I have been tuning in to the FNM convention this year and am wondering if any one else notices something that caught my attention.

Last convention when there were nominations and voting there was widespead crying, back biting, bickering, mud slinging, b**ching and yes people leaving the party etc. because they did not like the outcome of the elections or did not get elected.

This time however, despite the hotly contested leadership race, there seems to be so much togetherness and unity. Everyone is being very diplomatic and although saying who their preferred leader would be, pledges to support whomever wins.

I wonder if Wells and Dupuch were still members of the party, would the ambiance be just as tranquil?

Watching this process this time makes me realize even more what rich spoilt babies some people are when they cant get their way.

Any Views?

I have been tuning in to the FNM convention this year and am wondering if any one else notices something that caught my attention.
Last convention when there were nominations and voting there was widespead crying, back biting, bickering, mud slinging, b**ching and yes people leaving the party etc. because they did not like the outcome of the elections or did not get elected.
This time however, despite the hotly contested leadership race, there seems to be so much togetherness and unity. Everyone is being very diplomatic and although saying who their preferred leader would be, pledges to support whomever wins.
I wonder if Wells and Dupuch were still members of the party, would the ambiance be just as tranquil?
Watching this process this time makes me realize even more what rich spoilt babies some people are when they cant get their way.
Any Views?

snickering behind the door:rolleyes:

I was listening to Talk of the Day this morning and a caller commented on Ingraham's entrance and how he was wrong for what he did. The caller called him selfish for his actions. Can someone please explain to me what in the world he did that was so bad. Did he enter the room before Tommie and take all attention away from the FNM leader?

I was listening to Talk of the Day this morning and a caller commented on Ingraham's entrance and how he was wrong for what he did. The caller called him selfish for his actions. Can someone please explain to me what in the world he did that was so bad. Did he enter the room before Tommie and take all attention away from the FNM leader?


From how I heard it he pulled up outside and the masses rushed outside and ushered him in chanting 'It over'.

It did not seem like he planned it.

It seemed to be an impromptu thing. A few supporters went outside to greet him and when the 'mob' found out he was out there they wanted to show their support so they went to greet him.

I have been tuning in to the FNM convention this year and am wondering if any one else notices something that caught my attention.
Last convention when there were nominations and voting there was widespead crying, back biting, bickering, mud slinging, b**ching and yes people leaving the party etc. because they did not like the outcome of the elections or did not get elected.
This time however, despite the hotly contested leadership race, there seems to be so much togetherness and unity. Everyone is being very diplomatic and although saying who their preferred leader would be, pledges to support whomever wins.
I wonder if Wells and Dupuch were still members of the party, would the ambiance be just as tranquil?
Watching this process this time makes me realize even more what rich spoilt babies some people are when they cant get their way.
Any Views?


Lynette, the reason why Messrs. Wells and Dupuch ran as Independent MP's is because the FNM refused to give them the nomination. The reason why the FNM refused to give these gentlemen the nomination was because they both outwardly (in the media) decried the unfair and unjust way that Messrs. Turnquest and Foulkes were elected in the Leadership Convention of 2001. Your question is unfair and loaded with innuendo. These good gentlemen - say whatever you like about them - worked hard for the FNM when it was unpopular to do so.

On top of all that, the FNM Leadership race was nasty, unfair and unjust in 2001, where varying individuals mailigned the characters of their competitors IN PRINT - hardly the Roman form of democracy. To suggest then that these men have "sour grapes" implies that they had no just cause in raising the concerns of unfair play at the polls, when that is simply not true to the facts (intentional or otherwise).

Lynette, the reason why Messrs. Wells and Dupuch ran as Independent MP's is because the FNM refused to give them the nomination. The reason why the FNM refused to give these gentlemen the nomination was because they both outwardly (in the media) decried the unfair and unjust way that Messrs. Turnquest and Foulkes were elected in the Leadership Convention of 2001. Your question is unfair and loaded with innuendo. These good gentlemen - say whatever you like about them - worked hard for the FNM when it was unpopular to do so.
On top of all that, the FNM Leadership race was nasty, unfair and unjust in 2001, where varying individuals mailigned the characters of their competitors IN PRINT - hardly the Roman form of democracy. To suggest then that these men have "sour grapes" implies that they had no just cause in raising the concerns of unfair play at the polls, when that is simply not true to the facts (intentional or otherwise).


You are sorta making my point.

You state that the the Competitors maligned the characters of the competition in print'. This is exactly my point. It seems like things are different this go round.

Could it be the dynamics of the people who are running? Or is it something else?

Yes they (Wells and Dupuch) worked for the FNM when it was the unpopular thing to do and I dont disagree with you about what went on in 2001.

The main thing that got my attention is that the party seems to have Matured a little and the bad behavior of yester year seems to be a thing of the past. Despite the personal disagreements and preferences everyone seems to have the good of the party at heart. Unlike in times past.

You are sorta making my point.
You state that the the Competitors maligned the characters of the competition in print'. This is exactly my point. It seems like things are different this go round.
Could it be the dynamics of the people who are running? Or is it something else?
Yes they (Wells and Dupuch) worked for the FNM when it was the unpopular thing to do and I dont disagree with you about what went on in 2001.
The main thing that got my attention is that the party seems to have Matured a little and the bad behavior of yester year seems to be a thing of the past. Despite the personal disagreements and preferences everyone seems to have the good of the party at heart. Unlike in times past.


Your previous post implied that they (Wells & Dupuch) were somehow the cause of the bad behaviour in the Leadership Convention in 2001 and I'm simply stating that they weren't, they were indeed the victims. The reason I think that the FNM seems to be behaving a bit better this lap is because, wisely they realise that that DISUNITY caused their tremendous cut hip in 2002.

Also, the actioners of that bad behaviour were this time reportedly listening to "the crescendo of voices" and were not driven by who THEY might have wanted as Leader and Dep. Leader, but don't count your chickens before they hatch...election day was today, so let's see what happens.

Your previous post implied that they (Wells & Dupuch) were somehow the cause of the bad behaviour in the Leadership Convention in 2001 and I'm simply stating that they weren't, they were indeed the victims. The reason I think that the FNM seems to be behaving a bit better this lap is because, wisely they realise that that DISUNITY caused their tremendous cut hip in 2002.
Also, the actioners of that bad behaviour were this time reportedly listening to "the crescendo of voices" and were not driven by who THEY might have wanted as Leader and Dep. Leader, but don't count your chickens before they hatch...election day was today, so let's see what happens.


Agreed...the good behavior of the past few days may break down into who knows what, come results time!

Agreed...the good behavior of the past few days may break down into who knows what, come results time!

When are the results going to be public? I wanna know who the new FNM leader is going to be.

When are the results going to be public? I wanna know who the new FNM leader is going to be.


Hubert Ingraham won by I think about 200+ votes.

Hubert Ingraham won by I think about 200+ votes.

quietly, it is over for the plp and they know it!
all for a better Bahamas :bahamas::tup:

Hubert Ingraham won by I think about 200+ votes.

WOW!!!!
Guess I shouldn't have expected nothing less from the situation. I mean it isn't like Tommie actually stood a chance at all against Ingraham. He is much too inexperienced and doesn't have the leadership skills to hold the party together.

I hope they at least keep him on as a senator or MP. It would really suck if they totally kicked him on the side after appointing him the leader of the party for the past 4 years. Then again you never know with this FNM party. They could do just about anything to anyone with no remorse or apology for their actions.

WOW!!!!
Guess I shouldn't have expected nothing less from the situation. I mean it isn't like Tommie actually stood a chance at all against Ingraham. He is much too inexperienced and doesn't have the leadership skills to hold the party together.
I hope they at least keep him on as a senator or MP. It would really suck if they totally kicked him on the side after appointing him the leader of the party for the past 4 years. Then again you never know with this FNM party. They could do just about anything to anyone with no remorse or apology for their actions.

makes no sense in keeping inefficience around. he will be gone just like the PLP- done away with in 2007!

WOW!!!!
Guess I shouldn't have expected nothing less from the situation. I mean it isn't like Tommie actually stood a chance at all against Ingraham. He is much too inexperienced and doesn't have the leadership skills to hold the party together.
I hope they at least keep him on as a senator or MP. It would really suck if they totally kicked him on the side after appointing him the leader of the party for the past 4 years. Then again you never know with this FNM party. They could do just about anything to anyone with no remorse or apology for their actions.

Only Lynden Pindling used to do things like that!

makes no sense in keeping inefficience around. he will be gone just like the PLP- done away with in 2007!

One would be surprised that this outcome was planned some three to four years ago. We all need to read between the lines and take it as it is: just politics and tricks...