Politics and Elections in the Netherlands: Rutte III era

[DavidB.]

An official state commission on democratic and electoral reform, led by former minister of Interior Affairs Johan Remkes (VVD), has presented a sneak preview of suggestions that will be put forward in their final report in December, some of which are quite controversial: a binding corrective referendum, an elected Prime Minister, moving towards a district-based electoral system (presumably still under PR), and an elected "coalition formateur" (e.g. a leftist voter could vote for PvdD for parliament but would prefer GL leader Jesse Klaver to receive the initiative to form a government). None are likely to be implemented under this conservative government (and many would require a constitutional revision in the first place), but these ideas will probably continue to be on the shelves: I expect D66, FVD, PVV, and some of the left-wing parties to take the advise seriously. No high hopes for real change though: the Dutch constitution is relatively "set in stone" and remarkably few substantial changes have taken place since 1848. There have been several commissions like this one over the last couple of decades, and almost none of their advises have ever been implemented.

The commission finds the increasing gap in opinions between higher and lower educated voters combined with lower educated voters' increasing lack of the sense that they are being represented the most worrying development in Dutch democracy.

[DavidB.]

The PVV has really gone down the tubes. Henk Bres is a PVV "stand-in local councilman" in The Hague, elected with preferential votes despite being too low on the list. He is well-known locally for being a not particularly smart loudmouth idiot (him being on the PVV list was absurd in the first place) and also known for "charming" remarks such as "f**king cancer Muslims", and he now retweeted this infantile cartoon depicting Mark Rutte being bought and paid for by The Jews:
https://twitter.com/RMBras1973/status/1011303179131195392

[mvd10]

Dijkhoff organized a 'stand-up politics' night. It was a combination between politics and comedy (comedian Rob Scheepers also was there). There was some controversy because the tweet which announced the night seemed to imply they were going to make fun of refugees, but Dijkhoff stated this absolutely wasn't the case and he said he hoped people who wanted him to do that would stay home. Still, there were a bunch of very high-energy protestors. Dijkhoff invited them in but they didn't want to be part of the 'racist VVD propaganda show'.





(feel the high energy)

Seriously, Dijkhoff has been actively angering the activist left for the past few weeks. That's part of his job as VVD fraction leader and probably future leader. I don't even think it's a bad thing, Dijkhoff was broadly popular with everyone before these incidents but if he becomes VVD leader he was going to piss these people (who will never vote VVD lol) off anyway.

[DavidB.]

Love woke Dutch Twitter insisting Baudet, Wilders, Rutte and Buma are all fascists.

An interesting indicator of just how quickly the debate on immigration and asylum has shifted: only three years ago, VVD immigration spokesman Malik Azmani almost stood alone in proposing migration deals with Northern African countries and an end to the right to come to Europe and ask for asylum. Now, 85% of parliament support this. Not only D66 and CU have pulled a 180 since the election campaign, but so did PvdA (Asscher's visit to Denmark's SDs might have played a role here too) and SP (Roemer was more of an "internationalist" than Marijnissen/Meyer), which means GL almost stand alone in their opposition, with only the small PvdD and DENK on their side.

[mvd10]

Love woke Dutch Twitter insisting Baudet, Wilders, Rutte and Buma are fascists.

An interesting indicator of just how quickly the debate on immigration and asylum has shifted: only three years ago, VVD immigration spokesman Malik Azmani almost stood alone in proposing migration deals with Northern African countries and an end to the right to come to Europe and ask for asylum. Now, 85% of parliament support this. Not only D66 and CU have pulled a 180 since the election campaign, but so did PvdA (Asscher's visit to Denmark's SDs might have played a role here too) and SP (Roemer was more of an "internationalist" than Marijnissen/Meyer), which means GL almost stand alone in their opposition, with only the small PvdD and DENK on their side.

Woke UvA DENK-PvdD-Bij1 coalition inevitable!

But I believe a few weeks ago some American sociologist actually wanted to convince the Dutch public that a PvdD-BIJ1-DENK coalition would somehow be a good idea (he also claimed that climate change would cause the proletariat to overthrow the bourgeoisie, Scarlet would love it). Thank God notoriously left-wing occasional Buitenhof presenter Mar(x)cia Luyten will finally leave next year.

Another incident I remember now. A boy had a very high grade for history at high school (exams were a month ago or so). The boy also was an active FvD member. His teacher rewarded him by calling him out publicly and giving him a book on the dangers of fascism (lol).

[Republican Left]

This is for David B.

Why have the Dutch people taken such a hardline on immigration, specifically refugee policy (including the Christian Left CU and the socialistic SP)? Does this mean the Wilder's movement will end up obsolete like UKIP over the long run? Has the current situation somewhat disrupted social cohesion and order to an extent (I understand immigration can be messy)? Are smaller countries like Holland and Belgium, more vulnerable to this due to a smaller, more compact though not necessarily crowded geography?

If you don't mind me asking, how is the policy situation in Holland. For example, how is the economy and jobs situation doing, how are public finances, the education and health systems? Is Holland also have demographic issues from a low birth rate or it isn't really a major issue than other places like Japan?

Also, if I may ask, what is your opinion on the CDA (and the CU, is that their version of a CSU like in the CDU/CSU coaltion)? I understand you may or may not be a fan, but how is that party doing, is there anything they can do like more outreach or canvassing or are they doomed to decline due to the long-run trends of depillarization and secularization? I hope I'm not bothering you with all my questioning.

Also, if you don't mind me asking, what is your favorite part of living in Holland? What is her culture and people like? Would you describe your country as very asethically pleasing and beautiful place?

[DavidB.]

I think mvd10 is just as qualified as I to answer these questions, which are rather broad, but here goes...

- In terms of immigration policy I don't actually think the Netherlands is among the most "hardline" countries in Western Europe: Denmark and Austria clearly seem to be ahead of us.
- Wilders' PVV might well end up being obsolete, but mostly due to his own strategic mistakes, such as not campaigning in the 2017 General Election. As a result, FVD appears to be a good replacement to the PVV to many. However, it is also true that CDA and VVD have moved to the right due to the PVV's strong electoral position, the fact that the PVV have essentially steered the immigration debate in their direction, and the fact that there are many VVD/PVV and CDA/PVV swing voters.
- The 2015 migration crisis has mostly affected rural communities with asylum seeker centers, where the inflow of immigrants has had a very disruptive effect. Outside these areas, the impact has been relatively minimal. I live in a big city and am not sure I have ever seen any migrants taken in in 2015. But of course I do live in a minority-majority neighborhood and in a minority-majority city and it all adds up. Many Dutch people, like me, live in areas where they do not only feel as if they are a minority, they actually are a minority. Taking in almost 400k refugees in four years does not exactly improve the situation, especially in the long run, given birth rates.
- Difficult to say whether smaller countries in terms of size are more vulnerable to the socially disruptive effects of mass immigration than bigger countries. Population might matter more here than the geographical size of the country.
- I think the economy is doing very well, unemployment is low, the public finances situation is good, the education and healthcare systems generally work well even though an increasing number of people (1 million in 2017) have trouble affording their healthcare deductibles. However, we do have low native birthrates (though not as bad as Germany) and an aging population.
- The CDA have an existential problem as declining partisanship, secularization and an aging base mean that their electoral potential has decreased by a lot. They have to find a new strategy to appeal to center-right voters, but are strongly divided internally and their future looks bleak, though the Dutch electorate is volatile and the CDA could absolutely still win a general election with a good leader who has a strong message.
- CU are not like CSU: they are an independent party (not in any alliance with the CDA) with a clearly more left-wing profile than CDA (as opposed to CSU, who are more right-wing than the CDU, of course).
- I love living in the Netherlands, even more so after having lived and worked abroad. Most things (education, economy, healthcare, bureaucracy) are organized very well, I find most of the Dutch cities to be beautiful, the high population density means that there are a lot of facilites and an excellent public transit network running day and night, it is located quite centrally within Europe, and I find many of the rural areas to be beautiful too. Things that I like less are the weather and the fact that excelling is slightly looked down upon ("acting normal is crazy enough already" is one of our most common expressions).

[mvd10]

I'm not DavidB but I think I can answer some questions .

CDA/CU definitely isn't like CDU/CSU. First of all CDA and CU don't even have any official understanding, they're completely separate and different parties. CDA is a big tent Christian party, CU basically is a Protestant party. Dutch society was divided in pillars up until the 1960s and Catholics, Protestants, Socialists and Liberals (the fourth, 'neutral' pillar) didn't really have a lot of contact. In the 1970s when everyone saw pillarization was basically over and secularization started to hurt Christian Democratic parties the KVP (Catholic party) and two Protestant parties decided to merge. The more conservative Protestant parties of SGP, GPV and RPF (latter 2 became CU) always were much more anti-Catholic than the ARP and CHU (which merged into the CDA) so they obviously didn't join. CU accepts Catholic members now but I believe there still isn't a single prominent Catholic CU politician. And CDA is much more right-wing on identity issues than the CU, CU actually is quite progressive on issues like climate change, immigration, refugees, etc. In the past you could actually call them Christian left. They're not as left-wing as in the past, but on issues like immigration they're much closer to the left than to CDA. If the CDA were to have anything close to the CSU it probably would be the more conservative/right-wing Catholics CDA politicians in Limburg deciding to split off because they've lost enough to the PVV. There was talk of that 6/7 years ago but it's never going to happen (it's completely unrealistic). Depillarization practically has been completed anyway, so that won't affect the CDA anymore . Their electorate is aging, the Netherlands is becoming less Christian (and the very religious ones vote CU/SGP anyway) so their future doesn't look good. But I think they can survive if they become a big tent culturally conservative party. They probably won't ever win the elections again, but they still can be relevant in that role.

Economically things are going fine, even though there are a lot of people who don't really 'feel' it. That's a problem and the government basically is trying to solve it by cutting taxes and 'making people feel things are going better'. The public finances are excellent, the Netherlands is projected to have large surpluses in the coming few years (was to be expected after Rutte 1 and Rutte 2 pursued very ambitious austerity programs). There still is a debate on what to do with the surpluses (the government will spend a lot of money). Some economists want the government to be more austere and to stabilize the economy (Dutch economy is rather volatile, will come back to that later), other economists (and the IMF) advise the Netherlands to spend/invest more in things like infrastructure and education because interest rates are extremely low. There even are some economists who argue that Northern countries with huge trade and budget surpluses should start stimulating the economy and demand while Southern countries with huge deficits (Italy, Spain) should pursue more structural reforms (reducing employment protection, etc). They argue this will lead to a more balanced Eurozone (Northern European countries would reduce their criminally big trade surpluses because of the deficit spending, Southern European countries would reduce their trade deficits because of structural reforms and new Northern demand for cheap Southern poducts).

Another problem might be the labour market. We have a lot of people on flexible contracts with no job security. The right argues that this is because of strict employment protection laws for people on permanent contracts, the left argues that this is the case because of lax regulation for flexible contracts.

We also have a booming housing market with rising prices and very expensive rents (good luck finding a house in Amsterdam lol). The right (and a bunch of economists) argue that this is the case because of strict rent controls, the left wants to build more houses. I believe the IMF recommended reducing rent control laws. Another reason for the weird housing market here is the mortgage deduction. Because Dutch tax rates are higher and we don't have anything like the standard deduction the mortgage deduction is much more important in the Netherlands. We have a huge pile of mortgage debt and because of it the Dutch economy is rather volatile. If things are going well they are going great (2017, 2018), if things aren't going well we're f**ed (2012-2014). IMF recommends limiting the mortgage interest deduction (centre-right/right-wing parties oppose it during campaigns, but it happens anyway) and stricter regulation (allowing people to lend max 90% of the house price).

I don't really know a lot about the healthcare system and the educational system. But our healthcare system basically is Obamacare on steroids. Insurance is mandated and private insurers are forced to offer basic coverage to everyone (and it's free for children). I believe it works pretty well even though there are some concerns about the costs.

As for the educational system, all schools are publicly funded but they have quite a lot of freedom. There even are some religious schools which are publicly funded but can refuse students if they're not religious (legacy of 1917). Not really a problem since quality education is accessible almost everywhere. Only in some big cities there are a lot of worries about white parents not willing to send their children to (worse) 'black schools' which might lead to segegration and inequalities. Children get separated in 3 different categories when they're 12 (based on the teacher's opinion of their cognitive abilities). VMBO prepares you for vocational training, HAVO prepares you for HBO (university of applied sciences, more practical and less theoretical version of universities), VWO prepares you for actual universities. Obviously it's possible to move up if it becomes clear you can handle a higher level (I know a lot of people who moved from HAVO to VWO, I even know someone who started out at VMBO and ended up at VWO). There is some concern about the bad image of the VMBO, apparently only 45% of VMBO pupils feels safe at school while more than 80% of VWO pupils feels safe. This has led to parents 'pushing' children to HAVO/VWO which has led to a shortage of skilled workers. You can't blame the parents for this though, generally HBO/university offer better job prospects than vocational training/MBO. And I'm pretty sure HAVO/VWO probably is a safer environment for your children than VMBO. University education isn't really expensive. You can get government loans under very good terms and lower-income students still get free government grants. Still, because of the loans there is a lot of pressure (especially for low-income students) to graduate within 4 (or 5 depending on the study) years which might led them to pursue less extracurricular activities which might hurt their position on the job market. And a lot of people are studying in less employable fields while there will be a shortage of STEM degrees (also a problem for MBO and HBO).

I'm going to let David answer the other questions

(lol David ninja'd me)

I obviously love living in the Netherlands btw

[mvd10]

Anyway, the PVV probably always will have a niche role as I imagine many PVV voters think Baudet is too much of a snob (though they'll probably vote for FvD if they actually stand a chance to win the elections). Education probably doesn't really play a role for your left/right orientation, but it seems like higher educated voters vote for completely different parties. D66 (centrist), GL (left-wing) and to a lesser extent VVD (right-wing) are disproportionally supported by higher-educated voters while doing pretty badly with voters with a high school education. SP (left-wing) and PVV (far-right) do much better with voters with just a high school education. With FvD (right-wing/far-right) and PvdD (animals rights party) it looks like we even have anti-establishment parties for OSM ('ons soort mensen', basically a nickname for snobs). I think there is a hard core of PVV voters who just won't vote for someone like Baudet (he loves to portray himself as an intellectual).

People who have voted VVD for 40 years, say they now support <insert right-wing populist party here> and won't ever vote VVD again and then still vote VVD at the last possible moment (or in the next election) because they don't want the left to win or because of a last-minute 'October surprise' (Turkish ministers campaigning in the Netherlands) has been a recurring meme since the early 2000s or so. As a very optimistic VVD member I fully expect that to happen again in 2021 (or earlier) . Which is a reason why polls show there aren't many VVD-PVV swing voters even though there probably are some.

[Republican Left]

Loved both of your responds. I'm really sorry to overlook you Mvd, I liked your response especially in better understanding the CDA and CU. Thank you for your responds about the Netherlands. If I may ask you Mvd, why are you a supporter of VVD, if I may ask.

I hope you don't mind me having a take on your issues later. Hope you don't mind Americans opinion on Holland politics.

[DavidB.]

Thanks for your kind response!

To the surprise of absolutely nobody, former GL leader Femke Halsema will be the new mayor of Amsterdam and also the first non-PvdA mayor in Amsterdam since WW2.

[Republican Left]

This is for mvd10 (sorry again for overlooking you! I loved your response!)

Would the CDA get broad-based appeal amongthe broader electorate including young adults and
non-religious voters (heck even muslim voters, once they settle and integrate over time) if they build themselves up as the "good government" and "pro-community" party without necessarily sacrificing their principles (what's the point of voting for similar shades, if everyone's the same)? Do you have any info behind the splits?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I really like this, yes austerity is painful but over the long-run it provides an opportunity to invest in future endeavors as budget policy is rebalanced. I know this is going into the fantastical but I wish governments had more structural surpluses which would mean it would be much easier to invest in one project or the other. Is there anything you'd like to see the surpluses spend on?

In respect to labor policy, is the issue as bad as it is in France (I understand France and to an extent Italy are countries where labor reform is being debated and considered)? How is the Dutch labor market, it is abound with good jobs with benefits that allow a measure of self-sufficiency for Dutch workers and families and allows them to save for the future?

On the housing issue, is Holland doomed to deal with pricey homes due to the fact that the country is only so large, how would you address it? With health care, deductibles are a downer but without them, the health care system could become overloaded and overwhelmed, at least with cost-sharing, you can incentivize folks to stay in tip-top shape as much as they can (and provide a safety net and a floor which serves as a baseline and floor for those in need).

In respect to the Dutch education system, is the three tier pathway basically akin to Germany's system, this does sound like a rather well-organized system with enough freedom for students with the drive to move up if they were sorted in the wrong track for whatever reason (bad year, bad teacher, etc). Why don't they just improve conditions in the VMBO schools (yes I understand it's easier said than done), I know this sounds stereotypical but it seems like the vocational track is more likely to have disadvantaged students (perhaps those with disabilities, or refugee students trying to fit in Dutch society), could developing a more holistic approach improving the VMBO schools and put those students on the wrong track (while almost promoting societal inclusion and social mobility?)?

Again, I hope some American opining on Dutch politics and policy isn't turning you off. The Dutch model seems to work well in some aspects even if I don't agree with everything the Netherlands does or trends.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Looks like the CU is a better ideological fit for me than I thought.

[mvd10]

This is for mvd10 (sorry again for overlooking you! I loved your response!)

Would the CDA get broad-based appeal amongthe broader electorate including young adults and
non-religious voters (heck even muslim voters, once they settle and integrate over time) if they build themselves up as the "good government" and "pro-community" party without necessarily sacrificing their principles (what's the point of voting for similar shades, if everyone's the same)? Do you have any info behind the splits?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I really like this, yes austerity is painful but over the long-run it provides an opportunity to invest in future endeavors as budget policy is rebalanced. I know this is going into the fantastical but I wish governments had more structural surpluses which would mean it would be much easier to invest in one project or the other. Is there anything you'd like to see the surpluses spend on?

In respect to labor policy, is the issue as bad as it is in France (I understand France and to an extent Italy are countries where labor reform is being debated and considered)? How is the Dutch labor market, it is abound with good jobs with benefits that allow a measure of self-sufficiency for Dutch workers and families and allows them to save for the future?

On the housing issue, is Holland doomed to deal with pricey homes due to the fact that the country is only so large, how would you address it? With health care, deductibles are a downer but without them, the health care system could become overloaded and overwhelmed, at least with cost-sharing, you can incentivize folks to stay in tip-top shape as much as they can (and provide a safety net and a floor which serves as a baseline and floor for those in need).

In respect to the Dutch education system, is the three tier pathway basically akin to Germany's system, this does sound like a rather well-organized system with enough freedom for students with the drive to move up if they were sorted in the wrong track for whatever reason (bad year, bad teacher, etc). Why don't they just improve conditions in the VMBO schools (yes I understand it's easier said than done), I know this sounds stereotypical but it seems like the vocational track is more likely to have disadvantaged students (perhaps those with disabilities, or refugee students trying to fit in Dutch society), could developing a more holistic approach improving the VMBO schools and put those students on the wrong track (while almost promoting societal inclusion and social mobility?)?

Again, I hope some American opining on Dutch politics and policy isn't turning you off. The Dutch model seems to work well in some aspects even if I don't agree with everything the Netherlands does or trends.

Apparently CDA won 9% of young voters in 2017 (this surprised me, I actually thought they'd get less than 5%). I don't think Muslim voters will vote CDA in the forseeable future, they're far too culturally conservative for that. Right now Muslims vote pretty much exclusively for de-facto Muslim party DENK (I believe 50% of Muslims voted for them). I imagine there will always be place for a vaguely Christian 'pro-community' conservative party since neither the VVD (probably a bit too 'libertarian' for lack of a better word) nor the left will take that role (even though the VVD has become more culturally conservative). Famous electoral geographer Josse de Voogd (our king is alive!) made this map:



Green areas are areas that vote for the left, even if it's arrogant (think Hillary Clinton & 'deplorables'). They're mainly big cities and university towns. Blue areas are areas that vote right-wing anyway (a combination of wealthy VVD suburbs, CU/SGP Bible Belt areas and religious CDA-voting Catholic areas in eastern Noord-Brabant and eastern Overijssel). Yellow areas aren't monolithic by any means but generally they are the kind of areas that feel left behind by globalisation. De Voogd claims they'd vote for the left if they were less 'arrogant' (or more culturally conservative/populist). I hate to make the comparison but I guess you could see them as the Dutch version of the Midwest. It isn't really a good comparison because a lot of these yellow places didn't even vote for the left in the first place. I don't think the yellow parts of Noord-Holland voted for any left-wing party the past 30 years and parts of Limburg and Friesland are yellow even though they mostly voted for the CDA in the past. Almost all of the yellow places outside the northern 3 places voted VVD over PvdA/Labour in 2012 anyway. It seems like most of those places last voted for the left in the 1990s. But anyway, you get the idea. I imagine a more culturally conservative 'pro-community' CDA would win a lot of these places (even though some yellow places really aren't going to vote CDA while others vote CDA anyway). But seriously, I think that some of the yellow parts of Noord-Holland probably would never vote for the left, I don't know where de Voogd got that idea from. Other than that the map seems okay.

I'm a staunch VVD supporter because that's the party any libertarian-leaning person with some conservative leanings on immigration and law and order ends up . I don't like Buma (CDA leader) at all, I'm not particularly religious (so no CU/SGP), I'm rather libertarian on economic issues (no left-wing parties), I don't really like EU federalism but I'm also not an Eurosceptic either (no PVV, FvD) and I think D66 is a bit too left-wing overall. So that only leaves the VVD .

The Dutch labour market has rather strict employment protections. This probably doesn't really affect unemployment, but in theory it does increase the duration of unemployment (so there will be few people who will be unemployed for years instead of a situation where people will be layed off more easily but also can find a job relatively fast) and it creates a huge gap between people on permanent contracts and people on sh**tty temporary contracts. The main result is a dual labour market with a group of winners and a group of losers. The reason for low German unemployment wasn't the labour market reforms, it was a period of wage moderation agreed to by both labour unions and employer unions (they tend to work together rather harmoniously in Rhineland countries). The reason why France has high unemployment rates are hilariously high labour costs in France. And literally everything is a dysfunctional hellhole in Italy, so no surprises there. I still think employment protection laws generally are bad and inefficient, but not necessarily because they can affect unemployment.

For now the labour market is quite good, there is a shortage of workers in most sectors which will cause wages to rise (and hopefully it will cause employers to offer more permanent contracts).

I really think the problems in the housing markets are caused by things like the mortgage deduction (which sadly is overwhelmingly supported by the right) and way too much government regulation (rent controls) distorting the markets but that's the opinion of a borderline libertarian .

I still think the Dutch education system generally is great though. We don't have an elite who attended extremely expensive private prep schools, there are enough opportunities to move up if you want, the differences between the quality of different schools aren't as big as in other countries and there also are positive effects of separating the children when they're 12. It allows for more customization and because only people with a VWO degree (or HBO) can attend universities all of our universities are excellent and students should be well-prepared to enter university (which is affordable for everyone). There are some problems, but overall we have a great education system in my opinion. As for now the main problem is social inequality (children of minorities and poorer people disproportionally go to VMBO, children of wealthier people disproportionally go to VWO). But I don't think whether the problem is any bigger than in other European countries (and the problem certainly is bigger in Anglosaxon countries).

I'm not sure whether the austerity was a really good idea. I broadly supported it but at times I thought they went too far. Sure, the Dutch economy is a very open economy so stimulus doesn't always work and austerity might not be as bad as some leftists claim but I think I'd have preferred a more gradual austerity programme and more structural reforms. Mass austerity (we're talking about huge tax hikes and big spending cuts, much more than in other European countries) during a recession doesn't really sound like a brilliant idea. But then again, politicians wouldn't have had the discipline to continue a more gradual programme during better economic times so maybe it was better this way. If they had taken more time to implement the reforms they surely would have cancelled them by now because the economy is growing. And then we'd have been f**ed again during the next recession. Which is why the Dutch central bank isn't happy with the government splurging the money now (but the IMF is happy with it). 10 economists, 11 opinions .

[TheSaint250]

Two hypothetical coalition questions:

1. If GL were to win the most seats for a left-wing party, what would be some likely coalitions?

2. In the (very) hypothetical scenario that parties were willing to work with PVV to form a coalition, which parties would be most likely to do so? I assume FvD is one of them.

EDIT: One more question:

The VVD leadership election in which Rutte won was seen as the right-liberals vs. more right-wing conservatives (iirc). After Rutte leaves, what are the chances of the conservative faction taking control of the party?

[SunSt0rm]

Two hypothetical coalition questions:

1. If GL were to win the most seats for a left-wing party, what would be some likely coalitions?

2. In the (very) hypothetical scenario that parties were willing to work with PVV to form a coalition, which parties would be most likely to do so? I assume FvD is one of them.

EDIT: One more question:

The VVD leadership election in which Rutte won was seen as the right-liberals vs. more right-wing conservatives (iirc). After Rutte leaves, what are the chances of the conservative faction taking control of the party?

1. Klaver wanted a CDA-D66-GL-SP-PvdA government during the 2017 election. You could add PvdD and CU as well in the combination. Such an option is very unlikely as CDA more or less ruled it out during the 2017 campaign and the VVD-CDA-D66-GL negotiations failed because of differences between CDA/VVD and GL. Purple Plus VVD-PvdA-D66-GL could be an option, but also unlikely as  GL moved left since 2010.

2. It is very unlikely that the PVV is ever in a government since 2012. The only parties that could work with PVV are probably FVD and SGP and maybe 50+. It very much depends if VVD and CDA ever change their stance of never governing with PVV.

3. The next likely successor of Rutte is Dijkhoff currently factionleader of in parliament. He is probably more conservative than Rutte. He recently has highlighted right wing proposals as cutting welfare of people who are unwilling to work and sending refugees back after more than 5 years. MVD or David probably know more about Dijkhoff than me

[mvd10]

Two hypothetical coalition questions:

1. If GL were to win the most seats for a left-wing party, what would be some likely coalitions?

2. In the (very) hypothetical scenario that parties were willing to work with PVV to form a coalition, which parties would be most likely to do so? I assume FvD is one of them.

EDIT: One more question:

The VVD leadership election in which Rutte won was seen as the right-liberals vs. more right-wing conservatives (iirc). After Rutte leaves, what are the chances of the conservative faction taking control of the party?

I fully agree with SunSt0rm. GL would need atleast 1 right-wing party to govern with (we're likely not seeing a leftist majority anytime soon, and that is if you count D66 as centre-left) and neither VVD or CDA wants to be the only right-wing party in a broadly centre-lefy coalition. We'd probably see a vague centrist coalition (Purple Plus + CDA, the anyone but Thierry/Geert coalition?).

Like SunSt0rm said, it's extremely unlikely that the PVV will be in government ever again. I'm curious about FvD though. They're probably very cautious to work with an right-wing populist party again and Baudet also has said some things he'd probably need to retract if he wants to be in government, but they haven't had a breach of trust with Baudet like they had with Wilders, so maybe it's possible if the overton window shifts further to the right and FvD wins the election with a huge margin. I strongly doubt it though, I don't think we'll see FvD in government either.

Internal debate in the VVD has weakened the past few years. Ideological debate almost tore the party apart after the disastrous Rutte-Verdonk leadership election so they're really not keen on that anymore. Both flanks of the VVD weakened. The old D66-light moderates don't really have a lot of influence anymore, but the VVD also doesn't have vocal right-wing rebels who aren't happy with the current course either. The right-wing membership wasn't really happy with the possibility of a coalition with GL, but they also kept relatively quiet during the formation. So I don't think there will be anything like a revolution after Rutte leaves.

In a sense the right-wing faction did take control of the party. At heart Rutte might remain a centrist liberal but the VVD did shift to the right under him and I struggle to name any prominent moderate VVD politicians. Maybe Hennis-Plasschaert or Wiebes? But they won't ever be leader and they definitely don't dissent with the current course of the VVD. The old moderate wing of the VVD is only relevant in Amsterdam and some big cities, and even there the only real differences are that they're slightly less right-wing on immigration and more woke on climate change. Meanwhile people like Rutte or Dijkhoff are saying things that would have been unthinkable 10 years ago.

In 2008/2009 Mark Rutte had a few talks with a former Tory/GOP political consultant (the VVD was at a low point in the polls) and the consultant advised Rutte to go back to the basics and shift to the right if he wanted to win (and guess what happened lol). Dijkhoff probably will more or less continue on the same line as Rutte, we really shouldn't forget that post-2009 Rutte has been pretty right-wing during campaigns. Dijkhoff (or Schippers, who also remains a possibility if she decides she wants to return to politics) might only be marginally more right-wing than Rutte.

[DavidB.]

Completely agreed with mvd10 and SunSt0rm. There don't really seem to be any factional differences within the VVD anymore, because Rutte's historical run of electoral successes has turned the party into the Rutte machine. It is difficult to pin down Klaas Dijkhoff ideologically; I suspect his "natural leaning" might be slightly more to the right than Rutte's, but I doubt this will actually matter given that both are, err, quite "flexible"... It's easier to pin down Schippers: she is to Rutte's left when it comes to progressive vs. conservative issues ("social issues", as the Americans call them), but more right-wing on immigration and the like, and she has been quite open about this. But Dijkhoff is going to be Rutte's successor anyway.

The VVD's latest tactic is to chime in to every "identity politics" or "culture war" debate and pick the right-wing, "traditionalist" side -- this used to be Zijlstra's job, but it is Dijkhoff's job now. The left call this VVD tactic "PVV statute labour", performed in order to appeal to VVD-PVV swing voters (which is true, but it also contains the element that the VVD aren't sincere in expressing these positions, which I am less sure about -- at this point, many VVD MPs are not very distinguishable from PVV MPs in terms of actual policy positions). This usually does not have any direct consequences in terms of policy, which makes it particularly smart strategy in appealing to people because the political costs are zero. Notable exception where this did affect policymaking: a D66 deputy minister and a CDA minister were preparing a ban on consumer fireworks for New Year's Eve, but the VVD vetoed this idea, as this is regarded as a culture war issue.

[TheSaint250]

Thank you all

[Harlow]

Two hypothetical coalition questions:

1. If GL were to win the most seats for a left-wing party, what would be some likely coalitions?

2. In the (very) hypothetical scenario that parties were willing to work with PVV to form a coalition, which parties would be most likely to do so? I assume FvD is one of them.

EDIT: One more question:

The VVD leadership election in which Rutte won was seen as the right-liberals vs. more right-wing conservatives (iirc). After Rutte leaves, what are the chances of the conservative faction taking control of the party?

1. Klaver wanted a CDA-D66-GL-SP-PvdA government during the 2017 election. You could add PvdD and CU as well in the combination.

I thought PvdD, as a testimonial party, wasn't interested in being involved with government coalitions. Has their position on that changed?

[DavidB.]

I thought PvdD, as a testimonial party, wasn't interested in being involved with government coalitions. Has their position on that changed?

No, they generally aren't interested in participating in coalitions, but they could theoretically support a sufficiently left-wing coalition (i.e. one that will never have a majority in NL...) from the outside.

[parochial boy]

Speaking of PvdD, and I swear I saw someone mention at some point that they got quite a lot of a protest in the kinds of places you wouldn't necessarily expect. So, beyond the obvious kind of person who would vote for a party like them, who is voting PvdD as a protest option?

[EPG]

I suppose animal rights as a single issue does not necessarily bear any of the green movement's connotations of being part of the historical Left tradition.

[Zinneke]

I suppose animal rights as a single issue does not necessarily bear any of the green movement's connotations of being part of the historical Left tradition.

There was a good podcast in Dutch on the subject by NRC : https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2018/04/21/nrc-haagse-zaken-30-waarom-de-partij-voor-de-dieren-geen-lachertje-meer-is-a1600280

Just from the opening segments of THieme and other senior figures speaking : PvdD make a big deal out of the fact that they are dark green to GL's light green. But like you say, they also make a point of being outside the conservative-progressive, left-right scale, despite sitting in GUE and voting often with the Left.

Of course you get often interviews of caricatures of white working class Dutchmen in the media who say that they are hesitating between PVV and PvdD, or results in PVV-strong communes where PvdD overperform their national average, all of which are vastly overinterpreted. But they make an effort not to limit themselves to the certain type of voter you expect.

[TheSaint250]

Sorry, one more follow-up to the coalition question:

If there were enough seats, would a GL-D66-SP-PvdA-50+ coalition with PvdD and DENK support be possible? Would parties work with DENK, and would D66 leave the government for this type of deal?