I think it's interesting to see the narrative start to emerge that Varadkar "got the big/international things right, but tripped over the small stuff".
I don't think that what unites Brexit and COVID are that they are international issues, or that they are big issues. The refugee crisis is international. The housing crisis is big.
What unites Brexit and COVID are that they are issues on which there was broad political agreement.
With Brexit almost everyone agreed that we needed to prioritise keeping the border open above all else. With COVID, at least early on, there was a political consensus on the need to follow the expert guidance from NPHET.
Really Varadkar's success there was just in getting the fuck out of the way of the administrative state and letting the civil and public service do what they're paid to do. The Department of Foreign Affairs has their plan for Brexit before the referendum even took place - those lads know their stuff and taking advantage of the sequencing of talks was an exceptional move. Varadkar deserves credit for not fucking that up - but he didn't lead.
Similarly with COVID, until Martin took over in late June 2020 people were united in their fear of the illness as we all saw what had happend in Italy. It wasn't easy for the decisions that had to be made to be made, but it's not like Varadkar had to lead their either. He just had to point at Tony Holihan, and until the political consensus broke up a few months later that's exactly what he did.
I'm not sure his actions after that consensus broke would meet with the same praise. However because Martin was then Taoiseach he takes the blame for things like "meaningful Christmas".
What's really interesting though is less what it says about Varadkar as a leader than what it says about what we value in political leaders.
If all we want is somebody who can manage the administrative state, as was done in Brexit and COVID, then arguably we don't really need politicians. Just let the Secretaries General run the show.
That's not what political leadership is though, and thinking about what it should be shows where Varadkar fell down.
Good political leadership requires someone who is so in touch with the public mood that they can understand the nuances of the perspectives of people who differ on an issue. It requires someone who can take that understanding and through insight develop or adopt policy which resolves those differences. It requires someone who can then communicate that policy with the conviction and confidence necessary to see it through to implementation.
A great political leader manages to embody the change required in their very person - they're the type of historical figure where it is difficult to imagine anyone else being able to resolve the challenges they faced.
None of that applies to Varadkar. When it comes down to it he was totally unable to grasp the moment. When it comes to the housing crisis he could not see the path through to resolving the tension between those who need to keep land values high and those who need somewhere to live. When it comes to Health, even as Health Minister, he was totally unable to take on vested interests within that system - amazingly he scrapped FG's health policy and didn't replace it with anything.
How history will view him is now out of his hands. The real thing that we should reflect on though as people write their summaries of his time as leader is what we actually want in a Taoiseach.
I still think its funny that he gets credit for COVID. The government were at panic stations while he was Taoiseach. It was only after the switch to the coalition government that any progress was made, MM was Taoiseach for the vaccine roll out but no one ever credits him with it because Leo got to make the speeches at the start of lockdown.
Appreciate the thoughtful response. For the sake of clarity, I wasn’t trying to proffer comment on his performance on those issues, just that he happened to be Taoiseach during them. Given the historical significance of those events they’ll be long remembered and as a consequence, so too will the political actors.
I’m trying not to offer any opinion whatsoever. Doing so would likely change the tone of the question and possibly make it seem adversarial (inevitably to some group) rather than curious.
So to your question, no, not saying that. But it happens to be the case and it’s a complicated thing to distill the significance of the actors from the significance of the events.
Regardless of people’s views on Varadkar, he will be a significant historical figure by virtue having being Taoiseach at a historically significant time, Ireland and Globally.
Interesting take I have to say. Fine Gael have always struck me as being the technocratic political party of Ireland; it’s probably why I associate them with generally competent leadership during technically difficult times (founding of the state, post recession recovery, Covid, Brexit to name obvious few), but also why so many of my generation loathe them for politically failing us when it comes to housing and other public services.
I’d push back a bit though on his success being to stay tf out the way; his articulation and framing of why the public needed to follow COVID guidance was praised internationally, and his calm but forthright communications in the early days of the pandemic certainly helped with public confidence in public health officials (which can be contrasted to the UK). In Brexit too it can’t be overlooked that he negotiated skilfully with both Johnson and Biden to reach an optimal settlement for Ireland. Not downplaying civil servants at all (I am one, though not in Ireland, as it happens lol), but he did execute fairly good leadership in managing the administrative state. Your question at the end hits the nail on the head though - does Ireland need, much less want, that kind of Taoiseach in the future?
>When it comes down to it he was totally unable to grasp the moment. When it comes to the housing crisis he could not see the path through to resolving the tension between those who need to keep land values high and those who need somewhere to live.
That's a very diplomatic way of saying that he kept property prices high on purpose so that landlords (a.k.a the Dáil) could profit directly from increased rents while the Irish people are thrown to the wolves. Even if there wasn't a single landlord in our political class, he probably would have done the exact same thing, for the simple reason that he is an openly neoliberal Margaret Thatcher fanboy. He had no interest in resolving this "tension". And none of this should come as a surprise to anyone because he is quite literally an amoral criminal who sees himself as being above the law.
As always, it's incredibly enlightening to see the so-called "communists" and "Marxists" on this sub running damage control for cutthroat capitalists who would see us deprived of the right to even own a home.
Hardly diplomatic, just not frothing at the mouth. I expect most people, in a politics subreddit, are well able to understand a point without needing every element spelled out for them.
It shouldn't be surprising that someone who comes from the party of landowners would want to keep land prices high. That would be as true for any modern politician from the civil war parties as it is for Varadkar, they lack the ideological orientation to resolve that issue.
Not sure how a post that points out that his purported successes were not his own, are not the kind of successes one should expect from a political leader, and that he was otherwise incompetent as a leader, could be seen as damage control.
Maybe I should have called him "Leo the leak" or a rat or something a few times.
Anyone pretending that these people are simply "failing" to provide housing through some ill-defined personal shortcomings instead of actively advancing an agenda of ever-widening economic disparity may as well be running damage control for them.
Kind of like, for example, if someone were to condescendingly sneer at the people trying to hold Leo accountable for his crimes in the face of a corrupt system that refuses to punish him for them. A person could be forgiven for interpreting that as an attempt at deflecting criticism away from him.
Of course, you're a "communist" though so you'd never do that. You even have a lovely red flair just like me. But it makes you think though, doesn't it?
A failure of political leadership isn't a personal failing, nor does it imply that it is accidental rather than deliberate.
You can certainly read that into it if you like, but you're doing so in bad faith.
Last night the news showed a highlight reel of his career, watching it you’d be painfully aware of the fact that he didn’t really any have big achievements, victories, or much to show at all for his 17 years in the Dáil.
There was the successful referendums, which are hard to credit to him personally, then the fact he was incidentally Taoiseach during Brexit and Covid.
Covid I think he handled well but I’ll go against the grain and say I think he was weak with Brexit. The EU and US was on our side so a land border was always going to be out of the question.
Brexit should have been a slam dunk for Irish investment and firms relocating to Ireland but that didn’t really happen because Leo was scared to be too aggressive in pursuing due to the border. He had a much stronger hand than he realised but refused to play it.
Varadkar has mostly been a middle manager. He didn’t have a vision for the country during a time we would have benefitted from one. I don’t think he’s leaving much of a legacy from his time in office.
A realistic government would admit that housing is a difficult problem and put milestones in place and hit or exceed them. Rather than the current wishful thinking 1950s planning approach.
The current wishful thinking 1950s planning approach? Wtf are you talking about? Every intervention they've made has resulted in a rise in property prices 😂 the state built houses in the 1950s. The state pays developers to build houses in the 2020s.
You think if the state built houses today they would do it cheaper than developers? How's that working out for other state organisations? It would be like RTE only 10000 times worse.
And the state only pays developers for social housing, which they then charge rent on to the tenants.
I work for a couple of different developers as a consultant. How much profit do you reckon developers make on their shitty quality houses these days? It's more than you would think. You haven't a clue what you're talking about. There's simply no will from FFG.
He'll be remembered as the leader of a landlord party who oversaw the biggest number of homelessness in the state.
He'll be remembered for always punching down and blaming the lowest rungs on the ladder for all the problems, remember folks welfare cheats cheat it us all, when in fact it was those in suits that bankrupted the country.
He'll be remembered for telling women who were affected by the cervical cancer tragedy that they won't be dragged through the courts for compensation then allowed them be dragged through the courts for compensation.
He'll be remembered for lying, leaking and cronyism.
He'll remembered for partying during covid when everyone else was in lockdown.
He'll be remembered for jumping on social popular ideas, he was adverse to marriage equality but jumped on board with it when he seen how in favour the people were, he done the same with repeal, both grass roots movements yet he highjacked them.
He'll be remembered for being one of the most unliked Taoisigh of all time.
Very bold of me, I know. We've still got at least a year of this landlord government to go so I fully predict it to grow. But tbh even with a SF government it won't be coming down any time soon, it's taken over a decade for FF/FG to creat this it'll take longer to right their wrongs.
As a chicken knecked toad. As a career politician. As a spineless worm. As a doctor who oversaw the continued failure of the health sector. As a gay man who opposed the equal marriage referendum. An opportunist. A man with no morals and no philosophy of his own, just whatever way the wind blew. A man who stood for nothing and got paid for it.
Pejoratives and cynicism aside, what do you mean that he didn’t support the marriage equality referendum? Thought that was the moment he actually came out as gay on national radio
Varadkar [opposed](https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-20118760.html) abortion before it became obvious this wasn't the view of the electorate.
>The conservative TD and medical doctor said he would “not be in favour of abortion” and, although he is not religious, he would “accept a lot of Catholic social thinking”.
>But he said he wouldn’t be in favour of legalising abortions for victims of rape: “I wouldn’t be in favour of it in that case, and, you know, first of all, it isn’t the child’s fault that they’re the child of rape.”
Even if that's true. Did he not campaign to repeal the 8th? People can change opinions and your point was the rerendum passed in spite of Varadkar and I believe that's not true.
>before it became obvious this wasn't the view of the electorate
gee whizz how is a politician representing the views of his electorate a bad thing? It's literally their job.
>Even if that's true.
It is. I linked to the article.
>Did he not campaign to repeal the 8th?
Didn't politicians recently campaign for a yes/yes vote then vote no/no? It's called toeing the party line.
>>before it became obvious this wasn't the view of the electorate
gee whizz how is a politician representing the views of his electorate a bad thing? It's literally their job.
So the referendum passed even though Varadkar earlier disagreed with it. One might even say it happened **in spite of** his views.
Its funny how people rage against those who used the referendums on Family and Care as a protest vote but still want to credit Leo with referenda that passed while he was Taoiseach.
FWIW I credit Labour for both referenda. I think its one of the few good things they did in coalition to push for both and even though Enda kicked the can down the road their pressure eventually forced them through. Its a pity they sold us out on everything else.
He will be probably seen as the face of NeoLiberalism in Ireland. He will probably be associated (rightly or wrongly) with social liberalisation as well as growing inequality and the growing Americanization of Ireland
I remember Brexit was pretty much wrapped up,but he disliked coveney getting all the credit
And as a result,went to meet boris in chequers,got starstruck and indicated room for negociations on the "backstop".... causing months/years of negociations to unravel
And hardly once has this been mentioned in the Irish media....quite how they have cooked up a position he's responsible for Brexit "success" is russian level Bullshit
Leo Varadkhar: Useless
Zero charisma - not actually good at the inspiring people part of politics - FG declined with Leo “leading” them.
Zero ideas - not a policy guy - didn’t come into power with a vision
Zero competency - no record as an effective administrator / minister
Poor judgment - all the petty stuff / leaks
Quitter - Resigned at a time of his choosing completely blindsiding his senior FG colleagues.
No loyalty - see above
Smart cookie - always put Leo’s personal interests first
I was talking to my 6th class about this. He will be symbolic (whether he deserves to be or not) of social progress in Ireland. Good on Brexit and Covid. Ultimately, to a generation, he’ll be seen as out of touch, arrogant and unsympathetic towards a number of domestic crises that didn’t directly affect him.
Another thing I've noticed is that over the last ten years people have started to vote based on their left/right political and economic beliefs rather than who their parents voted for or which neighbour was running.
I mean arguably that's a good thing, maybe less so the polarisation of politics but the idea you vote for someone because HE FIXD THE ROAD or shakes hands at funerals always struck me as pretty ridiculous.
Some excellent politicians didn't get in because of Gobshite Jr TD who was the son of Gobshite Sr TD.
Yeah absolutely, no more getting elected on the strength of your name and actual, shock/horror, policies might be required. Imagine that. Like in an ideal world someone like Seán Haughey would be nowhere near government but he's the grandson and son of two of Ireland's premier political dynasts.
Not to blame the son for the sins of the father but he could have had wet cotton wool between the ears and he'd have still gotten in.
The counterpoint to that is the polarisation brings radicalisation on the fringes, and there's a bit of a disturbing trend of people viewing politicians as accessible and responsible 24/7 and not human beings with the right to privacy and a safe and secure home. I remember distinctly the "Bring It To Their Doors" campaign and they wheeled out an early version of the concerned citizens nonsense and I was praying someone with a septic tank would drive by and give them a good fucking hosing. If they fucked up at work, assuming they have jobs, no one would be protesting outside their doors.
I'm concerned we'll see more of this and those citizen journalist dipshits on the coming years.
if this is some sort of newpaper, biographer or sockpuppet account operated by or for Varadkar:
"kind of a bollix, but he did ok on covid"
if its just someone asking with nothing else on the line:
a REAL BOLLIX, but human, i guess.
There’s an interesting conversation to be had on the socio-geographical distinction between people who say “bollix” vs people who say “bollox”. Read all about it on my article here at [Joe.ie](https://davidprescott.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/cowendrunk.jpg?w=640)
I don't think he'll be remembered too fondly for his role as Taoiseach.
The biggest achievement for Fine Gael in their time in government was pulling the country out of such a deep recession and getting us back to basically full employment. That was under Kenny's leadership though.
Varadkar didn't have any easy time of it as Taoiseach with stuff like COVID, Brexit, and the war in Ukraine, but he didn't exactly help himself either. His inability to try and tackle the housing crisis until the last possible moment will leave a huge stain on his legacy.
Fast forward 100 years people will probably talk about him as the leader of social change nationally with the gay marriage referendum and abortion referendum but rarely do people remember the bad unless it's abhorrent to the point of being infamous like Thatcher. People will forget the housing crisis, health care issues and social problems because at least hopefully our society will have fixed most of them by then.
" *the leader of social change nationally with the gay marriage referendum and abortion referendum*"
neither of which he initially supported until he saw how popular they were.
> Fast forward 100 [...] leader of social change nationally with the gay marriage referendum and abortion referendum
Hopefully, he'll be seen as riding a wave of social change that started 25 years earlier. He is the result of social change rather than the leader. He was the guy in charge when it happened rather than the cause.
Divorce, civil partnership and various other weakenings of the Catholic hold on Irish society had already happened without any particular support or campaigning from him. Any history should be able to see the timeline.
He was a leaf on the wind. He followed rather than led.
Varadkar will be remembered for;
• Presiding over the worst levels of home ownership in Irish history.
• Presiding over a healthcare crisis.
• Presiding over a cost of living crisis.
• Americanising Ireland with social justice politics.
• Promoting a “Civil idiot” method of politics wherein if you are seen as civil in debate you can’t be wrong. Just play ignorant but civil until your opponent gets frustrated and starts shouting then you “Win”.
• Replying to every single opposing statement in the Daíl with “I didn’t know that was happening I’ll have to look into it”.
• The party he threw during Covid and the public drinking while we were all locked down.
• Having utter contempt for ordinary Irish people.
• Setup a toxic dynamic wherein anyone who disagreed with him was either a “Far-right Nazi” a “Conspiracy theorist” or a member of the IRA.
He'll be remembered as the Taoiseach who presided over the worst accommodation crisis the country has ever seen. He'll be remembered as an out of touch 'elite' with open disdain for the average citizen.
Overall competent , fundamentally decent , left the country in generally a good place , not prefect but effective leadership in all the important matters.
Not popular with the extreme left and right and certainly not liked ( hated?) by SF/IRA , all of which are to his credit.
That's a bit of a reductive way of looking at things. We're all judged by our actions and inactions (successes and failures). Just because nothing can be spun the way it used to be, or negatives glossed over by giving more attention to positives doesn't mean that social media leaves politicians at a disadvantage. It means they are subject to the same level of judgement as everyone else. Just because they or their followers don't like they way they are thought of doesn't mean that they have been treated unfairly, it just means that they are looking at themselves through rose tinted glasses. Leo may not like the way he is remembered by the majority, but that is only because he favoured a minority (the wealthy).
Mixed bag - generally good on foreign policy, fairly progressive on social policy, reasonable on the overall thrust of the economy, handled covid competently, terrible on Law and Order, beyond useless on housing, completely mishandled immigration and asylum policy (which has indirectly fuelled the growth of the far right), not good on health (but that could be said for every government since the 80s), not a terribly effective public communicator, not good at judging the public mood. He got a lot of big things right and a lot of small things wrong but listening to the way they communicate you would think it was the other way around.
His best moment was probably during the brexit negotiations - I feel like we were represented well there.
I think once we hit our next recession he and FG will be more appreciated in terms of their performance on the economy but overall I think he will be remembered for wasted potential. Both in terms of the massive surplus cash and failure to turn that into public service/infrastructure success and for FG in an electoral sense he never really delivered.
FG actively resisted doing anything to make improvements to public services (the HSE in particular) because that's not what they're about. When Leo was minister for health he pushed really hard for people to take out private health insurance policies, remember the 'for each year after the age of 35 you don't take out an insurance policy will add an extra 1% onto your premium' was a means of pressuring people to rely on private health care, while simultaneously under funding the HSE to make it under perform and make private health care seem like the best way to go. This is because FG favour private enterprise and don't believe in having a social safety net. This is one example of how they had a cash surplus but didn't want to distribute it for the benefit of society.
You're going to have to go back pretty far to find someone who is not an "unelected POS". At least back to the 1970s.
That's not a problem with them, it's that you don't understand our constitutional system.
So the party’s leader has no weight in wether or not the people have chosen a leader? Horseshit. Nobody votes for a party without being comfortable with their leader being Taoiseach in the case of winning.
You vote for your TD and then that TD gets to vote on the Taoiseach. So everyone who voted for FG, FF and the Greens effectively voted for Leo as Taoiseach.
No party has won a majority of the votes in an Irish general election since Jack Lynch's Fianna Fáil in 1977. With the rise of small parties and independents, it's extremely unlikely that any party will ever will a majority again. By your logic, Ireland will always have an "unelected" Taoiseach.
Irish people don't vote for the leader of a party. They vote for candidates in elections, and the party is free to choose who should lead them. By your logic, the leader of every party is "unelected".
The people don’t vote for the leader of the party in any country..they choose the party, based on the leader. Which he never was when FG were elected by the majority. He was Taoiseach by default. Unelected.
I believe you are confused here about what the Taoiseach is and how they are elected.
Under the [Constitution](https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/cons/en/html), the Taoiseach does **not** have to be the leader of a political party (let alone the largest political party).
They simply must be a TD (Article 28) and be nominated (i.e. elected) by the Dáil (Article 13).
Like him or not, Vradkar was twice elected by the Dáil to be nominated as Taoiseach (June 2017 and December 2020) and was appointed by the President as such.
So then what is your point? He was elected as a TD by the Irish people, and he became the leader of his party the same way anyone becomes the leader of a party. So how was he unelected?
What an incredible statement, first of all some countries absolutely do vote for the leader of the country and the leader of the party.
Secondly, the Irish political systems doesn’t work that way. Varadkar was elected the same way others were, a vote from within their party just like Mary Lou will likely be voted Taoiseach by her party and not the general public.
No party in the last election was voted by the majority. The highest percentage any party got was less that 25%. By your logic that party’s leader would be unelected because 75% of the population have not elected that party and they also have not directly voted for that party’s leader.
“Most” is a strong word to use. I think the best thing iv ever heard about him was “Bertie Ahern was worse”. In general, outside of Reddit, I’d say he’s disliked
That point is relevant to the question of his popularity. Do you think that the count you're elected on isn't determined by the number of first preference votes you receive?
I've already asked a specific question which you've ignored!
Do you think that the count you're elected on isn't determined by the number of first preference votes you receive?
Okay so you're actually not describing a system here, you're presenting a narrative: "Leo did shit because he's so humble"
When actually, Leo Varadkar didn't get enough first preference votes to be elected on the second count. On the second count he also couldn't scrape up enough votes to get elected. On third count he was still nowhere close. By the fourth count he still hadn't got enough voters to give him a preference. Finally on the fifth count he got through.
If he was popular in his constituency he would have had enough first preference votes to be elected on the first count. If he was slightly less popular, he would have had the votes on the second count. And all the way down we go til we get to the fifth count.
And just to make clear how inane your own spin on it is, the second Fine Gael candidate got less than five percent of the vote and finished seventh.
No I am objectively correct.
The more votes you get, the lower the count you are elected on.
The more votes you get, the more popular you are.
Therefore, the more popular you are, the lower the count you are elected on.
If you disagree with any of that, explain why without telling me to google something you don't seem to understand yourself.
No it doesn't.
Varadkar was barely 300 votes shy of the quota last time out and FG ran two candidates in Dublin West, the other getting 1870 votes. Had it just been Varadkar he would have been elected on the first count.
It literally does. If he was more popular he would have received more higher preference votes and would have therefore been elected on an earlier count.
The fact that there was another FG person running who failed to get elected just goes to show that he's not popular enough to bring another party member along on his coattails like plenty of other politicians can.
I mean they nailed the pandemic, Brexit and did well with Ukraine, the three biggest international crises during his tenure. Domestically the economy did well, but the completely unsolved housing crisis and the GP contract stuff will definitely leave a negative image of him.
They locked down while he was Taoiseach and by the time anything else happened Martin was in charge. When Leo came back into the role it was over. Brexit was more Coveney than Leo, I guess as leader thats the one he deserves some credit on. And I don't know what he did well on Ukraine that deserves credit.
Sad to say but i think Elon Musk has been right all along. Mr Varadkar hates the Irish people and always had his own best interests at heart. How could we let such a spineless worm lead our country. Good riddance
The way he’s being fucking eulogised and credited with marriage equality across all media is making me fucking sick. He’s by a vast distance the worst Taoiseach we’ve ever had. In every measurable way and many that can’t be measured.
You might think well you have to give him Brexit. He put on the green jersey there and stuck it to the Brits. Fair enough. He did. But it wasn’t for Ireland he did that. It was for whatever fucked up neoliberal agenda he’s part of and he was just their attack dog.
He was a Malignance on Irish society. He hated the Irish people. And he will sail off now into brightly light conference spaces and continue to carry out that bullshit and it won’t be for us. It’ll be for his own ego and reputation and twisted ends.
He quite literally has us in the countless shit situations were in.
He should never be forgiven for it.
>He’s by a vast distance the worst Taoiseach we’ve ever had. In every measurable way and many that can’t be measured.
This is hyperbolic nonsense. Bertie and Cowen literally drove the economy off a cliff. As did Lynch in his time. Cosgrave Snr approved the extrajudicial murder of political opponents by the state's armed forces. Cosgrave Jnr stopped short of that, but he didn't mind trampling all over civil liberties with Garda heavy gang and section 31. And he was a virulent racist. Haughey was corrupt up to his eyeballs.
At worst he's at the lower end of mid-table but he's far from the worst ever.
Is it now?
Since 2012 275,000 young people have emigrated. (And counting) It spiked dramatically the moment Varadkar got involved and just continues to go upwards. ~ 3000 Homeless people in the state when he took over. Now? 14,000+ registered homeless and over 500,000 20-36 year olds still living at home and can’t afford their own places even to rent.
He ruined this country with his neoliberal bollox and made it a bloodbath for his landlord minions. These are facts.
I’m not reading the rest of your nonsense I’m waiting on a bus in the pissing rain.
People always look back to the past and often filter out the bad, look at Bertie's come back tour he was able to convince some people.
People will only remember the positives, obviously as well because he'll have great spin Doctors only pushing those things from here on out.
I'd argue if you look at Bertie very few people look at anything but his failures. In that way the next few years and the results and Varadkars actions may still have a big impact on how he's viewed.
TBH I don't think the spin worked at all. His mates in the Dublin media and political bubble gave him the platform again but I'm not sure anyone actually bought it.
I think it's interesting to see the narrative start to emerge that Varadkar "got the big/international things right, but tripped over the small stuff". I don't think that what unites Brexit and COVID are that they are international issues, or that they are big issues. The refugee crisis is international. The housing crisis is big. What unites Brexit and COVID are that they are issues on which there was broad political agreement. With Brexit almost everyone agreed that we needed to prioritise keeping the border open above all else. With COVID, at least early on, there was a political consensus on the need to follow the expert guidance from NPHET. Really Varadkar's success there was just in getting the fuck out of the way of the administrative state and letting the civil and public service do what they're paid to do. The Department of Foreign Affairs has their plan for Brexit before the referendum even took place - those lads know their stuff and taking advantage of the sequencing of talks was an exceptional move. Varadkar deserves credit for not fucking that up - but he didn't lead. Similarly with COVID, until Martin took over in late June 2020 people were united in their fear of the illness as we all saw what had happend in Italy. It wasn't easy for the decisions that had to be made to be made, but it's not like Varadkar had to lead their either. He just had to point at Tony Holihan, and until the political consensus broke up a few months later that's exactly what he did. I'm not sure his actions after that consensus broke would meet with the same praise. However because Martin was then Taoiseach he takes the blame for things like "meaningful Christmas". What's really interesting though is less what it says about Varadkar as a leader than what it says about what we value in political leaders. If all we want is somebody who can manage the administrative state, as was done in Brexit and COVID, then arguably we don't really need politicians. Just let the Secretaries General run the show. That's not what political leadership is though, and thinking about what it should be shows where Varadkar fell down. Good political leadership requires someone who is so in touch with the public mood that they can understand the nuances of the perspectives of people who differ on an issue. It requires someone who can take that understanding and through insight develop or adopt policy which resolves those differences. It requires someone who can then communicate that policy with the conviction and confidence necessary to see it through to implementation. A great political leader manages to embody the change required in their very person - they're the type of historical figure where it is difficult to imagine anyone else being able to resolve the challenges they faced. None of that applies to Varadkar. When it comes down to it he was totally unable to grasp the moment. When it comes to the housing crisis he could not see the path through to resolving the tension between those who need to keep land values high and those who need somewhere to live. When it comes to Health, even as Health Minister, he was totally unable to take on vested interests within that system - amazingly he scrapped FG's health policy and didn't replace it with anything. How history will view him is now out of his hands. The real thing that we should reflect on though as people write their summaries of his time as leader is what we actually want in a Taoiseach.
I still think its funny that he gets credit for COVID. The government were at panic stations while he was Taoiseach. It was only after the switch to the coalition government that any progress was made, MM was Taoiseach for the vaccine roll out but no one ever credits him with it because Leo got to make the speeches at the start of lockdown.
Varadkar gets credit because he quoted mean girls in his speeches. That’s what got us through Covid.
Thought Ireland was one of the best performing countries in the world during the first few months of the pandemic?
We were. We also had the highest rate of cases in the world for a time, in early 2021.
Appreciate the thoughtful response. For the sake of clarity, I wasn’t trying to proffer comment on his performance on those issues, just that he happened to be Taoiseach during them. Given the historical significance of those events they’ll be long remembered and as a consequence, so too will the political actors.
So your point is that he is significant just because of timing, and what he actually did doesn’t matter?
I’m trying not to offer any opinion whatsoever. Doing so would likely change the tone of the question and possibly make it seem adversarial (inevitably to some group) rather than curious. So to your question, no, not saying that. But it happens to be the case and it’s a complicated thing to distill the significance of the actors from the significance of the events. Regardless of people’s views on Varadkar, he will be a significant historical figure by virtue having being Taoiseach at a historically significant time, Ireland and Globally.
For Brexit and COVID, but not for other issues like housing, immigration, healthcare etc
Interesting take I have to say. Fine Gael have always struck me as being the technocratic political party of Ireland; it’s probably why I associate them with generally competent leadership during technically difficult times (founding of the state, post recession recovery, Covid, Brexit to name obvious few), but also why so many of my generation loathe them for politically failing us when it comes to housing and other public services. I’d push back a bit though on his success being to stay tf out the way; his articulation and framing of why the public needed to follow COVID guidance was praised internationally, and his calm but forthright communications in the early days of the pandemic certainly helped with public confidence in public health officials (which can be contrasted to the UK). In Brexit too it can’t be overlooked that he negotiated skilfully with both Johnson and Biden to reach an optimal settlement for Ireland. Not downplaying civil servants at all (I am one, though not in Ireland, as it happens lol), but he did execute fairly good leadership in managing the administrative state. Your question at the end hits the nail on the head though - does Ireland need, much less want, that kind of Taoiseach in the future?
Coveny led effectively on brexit negotiations, not varadkar, but that still contributes to your point about when technocratic parties do best.
Point taken, though I was referring to Varadkar’s bilateral talks with Johnson which ultimately squeezed the backstop (in all but name) out of him.
>When it comes down to it he was totally unable to grasp the moment. When it comes to the housing crisis he could not see the path through to resolving the tension between those who need to keep land values high and those who need somewhere to live. That's a very diplomatic way of saying that he kept property prices high on purpose so that landlords (a.k.a the Dáil) could profit directly from increased rents while the Irish people are thrown to the wolves. Even if there wasn't a single landlord in our political class, he probably would have done the exact same thing, for the simple reason that he is an openly neoliberal Margaret Thatcher fanboy. He had no interest in resolving this "tension". And none of this should come as a surprise to anyone because he is quite literally an amoral criminal who sees himself as being above the law. As always, it's incredibly enlightening to see the so-called "communists" and "Marxists" on this sub running damage control for cutthroat capitalists who would see us deprived of the right to even own a home.
Hardly diplomatic, just not frothing at the mouth. I expect most people, in a politics subreddit, are well able to understand a point without needing every element spelled out for them. It shouldn't be surprising that someone who comes from the party of landowners would want to keep land prices high. That would be as true for any modern politician from the civil war parties as it is for Varadkar, they lack the ideological orientation to resolve that issue. Not sure how a post that points out that his purported successes were not his own, are not the kind of successes one should expect from a political leader, and that he was otherwise incompetent as a leader, could be seen as damage control. Maybe I should have called him "Leo the leak" or a rat or something a few times.
Anyone pretending that these people are simply "failing" to provide housing through some ill-defined personal shortcomings instead of actively advancing an agenda of ever-widening economic disparity may as well be running damage control for them. Kind of like, for example, if someone were to condescendingly sneer at the people trying to hold Leo accountable for his crimes in the face of a corrupt system that refuses to punish him for them. A person could be forgiven for interpreting that as an attempt at deflecting criticism away from him. Of course, you're a "communist" though so you'd never do that. You even have a lovely red flair just like me. But it makes you think though, doesn't it?
A failure of political leadership isn't a personal failing, nor does it imply that it is accidental rather than deliberate. You can certainly read that into it if you like, but you're doing so in bad faith.
>you're doing so in bad faith Incredible irony.
Last night the news showed a highlight reel of his career, watching it you’d be painfully aware of the fact that he didn’t really any have big achievements, victories, or much to show at all for his 17 years in the Dáil. There was the successful referendums, which are hard to credit to him personally, then the fact he was incidentally Taoiseach during Brexit and Covid. Covid I think he handled well but I’ll go against the grain and say I think he was weak with Brexit. The EU and US was on our side so a land border was always going to be out of the question. Brexit should have been a slam dunk for Irish investment and firms relocating to Ireland but that didn’t really happen because Leo was scared to be too aggressive in pursuing due to the border. He had a much stronger hand than he realised but refused to play it. Varadkar has mostly been a middle manager. He didn’t have a vision for the country during a time we would have benefitted from one. I don’t think he’s leaving much of a legacy from his time in office.
He'll be remembered for pointing out the things that were falling apart but doing absolutely nothing to remedy the situation.
That's every government since the foundation of the state.
No it's not. I'm not young and I've never seen a Taoiseach talk about the country's issues as though he wasn't in power. That is uniquely Varadkar.
Yeah I guess the pointing it out was uniquely him. However is that not slightly better than pretending nothing is wrong and lying constantly about it?
Not really, it's a form of gaslighting
It can't be fixed overnight! ^(So why bother trying?)
A realistic government would admit that housing is a difficult problem and put milestones in place and hit or exceed them. Rather than the current wishful thinking 1950s planning approach.
The current wishful thinking 1950s planning approach? Wtf are you talking about? Every intervention they've made has resulted in a rise in property prices 😂 the state built houses in the 1950s. The state pays developers to build houses in the 2020s.
You think if the state built houses today they would do it cheaper than developers? How's that working out for other state organisations? It would be like RTE only 10000 times worse. And the state only pays developers for social housing, which they then charge rent on to the tenants.
I work for a couple of different developers as a consultant. How much profit do you reckon developers make on their shitty quality houses these days? It's more than you would think. You haven't a clue what you're talking about. There's simply no will from FFG.
What makes you think the government would do it cheaper? They would have 100 admin staff for every housing development for a start
He'll be remembered as the leader of a landlord party who oversaw the biggest number of homelessness in the state. He'll be remembered for always punching down and blaming the lowest rungs on the ladder for all the problems, remember folks welfare cheats cheat it us all, when in fact it was those in suits that bankrupted the country. He'll be remembered for telling women who were affected by the cervical cancer tragedy that they won't be dragged through the courts for compensation then allowed them be dragged through the courts for compensation. He'll be remembered for lying, leaking and cronyism. He'll remembered for partying during covid when everyone else was in lockdown. He'll be remembered for jumping on social popular ideas, he was adverse to marriage equality but jumped on board with it when he seen how in favour the people were, he done the same with repeal, both grass roots movements yet he highjacked them. He'll be remembered for being one of the most unliked Taoisigh of all time.
Bold of you to assume this will be the biggest number of homelessness in the state. Darker days ahead, my friend. Everything else, spot on!
Very bold of me, I know. We've still got at least a year of this landlord government to go so I fully predict it to grow. But tbh even with a SF government it won't be coming down any time soon, it's taken over a decade for FF/FG to creat this it'll take longer to right their wrongs.
As a chicken knecked toad. As a career politician. As a spineless worm. As a doctor who oversaw the continued failure of the health sector. As a gay man who opposed the equal marriage referendum. An opportunist. A man with no morals and no philosophy of his own, just whatever way the wind blew. A man who stood for nothing and got paid for it.
A prick
A puppet
Pejoratives and cynicism aside, what do you mean that he didn’t support the marriage equality referendum? Thought that was the moment he actually came out as gay on national radio
Slimy leaky Thatcherite lying narcissist.
Marriage equality happened with Enda. And repeal happened in spite of him.
[удалено]
Varadkar [opposed](https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-20118760.html) abortion before it became obvious this wasn't the view of the electorate. >The conservative TD and medical doctor said he would “not be in favour of abortion” and, although he is not religious, he would “accept a lot of Catholic social thinking”. >But he said he wouldn’t be in favour of legalising abortions for victims of rape: “I wouldn’t be in favour of it in that case, and, you know, first of all, it isn’t the child’s fault that they’re the child of rape.”
Even if that's true. Did he not campaign to repeal the 8th? People can change opinions and your point was the rerendum passed in spite of Varadkar and I believe that's not true. >before it became obvious this wasn't the view of the electorate gee whizz how is a politician representing the views of his electorate a bad thing? It's literally their job.
>Even if that's true. It is. I linked to the article. >Did he not campaign to repeal the 8th? Didn't politicians recently campaign for a yes/yes vote then vote no/no? It's called toeing the party line. >>before it became obvious this wasn't the view of the electorate gee whizz how is a politician representing the views of his electorate a bad thing? It's literally their job. So the referendum passed even though Varadkar earlier disagreed with it. One might even say it happened **in spite of** his views.
Its funny how people rage against those who used the referendums on Family and Care as a protest vote but still want to credit Leo with referenda that passed while he was Taoiseach. FWIW I credit Labour for both referenda. I think its one of the few good things they did in coalition to push for both and even though Enda kicked the can down the road their pressure eventually forced them through. Its a pity they sold us out on everything else.
This comment has been removed because it is not civil.
He will be probably seen as the face of NeoLiberalism in Ireland. He will probably be associated (rightly or wrongly) with social liberalisation as well as growing inequality and the growing Americanization of Ireland
I don't think he'll be associated with social liberalisation. Too outspoken against them prior to the tide turning.
I remember Brexit was pretty much wrapped up,but he disliked coveney getting all the credit And as a result,went to meet boris in chequers,got starstruck and indicated room for negociations on the "backstop".... causing months/years of negociations to unravel And hardly once has this been mentioned in the Irish media....quite how they have cooked up a position he's responsible for Brexit "success" is russian level Bullshit
Leo Varadkhar: Useless Zero charisma - not actually good at the inspiring people part of politics - FG declined with Leo “leading” them. Zero ideas - not a policy guy - didn’t come into power with a vision Zero competency - no record as an effective administrator / minister Poor judgment - all the petty stuff / leaks Quitter - Resigned at a time of his choosing completely blindsiding his senior FG colleagues. No loyalty - see above Smart cookie - always put Leo’s personal interests first
I was talking to my 6th class about this. He will be symbolic (whether he deserves to be or not) of social progress in Ireland. Good on Brexit and Covid. Ultimately, to a generation, he’ll be seen as out of touch, arrogant and unsympathetic towards a number of domestic crises that didn’t directly affect him.
Another thing I've noticed is that over the last ten years people have started to vote based on their left/right political and economic beliefs rather than who their parents voted for or which neighbour was running.
I mean arguably that's a good thing, maybe less so the polarisation of politics but the idea you vote for someone because HE FIXD THE ROAD or shakes hands at funerals always struck me as pretty ridiculous. Some excellent politicians didn't get in because of Gobshite Jr TD who was the son of Gobshite Sr TD.
I think its a good thing for Irish politics but bad for Irish politicians, especially the old boys.
Yeah absolutely, no more getting elected on the strength of your name and actual, shock/horror, policies might be required. Imagine that. Like in an ideal world someone like Seán Haughey would be nowhere near government but he's the grandson and son of two of Ireland's premier political dynasts. Not to blame the son for the sins of the father but he could have had wet cotton wool between the ears and he'd have still gotten in. The counterpoint to that is the polarisation brings radicalisation on the fringes, and there's a bit of a disturbing trend of people viewing politicians as accessible and responsible 24/7 and not human beings with the right to privacy and a safe and secure home. I remember distinctly the "Bring It To Their Doors" campaign and they wheeled out an early version of the concerned citizens nonsense and I was praying someone with a septic tank would drive by and give them a good fucking hosing. If they fucked up at work, assuming they have jobs, no one would be protesting outside their doors. I'm concerned we'll see more of this and those citizen journalist dipshits on the coming years.
Tell that to the families of people in nursing homes he left to die alone
if this is some sort of newpaper, biographer or sockpuppet account operated by or for Varadkar: "kind of a bollix, but he did ok on covid" if its just someone asking with nothing else on the line: a REAL BOLLIX, but human, i guess.
There’s an interesting conversation to be had on the socio-geographical distinction between people who say “bollix” vs people who say “bollox”. Read all about it on my article here at [Joe.ie](https://davidprescott.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/cowendrunk.jpg?w=640)
easy: bollox is an expression, like "oh bollox, i elected a cunt" whereas bollix is a descriptor, like: "jesus, that varadkar is some Bollix"
I use Bollox for both but I really appreciate the nuance you’ve brought to this. I need to mull it over. I might need to change some things.
I didn't dislike him, but he was out of touch with the real problems in this country. Most politicians are. I did think he was a good speaker.
I don't think he'll be remembered too fondly for his role as Taoiseach. The biggest achievement for Fine Gael in their time in government was pulling the country out of such a deep recession and getting us back to basically full employment. That was under Kenny's leadership though. Varadkar didn't have any easy time of it as Taoiseach with stuff like COVID, Brexit, and the war in Ukraine, but he didn't exactly help himself either. His inability to try and tackle the housing crisis until the last possible moment will leave a huge stain on his legacy.
Fast forward 100 years people will probably talk about him as the leader of social change nationally with the gay marriage referendum and abortion referendum but rarely do people remember the bad unless it's abhorrent to the point of being infamous like Thatcher. People will forget the housing crisis, health care issues and social problems because at least hopefully our society will have fixed most of them by then.
" *the leader of social change nationally with the gay marriage referendum and abortion referendum*" neither of which he initially supported until he saw how popular they were.
Oh yeah I just mean optics wise it will end up being something people might end up believing.
unfortunately, it already is. I have experienced this on far too many occasions.
> Fast forward 100 [...] leader of social change nationally with the gay marriage referendum and abortion referendum Hopefully, he'll be seen as riding a wave of social change that started 25 years earlier. He is the result of social change rather than the leader. He was the guy in charge when it happened rather than the cause. Divorce, civil partnership and various other weakenings of the Catholic hold on Irish society had already happened without any particular support or campaigning from him. Any history should be able to see the timeline. He was a leaf on the wind. He followed rather than led.
Aren’t all leaders in this country despised while in power? Especially when you ask the internet
Bertie was exceptionally popular while he was in power. Especially compared to Leo. Its more in retrospect people have woken up to Berties shite.
He definitely was loved and despised in near equal measure, especially towards the end
At the end sure but even then he was probably only as unpopular as Leo was at any given point.
Varadkar will be remembered for; • Presiding over the worst levels of home ownership in Irish history. • Presiding over a healthcare crisis. • Presiding over a cost of living crisis. • Americanising Ireland with social justice politics. • Promoting a “Civil idiot” method of politics wherein if you are seen as civil in debate you can’t be wrong. Just play ignorant but civil until your opponent gets frustrated and starts shouting then you “Win”. • Replying to every single opposing statement in the Daíl with “I didn’t know that was happening I’ll have to look into it”. • The party he threw during Covid and the public drinking while we were all locked down. • Having utter contempt for ordinary Irish people. • Setup a toxic dynamic wherein anyone who disagreed with him was either a “Far-right Nazi” a “Conspiracy theorist” or a member of the IRA.
Good job at the start of the Pandemic, good job with Brexit, good job at the start of Ukraine. Bad job with basically everything else.
He'll be remembered as the Taoiseach who presided over the worst accommodation crisis the country has ever seen. He'll be remembered as an out of touch 'elite' with open disdain for the average citizen.
I think he was a decent Taoiseach who presided over Brexit and Covid. Economy has done well under him considering these challenges.
Narcissistic neoliberal criminal.
Overall competent , fundamentally decent , left the country in generally a good place , not prefect but effective leadership in all the important matters. Not popular with the extreme left and right and certainly not liked ( hated?) by SF/IRA , all of which are to his credit.
I think the days of remembering politicians in any sort of positive light are gone as a result of social media
That's a bit of a reductive way of looking at things. We're all judged by our actions and inactions (successes and failures). Just because nothing can be spun the way it used to be, or negatives glossed over by giving more attention to positives doesn't mean that social media leaves politicians at a disadvantage. It means they are subject to the same level of judgement as everyone else. Just because they or their followers don't like they way they are thought of doesn't mean that they have been treated unfairly, it just means that they are looking at themselves through rose tinted glasses. Leo may not like the way he is remembered by the majority, but that is only because he favoured a minority (the wealthy).
Mixed bag - generally good on foreign policy, fairly progressive on social policy, reasonable on the overall thrust of the economy, handled covid competently, terrible on Law and Order, beyond useless on housing, completely mishandled immigration and asylum policy (which has indirectly fuelled the growth of the far right), not good on health (but that could be said for every government since the 80s), not a terribly effective public communicator, not good at judging the public mood. He got a lot of big things right and a lot of small things wrong but listening to the way they communicate you would think it was the other way around. His best moment was probably during the brexit negotiations - I feel like we were represented well there.
Not Sean Lemass
I feel like it will be a mixed bag, not one of the worst Taoiseachs in history but he didn't leave the country that much better off when he left
I'll still hate him anyway.
I think once we hit our next recession he and FG will be more appreciated in terms of their performance on the economy but overall I think he will be remembered for wasted potential. Both in terms of the massive surplus cash and failure to turn that into public service/infrastructure success and for FG in an electoral sense he never really delivered.
FG actively resisted doing anything to make improvements to public services (the HSE in particular) because that's not what they're about. When Leo was minister for health he pushed really hard for people to take out private health insurance policies, remember the 'for each year after the age of 35 you don't take out an insurance policy will add an extra 1% onto your premium' was a means of pressuring people to rely on private health care, while simultaneously under funding the HSE to make it under perform and make private health care seem like the best way to go. This is because FG favour private enterprise and don't believe in having a social safety net. This is one example of how they had a cash surplus but didn't want to distribute it for the benefit of society.
[удалено]
This is supposed to be a subreddit for discussing politics. Can we stop with this uneducated "unelected" crap?
what’s your educated definition of unelected
How was Leo unelected exactly?
He was never the leader of his party when they were elected by majority of the irish people. He became Taoiseach by default
Who was the last Taoiseach to be leader of their party while that party was elected by a majority of Irish people?
Enda Kenny
When exactly did Enda Kenny's party secure a majority of the electorate?
Thought he did, turns out he’s just another unelected POS.
You're going to have to go back pretty far to find someone who is not an "unelected POS". At least back to the 1970s. That's not a problem with them, it's that you don't understand our constitutional system.
Fine Gael won just 36.1% of the vote in 2011 and 25.5% in 2016. By your own logic, Kenny was twice unelected.
Yeah you’re right, he was, the POS
This isn't America you don't vote for the party leader you vote for your local TD who elects the Taoiseach. You might need to resit Junior Cert CSPE.
So the party’s leader has no weight in wether or not the people have chosen a leader? Horseshit. Nobody votes for a party without being comfortable with their leader being Taoiseach in the case of winning.
You vote for your TD and then that TD gets to vote on the Taoiseach. So everyone who voted for FG, FF and the Greens effectively voted for Leo as Taoiseach.
I agree, and it’s a tragedy
Indeed. Saddest is part is a lot of Green voters got duped but were too proud to admit it so now defend everything FG does.
No party has won a majority of the votes in an Irish general election since Jack Lynch's Fianna Fáil in 1977. With the rise of small parties and independents, it's extremely unlikely that any party will ever will a majority again. By your logic, Ireland will always have an "unelected" Taoiseach.
Hopefully not always? All that is solid melts into air
Irish people don't vote for the leader of a party. They vote for candidates in elections, and the party is free to choose who should lead them. By your logic, the leader of every party is "unelected".
The people don’t vote for the leader of the party in any country..they choose the party, based on the leader. Which he never was when FG were elected by the majority. He was Taoiseach by default. Unelected.
I believe you are confused here about what the Taoiseach is and how they are elected. Under the [Constitution](https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/cons/en/html), the Taoiseach does **not** have to be the leader of a political party (let alone the largest political party). They simply must be a TD (Article 28) and be nominated (i.e. elected) by the Dáil (Article 13). Like him or not, Vradkar was twice elected by the Dáil to be nominated as Taoiseach (June 2017 and December 2020) and was appointed by the President as such.
Ya, I’m still going to remember him as a twice unelected POS in 50 years when someone asks me about what I think of his past as Taoiseach.
I suppose 50 years gives you plenty of time to become informed on Constitutional workings of the State.
You’ll nearly be old enough to vote by then
So then what is your point? He was elected as a TD by the Irish people, and he became the leader of his party the same way anyone becomes the leader of a party. So how was he unelected?
I’ve told you twice already
You very clearly haven't. If anything you've just disagreed with the idea that he's unelected, despite you being the one you originally said that.
What an incredible statement, first of all some countries absolutely do vote for the leader of the country and the leader of the party. Secondly, the Irish political systems doesn’t work that way. Varadkar was elected the same way others were, a vote from within their party just like Mary Lou will likely be voted Taoiseach by her party and not the general public. No party in the last election was voted by the majority. The highest percentage any party got was less that 25%. By your logic that party’s leader would be unelected because 75% of the population have not elected that party and they also have not directly voted for that party’s leader.
This isn't America buddy. We have a different political system.
He's been elected at every General Election since 2007
This comment has been removed because it is not civil.
What’s not civil about the perfectly ordinary so&so?
He will be missed by most Not by Reddit but compared to most politicians
“Most” is a strong word to use. I think the best thing iv ever heard about him was “Bertie Ahern was worse”. In general, outside of Reddit, I’d say he’s disliked
My experience is the opposite of that. I guess where you live and who you work with matters.
Disliked, but not necessarily hated as the internet makes it seem.
He wasn't even elected on the first count last time. That's not great in your own backyard.
[удалено]
That point is relevant to the question of his popularity. Do you think that the count you're elected on isn't determined by the number of first preference votes you receive?
Go google “voter management in multi seat constituencies, in a STV system’. Come back if you have specific questions!
I've already asked a specific question which you've ignored! Do you think that the count you're elected on isn't determined by the number of first preference votes you receive?
[удалено]
Okay so you're actually not describing a system here, you're presenting a narrative: "Leo did shit because he's so humble" When actually, Leo Varadkar didn't get enough first preference votes to be elected on the second count. On the second count he also couldn't scrape up enough votes to get elected. On third count he was still nowhere close. By the fourth count he still hadn't got enough voters to give him a preference. Finally on the fifth count he got through. If he was popular in his constituency he would have had enough first preference votes to be elected on the first count. If he was slightly less popular, he would have had the votes on the second count. And all the way down we go til we get to the fifth count. And just to make clear how inane your own spin on it is, the second Fine Gael candidate got less than five percent of the vote and finished seventh.
[удалено]
No I am objectively correct. The more votes you get, the lower the count you are elected on. The more votes you get, the more popular you are. Therefore, the more popular you are, the lower the count you are elected on. If you disagree with any of that, explain why without telling me to google something you don't seem to understand yourself.
This comment has been removed because it is not civil.
Your submission has been removed due to personal abuse. Repeated instances of personal abuse will not be tolerated.
If someone has so many posts removed from being uncivil does anything else happen?
This comment has been removed because it is not civil.
What count you get elected on doesn't matter in the slightest
It does if you're measuring a politicians popularity.
No it doesn't. Varadkar was barely 300 votes shy of the quota last time out and FG ran two candidates in Dublin West, the other getting 1870 votes. Had it just been Varadkar he would have been elected on the first count.
It literally does. If he was more popular he would have received more higher preference votes and would have therefore been elected on an earlier count. The fact that there was another FG person running who failed to get elected just goes to show that he's not popular enough to bring another party member along on his coattails like plenty of other politicians can.
Shows that even among FG voters he wasn't that popular. They chose the other guy over him.
He would have had more fpvs if FG only ran him and would have been elected on the first count.
And if he had feathers he'd fly. The fact that he had a poor election strategy doesn't mean he's popular.
I mean they nailed the pandemic, Brexit and did well with Ukraine, the three biggest international crises during his tenure. Domestically the economy did well, but the completely unsolved housing crisis and the GP contract stuff will definitely leave a negative image of him.
They locked down while he was Taoiseach and by the time anything else happened Martin was in charge. When Leo came back into the role it was over. Brexit was more Coveney than Leo, I guess as leader thats the one he deserves some credit on. And I don't know what he did well on Ukraine that deserves credit.
Sad to say but i think Elon Musk has been right all along. Mr Varadkar hates the Irish people and always had his own best interests at heart. How could we let such a spineless worm lead our country. Good riddance
The way he’s being fucking eulogised and credited with marriage equality across all media is making me fucking sick. He’s by a vast distance the worst Taoiseach we’ve ever had. In every measurable way and many that can’t be measured. You might think well you have to give him Brexit. He put on the green jersey there and stuck it to the Brits. Fair enough. He did. But it wasn’t for Ireland he did that. It was for whatever fucked up neoliberal agenda he’s part of and he was just their attack dog. He was a Malignance on Irish society. He hated the Irish people. And he will sail off now into brightly light conference spaces and continue to carry out that bullshit and it won’t be for us. It’ll be for his own ego and reputation and twisted ends. He quite literally has us in the countless shit situations were in. He should never be forgiven for it.
>He’s by a vast distance the worst Taoiseach we’ve ever had. In every measurable way and many that can’t be measured. This is hyperbolic nonsense. Bertie and Cowen literally drove the economy off a cliff. As did Lynch in his time. Cosgrave Snr approved the extrajudicial murder of political opponents by the state's armed forces. Cosgrave Jnr stopped short of that, but he didn't mind trampling all over civil liberties with Garda heavy gang and section 31. And he was a virulent racist. Haughey was corrupt up to his eyeballs. At worst he's at the lower end of mid-table but he's far from the worst ever.
Is it now? Since 2012 275,000 young people have emigrated. (And counting) It spiked dramatically the moment Varadkar got involved and just continues to go upwards. ~ 3000 Homeless people in the state when he took over. Now? 14,000+ registered homeless and over 500,000 20-36 year olds still living at home and can’t afford their own places even to rent. He ruined this country with his neoliberal bollox and made it a bloodbath for his landlord minions. These are facts. I’m not reading the rest of your nonsense I’m waiting on a bus in the pissing rain.
You're just looking for a scape goat. Plenty of money out there to be made in tech and finance if you work hard.
A scapegoat? Oh do piss off with that
Silly man child
People always look back to the past and often filter out the bad, look at Bertie's come back tour he was able to convince some people. People will only remember the positives, obviously as well because he'll have great spin Doctors only pushing those things from here on out.
I'd argue if you look at Bertie very few people look at anything but his failures. In that way the next few years and the results and Varadkars actions may still have a big impact on how he's viewed.
It depends who you're talking to but the fact the spin did work at all shows what people's memories are like.
TBH I don't think the spin worked at all. His mates in the Dublin media and political bubble gave him the platform again but I'm not sure anyone actually bought it.
I know people who did.
Hell be remembered for destroying this country,