Politics and Elections in the Netherlands: coalition agreement presented

[SunSt0rm]

In this time of global populist fervor, the most underplayed story of this election has to be the quite lousy performance of the SP and that, despite the imminent collapse of the PvdA. It's hard to pin this entirely on the seemingly uncharismatic Roemer.

Its remarkable indeed. Its mainly the fault of Roemer who is seen as a nice but incompetent leader. In every debate, he fails and forgets the numbers. Moreover, its pro-immigration stance is hurting as well, losing many voters to the PVV

[DavidB.]

In this time of global populist fervor, the most underplayed story of this election has to be the quite lousy performance of the SP and that, despite the imminent collapse of the PvdA. It's hard to pin this entirely on the seemingly uncharismatic Roemer.

Yes, it is truly incredible that the SP may lose one third of their seats in an election in which the PvdA has been in an austere, "reformist" government with the VVD for over four years and will collapse because of that. I do think it is mainly Roemer's fault, who could not be taken seriously by most people anymore after his terrible debate performances and subsequent collapse in the polls in 2012. However, the underlying issue, of course, is that the extremely hierarchic SP party structure does not favor those who are charismatic or show leadership but rather those who are obedient. Potential leaders are seen as threats by their superiors and won't get into parliament in the first place. Of course, this only became a problem when Marijnissen, quite the charismatic guy himself, resigned. In its current incarnation, the SP does not appeal to anybody who is not already "locked in". If, then, GroenLinks picks a hot young leader, makes a turn to the left and ends up being the chief alternative to the PvdA for disillusioned voters on the left, it is pretty logical that both PvdA and SP end up losing.

[Zinneke]

So I listened to the radio debate. Klaver stole the headlines by asking Asscher if he would renounce working with the VVD again and turn towards the left parties instead. Asscher gave a condition for working the GL : tougher stance on immigration and integration. He then called Klaver arrogant. Later, when asked who he'd prefer working with, Klaver said the SP. Others :

SP : GL
PvdA : GL
SGP : CDA or CU
CU : non-answer
50+ : SP ("only party that makes 65 65 again")
CDA : non-answer. I think he quoted the Bible to remind us he is Christian.
VVD : D66 and CDA (expected)
D66 : "even with the SP" (D66 in one phrase right there)



Otherwise it was a very awkward first debate. Van der Staaij is probably the one who came out best (made Rutte squirm on defense spending despite both agreeing on the essence) but his ceiling is still limited. Who knows, maybe more intellectual Wilder supporters might flock to him.

[Zinneke]

https://www.noties.nl/v/get.php?a=peil.nl&s=weekpoll&f=2017-02-26.pdf

New polls. 50+ falling towards PVV. FvD and VNL rising from PVV. The former FvD in particular are trying Wilders-lite style tactics, attracting headlines for weird stunts.  I think a lot of people like me would much prefer them than PVV though, so they may be just be being pushed by ''The Elite''(despite FvD attacks on the NPO) as a way to split the PVV.

(can someone post the image?)

[freek]

(can someone post the image?)

[SunSt0rm]

FvD is a bigger threat to the establishment than the PVV in the long run if they manage to get a seat this election. When Wilders leaves politics, the party will be gone.

Tonight, the first tv debate will be held. Roemer, Klaver, Asscher, Pechtold and Buma will be present. Rutte and Wilders will not attend the debate as more than 4 parties were inivited to. Most important thing to watch: battle of the left parties and Buma who will present himself as VVD-light. This is going to be the most important debate for these outsiders to get momentum.

[ApatheticAustrian]

just googled the FvD, remembered i have read about mister baudet somewhere before, checked some of his stances....and once again stumbled over a russia apologist.

why isn't there a proud, european right-wing party, which is at the same time against radical islam and russia's neo-imperialism? it baffles me.

[Zinneke]

why isn't there a proud, european right-wing party, which is at the same time against radical islam and russia's neo-imperialism? it baffles me.

The PVV are pro-Atlanticist/anti-Kremlin --

I'm not sure those two stances are compatible anymore.
Wilders just prefers to travel to the US and have his policies dictated to him there.

[Zinneke]

why isn't there a proud, european right-wing party, which is at the same time against radical islam and russia's neo-imperialism? it baffles me.

The PVV are pro-Atlanticist/anti-Kremlin -- and yes, FVD are definitely too Kremlin-friendly in my opinion.

Will be watching the debate tonight (if RTL broadcast it online, that is).

http://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nederland/politiek/livestream-2100-uur-rtl-rode-hoed-debat

[DavidB.]

Thanks for the link. The idea that Wilders has "his policies dictated to him" is nonsense, though -- completely unsubstantiated. As I said, people donate to his party because they like his views. The PVV's continued insistence on a ban on ritual slaughter may be the best proof that the party isn't willing to budge for its potential donors (I sure wish it were different on this issue...).

[Zinneke]

Thanks for the link. The idea that Wilders has "his policies dictated to him" is nonsense, though -- completely unsubstantiated. As I said, people donate to his party because they like his views. The PVV's continued insistence on a ban on ritual slaughter may be the best proof that the party isn't willing to budge for its potential donors (I sure wish it were different on this issue...).

Hey, remember when Wilders, much like Farage, had a much broader focus on policy issues rather than STOP ISLAM AAAAAH and an A4 sheet for a manifesto, as he actually tried to build a serious RWPP a la Fortuyn. Remember when he came back from the US with a bigger bank account after meeting the neo-cons? Put two and two together...If it was a left-wing populist and the USSR 30 years ago we would all know how your type would react.

Anyway, lets watch the debate,

[DavidB.]

Yeah, this sort of conspirational stuff doesn't fly with me. There is also a difference between the USSR and the U.S., and between private donors and a foreign government.

Klaver is now attacking Pechtold on healthcare. Smart. Pechtold is to the right of his electorate, an important weak spot which Klaver can exploit.

[Zinneke]

Yeah, this sort of conspirational stuff doesn't fly with me. There is also a difference between the USSR and the U.S., and between private donors and a foreign government.

The point of sovereignty and national security is ensuring that foreign actors do not determine your policy through force or through covert action. Clearly whether the foreign actor is a government or not is irrelevant. Ideologies like Marxism and whatever yours will be called in 20 years time (alt-right I don't know) are just vehicles for actors to take over our countries.

Before the eurosceptics start shouting, The EU is another matter. The system was also designed for small countries like ours to not get dominated on a chessboard with France and Germany, and essentially have to pick sides. Furthermore, its legal character is still that of a trading block with security cooperation methods that are entirely a la carte, and the power still lies with the elected national governments.

The Euro is also another matter, I'm more on the eurosceptic side with the Euro, because I believe currency should be a policy instrument and not determined by technocrats with institutional liberalism who haven't successfully modeled money in the economy yet. But let's not also pretend our currencies were somehow manageable and independent in the pre-Euro era.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yup, and he just called Roemer Asscher. He looks uncomfortable though.

[mvd10]

Klaver doesn't completely rule out cooperation with the VVD, but he says the chance they will come to an agreement is very small. The problem is that VVD-CDA-D66-CU-SGP probably won't have a majority, so VVD-CDA-D66 will need another (leftist) party.

Maybe purple plus (VVD-GL-D66-PvdA) becomes an option if GroenLinks wins a lot of seats, but that would be suicide for the VVD. It might be the only way for GroenLinks and PvdA to agree to join a Rutte cabinet though. If GL is in the cabinet while the PvdA isn't GL would lose a lot of seats to the PvdA (and vice versa), but they might enter a coalition with the VVD together. It would be hilarious to see the CDA locked out of government again. But even though I hate Buma I would much rather have a cabinet with the CDA than a left-liberal coalition.

[Zinneke]

Ascher looks and speaks like a cartoon character.

All candidates agree that Islam is not a threat to Dutch identity. Its a poorly phrased question. Bruma is right, the issue is religious extremism, but there you see the effect of Geertje.

Klaver exposing Christian extremist hypocrisy when it comes to the question though. Against gay marriage, against equal rights for women. Same intolerance different religion. EDIT : and now Pechtold too.

[DavidB.]

Buma: "Why do you not support locking up jihadists coming home?"
Klaver: "The CDA were against gay marriage, the KVP were against the right to women's self-determination"

Full edgy internet atheist

[mvd10]

The current CDA and it's voters fully supports gay marriage. There have been multiple homosexual/lesbian CDA ministers. CDA opposed gay marriage in 2001, but the majority of VVD MP's including their leader Bolkestein opposed gay marriage in the mid 90s (they did vote for it in 2001 though). So it's cheap to attack CDA over this imo.

[Zinneke]

Buma: "Why do you not support locking up jihadists coming home?"
Klaver: "The CDA were against gay marriage, the KVP were against the right to women's self-determination"

Full edgy internet atheist

We are forgetting that we are also capable of ''backwards'' mentalities, and it was the Left who had to stick up for women and gay rights, not Wilders', and certainly not Bruma's gang. That's what Klaver was saying.

Its a response to this insinuation that the Left are a fifth column for religious islamist conservatives. You half-quoted Bruma.

The current CDA and it's voters fully supports gay marriage. There have been multiple homosexual/lesbian CDA ministers. CDA opposed it in 2001, but the majority of the VVD MP's including the leader Bolkestein opposed gay marriage in the 90s (they did vote for it in 2001 though). So it's cheap to attack CDA over this imo.

See above. Plus what Pechtold and Asscher said : Dutch identity as it stands is not to be determined by politicians. Bruma still sticking to the Christian argument is just pandering to the missing elephants in the room.

[DC Al Fine]

Buma: "Why do you not support locking up jihadists coming home?"
Klaver: "The CDA were against gay marriage, the KVP were against the right to women's self-determination"

Full edgy internet atheist

This line of reasoning is so tedious. CDA is what, forty years old? People roll their eyes when hacks complain about the Conservative Party of Canada's predecessors. That merger was a mere 13 years ago

[Zinneke]

Roemer votes no to the proposition of taking in more refugees. Interesting.

[DavidB.]

Klaver and Pechtold vote for taking in more refugees, Roemer, Buma and Asscher against. Asscher thinks the limit has been reached and wants to introduce EU quota, Roemer says he wants to take away the causes abroad while never turning away true refugees.

Roemer is surprisingly strong. Buma is also strong but comes across as a bit too angry.

[mvd10]

The SP already is well to the left of their base on issues like refugees. Saying that the Netherlands should take in more refugees would make this rift even bigger (and drive away more SP voters to the PVV). The SP doesn't draw young college educated idealists like Bernie or Corbyn do, the SP base still mainly consists out of lower educated workers.

[DavidB.]

Yeah, Roemer is being hypocritical by voting "no" and gets away with it due to Wilders' absence. He knows it too. Strategically smart, though.

Frits Wester, the moderator, is clearly biased against Roemer, by the way.

[mvd10]

Yeah, Roemer is being hypocritical by voting "no" and gets away with it due to Wilders' absence. He knows it too. Strategically smart, though.

Frits Wester, the moderator, is clearly biased against Roemer, by the way.

Wester used to work for the CDA. He probably still is a CDA member.

[Zinneke]

Yeah, Roemer is being hypocritical by voting "no" and gets away with it due to Wilders' absence. He knows it too. Strategically smart, though.

Frits Wester, the moderator, is clearly biased against Roemer, by the way.

Wester used to work for the CDA. He probably still is a CDA member.

Big if true. How is that allowed btw.

Pechtold on top form tonight. Him and Bruma the big winners for me, but then their competitor, Rutte, is away so they had to be.
 
Roemer may have restarted to SP campaign. Asscher is just a suit with some good lines. Asscher looked nervous, will not be seen as PM material which is unfortunate.