Irish General Election (February 8th 2020)

[Tintrlvr]

What is the difference between Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael? They’re both listed as pro-European conservative parties, which is obviously an over-simplification.

The Irish party system is confusing. Looking at the history, Fianna Fail and Fine Gael descend from the Anti-Treaty and Pro-Treaty factions of Sinn Fein which fought the Irish Civil War in the early 1920s. The basis of the appeal of both was vote the way you shot, so animosities ran very deep without being based much upon policy in the conventional European sense.

The predecessors of Fine Gael governed as a conservative Catholic party. They also attracted the support of former unionists (mostly in the Dublin area) and the larger farmers.

Fianna Fail was also a conservative Catholic party, but it was a more populist vehicle for Eamonn De Valera and had support originally from smaller farmers, particularly in the west of Ireland.

As the two parties have developed they both aspired to be conservative catch all parties, but Fine Gael was simultaneously more conservative old wealth and socially liberal than Fianna Fail. Fianna Fail represented more new wealth and clientalist politics. The culture of the two parties is quite different, as far as I can tell, not myself being Irish.

From a non-Irish perspective, the two parties seem to have evolved to be further apart in recent years, even while forming a coalition, partially because of the total death of Fianna Fail's urban wing (and, if Fine Gael loses an election badly in the near future, their rural wing might start looking endangered), and partially because of the evolution and decline of Fine Gael's "special relationship" with Irish Labour (which has itself basically become a social-liberal party rather than a social democratic party). Fine Gael has become more liberal-conservative (more urban, more upper-middle class, more economically right-wing, more socially liberal), while Fianna Fail has become more Christian-democratic (more rural, more lower-middle class, more economically populist, and, while maybe not more socially conservative, less in the socially liberal direction than Fine Gael, while Ireland as a whole is rocketing in a socially liberal direction), to use Continental terms. The Dutch VVD and CDA might be useful analogies.

[Tintrlvr]

If Fine Gael is seen to be a bit more rightwing economically than Fianna fail - why is it that the Labour party has had so many coalition agreements with FG over the years but they never seem to want to cooperate with FF?  

FF didn't need Labour; they usually won majorities or only needed small parties/independents that were ideologically closer to FF or otherwise structurally preferred. And, when they didn't, it was typically because the electorate had rejected a FF government; Labour wasn't about to go in and prop them up. The one time Labour did go into coalition with FF (after the 1992 election), it was a total disaster for Labour, who lost a ton of seats in 1997 as well as the last opportunity they realistically had at displacing FG as the main opposition party (well, they got a shot in 2011 at displacing FF and blew that, too).

The pre-2011 Irish political system has to be looked at in the context where FF was the dominant party and everyone else (other than some scattered independents and, for a while, the PD, which was really just a FF satellite after its inaugural election in 1987) was, first and foremost, anti-FF, and therefore odd ideological coalitions were formed by politicians and voters whose uniting feature was opposition to FF.

[Tintrlvr]

Assuming polls hold, how likely would an SF-FF coalition be? (maybe with support from the Trots, Irish Labour or some indies)

I'd be disappointed if Ireland gets another FF-FG coalition with roles swapped tbh; even if I despise Sinn Fein and think they should be banned in any reasonable country (see: Batasuna)

FF is probably the only party (other than the hard left) who would be willing to go into coalition with SF, though it's hard to see FF and the hard left in a coalition together. So you could maybe see SF-FF-some Indies as the next government (or FF-SF-Indies, depending on who comes out on top). They share a pretty assertively nationalist agenda without clashing too much on other issues.

FG would probably prefer not to be the junior partner to FF in a government so I doubt they would go for another coalition (as it now looks certain that they will be behind FF on election day), and working with SF would be the total antithesis of FG. Labour would not go into coalition with SF and would also have trouble working with the hard left. The Greens are a bit of a wild card but I don't think they'd go for a coalition with SF, either, and they nearly went extinct the last time they worked with FF, so they will probably be leery of a coalition with FF generally.

[Tintrlvr]

Surprisingly strong for FG/weak for FF in the exit poll compared to pre-election polling. We'll see what the actual results look like. I don't recall historically how good exit polls are in Ireland; do they have a good reputation? I think this would result in FF largest party as FG, having been in government for a while, will probably have worse transfers, but very uncertain of course. (SF will likely struggle with transfers as usual and should be 5-10 seats short of FG/FF on a tied first vote.)

[Tintrlvr]

Where are people getting results? I have RTE's election results page up, but it seems like they may be fairly behind.

[Tintrlvr]

Looks like there will be 19 independents elected - is there any ideological breakdown of where they stand? are some very rightwing and some very leftwing? What's the deal?

All over. A large majority are on the right but not necessarily friendly with either FF or FG, and a sizeable minority on the left or even far-left. The below is a general overview but subject to others' thoughts/corrections. Most are probably persuadable to join a government but not clear if a government would want most of them.

Michael Healy-Rae: random populism, personal reelection (brother of Danny Healy-Rae)
Michael Lowry: ex-FG
Michael Fitzmaurice: rural interests
Michael Collins: anti-immigration
Mattie McGrath: ex-FF
Danny Healy-Rae: random populism, personal reelection (brother of Michael Healy-Rae)
Dennis Naughten: ex-FG
Noel Grealish: ex-PD (Progressive Democrats, a now-extinct Euroliberal party), anti-immigration
Sean Canney: has been part of recent FG governments
Michael McNamara: ex-Labour
Marian Harkin: Euroliberal
Peter Fitzpatrick: ex-FG, anti-abortion
Richard O'Donoghue: gene-pool FF (lost their nomination in local elections)
Verona Murphy: ex-FG, anti-immigration
Cathal Berry: military interests, seems to be somewhat on the left
Thomas Pringle: ex-SF, on the left
Catherine Connolly: aligned with the far-left
Carol Nolan: ex-SF, on the left but anti-abortion (did not join Aontu, however)
Matt Shanahan: left-wing

[Tintrlvr]

It'll be fascinating to see where things go from here.

You'd think that having the most seats would mean that the negotiations are FF's game to run now but they've been pretty clear in interviews that they see SF as having won & that it's SF's mess to sort out. All indications from FF are that they're gonna  sit back & give McDonald the first shot at forming a government.

The cynic in me thinks that FF knows there isn't a workable coalition to be found & are trying to preemptively avoid any blame for the negotiations failing, but maybe they're just trying to buy time to get their house in order before dealing with SF?

FG seem keen in interviews to emphasize that they came in 3rd & to downplay any mandate that they might have to govern, so it looks like they're eager to go into opposition & wash their hands of the situation. Hence, not expecting them to do deals with anybody.

So I guess the next step is an attempt at a broad coalition of SF + left-wing parties + independents, but does anybody really expect that to come to anything workable? As far as I can see it, SF & FF will eventually have to come together (with the Greens &/or other parties too) or there'll have to be another election.

Everyone (except SF, who can't cobble together a coalition without one of the other two big parties) is disclaiming a desire to govern, so it seems fairly clear this is going to go to another election rather quickly because no one has an incentive to compromise.

[Tintrlvr]

The key takeaway here is that all 15 TDs who voted against the bill to legalize abortion won their reelection campaigns.

It's no surprise that there is a passionate anti-abortion minority who can elect one TD per constituency in rural areas. Nor does it bode particularly well for those who would like to turn back the clock.

[Tintrlvr]

So it sounds like right now Ireland is about to get their own little taste of Israeli politics. FG is flipping off everyone and saying "you sort it out," SF discovered that the math forces two of the big three to work together as their small party discussions collapsed, and FF insiders have serious problems with SF. So you get a Mexican Standoff that will produce new elections, a la Israel or Spain. The only difference of course is that all parties can adjust the number of candidates they run to tilt the math potentially in their favor.

... though it isn't entirely clear that SF running more candidates would make that much difference to whether coalitions are viable, as extra SF seats would have mostly come from the smaller parties and independents who are relatively happy to work with them, not from FF and FG.

I would presume a second election would revolve heavily around the question of who would and wouldn't work with who. Which is a bit of a problem, given that you'd only get a second referendum if FF and FG can't work out a coalition.

Also, if SF did run extra candidates, that might somewhat mitigate the smaller parties' seat losses, as in the constituencies where they wouldn't be able to elect an extra candidate it's still likely they'd transfer heavily to non-FF and non-FG candidates. Which probably means fewer Trot TDs but more Greens.

I think a second election would inevitably lead to a strong result for SF, as they will run the proper number of candidates this time, and they're the only party that seems to be trying to make a government work so will be rewarded for looking like adults (without having to actually govern and therefore do anything that might make them unpopular), and a weak result for FF, as SF is the only party they really get a lot of transfers from, and therefore refusing to work with SF will hurt them considerably, and SF running more candidates will also eat into what transfers and seats FF do get. FG probably doesn't change much, maybe even gets a small boost if voters decide they've been punished enough and come back. I think the small left-wing parties would be hurt by a stronger SF since there would then be fewer excess SF votes to transfer to them, but I agree that there would still be transfers to the left--though risky for the small left parties if the second (or third) SF candidate ends up ahead of their candidates but not high enough to actually get elected. Another election would also probably be good for the Greens, as you note.

Not sure the second election would break the deadlock, but it might force FF into accepting another junior partner status, this time with SF, if SF has a strengthened hand post-election and FF a weakened one.