance mixed with high expectations. Getting Jim Nicholson returned will be a success, never mind topping the poll! The way some UCUNF bloggers were talking they will be getting 200K worth of votes!
The bright side for the DUP if they do badly is they can start from scratch, a bit of rebranding and address their policies. For UCUNF it is a lot more complicated.
Roll on Thursday so the election hype can end!
Go to comment
Comment on DUP double speak
on 21 May 2009 at 3:01 pm
Dec,
Isn’t much of an issue now for the UUP for obvious reasons. I recall a lot of people calling for Lady Hermon to run for the Assembly in 2007, and I don’t think it was ever mentioned she should not be double-jobbing!
Go to comment
Comment on DUP double speak
on 21 May 2009 at 2:59 pm
I can’t remember who said it, maybe on Slugger or another blog, but I think it is required for the time being that the First Minister and possibly Finance Minister are exempt from the potential ban on double-jobbing.
Glad to see everyone on the same page!
Go to comment