Once Gerry Adams stepped back into the shadows, it was inevitable that the party would increase its appeal, the stench of decomposition no longer pungent in the nostrils of as many voters.
It was slow at first, even going into reverse at one point, but when it moved it did so with lightning-quick speed and for a while the party looked uncatchable. It was soaring in the opinion polls, gliding its way not just into government but to its summit, bagging the position of Taoiseach. Its rivals struggled to keep up with it.
Although on its best day the party never outpolled the combined opposition tally, it still held a commanding position which if translated into Dail seats would have provided powerful leverage with which to prise one of the government parties loose from the current coalition and into a Sinn Feil led government. While the incumbent government certainly had the chance of being returned, Sinn Fein in its favour had the look of a winner. Riding at one point as high as 37% in the polls the party's fortunes seemed to prove the maxim there is no quarrelling with success.
Yet in the latest opinion poll Sinn Fein is down to 23% alongside Fine Gael and a mere three points ahead of Fianna Fail. The downward trend has been consistent since at least January. Some political analysts have sought to explain the slump: John Lee, for example, in the Irish Daily Mail giving what he believes are five underlying reasons for the 'plunge.'
Yet in the latest opinion poll Sinn Fein is down to 23% alongside Fine Gael and a mere three points ahead of Fianna Fail. The downward trend has been consistent since at least January. Some political analysts have sought to explain the slump: John Lee, for example, in the Irish Daily Mail giving what he believes are five underlying reasons for the 'plunge.'
Because the party is deeply populist, trying to be all things to all people, it is vulnerable to the shifting plates of populism and can take a hit on many fronts. Four at least might go some way in explaining its fall from populist grace.
It seems to be hemorrhaging support to the far right which is amplifying and then exploiting hostility towards the influx of people from foreign climes. The far right has read the Sinn Fein playbook for intimidating political opponents and has been quite vociferous towards Sinn Fein people on the hustings. The party is now making noises about the need to control immigration.
It is also shifting its economic stance. After meeting Pearse Doherty, Davy stockbrokers felt confident enough to proclaim that "Overall, Sinn Féin’s approach from an economic standpoint is more ‘New Labour’ than ‘Corbyn Labour’. To many desperate for a home, there is little chance of Blairite economics delivering one.
The eagerness displayed by party leaders to take part in Genocide Joe's Patrick's Day junket without using the occasion to publicly lambast Biden, who at that very moment was arming Israel's genocidal onslaught in Gaza, exacerbated tensions in the base. These had arisen earlier when party councillors in Belfast City Council collectively refused to back a motion calling for the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador to Ireland. This was compounded by the ejection of Palestinian protestors from a Sinn Fein gathering in Belfast supposedly in solidarity with Palestine. This gives legs to the arguments of party critics that it is controlled at all levels by a careerist cartel, eager not to displace the establishment but to become it.
When Michelle Gildernew made a statement that the party was not going to the centre right that was as clear an indicator as any that the centre right was exactly where the party was heading, where it might think is the best place to confront and steal the thunder of the far right, using the logic keep your friends close but your enemies closer. For Sinn Fein to go to the centre right it would involve very little adjustment and certainly nowhere near as much as has been required to complete all the various summersaults it has has made since the onset of the peace process.
Finally, Simon Harris, the Fine Gael leader and Taoiseach, seems young and fresh whereas Mary Lou McDonald looks old and stale. He can be devastatingly effective in his deconstruction of Sinn Fein in a way that other party leaders have not been.
Nothing forensic or scientific in any of the above, just an instinctive sense of where things are at. Still, when the rubber hits the road, if the current government is as unpopular as its detractors claim, it would be in a position similar to the Rishi Sunak government in the UK. And if Sinn Fein is as popular as its supporters claim it would be in the same first class carriage to government as Keir Starmer now occupies. But neither happens to be true. If current opinion polls are an accurate barometer of voter opinion then the government is in a position envied by many incumbent governments, It is riding high and looking down on the opposition. The government has Starmer's popularity while Sinn Fein has Sunak's.
The Sinn Fein mantra for the past four years has been that the people want change. Perhaps the one big change that might result if Sinn Fein ends up in opposition for another term is a change of party leader.
 |
| ⏩Follow on Twitter @AnthonyMcIntyre. |
Harris seems likeable too, the bastard.
ReplyDeleteI wonder are the Shinners still run by committee or is there still large personalities at play behind closed doors that are misreading the room?
Inch by inch calls the Commons.
I sometimes wonder if I'm missing something - I think Sinn Fein MPs taking their seats, and participating in, Westminster would increase their profile and the number of people voting for them. They could get up to all kinds of stunts, side with popular political figures, pressure the government, and they'd get acres of publicity.
ReplyDeleteThere's no ideological difference between taking a seat in the Dail, Stormont, or Westminster, and those that would cease voting for them on a matter of principle would surely have ceased voting for them already.
Seems a no-brainer to me.
Brandon,
DeletePerhaps it's just as simple as having to swear an oath of allegiance to the UK Monarch before taking a seat?
I totally agree. It has always seemed weird to me. There was a period in the last 5 or 6 years when a presence in Westminister would have brought real opportunities. The SNP were the 3rd largest party, Corbyn was the leader of the opposition, Brexit was happening, the SNP were pushing hard for a new referendum and the census showed a catholic majority in NI. Here was a real opportunity for SF to make havoc and push for their own referendum with plenty of potential allies. Why would they forego such an opportunity? It's almost as if they don't really want border poll.
Delete@ Steve R
ReplyDeleteGood point - hadn't considered that. I wonder if there's a way round that though.
Apart from crossing their fingers I doubt it. It would take an act of parliament and I doubt they'd vote to allow a change of oath to accommodate those who've in the past tried to wipe out the entire government in Brighton.
DeleteI vote Sinn Féin not because I agree with everything they say but because they are the closest party to my viewpoints than any other. All of Anthony's points turn me off from Sinn Féin. I agree with much of what Alliance and the Greens say and also much of what People Before Profit have to say. Sometimes an Ulster Unionist says something I'm 100% behind. Even some things DUP politicians say, although that's rare. Sinn Féin remain the closest.
ReplyDeleteI have voted right down the ballot in PR assembly and council elections However, I only want to vote for an abstentionst party. I don't want to legitimise the Westminster Parliament ruling Ireland from England. This is different than The Dáil or even Stormont as the latter two are local political representatives ruling this island from this island. This is more than symbolic. There is accountability and transparency that you don't get from Westminster.
The Good Friday Agreement wasn't the ultimate form of self-determination but it was a limited act of self-determination. People here decided to bring some decision-making power back to this island, a small but significant move. I can vote for someone who can make decisions for me. The parties in power in Westminster don't stand here and have little or no interest in doing so and both main parties are anathema to me. I like some Labour politicians but would likely vote Green if I lived in England. Let them rule themselves and let us rule ourselves.
I don't vote them mainly because I find them almost impossible to believe.
DeleteThe GFA was simply codifying the Bantustan nature of the North. Sam McBride's book Burned illuminated the absence of transparency. At times it as taken the British government to force change or limit the ability of the North's political class to behave in an even more reactionary fashion: abortion, same sex marriage, Libel reform.
There was very little significant about devolving power to the North. Power remained in London which set parameters on what could happen in the North.
The GFA institutionalised and legitimised partition's authority to deny national self determination.
I would only vote SF in one circumstance - if I felt it was necessary to prevent the far right coming to power. And that would be the result of figuring out the political landscape at the juncture. Not because I would believe anything SF would have to say on the matter.
Much of what you say is true. With the RHI scandal the UK government had the PPE scandal and much corruption. The UK forcing things through is mainly down to the Stormont veto as most members were in favour of the changes. The DUP exploit the veto more often as they are steadfast against change. This is an obvious point for reform.
DeleteIt's not perfect and I was very reluctant to vote in favour of the GFA and I don't like Stormont looking down on us from the Hill but there are many unpalatable alternatives and few realistic good ones.
The DUP wrestles with its religious conscience but the conscience always wins.
DeleteBoth parties mirror each other.
Stormont needs an opposition.
Every country has a government but what makes for good governance is a robust opposition who want to replace the government for something other than the sake of being the government.
I think it unwise of republicans not to vote SF because SF abandoned everything republicans believed in. That ship has sailed. There is a lot of important issues that need addressed
and the one decision when voting should be based on what the party might do if in office. In my view they will do absolutely nothing but twist in the wind in a desperate bid to stay in office.
Infatuated with formal power much like they have in Stormont, whereas the real levers of power are elsewhere. Poulantzas was good on this type of thing.
Of course it all makes the strategic question must more difficult to solve. The quick fix solution of revolution and armed armed struggle is not a solution at all.
I no longer believe in either.
AM, I totally get that.
DeleteI don't suppose anyone in PSF would admit to doing 'squeaky bums' but I'd say by next Saturday several of them will be taking note of the location of nearby WC's.
ReplyDeleteThe party who so arrogantly breached the Covid 19 rules at the time of Bobby Storey's funeral may yet experience some enforced humility.
Last time out they didn't run enough candidates, this time it seems they've misread the electorate, and ran too many.