The recent special elections, though small in scale, offered a fascinating peek into the current political landscape and the powerful, sometimes misunderstood, mechanics of Ireland’s voting system. These weren’t about changing the government, but rather about who could claim bragging rights, a test of strength between different political ideologies. Even those on the left, like the Social Democrats, knew that winning two seats in a single area, as happened in Dublin Central, was a rare electoral unicorn, unlikely to be repeated in a general election. Yet, these contests served as an excellent live demonstration of how “transfers” – where voters’ second and third choices move to other candidates – can completely transform an election outcome in the Proportional Representation – Single Transferable Vote (PR-STV) system. They also gave us a clear picture of the ongoing tug-of-war between the mainstream political center-left and the surging hard right. In both elections, the right ultimately lost, not due to a lack of support, but because of how these votes redistributed. And for those wondering how the hard right is handling this defeat, the answer is, to put it mildly, not graciously.
The backlash from some figures on the right has been quite illuminating, bordering on alarming. Dr. Marcus de Brun, a public figure currently facing professional misconduct allegations, responded to the losses by posting his conviction that “the only solution for Ireland is a military coup d’etat.” This kind of extreme rhetoric, especially from someone in a position of public trust, is deeply concerning. Peadar Tóibín, leader of the Aontú party, sent his “commiserations” to Independent Ireland’s candidate in Galway West, expressing incredulity that the mainstream Fine Gael party won with the “help” of Labour, an “opposition party.” It almost sounded as if Tóibín, whose own candidates struggled, was unfamiliar with the concept of tactical voting, or perhaps chose to ignore how much of the winning candidate’s crucial transferred votes came from independents and smaller parties, possibly even some from Aontú supporters. Then there’s Niall Boylan, a radio host and former European Parliament candidate, who lamented that the Independent Ireland candidate, Noel Thomas, “sadly became a victim of the voting system.” Boylan’s Sunday message was particularly unsettling because, as someone deeply embedded in the electoral process, his casual questioning of the system itself, rather than the outcome, raises serious red flags. When influential figures, who understand the system well, start undermining its legitimacy, it’s a dangerous path – one we’ve seen lead to democratic erosion in other countries. Our system is called proportional representation for a reason; it’s designed to ensure a fair distribution of seats. While everyone is entitled to scrutinize it, those with a platform have a responsibility to explain its workings rather than sow doubt.
Many thoughtful individuals on the political center-left, whom we might call “nuanced liberals,” genuinely worry about the rise of the hard right and believe the best way to counter it is by listening more, with greater empathy and understanding. The idea is that people attracted to hard-right views often feel dismissed, disrespected, and patronized by the establishment, and this sense of alienation has pushed them towards figures like Brexit advocates, Trump, Farage, and their homegrown counterparts. While the intention to understand is noble, it’s a complicated and fraught approach. We saw glimpses of this “far-right mindset” in the Irish People party’s campaign posters, which unashamedly mimicked the “Make America Great Again” aesthetic, and in Derek Blighe’s outrageous comment about a photo of Helen Ogbu, brazenly telling the elected representative to “go back to her homeland.” Even veteran criminal Gerard Hutch, interviewed by Cllr Gavin Pepper, offered his own disturbing stream of consciousness about immigrants. These incidents, alongside Bertie Ahern’s revealing comments on a doorstep about immigration, highlight deeply ingrained prejudices that empathy alone might struggle to address, if not inadvertently legitimize.
Interestingly, at a time when national polls suggest public concern about immigration is actually receding, these special elections provided a significant platform for the anti-immigration movement. Noel Thomas, the Independent Ireland candidate, personified this “strong man energy.” A former Fianna Fáil councillor for a decade, he famously declared “the inn is full” in the wake of the arson attack on a proposed refugee shelter in late 2023, promptly finding a home in Independent Ireland. Last year, he even made news for attending meetings of the Oughterard “community council co-op,” an organization linked to the self-proclaimed “Irish Republican Brotherhood,” which startlingly claims to be the legitimate government of the State, complete with its own ministers, courts, and a theory that citizens are not bound by laws they haven’t consented to. Despite this controversial background, Independent Ireland enthusiastically nominated Thomas as their byelection candidate. As his vote count ran neck and neck with Fine Gael’s candidate, Kyne, over the weekend, it wasn’t condescending to question what exactly in Thomas’s history appealed so strongly to his impressive 10,007 first-preference voters. Similarly, it wasn’t disrespectful to wonder why Niall Boylan chose to politicize the voting system rather than use it as an opportunity to educate his audience about its mechanics. While all these figures might vehemently insist they occupy different points on the right-wing spectrum or are simply “standing by their people,” others are entirely justified in being concerned about the direction they intend to steer the country.
One particularly striking moment, echoing the “Trump/Brexit/Reform” political playbook, came from a Dublin Central voter who, in an interview with the Financial Times, “cheerfully” admitted she planned to vote for Gerard Hutch. She conceded that Hutch “hadn’t a clue about policies – but he’d put the cat among the pigeons.” The idea of a leader of an organized crime family, who spends much of his time in Lanzarote and is under Spanish investigation for money laundering – and by his own estimation, could become the wealthiest TD in Leinster House if elected by the working classes of Dublin Central – would have been dismissed as pure satire just a few years ago. Yet, despite, or perhaps because of, his refusal to explain his policies in an RTÉ debate, he garnered over 11% of the vote, securing 2,817 initial votes, which grew to 4,466 after transfers. Both Hutch and Cllr Malachy Steenson, a prominent organizer of anti-immigration protests in Dublin, collectively captured 20% of the vote and have both vowed to run in the next general election, raising concerns about a potential hard-right seat. Ironically, Steenson, who blames the media (with some justification) for turning Hutch into a celebrity, saw nearly 70% of his non-transferable votes flow to the veteran criminal – another powerful lesson on the impact of transfers.
Ultimately, the true victors of these special elections aren’t just the newly elected TDs. They include all the candidates, canvassers, and volunteers who, despite the charged political atmosphere, continued to engage with empathy and understanding, all while steadfastly upholding their political and personal integrity. In an era saturated with highly confident, Trumpian-style misinformation and provocative rhetoric, these individuals truly stood by the people, embodying a commitment to reasoned discourse and democratic participation. Their diligent efforts in simply listening, even to those with vastly different viewpoints, and maintaining their own moral compass, offer a beacon of hope in increasingly fragmented political times.