Politics and Elections in the Netherlands: coalition agreement presented

[DavidB.]

Alternatively I think the PVV could suffer like the SP did in 2012 when people watch the debates and realise that voting for them is ultimately a wasted vote. They will get 20 seats. Quote this on election day to make me look like an idiot.

This one aged well.

Does anybody know what the best polling station or sub-municial unit was for the PvDA?

NRC should come up with a map of all polling stations soon. For now, I expect it to be somewhere in Friesland or perhaps in a black area in Amsterdam-Zuidoost, but probably the former.

[DavidB.]

VVD+CDA (traditional right-wing parties*)
1989: 76
1994: 65
1998: 67
2002: 67
2003: 72
2006: 63
2010: 52
2012: 54
2017: 52

CDA+VVD+PVV+LPF+FvD (traditional right + radical right)
1989: 76
1994: 65 (but 3 seats for extreme right CD, which is a different category imo)
1998: 67 (no radical right)
2002: 93 (LPF surge)
2003: 72 (LPF collapse)
2006: 72 (LPF gone, PVV in)
2010: 76
2012: 69
2017: 74

PvdA+GL+SP+PvdD (combined left)
1989: 55
1994: 44
1998: 71
2002: 42
2003: 59
2006: 67
2010: 57
2012: 59
2017: 42

PvdA+GL+SP+PvdD+D66 (progressive/left)
1989: 67
1994: 68
1998: 75
2002: 49
2003: 65
2006: 70
2010: 67
2012: 71
2017: 61

The right isn't necessarily bigger -- but the left and progressives are definitely smaller.

*traditionally, the CDA cannot really be seen as a right-wing party (the Netherlands doesn't do the "non-socialist = right-wing" thing) and while this is irrelevant to the point, I still wanted to mention this. It used to be a centrist party, but it has moved to the right under Lubbers, under Balkenende and most certainly under Buma.

[Zuza]

Green = "green" (D66, GL, PvdD) larger than populist (PVV, SP, 50Plus, FvD)

It seems to be a rather unusual division. Isn't PvdD also has a significant populist (anti-establishment/anti-EU) component?

[windjammer]

VVD+CDA (traditional right-wing parties*)
1989: 66
1994: 65
1998: 67
2002: 67
2003: 72
2006: 63
2010: 52
2012: 54
2017: 52

CDA+VVD+PVV+LPF+FvD (traditional right + radical right)
1989: 66
1994: 65 (but 3 seats for extreme right CD, which is a different category imo)
1998: 67 (no radical right)
2002: 94 (LPF surge)
2003: 72 (LPF collapse)
2006: 72 (LPF gone, PVV in)
2010: 76
2012: 69
2017: 74

PvdA+GL+SP+PvdD (combined left)
1989: 55
1994: 44
1998: 71
2002: 42
2003: 59
2006: 67
2010: 57
2012: 59
2017: 42

PvdA+GL+SP+PvdD+D66 (progressive/left)
1989: 67
1994: 68
1998: 75
2002: 49
2003: 65
2006: 70
2010: 67
2012: 71
2017: 61

The right isn't necessarily bigger -- but the left and progressives are definitely smaller.

*traditionally, the CDA cannot really be seen as a right-wing party (the Netherlands doesn't do the "non-socialist = right-wing" thing) and while this is irrelevant to the point, I still wanted to mention this. It used to be a centrist party, but it has moved to the right under Lubbers, under Balkenende and most certainly under Buma.

Could you make something total left/total right in order to have something like 150 sears in the end please? (for 50+ I suppose you should divide in two right? )

[DavidB.]

Green = "green" (D66, GL, PvdD) larger than populist (PVV, SP, 50Plus, FvD)

It seems to be a rather unusual division. Isn't PvdD also has a significant populist (anti-establishment/anti-EU) component?

I wouldn't call them populist, but this is a fair point insofar that on the "demand side" it is true that PvdD tend to function as a "protest party" for a not insignificant number of voters. The PvdD could perhaps have been included in the yellow category too. Arguably the value of this map is that slightly less than half the country is green and slightly more than half the country is yellow, and the PvdD remain the most "green" party so it would have been weird to leave them out, but your caveat with the categorization of the parties is a legitimate one.

[DavidB.]

Could you make something total left/total right in order to have something like 150 sears in the end please? (for 50+ I suppose you should divide in two right? )

I don't think categorizing parties like 50Plus, CU and DENK as left-wing or right-wing is really meaningful, but I could do one on right-wing + religious parties (but let's ignore discussion on whether DENK are a religious party for the moment...).

VVD+CDA+PVV+LPF+LN+FvD+SGP+CU and predecessors+CD (right + religious):
1989: 83
1994: 75
1998: 75
2002: 101
2003: 85
2006: 80
2010: 83
2012: 77
2017: 82

The news is not really here (though note the uptick in right-wing support since the Fortuyn revolution compared to the 90s), but rather in the decline of the vote share of progressive parties.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Why this happened? Josse de Voogd: "When the left starts campaigning on the cultural dimension, the rest of the country says: get me outta here. This effect is stronger once you get closer to the border. The losses of the left are larger in the east and the south." Asscher campaigning against Wilders instead of Rutte was perhaps inevitable, but it's been a disaster for the party, one everyone could have anticipated (I certainly did).

I'm sorry to chime in like a noob like this (then again, I think I've done my part in answering noob questions about Italy and France. ), but why didn't the SP benefit more from PvdA's nice pragmatic centrist turn? My impression was that it was the one left-wing party that still focuses on bread-and-butter issues. I expected it to gain a few seats from disgruntled PvdA voters, at least (especially considering that many such PvdA voters almost voted SP back in 2013). Did something go horribly wrong with their campaign?

[DavidB.]

Why this happened? Josse de Voogd: "When the left starts campaigning on the cultural dimension, the rest of the country says: get me outta here. This effect is stronger once you get closer to the border. The losses of the left are larger in the east and the south." Asscher campaigning against Wilders instead of Rutte was perhaps inevitable, but it's been a disaster for the party, one everyone could have anticipated (I certainly did).

I'm sorry to chime in like a noob like this (then again, I think I've done my part in answering noob questions about Italy and France. ), but why didn't the SP benefit more from PvdA's nice pragmatic centrist turn? My impression was that it was the one left-wing party that still focuses on bread-and-butter issues. I expected it to gain a few seats from disgruntled PvdA voters, at least (especially considering that many such PvdA voters almost voted SP back in 2013). Did something go horribly wrong with their campaign?

Haha, no, ask whatever you like; if something is unclear about the patterns on any of the maps posted here I'd like you -- and others -- to ask too, rather than to stay in the dark. To me the patterns are so clear that I just don't start talking about it myself (where to start?) but I imagine this may be different to others.

The SP only focuses on bread-and-butter issues and chose to emphasize its support for a single-payer healthcare system. This didn't seem like a bad choice at first since polls showed healthcare was the single most important issue to voters this time around, with copayments having gone up from 150 to 380 euros over the last five years and over a million people having trouble paying the bills for basic healthcare. However, despite Wilders' absence in many debates, national identity became the overarching theme of the election (thanks to CDA and VVD), which basically left SP leader Roemer speechless. In addition to that, Roemer is a bad fit for non-working class voters, and many people who are on the left nowadays simply aren't working-class; to people who are working-class, the party's classic left-wing stances on refugees, immigration and integration may have been a serious turnoff, even if the party tries very hard not to place emphasis on these issues. I was surprised by the SP losing because of the fact that their campaign had been decent and Roemer had done well in the debates, but they just don't seem to attract many people who aren't part of their base already; however, exit polls suggest the SP did "win" a few seats from the PvdA -- it just lost even more support, probably to GL, PVV, 50Plus and PvdD. Due to the focus on national identity (and the SP's stance here) and the limited appeal of the SP and Roemer to non-working class voters and working-class westerners (let's not underestimate just how southern Roemer is; I've joked about subtitles), quite some disgruntled working-class PvdA 2012 voters may have gone to the PVV, CDA or even the VVD.

A socialist's analysis would be that right-wing party leaders made this election about national identity in order to make voters forget their socio-economic interests. This may be an important part of the picture. Another important part of the picture, however, is that working-class voters (and a lot of non-working class voters, for that matter) start running away really quickly once left-wing parties start to talk about culture, or identity, or immigration, and that perhaps they should think about this.

[Antonio the Sixth]

That is so utterly, soul-crushingly depressing, but not too surprising. Thanks for the explanation.

Maybe some day, voters will get tired of this whole "muh national identity" bullsh*t and realize that while they sit here worrying about those big bad refugees robbing their homes or something, billionaires have been robbing them of their basic welfare and dignity. Maybe... Or maybe the world is doomed.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

So are any of the leaders resigning? I mean, obviously Wilders won't go (unless he gets bored and flies off to America for a lucrative career at breitbart or something); but surely Roemer and Asscher need to leave pronto?

[DavidB.]

So are any of the leaders resigning? I mean, obviously Wilders won't go (unless he gets bored and flies off to America for a lucrative career at breitbart or something); but surely Roemer and Asscher need to leave pronto?

It has been quiet within the SP, but I still expect a coup to happen there. It always happens silently there, not in the heat of the moment. Jan Marijnissen would love to see his daughter take over. But this may take some months, or some years. Lilian Marijnissen was only just elected.

Asscher will stay on, which is terrible for the party. It's as if Hillary Clinton got to stay on as leader of the Democrats after her defeat. I always thought Asscher would make a good PvdA leader, but I also thought he would be finished if he took over before the inevitable defeat in this election, which will stick with him forever. Truly an incomprehensible kind of hubris for him to have tried to turn the tide. He means well and perhaps he could have done well in the next election (though even that is doubtful given his underwhelming, tone-deaf campaign), but the PvdA needs someone different now. Anyway, they will probably lose the next second-order elections too, starting with next year's municipal elections, and then someone will stab him in the back and Aboutaleb will take over. The problem with him is that he is more of a manager than a politician (let alone the leader of an opposition party) too, just like Asscher.

[mvd10]

I wonder who the next VVD leader will be actually. Rutte probably won't run in the next election (unless the cabinet falls in 2018). Halbe Zijlstra (parliamentary leader) and Edith Schippers (healthcare minister) are the most mentioned names, but Schippers not wanting to be MP makes me think she doesn't really have leadership ambitions. Zijlstra absolutely wants to be leader though. Both Schippers and Zijlstra are to the right of Rutte, but Zijlstra probably is the most right-wing of the three. Klaas Dijkhoff also is an interesting option. He is young, fairly charismatic and competent. He currently is deputy justice minister, but I'm sure he will be either parliamentary leader or minister in the next cabinet. Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert (defense minister) was number 2 on the VVD list but I can't see her as VVD leader. She is horribly incompetent and on the left of the party.

[DavidB.]

It is clear the party establishment is gearing up Klaas Dijkhoff to be the next leader (even if I'm not entirely sure that Rutte doesn't run another time: his PM bonus may be even bigger next time around, he's still fairly young, no criticism seems to stick with him, he doesn't care about making money given his lifestyle, and he doesn't have a family). Together with Rutte and Hennis, Dijkhoff was the only spokesperson in the VVD campaign. The party has successfully rebranded him as some young, charismatic, folksy guy despite the fact that he is an academic with a PhD and that people close to him know he has always been nerdy. I still don't know what happened to Schippers: was she sidelined for being too critical of Rutte in the press (the infamous NRC interview), was this criticism staged and does she really want some more time for herself, or does she think she has a better shot at becoming party leader in four years? Given the fact that Rutte still appears to trust her and that she became "explorer" for a next government, the second or third possibility seem most likely to me. Zijlstra himself clearly wants to lead the party but it also seems the establishment is less enthusiastic.

[mgop]

Green = "green" (D66, GL, PvdD) larger than populist (PVV, SP, 50Plus, FvD); yellow = the other way around. Map represents population distribution. The Alkmaar-Nijmegen progressive belt is real, folks.


without dams most of progressive belt would be under water, that would be nice netherlands why is nijmegen so progressive?

[DavidB.]

without dams most of progressive belt would be under water, that would be nice netherlands why is nijmegen so progressive?

University.

[mgop]

without dams most of progressive belt would be under water, that would be nice netherlands why is nijmegen so progressive?

University.

but thats catholic university. besides other cities also have universities but arent that much progressive.

[DavidB.]

but thats catholic university. besides other cities also have universities but arent that much progressive.

It's Catholic in name only nowadays, and I can tell you that it's one of the most progressive, left-wing universities in the country. Other university cities are progressive too: Leiden, Delft, Utrecht, Groningen and Wageningen were the only places won by D66 and are all university towns (though Utrecht is progressive and highly educated in general), in Rotterdam, Enschede, Eindhoven, Maastricht and Tilburg the student population is relatively smaller compared to the non-student population (and Maastricht has many internationals who don't vote), and I don't have to start about Amsterdam. But Nijmegen, like Amsterdam, is more old-left, whereas Leiden, Groningen and Delft are more progressive than truly left-wing.

[mgop]

but thats catholic university. besides other cities also have universities but arent that much progressive.

It's Catholic in name only nowadays, and I can tell you that it's one of the most progressive, left-wing universities in the country. Other university cities are progressive too: Leiden, Delft, Utrecht, Groningen and Wageningen were the only places won by D66 and are all university towns (though Utrecht is progressive and highly educated in general), in Rotterdam, Enschede, Eindhoven, Maastricht and Tilburg the student population is relatively smaller compared to the non-student population (and Maastricht has many internationals who don't vote), and I don't have to start about Amsterdam.

that makes sense. and yeah amsterdam, city where denk got more votes than pvv is really sad place...

[SunSt0rm]

Even without the university Nijmegen is very left-wing. It is also known as the Havana on the Waal

[DavidB.]

Ronald Plasterk, Interior Minister (PvdA), now suggests the 9 PvdA MPs place themselves under the leadership of Jesse Klaver and form one parliamentary group with GL, with the intention of eventually forming one progressive party that ideally includes the SP too.

[ApatheticAustrian]

sounds like a radical but surely more realistic approach, especially if the opposition is meant to talk in an united fashion.

[DavidB.]

It seems like an overreaction to me. In 2012 we declared GL dead and thought they were redundant given the existence of D66, PvdA, PvdD and SP. In 2017 they reached an all-time high. Losing an election is never easy but the PvdA should be able to find the way up again by themselves.

[seb_pard]

Well also is a way to put pressure on GL. If Groenlinks become part of the new government, PvdA could take advantage on the left side (knowing that for many voters SP is not a viable option).

[Antonio the Sixth]

If Groenlinks become part of the new government

That's a serious possibility? FFS

[DavidB.]

If Groenlinks become part of the new government

That's a serious possibility? FFS

VVD-CDA-D66-GL was considered to be the most likely option before the election, but now that GL's gains have been relatively underwhelming (14 seats was less than most polls suggested), the VVD still have well over 30 seats, and VVD-CDA-D66-CU have a majority, this latter coalition (or alternatively a VVD-CDA-D66 minority coalition) seems much more likely now.