Welcome to Political Irish

We believe in free legal speech, fair play and good discussion. Sign up and join in!

Register Log in

Predict how many votes Gemma will get in DF by election

Sunburst

PI Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2018
Messages
76
Likes
139
Gemma's showing tremendous courage in highlighting the scam. Sincere congrats to her.

To any naysayers on this site: what have you done for the Nationalist cause today?
It's not courage to promote yourself in the public spotlight when your own financial situation is very lucratively secured and the label of racist costs you nothing. There is a certain type who craves the limelight and it has to be said, she has that same mentality of most journalists of her generation, hankering after the spotlight and the cause celebre.

There are quite a few nationalists who have done a lot more than this woman, risked far more for acts that carry considerable incarceration time and they cannot declare publicly. These are people who were present long before her or I dare say most here, at the very beginning of the problem, at a time when there was none of the supportive numbers that she and many on the bandwagon can now reply upon. Courage is taking a stand when there is none of that support, when you forge ahead into the unknown knowing you are alone or your actions are definitely illegal and likely to result in your imprisonment, or you stand to lose your job etc, whereas Gemma does not. Gemma has never risked her home or finances and always remained within the boundaries of a supportive element and the law. During the presidential election she was repeatedly asked her views on immigration, the silence was deafening. She cannily kept schtumm on that, engaging in realpolitik to try to win the prize of President. Had she won, she'd be content with the fame and prestige and no doubt be courting the establishment now. She wouldn't be giving Nationalism the time of day. She lost the Prez election, and was already an ostracised figure during that, so she decided to pitch her stall on the burgeoning nationalist market of followers growing massively in Europe, America etc. Yet in these election campaigns, there is nothing of the same realpolitik sensibilities, instead she flagrantly rants about the most offputting topics that anyone could devise to drive voters away, when she had a duty to present a respectable image of nationalism, she has done the opposite, damaged it. Nationalism was the next big thing which showed signs of potential for her to become a 'star', as seems to be the case around the West, a few people here and there seeing their chance to grab the limelight.

Regarding her rather late but limpet-like attachment to the National Party. When the woman saw the rise of the National Party, she latched onto it, only relatively lately. This for me was particularly indicative of a possible troubling mercenary nature of the woman, it was apparent ACI was not getting any traction, but NP were, and she hitched her wagon onto them. NP didn't need her, they were busy making steady increases on their own. ACI were disappearing though, and she needed the NP.

Going forward this could prove seriously damaging to the NP, as the chemtrails,VAXX etc items will drag anyone seen representing the more esoteric fringe down, losing credibility. As I said, I had hoped she got in, only because I am willing to support anyone, even a rather dubious self-serving person, who puts their weight behind securing our borders. However Gemma may now turn out to be more damaging influence for nationalist politics than good for the overall effect of the NP getting to stop the no-borders agenda. She is good when she applies herself to investigative journalism and she really should've concentrated on setting up an independent media engine to rival the state. She knows the ropes and would've been able to direct that machine and people, onboard such an imposing media ship.
 
Last edited:

Jazzhead

PI Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2019
Messages
60
Likes
150
I
If the cap fits by all means wear it!



Not clever, just a reality for so many people - you should get out more.



So born in Italy, raised in Italy, educated in Italy, live in Italy but not Italian....
You seem to think all your replies are exceptionally astute and you're some kind of masterful debater, but really you're not, more like a child really,
 
Joined
Dec 1, 2019
Messages
340
Likes
678
It's not courage to promote yourself in the public spotlight when your own financial situation is very lucratively secured and the label of racist costs you nothing. There is a certain type who craves the limelight and it has to be said, she has that same mentality of most journalists of her generation, hankering after the spotlight and the cause celebre.

There are quite a few nationalists who have done a lot more than this woman, risked far more for acts that carry considerable incarceration time and they cannot declare publicly. These are people who were present long before her or I dare say most here, at the very beginning of the problem, at a time when there was none of the supportive numbers that she and many on the bandwagon can now reply upon. Courage is taking a stand when there is none of that support, when you forge ahead into the unknown knowing you are alone or your actions are definitely illegal and likely to result in your imprisonment, or you stand to lose your job etc, whereas Gemma does not. Gemma has never risked her home or finances and always remained within the boundaries of a supportive element and the law. During the presidential election she was repeatedly asked her views on immigration, the silence was deafening. She cannily kept schtumm on that, engaging in realpolitik to try to win the prize of President. Had she won, she'd be content with the fame and prestige and no doubt be courting the establishment now. She wouldn't be giving Nationalism the time of day. She lost the Prez election, and was already an ostracised figure during that, so she decided to pitch her stall on the burgeoning nationalist market of followers growing massively in Europe, America etc. Yet in these election campaigns, there is nothing of the same realpolitik sensibilities, instead she flagrantly rants about the most offputting topics that anyone could devise to drive voters away, when she had a duty to present a respectable image of nationalism, she has done the opposite, damaged it. Nationalism was the next big thing which showed signs of potential for her to become a 'star', as seems to be the case around the West, a few people here and there seeing their chance to grab the limelight.

Regarding her rather late but limpet-like attachment to the National Party. When the woman saw the rise of the National Party, she latched onto it, only relatively lately. This for me was particularly indicative of a possible troubling mercenary nature of the woman, it was apparent ACI was not getting any traction, but NP were, and she hitched her wagon onto them. NP didn't need her, they were busy making steady increases on their own. ACI were disappearing though, and she needed the NP.

Going forward this could prove seriously damaging to the NP, as the chemtrails,VAXX etc items will drag anyone seen representing the more esoteric fringe down, losing credibility. As I said, I had hoped she got in, only because I am willing to support anyone, even a rather dubious self-serving person, who puts their weight behind securing our borders. However Gemma may now turn out to be more damaging influence for nationalist politics than good for the overall effect of the NP getting to stop the no-borders agenda. She is good when she applies herself to investigative journalism and she really should've concentrated on setting up an independent media engine to rival the state. She knows the ropes and would've been able to direct that machine and people, onboard such an imposing media ship.
When I hear Gemma speak about the establishment it really resonates with me. The she starts going on about chemtrails etc, and it feels like such a let down. I admire her a lot, but nobody has an appetite for chemtrails. There may be merit to her fringe topics, but as you said, it's not gonna win votes.
 
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
4,243
Likes
2,651
It's not courage to promote yourself in the public spotlight when your own financial situation is very lucratively secured and the label of racist costs you nothing. There is a certain type who craves the limelight and it has to be said, she has that same mentality of most journalists of her generation, hankering after the spotlight and the cause celebre.

There are quite a few nationalists who have done a lot more than this woman, risked far more for acts that carry considerable incarceration time and they cannot declare publicly. These are people who were present long before her or I dare say most here, at the very beginning of the problem, at a time when there was none of the supportive numbers that she and many on the bandwagon can now reply upon. Courage is taking a stand when there is none of that support, when you forge ahead into the unknown knowing you are alone or your actions are definitely illegal and likely to result in your imprisonment, or you stand to lose your job etc, whereas Gemma does not. Gemma has never risked her home or finances and always remained within the boundaries of a supportive element and the law. During the presidential election she was repeatedly asked her views on immigration, the silence was deafening. She cannily kept schtumm on that, engaging in realpolitik to try to win the prize of President. Had she won, she'd be content with the fame and prestige and no doubt be courting the establishment now. She wouldn't be giving Nationalism the time of day. She lost the Prez election, and was already an ostracised figure during that, so she decided to pitch her stall on the burgeoning nationalist market of followers growing massively in Europe, America etc. Yet in these election campaigns, there is nothing of the same realpolitik sensibilities, instead she flagrantly rants about the most offputting topics that anyone could devise to drive voters away, when she had a duty to present a respectable image of nationalism, she has done the opposite, damaged it. Nationalism was the next big thing which showed signs of potential for her to become a 'star', as seems to be the case around the West, a few people here and there seeing their chance to grab the limelight.

Regarding her rather late but limpet-like attachment to the National Party. When the woman saw the rise of the National Party, she latched onto it, only relatively lately. This for me was particularly indicative of a possible troubling mercenary nature of the woman, it was apparent ACI was not getting any traction, but NP were, and she hitched her wagon onto them. NP didn't need her, they were busy making steady increases on their own. ACI were disappearing though, and she needed the NP.

Going forward this could prove seriously damaging to the NP, as the chemtrails,VAXX etc items will drag anyone seen representing the more esoteric fringe down, losing credibility. As I said, I had hoped she got in, only because I am willing to support anyone, even a rather dubious self-serving person, who puts their weight behind securing our borders. However Gemma may now turn out to be more damaging influence for nationalist politics than good for the overall effect of the NP getting to stop the no-borders agenda. She is good when she applies herself to investigative journalism and she really should've concentrated on setting up an independent media engine to rival the state. She knows the ropes and would've been able to direct that machine and people, onboard such an imposing media ship.
A fair critique. I usually end up binary on these things.. so I'm glad there is a Gemma rather than not and, you know, there's no such thing as bad publicity etc. :)
 

TW Tone

PI Member
Joined
May 5, 2019
Messages
3,070
Likes
5,678
Location
Wherever Green is Worn
It's not courage to promote yourself in the public spotlight when your own financial situation is very lucratively secured and the label of racist costs you nothing. There is a certain type who craves the limelight and it has to be said, she has that same mentality of most journalists of her generation, hankering after the spotlight and the cause celebre.

There are quite a few nationalists who have done a lot more than this woman, risked far more for acts that carry considerable incarceration time and they cannot declare publicly. These are people who were present long before her or I dare say most here, at the very beginning of the problem, at a time when there was none of the supportive numbers that she and many on the bandwagon can now reply upon. Courage is taking a stand when there is none of that support, when you forge ahead into the unknown knowing you are alone or your actions are definitely illegal and likely to result in your imprisonment, or you stand to lose your job etc, whereas Gemma does not. Gemma has never risked her home or finances and always remained within the boundaries of a supportive element and the law. During the presidential election she was repeatedly asked her views on immigration, the silence was deafening. She cannily kept schtumm on that, engaging in realpolitik to try to win the prize of President. Had she won, she'd be content with the fame and prestige and no doubt be courting the establishment now. She wouldn't be giving Nationalism the time of day. She lost the Prez election, and was already an ostracised figure during that, so she decided to pitch her stall on the burgeoning nationalist market of followers growing massively in Europe, America etc. Yet in these election campaigns, there is nothing of the same realpolitik sensibilities, instead she flagrantly rants about the most offputting topics that anyone could devise to drive voters away, when she had a duty to present a respectable image of nationalism, she has done the opposite, damaged it. Nationalism was the next big thing which showed signs of potential for her to become a 'star', as seems to be the case around the West, a few people here and there seeing their chance to grab the limelight.

Regarding her rather late but limpet-like attachment to the National Party. When the woman saw the rise of the National Party, she latched onto it, only relatively lately. This for me was particularly indicative of a possible troubling mercenary nature of the woman, it was apparent ACI was not getting any traction, but NP were, and she hitched her wagon onto them. NP didn't need her, they were busy making steady increases on their own. ACI were disappearing though, and she needed the NP.

Going forward this could prove seriously damaging to the NP, as the chemtrails,VAXX etc items will drag anyone seen representing the more esoteric fringe down, losing credibility. As I said, I had hoped she got in, only because I am willing to support anyone, even a rather dubious self-serving person, who puts their weight behind securing our borders. However Gemma may now turn out to be more damaging influence for nationalist politics than good for the overall effect of the NP getting to stop the no-borders agenda. She is good when she applies herself to investigative journalism and she really should've concentrated on setting up an independent media engine to rival the state. She knows the ropes and would've been able to direct that machine and people, onboard such an imposing media ship.
She didn't lose "the Prez election".
She wasn't allowed take part.
As to her thinking on Mass Immigration evolving, if substantial numbers of people don't similarly evolve, we're going nowhere. You should welcome it.
All in all, a churlish post by you.
Given GoD's 4%, and NP's zero per cent, it's the proverbial two bald men fighting over a comb.
 

GodsDog

Staff member
Moderator
Premium
PI Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
9,349
Likes
9,183
Location
Barkshire
I

You seem to think all your replies are exceptionally astute and you're some kind of masterful debater, but really you're not, more like a child really,
If you ask me this poster is a total masterdebater! :p
 
Top Bottom