Independent socialist Catherine Connolly’s coolness to Brussels and hostility to Donald Trump put her at odds with the Irish government.
She’s slammed NATO, voted against EU treaties, been accused of offering propaganda boosts for dictators from Russia to Syria — and now she’s on track to become Ireland’s next president.
Catherine Connolly, a former mayor of the western city of Galway who’s spent the past nine years as an opposition socialist lawmaker in Ireland’s parliament, has built a commanding polling lead ahead of Friday’s election versus her only challenger, former government minister Heather Humphreys from the center-ground Fine Gael party.
The latest opinion poll, published Wednesday night, put Connolly on 55.7 percent support compared to Humphreys’ 31.6 percent. Results will be announced Saturday, but the surprisingly fleet-footed 68-year-old Connolly acts and talks like she’s already won.
Another fake socialist.
Here’s what she actually says about Ukraine, btw. Doesn’t seem like she’s a Russian propagandist. https://youtube.com/watch?v=FW8co4DMVSo
Seems reasonable in the video.
But the “NATO opposition” is a massive red flag that suggests a complete inability to read and understand the russians.
I will be for nato when it get rid of the usa and it’s influence and stop collaborating with Israel
I hope you and your family end up in a russian internment camp!
Libs when imperialism gets anything less than unquestioning support.
I am not a “lib”, the very term “liberal” isn’t even used correctly in North America.
This was a very specific answer to specific claims (get rid of the US, stop collaborating with Israel). These are ridiculous statements in context of NATO’s primary goal, defence against russian invasions.
They are facts. Opposing NATO doesn’t necessary mean not supporting Ukrainians. Countries has signed international conventions that gives right to support the occupied like Ukraine and Gaza without being in NATO.
Do you still trust the USA what the rest of NATO will do if the USA goes full Russian supporter?
NATO is a supporter of Israel which shouldn’t has anything to do with the area that they try to protect
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel–NATO_relations
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_21331.htm?selectedLocale=en
Look at how Nato can’t even condemn Israeli occupation and backing of settlements and violent settlers
I
The US is a bigger military force (qualitatively and quantitatively) than all other NATO members combined (although UK/France are no slouches and some smaller countries like Poland, Sweden, Finland hold their own). This is a critical issue in holding back the russians.
You denying this (and ignoring that russia is currently occupying 3 non-NATO members, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia), says everything we need to know.
The real irony is that I lean much more towards the Palestinian side, but that doesn’t mean I am going to buying into “DATO forced poor putin to invade1!”
Russia can’t even invade, let alone occupy Ukraine lmao, and Israel is entirely orthogonal if not detrimental to supplying Ukraine with weapons.
Find a new boogeyman to justify a “defense” organization that has never acted in self-defense.
There is many Ukrainian area occupied by Russia but you are right that during the war
NATO shills are so full of it. Russia is both comically weak, but also such a threat that every country from Turkey to Canada must be a part of it. And must pour shit loads of money into it.
A lot of effort to defend against a country that can’t even take a third of a much smaller and weaker neighbour.
Funny as well because the country next door that invaded and occupied Ireland for centuries (and still does a part of it) is in NATO. Russia never threatened Ireland. It’s not hard to see why many Irish people reject this sort of militarism.
Thank you for proving my point with your “BATO made putin do it” world salad!
I couldn’t have done a better job myself.
I hope you and your family end up get tortured in Israeli jail
deleted by creator
Not that it matters in a purely ceremonial governmental position.
There is some truth to that, but I think you generally want savvy individuals even in ceremonial positions
Fair, but have you seen the other candidates?
I have not, no.
Are you saying nothing they advocate for matters at all? No? Then where do you draw the line? Seems like a disingenuous statement. Of course it matters what the opinions of a elected official are.
Sure, it matters what the opinions of an elected official are. But when the elected official in question holds little to no power, then does it really matter what their specific opinion on NATO is, especially when the other candidates are right-wing dipshits? It’s good to have a head of state with generally respectable opinions, but in the grand scheme of things, this doesn’t matter.
Seriously, these are a crazy mix of viewpoints.