was wondering why dont we just have a reality TV show on RTE, let them all live in the Aras for a few weeks and get them to do challanges etc, only we’d vote out the contestant we didnt like each week and the winner would be the one who last the longest……I dont think anything like this has ever been done before??? If it has I’ve never seen it and we could call it Big Bother!

Did I miss a debate on TV last night? Dammm I was watching the Late Late instead

Couldn’t tell if Norris was speaking with passion, or just being loud.

From what Dana was saying, it sounds like she would be keeping the supreme court busy…

Dana completely over reacted when asked about her views on confessions of sexual abuse to priests. She needs to realise that if she is going to be President in the 21st century, she has to be objective in regards to her own views.

Anyway, surely that question was rehearsed. If she thinks TUBRIDY was hard on her, wait until Vincent Browne starts asking her his questions!

Only got to see half of the debate and thought it was pretty poor. The lines of questions seemed to be more about the office of president rather than what any one candidate would do with it.

Why ask about pay? We do know that the position is paid and that level of pay is under review. We don’t expect anybody to take the position without a salary so is it really an issue?

The folks that I suspect will be, in my view, the main players in this election came across well – Higgins, Norris and MgGuinness.

Anyway not a great debate. I wonder, now that w have 7 candidates, is it possible to have a decent TV debate in the format that we have become used to?

I only watched the first 20mins or so, so am open to correction if it changed afterwards, but what I saw wasn’t a debate. It was questions with rehearsed answers. They didn’t tackle each other at all.

Can someone clear this up for me..jedward aren’t running for president too are they? They wouldn’t look out of place if they did.

I missed MD saying he had to dumb himself down for the proletariat. If that’s what he said, then he’s blessed with a natural flair for dumbness. Norris was hyper, and made me uncomfortable. Mary Davis I found patently unsuitable, and for me represented a lot of what I dislike about Ireland: quangos, smugness, boredom. Sean Gallagher is too much about the money. Martin McGuinness makes me uncomfortable too, as it was like watching an actor who played an arch villain in a long-running soap now playing Mother Theresa’s right hand man in his latest production. Gay MItchell is as interesting as Mary Davis, except he grew up in a cardboard box. I leave Dana to last, as she provided my favourite quote of the night: “I’m not a mouthpiece for anyone except myself and the people of this country”, or to translate: How ‘anyone’ became all kinds of everyone.

None of them are particularly inspiring. Michael D wasn’t bad I suppose.Might warm more to one of them nearer the time but as it stands, I think I’ll be voting in this election more to keep certain candidates out rather then voting a particular one in. Didn’t see it all (so maybe I missed it) but feel that Tubs should have asked Davis more about the quangos she’s involved in. Had to laugh though when I saw her in the flesh. All day on radio I heard about her posters, how they are 90% clever lighting, 10% airbrushing…..think it may be the other way around :-)

I thought Higgins was the best on the night – engaging, articulate and managing to avoid sounding pompous. Davis did okay, although that mad red outfit had the unfortunate effect of accentuating her slightly manic expression. McGuinness I think held his own and positioned himself well. I was surprised how forthright and aggressive Dana was – she made a strong opposition in the first segment where she was the only candidate to eschew script and soundbite, but was a bit shaky after that. Gallagher was a surprisingly poor speaker, and failed to convince on his theme of an “enterprise” presidency imo. Norris came across as a bit manic, and didn’t do anything to change the minds of voters not already in his camp. The fact that he sounded like he had a loudhailer stuck down his throat didn’t help. Mitchell was the poorest performer on the night I thought – bar Tubridy of course, who should be spanked for making such a hames of it – dull, drab, uninspiring….

This is the first time I have had no complaints about fianna fail during a political debate.

My god imagine if gay Byrne had been there tubridy would have shat himself.

Journal.ie readers are so biased towards Norris it’s not even funny. If there was a poll called ‘Which candidate had the best hair?’ Norris would still win on this site.

I thought Ryan was poor, correction, I knew Ryan would be poor. Pat Kenny on The Frontline, now that’s going to tell all. Because looking at the poll results here my God. You would wonder what planet sone people live on, but that’s Tuburity’s fault

not a great debate … …was put off by Norris and his shouting, didn’t think he came across very well. though he came across a bit manic really; sean gallagher couldn’t give a straight answer on same sex couples adoption, he hid behind being not informed enough, whats there to be in formed about, parenting is not about the sex of the parent; mary davis might as well be called mary quango, came across very poor and couldn’t talk outside of the special Olympics discourse; surprised that mcguinness didn’t come across better, he seemed nervous and felt let down by his answers … he may as well had played the interview he did with ray Darcy as all the answers and rhetoric was word for word the same; gay mitchell was very weak, if all he is going to do is bash at mcguinness and laud his dublin electoral achievements he might as well go home now … said nothing of substance; don’t like dana but thought she held her own however when asked by tubridy if she wanted the job tehre was a hesitation there … don’t think she wants it.; michael d held his own, spoke well and kept it simple but jaysus he is dated and it would be like having a hobbitt as a president … … so at the end of it not quite sure where vote will go yet … … possibly between norriss, higgins and mcguinness

* We had Gay Mitchell re-quoting soundbites from an American presidential debate. We had Gay Mitchell sitting like a dummy trying to say very little – maybe because if he opened his mouth he would yet again put his foot in it! He totally avoided his extreme religious ideology which like Dana would have an effect on the role of President. He just sat there all night like a puppet dummy – looking just as dumb!

* We had Dana complaining about her questions – yet ALL had their own controversy related questions put to them – and she went on about defending the constitution = “I will not sign anything that conflicts with my religion” and she OUTRIGHT stated this to be the case” at the start of her personal interview. She wants to work with all but is VERY anti-European. Thats will go down well in Europe!

* We had Higgins looking one of the few decent ones. Slightly boring but knowing his stuff. When he started to wander off doddering about what he did in his childhood, he lost me… Yawn…

* We had Mary Davis just offering up buckets of generisations and stating well I sat on the boards of this and that – but she failed to state one thing she actually achieved beyond the Special Olympics.

* We had Sean Gallagher ducking FF questions – even lying about it. “I do not come from a political background” SAY WHAT!!! …He only has been a member of FF, worked for their organisation for many, many years and acted as advisor to a number of people in it for a long time …And this is WELL known.

* Martin McGuinness tried yet again to clarify some points but was constantly interrupted by Ryan (I noted Ryan did not do this at all with the rest as much – if at all!) and Martin ended up taking a safe route of where he’d like to see the presidents office going. Something by the way few others actually mentioned or thought to raise!

* We had Norris, Was he shouting to the back of the audience? Strange! He defended himself yet again for the thousand time to the now same boring questions – its getting tiring by now – SERIOUSLY interviewers. Its ruddy time to move on!

Tubridy was his usual obnoxious self and very select in treatment, depending on whom he was questioning. He failed in some questions to get answers and avoided others he should have asked!

In all, a complete waste of time. It wasn’t a debate as such – just a constant round of soundbites for the cameras, the masses back home. Sadly the sheep of Ireland will swallow this rubbish!

Michael D was the only one who came across with a sense of dignity and understanding of the office of president. He was stately and intelligent. I’m not sure that television is the best medium for that kind of message though – it was Dana’s (dare I say Jim Corr-ish) ranting with brought some applause.

We need a candidate that will represent “The mortgages are too damn high party” & Stop cutting peoples trees down that don’t want them cut down party”

Am not a MD fan or supporter but I think the rest looked like school children and had amateur answers. Dana clearly is not happy with slot of things especially the CC issue whilst Norris who I do favour is looking less presidential as he’s pushed on the letters (which I do think it’s a waste of time asking for them to be released if he said legally he cant). Each time these guys are interviewed it’s the same old questions and therefore the same rehearsed questions! The remaining candidates don’t really feature in my opinion. Where’s the energy, the drive, the uniqueness of any single candidate hiding? Most of all – where is the president that will be for the people (and thee interests) hiding? Please stand up!

Forget about who is going to get the most ~#1 votes, look at who is going to get transfers and Michael D will win hands down after the transfers

Think we will have to start looking in the Buy and Sell :(

Gay Mitchell appeared to be the most boring man in the world; Dana came across as a simpleminded loon; McGuinness seemed very hesitant or stiff in his delivery.

Of the credible 4, apart from looking like a bouncer Sean Gallagher seemed sensible and realistic, Mary I couldn’t take seriously after noticing her top lip never moves but she seemed decent enough, and Michael D was Michael D. Only Senator Norris seemed to have passion for the role, and came across as being very articulate and charismatic.

The weak point, apart from Dana’s attempt to sound like a paranoid loon, was Tubbers and his godawful questioning. Posters appear to be his only concern – bizarre.

It wasn’t a debate. Candidates were asked obvious questions which we have already heard the answers to. And stop asking about the letters, move on. There are more important questions to be asked.

Norris and Higgins held strong last night, their only weakness was reiterating each other all the time. Gallagher proved to be a contender and made an impression, but confused me when he couldn’t give a to-the-point answer about important legislation. Dana’s constitutional/confessional line made me feel a little sick, I think she was the big loser on the night. Davis did well, but didn’t inspire me to vote her way. McGuinness sees the country on a North/South axis, which he must realise is not how the majority of us from the "south" see ourselves. I have to say that while Norris was loud at times last night, but it was not without justification, and I was glad to hear him highlight the fact he wasn’t given the opportunity to voice his "vision for Ireland".

I’ll be keeping tabs on Norris/Higgins/Gallagher I reckon.

Wasn’t a debate by any means – a lot of cynical manipulation by Tubridy and RTE – eg. Dana gets the questions about the seal of the confessional (not an issue in this election), Mitchell is set up to repeat his pop at Mc Guinness, Norris gets an easy ride on the letters issue and just a hint of the info on Davis’ income form her nominations to various boards! Have to admit – Gay Mitchell and Sean Gallagher came over as most electable – ( not necessary my choices, but objectively they were far more reasonable, clear and less baggage electorally).

Michael D came out best followed by Norris – The rest blah blah blah – Who is this Mary Davis besides queen of the quangos?

David Norris roars and rants and is just so off-putting. It’s all dramatics, table thumping, chest beating…. Not for me.

Also with a certain candidate very open about his wish to earn the average industrial wage, it will be interesting to see how many bank heists occur should he be elected.

The only one really qualifying as Statesmen are McGuinness and Mickey D. Mr. Gallagher isn’t – not his time he has still much to do, needs to pull away from his FF roots. Maybe in another 14 years. Davis – she’s just in it for the money. Cash Queen. Quango Queen – whatever. Gay Mitchell – 22 countries. Seeya!
Dana. (lol) Norris – I don’t see the Irish as being that much rambunctious. Though his election would put a lot of people out – that’s always a good thing. Only really 3 main runners as far as I can see. Wouldn’t take many polls here on the Journo too seriously. Very cute focus book. But not a player – just yet! :)

That wasn’t a debate, it was a string of infantile questions about wages and an effort to trip people up rather than understand their vision/plans for the role. Surprising considering Tub’s calibre.
That said, the responses were so rehearsed – Mc Guinness is like one of those old toy dogs when you pull the chord, you get one of 5 answers – Michael D for pres

I thought Sean Gallagher did very well, but over all I was very impressed with Martin McGuiness. He was constantly badgered by Ryan T yet responded with sensible, coherent answers.

The media are mostly pretending to give Norris a hard time but they aren’t asking the questions that leap out from the first letter, for example:

"Why did you say Ezra Nawi was unwise to plead guilty?"

"Why are you giving the impression you became involved in the case late in the day when in the letter you said you had been a ‘direct personal witness to some of the peripheral events surrounding the case before it came to the first Court.’ in fact you offered to give evidence to the first court. Listen to the podcast of the Pat Kenny interview at about 6 minutes in, you said you didn’t know when Nawi was convicted"

"Did you always plan to make a comeback once the fuss about the matter had died down?"

Jesus wept. What class of muppet comes to a poll like this to vote “I don’t know”? 652 of them so far, it beggars belief.

The fact that Norris is in the lead in this poll says a lot about this type of polling…

David Norris didn’t dig any holes for himself.

Norris must think the Irish people are fools,with his legal bulshit.The Irish people are not that foolish,if you have nothing to hide publish the letters.

I see the media establishment is still trying to drive David Norris out of the Presidential Election.

Fortunately the people are seeing through the artificial heat they are throwing up.

And still they choose to not probe Gay Mitchell. Sucking up to the government of the day as usual.

Martin McGuinness despite the fact that idiot of a host trying to cut him short

In the absence of a reply from any Norris supporters to substantial points which I raised above, apart from the few red thumbs, I repeat the points here:

The media are mostly pretending to give Norris a hard time but they aren’t asking the questions that leap out from the first letter, for example:
“Why did you say Ezra Nawi was unwise to plead guilty?”
“Why are you giving the impression you became involved in the case late in the day when in the letter you said you had been a ‘direct personal witness to some of the peripheral events surrounding the case before it came to the first Court.’ in fact you offered to give evidence to the first court. Listen to the podcast of the Pat Kenny interview at about 6 minutes in, you said you didn’t know when Nawi was convicted”
“Did you always plan to make a comeback once the fuss about the matter had died down?”

yeah I think ill go with martin, its been so obvious with most of rte and the media that he has a large popular following in modern Ireland that they are afraid of him becoming president and so they attack him the most with his past and all but its a credit to him, to stick to his credentials and not deny any of his past because he is proud of most of it but look to the future and the good work he has done. He is a real leader, and doesn’t let the scrutiny get to him like it has got to norris, and mitchell when he is under pressure, so martin no1.

Instead of a presidential election can we have a referendum to change the constitution so we could keep Mary McAleese forever!!! Don’t fancy any of the candidates in the job. And definitely wouldn’t have called that a debate!

Michael D in his solo slot talked about Ministers strutting about during the boom years. Then he proceeded to tell us how as Minister for Arts,etc he had GIVEN us this and that (was it 40 arts centres?) as if he had put his hand in his own pocket, rather than spending taxpayer’s money on his pet projects (however worthy they may have been). And what was all that hogwash about breaking his knee while helping Colombian mothers who were begging him to save their sons from narcoterrorism? Why couldn’t he just say that he fell while on an official trip overseas? Only Norris has a bigger ego (and I’m not just talking about amongst the seven candidates).

Michael D Higgins??? Are you serioues lads???

Michael D was the most impressive, with Sean Gallagher and Martin McGuiness also quiet impressive. Norris just shouted a lot and Dana was like a quiet little mouse. Gay Mitchell and Mary Davis were non- entities.

Only one person there last night with presidential quality,M D Higgins the rest would not lace his boots.

McGuinness 1 for a new Ireland and new direction. Norris 2 for passion and focus. Gallagher 3 for Inspiration and enterprise.

I did not rate the rest.

martin mc guinness is the only candidate with a relevant opinion on anything

Norris kept talking about there being no traction-have a feeling we all know what he was slipping in.
All of it coming out of his own mouth

David Norris was very impressive,passionate and knowledgeable.Michael D. was statesmanlike but came across somewhat picky,prissy and defensive so overall I would say David Norris.Mary Davis was appallingly bad,egotistical and very cold.

I thought Sean Gallagher did well.. .. yes he was involved in FF however I hope he is not put out of the running because of this…. people want to forget the fact that the majority of Irish people were once in some way linked to FF otherwise they would not have been in government !!! As a recent graduate I hope people vote based on someone who can actually work towards improving Irelands job creation and who can promote Ireland in a positive light at home and abroad ..I fully expect to be ranted at for this comment but if you just think about it why not just consider voting for someone who actually has practical experience in business, worked with youth organisations, schools, colleges and charity organisations.Voting outside the norm maybe just what we need.. let the rants begin!!!!!

Michael d is a cocky pompous little man. My weakness is I have to dumb myself down for the commoner. Give me a break.

No president. All a shower of crawthumpers. And it’s about time we change our defunct constitution to represent the Ireland we live in now. Disgusted by politics of this state.

as the sayin goes Guinness is good 4 u ………. Martin mc Guiness is gona b good 4 ireland

Sean Gallagher is the intelligent choice. He’s practical he’ll use the position positively to promote the country.

MMcG all the way! Most experience by a mile.

mcguinness is the only one talking sense,that norris is a nutcase,wee mickey d is away above himself,dana is ready to crack and the rest arent worth talking about.mcguinness all the way.

yawn

Gallagher & Mitchell had the most substance. Higgins was very safe. Norris was a bit loud but came out fighting and much improved. Davis failed to get her many other achievements across. Worryingly she doesn’t appear to realise Council of State role is important. McGuinness surprisingly poor in the interview. Not providing credible answers. Picked up ground in group stage where he performed well. Dana was poor throughout. Doesn’t really appear to know why she wants the position. Allowed herself be boxed into the catholic box and appeared comfortable there.

Summary: No big winner. Dana big loser. Also these polls are meaningless, depends on whose supporters can click
a mouse button. Totally arbitrary, but fun. Take it as seriously as tarot cards.

that little reason you refer to is what caused the trouble first day or do you suffer from seclected memory and he fought along side his fellow derry men.in the bogside

None of the seven,Not one with charisma,futuristic ideas,imagination and Mary Davis gave her one great moment seeing the Chinese President putting his arm around a child with a disability.Where is she living,China has the greatest history of torture in the world,Do we need all these recycled has beens,we need new young blood to represent our Country.and the crux of the matter is,Do we need a President at all? ,We have embassies all over the world in the most far out places,we could pay back the IMF if we got rid of the lot of them. If we are to go ahead with this we need new young dynamic canditates with Charisma,imagination and someone with energy to help to ignite our economy in some way.

@ James

in the event of war? seriously?
MMcG didn’t consider giving up his life for his country..he made lots of other people give up their lives- for little reason

Norris was articulate, insightful and original as ever. Also thought Sean Gallagher did particularly well – very direct and personable. Two very charming men. Martin McGuinness did better than I expected too.

I’m just waiting for somebody to mention the Black and Tans

Martin McGuinness won the debate, Martin McGuinness for President

in a war a lot of people die if you were a spy you were a fair target and if you were collaborating with the en’emy olso it was hard at times to see hue was on your side no one is per’fect countrys at war all the time make a mistake and innocent people die it is a fact of life sad yes but a truth we all can make a mistake no one is per’fect ok.

i look at all the candidate and i asked my self witch one of them would give up there lives for there country martin mc guinness would be the only one the rest are in for the cash and prestige and who would want them runing the country if we went to war and repasenting us in other country’s , Martin Mc Guinness has all ready the proper training as first minister in the north of Ireland he has met with americam president’s and other world leaders and as far as i can see he is more like the man i would want to see as head of our country not a load of hangours on who can not run there one lives never mind a country like Ireland.

the only good thing about McG running is it brings the terrorist supporters out of the woodwork

Gallagher in particular came across as very straight talking and i think he has a practical and clear vision for Ireland. he wants to put the position to good use, and I think he’d do a fine job promoting Ireland as a place to invest. Most people commenting are talking about the bad stories that are following the candidates, well it only takes someone with half a head between their shoulders to realise that the controversy surrounding Norris makes him wholly inappropriate for the job.. please visit the page to read up on the scandal

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Urging-you-all-not-to-vote-David-Norris-for-President-of-Ireland/199967623405845

Gráinne, is that the same for the “terrorist organisation” that achieved freedom for the 26 counties? or did nobody die in that war.

I don’t think I will vote for him but I think Michael D came out the best on the show