Politics and Elections in the Netherlands: Rutte III era

[DavidB.]

Ipsos poll for Senate (compared to 2015 result):

VVD 12 (-1)
GroenLinks 9 (+5)
Forum voor Democratie 8 (+8)
PVV 8 (-1)
CDA 7 (-5)
D66 6 (-4)
SP 5 (-4)
PvdA 5 (-3)
ChristenUnie 4 (+1)
PvdD 3 (+1)
50Plus 3 (+1)
SGP 2 (-)
Independent Senate Group 2 (+1)
DENK 1 (+1)

Coalition 29 seats (-9) out of 75.

Ipsos is both accurate and probably the pollster that has the least bad results for the coalition; they also tend not to overpoll "populists", so this is a very bad poll for the coalition. Even together with GL they would barely have a majority, and the PvdA alone would not suffice.

Also a very bad poll for the SP. A loss is expected, but losing four seats while in opposition to a center-right government would look really badly.

The PvdA losing three more seats compared to their already abysmal 2015 result would put a lot of pressure on Asscher too. Play time is over for him: by now he should have turned things around, but he seems unable to do it.

If the CDA really lose five seats, which I still don't expect because of differential turnout but which could be true (and Ipsos claim to have taken it into account), Buma (or the CDA's support for the government...) could be on his way out too. Seven seats in the Senate would be an all-time low and it would also mean that the CDA had lost a lot in the provincial councils, which are more important to them than to most other parties. The CDA keep misreading their electorate and thinking it is more left-wing than it really is.

Their poll for parliament, compared to last month:
VVD 28 (+1)
PVV 19 (-1)
GroenLinks 17 (-1)
Forum voor Democratie 14 (+2)
D66 14 (+1)
CDA 13 (-1)
SP 11 (-1)
PvdA 9 (-)
ChristenUnie 7 (-)
PvdD 6 (-1)
50Plus 6 (+1)
SGP 3 (-)
DENK 3 (-)

Coalition 62 out of 150; +1 compared to last week, -14 compared to GE17

[DavidB.]

There really isn't much happening in the Netherlands, it's not that I'm being lazy only posting polls. I suppose it's the calm before the election storm. Here's another poll for the Senate, from I&O. It's very similar to the one by Ipsos.

Party (compared to now; number of seats in Ipsos poll)
VVD 11 (-2, 12)
GroenLinks 10 (+6, 9)
PVV 8 (-1, 8 )
FVD 8 (+8, 8 )
CDA 7 (-5, 7)
SP 7 (-2, 5)
D66 6 (-4, 6)
PvdA 5 (-3, 5)
CU 4 (+1, 4)
PvdD 3 (+1, 3)
50Plus 3 (+1, 3)
SGP 2 (-, 2)
DENK 1 (+1, 1)
OSF 0 (-1, 2)

Coalition 28 seats (-10) out of 75

63% disapprove of the government, 33% approve, down from 59/37 last month and an all-time low for this government. 85% of VVD voters approve of the government, compared to 61% of D66 voters, 57% of CDA voters and 52% of CU voters. Approval of the government dropped by 13 points among CU and CDA voters and by 12 points among D66 voters since January.

Seat poll for parliament (compared to GE17):

VVD 23 (-10)
GL 20 (+6)
PVV 17 (-3)
FVD 16 (+14)
SP 14 (-)
CDA 12 (-7)
D66 11 (-8)
PvdA 10 (+1)
CU 7 (+2)
PvdD 7 (+2)
50Plus 6 (+2)
SGP 4 (+1)
DENK 3 (-)

Coalition 53 seats (-23) out of 150.

Important issues for party choice for parliament (multiple options possible, compared to February 2017):

"Norms and values": 42% (-)
Healthcare: 40% (-14% )
Sustainability, climate, environment: 36% (+10%)
Social security, anti-poverty policy: 36% (-6%)
Income policy: 33% (+3%)
Immigration and asylum: 32% (-3%)
The economy and state finances: 30% (+1%)
Safety: 29% (-5%)
Education: 28% (-2%)
European Union: 27% (-)
Employment opportunities: 26% (-7%)
Relations between native Dutch and immigrants: 23% (-5%)
Energy: 23% (+7%)
Participation and democracy: 23% (+5%)
Ethical (US: "social") issues (euthanasia, homosexuality etc.): 22% (+4%)
"Livability" (atmosphere, security etc.) in the neighborhoods: 20% (-)
Housing market, rental market: 18% (+4%)
Terror threat: 17% (-3%)
Traffic and public transportation: 15% (+5%)
Animal welfare: 12% (+3%)
Religious affairs: 11% (-1%)
Arts and culture: 8% (-)

[DavidB.]

Are there any serious differences in terms of political program between PVV and FvD which potentially might be problems in their future cooperation?

Cooperation between PVV and FVD, you mean? Both explicitly say they would like to cooperate with each other. There are differences on the details but they aren't important and would certainly not form a stumbling block. The PVV resent FVD's existence and aren't too friendly to FVD (with an occasional direct line of attack on how FVD are too moderate), FVD view PVV pretty positively. When push comes to shove, however, the two would eagerly cooperate.

The big issue with right-wing cooperation lies in the gap between VVD/CDA on the one hand and FVD/PVV on the other hand. But I wouldn't exclude VVD-CDA-FVD yet. Such cooperation, however, would require a) FVD to usurp more of the PVV vote in order for these parties to come close to 76 seats (given that VVD-CDA cooperation with the PVV is much more difficult) and b) for the right-wing parties not to lose too many seats to the left.

Especially a) is currently an issue (amazingly the total of VVD-CDA-PVV-FVD isn't far down from GE17 even though we have an unpopular government carrying out a right-wing economic agenda), so VVD-CDA-FVD is probably not yet possible following the fall of this government.

[DavidB.]

Yeah, but I wonder what such differences are. As far as I noticed FvD is mainly vocal about cultural issues, Nexit, immigration but are there any particular differences? Maybe PVV highlight some issues more frequently? As far as I remember PVV was strong in post-industrial areas, maybe some economic issues?

In terms of worldview I would say Wilders is still fundamentally a liberal who thinks Dutch liberalism is endangered by mass immigration and the perceived suicidal behavior of foolish elites, whereas Baudet is a reactionary who thinks mass immigration, European integration and all sorts of other developments (secularization, individualization, neoliberalism) are all consequences of the West losing its understanding of its own roots and identity - for an important part due to the trauma of WW2/Auschwitz.

But in terms of actual policies Baudet is also rather liberal on issues such as euthanasia (while strongly rejecting the "fads" such as gender neutral toilets). Wilders tends to use more socio-economically left-wing rhetoric than Baudet and Baudet is certainly more of a small-government guy than Wilders (focusing on small and medium-sized businesses more than on pensioners), but their voting behavior isn't very different. Voters are more likely to view Wilders as someone who is economically left-wing (which isn't really true) while viewing Baudet as economically right-wing.

The one area on which Wilders tries to taunt Baudet is Islam: Baudet does not support a ban on mosques, the Quran etc. and will be more inclined to talk about "political Islam" than about Islam as a whole. All for the optics: I don't think Baudet really thinks about Islam differently than Wilders, but it's not worth losing voters over by coming across as too radical. Wilders tends to introduce motions with a fairly factual headline and inflammatory content, then FVD vote against this motion along with all the other parties except for the PVV. Then Wilders takes a screenshot of the result and the way parties voted to depict Baudet in a negative light.

FVD's difficulty with their Nexit standpoint, on which they seem to have shifted from "Nexit now" to "we want a referendum, but in the meantime we're in the EU and we need to be realistic so we need to try and reform it", is also used by Wilders to create the impression that FVD are really quite squishy and just as much part of the "party cartel" (a term used a lot by Baudet) as the other parties.

Their style is obviously very different, which means they attract more people separately than the PVV did by itself. Baudet comes off as a posh boy from Amsterdam, Wilders as an ordinary man with (at least to a non-Southerner) a very noticeable and distinct Limburg accent - setting him apart from the elites. The difference between the demographics they attract is not too big, but in the 2017 GE FVD did best in the West and Limburg (including in middle-class areas), whereas the PVV has much higher peaks in deprived lower-middle class and working-class areas in the West and in the periphery while not doing as well in areas that are more well-off. There were affluent areas in Amsterdam where the FVD vote in 2017 was almost at the same level as the PVV vote... I do think the correlation between the PVV and FVD vote will be stronger this time, but FVD should still do clearly better (relatively) in non-deprived areas. If they are both at roughly the same amount of electoral support, the map FVD bigger vs. PVV bigger will probably be mixed but with a noticeable center vs. periphery pattern.

[DavidB.]

On February 15, the government secretly decided to take a share of 14% in Air France-KLM, the same percentage that the French have. The French were quite angry because they had not been informed by the Dutch government. Finance Minister Wopke Hoekstra (CDA) went to Paris and a joint press conference with French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire took place, in which Hoekstra handily avoided answering tough questions in his best French. Hoekstra and Le Maire created the impression that the French-Dutch relations were fine again, resulting in a 3% increase of Air France-KLM stocks. But behind the scenes, the French are probably still not too happy. The Dutch press, on the other hand, was absolutely jubilant about Hoekstra's dealing with this affair. He will probably be the most popular minister after this incident: there is no love lost for the French here. Hoekstra is definitely the frontrunner for the CDA leadership race should Buma resign, and he'd be a serious contender for the Prime Ministership if Rutte leaves for Brussels and the coalition collapses.

[DavidB.]

Peil today (compared to last week):

VVD 23 (+1)
GL 18 (-)
FVD 17 (-1)
PVV 17 (-1)
PvdA 14 (-)
SP 12 (-)
CDA 10 (+1)
D66 9 (-)
PvdD 8 (-)
DENK 7 (-)
CU 7 (-)
50Plus 5 (-)
SGP 3 (-)

Coalition 49 (+2)

63% are positive about the Air France-KLM intervention, 14% oppose it.

46% want Schiphol Airport to grow, 34% want to keep it at its current level, 13% want the maximum number of flights to decrease, 3% want to gradually phase out flights at Schiphol to 0.

The term "vliegschaamte" ("being ashamed of flying" because of the environmental impact) has entered the discourse in the liberal newspapers. 68% of people who sometimes fly don't feel ashamed to fly, 21% feel a little ashamed, 10% do feel quite ashamed. The partisan breakdown on this should be clear.

As for healthcare, 27% want the current market system with a lot of freedom to choose and a lot of competition, 52% want less competition and accept less freedom to choose, 11% don't have a preference.

[DavidB.]

On Thursday evening, RTL's election debate took place, with the leaders of the eight best-polling parties (VVD, PVV, GL, FVD, D66, CDA, SP, PvdA) as participants - except for the fact that the VVD sent parliamentary group leader Klaas Dijkhoff instead of PM Rutte, who is portrayed as the statesman who is "above" debates like these. The provinces were barely mentioned: this election has clearly evolved into a midterm, completely focused on the Senate. The four themes discussed were climate policy, budget cuts in the public sector, immigration, and Dutch traditions; every round involved four candidates. Every participant had one opportunity to directly confront another leader one-on-one. Apparently Dijkhoff was crowned the winner by 20% (Klaver got 19%, Baudet came third), but in reality I don't think there was a clear winner or loser, as supporters of every party could find something good in their candidate's performance. Purely based on debating performance I think GL's Jesse Klaver should have won it. Lodewijk Asscher (PvdA) was the least impressive candidate and should really be on his way out after the election. Unfortunately for the PvdA, their bench isn't deep anymore...

Wilders and Baudet were never in the same round, and one of the most important consequences of Baudet's breakthrough is that the right-wing populist message is amplified greatly in the public debate: there was no debate that did not involve either Wilders or Baudet, except for some of the one-on-ones. Baudet was predictably attacked on climate policy and Nexit (on which Henk Otten and Baudet still seem to deliver different messages...), but some people's expectations that he would bomb definitely did not come true.

[DavidB.]

Peil poll: VVD 23, FVD 19 (+2), GL 18, PVV 15 (-2), PvdA 13 (-1), SP 11 (-1), CDA 9 (-1), D66 9, PvdD 8, DENK 7, CU 7, 50Plus 5, SGP 3, Combined local parties 3 (+3, there is no such list and I believe it when I see it).

26% think Dijkhoff won the debate, 18% think Baudet did, which puts him in second place. Baudet attracted PVV voters in the debate: only 59% of (current) PVV voters thought Wilders won it, 21% said Baudet did.

Wopke Hoekstra is now the most popular minister, and Wilders and Baudet's popularity is increasing among the general public: compared to other parliamentary group leaders they are ahead of Krol, Van der Staaij, Jetten (!) and Kuzu.

[DavidB.]

Some LOL pictures from Friday's Women's March in Amsterdam here.

[DavidB.]

Ipsos poll for Senate compared to last poll:
VVD 13 (+1), PVV 9 (+1), FVD 8, GL 8 (-1), CDA 7, PvdA 6 (+1), D66 5 (-1), SP 5, PvdD 4 (+1), CU 3 (-1), 50Plus 3, SGP 2, Independent Senate Group 2, DENK 0 (-1). 51% have made up their minds for the Provincial elections.

Peil poll for the Provincial States in Noord-Holland, compared to now:
VVD 9 (-2)
GL 8 (+4)
FVD 7 (+7)
PVV 5 (-1)
PvdA 5 (-2)
SP 4 (-2)
D66 4 (-6)
CDA 3 (-2)
PvdD 3 (nc)
50Plus 2 (+1)
DENK 2 (+2)
Others 2 (+1)
CU-SGP 1 (nc)

[DavidB.]

I&O for Senate, compared to February 28th:

VVD 12 (+1)
FVD 9 (+1)
GL 9 (-1)
CDA 8 (+1)
PVV 7 (-1)
SP 7 (nc)
D66 5 (-1)
PvdA 5 (-1)
CU 3 (-1)
50Plus 3 (nc)
PvdD 2 (-1)
SGP 2 (nc)
Independent Senate Group 2 (nc)
DENK 1 (nc)

For parliament (compared to February 28th):

VVD 24 (+1)
FVD 18 (+2)
GL 18 (-2)
CDA 15 (+3)
PVV 15 (-2)
SP 15 (+1)
D66 11 (nc)
PvdA 10 (nc)
CU 8 (+1)
PvdD 5 (-2)
50Plus 5 (-1)
SGP 3 (-1)
DENK 3 (nc)

Interesting uptick in CDA support, not sure where that comes from. FVD are attracting lots of PVV voters now. The PVV, as always in campaign season, are invisible, largely because they have no real local organizational power whatsoever. Wilders just hands out leaflets in his strongholds Spijkenisse, Heerlen, Enschede and Volendam, and that's it. FVD leader Baudet, meanwhile, is talking to audiences in theaters and concert halls filled to the brim all across the country every evening. FVD have a big social media presence too.

[DavidB.]

Last Peil.nl poll for the election on Wednesday:

VVD 22 (-1)
FVD 20 (+1)
GL 17 (-1)
PVV 15
PvdA 12 (-1)
SP 12 (+1)
D66 11 (+2)
CDA 10 (+1)
PvdD 7 (-1)
DENK 7
CU 7
50Plus 5
SGP 3
Others 2

A few days ago, the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL) publicized its analysis of the results of the government's climate policy. It assessed that the Netherlands will "probably not" reach the target of a 49% reduction in CO2 emissions in 2030 compared to 1990. The PBL also found that lower and middle income groups would carry most of the burden of the climate transition, whereas businesses and higher incomes would be less affected. They proposed the implementation of a carbon tax, a longstanding wish among the left-wing parties.

In response to the PBL's assessment, the government promised to shift the household/business balance from 70-30 to 50-50 and announced that a carbon tax would be implemented. It also opened the door to negotiations with GL and PvdA with regard to the measures that will be taken in order to ensure that the target is reached. The left-wing opposition thinks this agreement does not do "climate justice" because the burden isn't carried equally, whereas the right-wing opposition parties FVD and PVV have railed against Rutte saying the VVD are now literally implementing GL climate policy. All in all hardly good news for the VVD both from a policy and a political point of view. But they will still top the poll on Wednesday anyway.

[DavidB.]

Why is OSG running in the House of Representatives? I would assume from the name that they are a Senate-only party

This is a Senate poll.

[DavidB.]

Also, are there any polls available for the provincial elections?

Peil had one for NH. But no others have done it.

Ipsos have decided not to publish their final poll because it was pre-Utrecht. Peil will still do one (just received an invitation link to their survey) and we may or may not be getting something from Kantar.

[DavidB.]

A final debate with all party leaders took place, which I didn't watch except for Rutte's Rick Perry moment: he was summing up some things and then forgot one item, upon which he fell silent for some seconds and then said: "Caroline?" Apparently Rutte's personal assistant is named Caroline and the party leaders are allowed to have in-ear connection with them, which I never even knew. Of course "Caroline" is trending topic right now.

Embarrassing and not a good way for the VVD to end the campaign, although I empathize with Rutte because he must have had two incredibly tough days, regardless of what you think of his performance as a PM.

[DavidB.]

Turnout at 10:30 was 7%, like last time in 2015. Final turnout was 48% back then.

Voted before work already, for myself and a friend. FVD +2 for the provincial/Senate election, Integer Liberaal +2 for the water boards.

[DavidB.]

Turnout definitely doesn't seem to be up at least for now. 18% right now in The Hague, 20% in Utrecht, 16.1% in Rotterdam, 19.8% in Groningen, 19.4% in Purmerend, 18.2% in Eindhoven.

At 1:45 PM, turnout was 18% - like in 2015.

[DavidB.]

Peil.nl prognosis by province here. FVD would be the largest party. Would be amazing but I am reluctant. They probably overestimate FVD.

In this prognosis, FVD would be the largest party in Limburg, Noord-Brabant, Zuid-Holland, Flevoland and share the first place in Overijssel (with CDA) and Noord-Holland (with VVD).

In any case, this will be the best result for the populist right to date in the Netherlands; better than GE 2002, EP 2009 or GE 2010. Probably in the 20%-25% range.

[DavidB.]

Turnout was 26% at 3:45, up from 24% in 2015.

[DavidB.]

At 5:45, turnout was 33%. 2% up from 2015 (final turnout 48%) but 2% down from 2011 (final turnout 56%).

[DavidB.]

Yes. This is our evening. We won't be the biggest but it's good. 9-11 in the Senate. Doing watchparty with FVD friends now. Will do analysis tomorrow. Shift from left to right is clear. Also clear that we gained more from PVV and slightly less from VVD and CDA than perhaps expected. I "felt" that coming. PVV's floor is lower than many people think, evidenced by the local election in The Hague in 2018. Because they have no grassroots org.

[DavidB.]

Coalition and GL may have a majority in the Senate. Polls predicted this would not happen. It's because FVD gained more from PVV and less from coalition parties VVD and CDA.

[DavidB.]

Wilders seems teary-eyed. An air of defeat. He knows he's kind of done.

@Diouf: seems impossible to predict...

[DavidB.]

What a beautiful evening this was, which will be remembered as a historic turning point in Dutch history. Despite all the efforts of the government and the left and the media with their lies, more than a million people voted for Forum voor Democratie and for a Dutch future. And the movement is only getting bigger.

The distribution for the Senate seems to be as follows, but may still change, depending on the deals that parties strike with each other to maximize their seat number and the way local parties decide to vote:

Forum voor Democratie 13 (+13)
VVD 12 (-1)
CDA 9 (-3)
GroenLinks 9 (+5)
PvdA 7 (-1)
D66 6 (-4)
PVV 5 (-4)
SP 4 (-5)
ChristenUnie 4 (+1)
PvdD 3 (+1)
50Plus 2 (+1)
SGP 1 (-1)
Independent Senate Group 0 (-1)
DENK 0

Government: 31 (-7) out of 75.

Left (SP-PvdA-GL-PvdD): 23 (no change)
Left/progressive (SP-PvdA-GL-PvdD-D66): 29 (-4)

Economic center-right (VVD-CDA-D66): 27 (-8)

Right (VVD-CDA-FVD-PVV-SGP): 40 (+4)
Center-right (VVD-CDA): 21 (-4)
Far-right (FVD-PVV): 18 (+9)

Christian (CDA-CU-SGP): 14 (-4)

The government has lost its majority, but lost fewer seats than expected. As a result, either GL or PvdA will suffice for the government to form a majority. Difficult, but at least if Rutte stays, they should probably be able to work things out on a case-by-case basis.

Some analysis by party:

Forum for Democracy are the big winner of the election, which is incredibly important symbolically: we will be able to center ourselves even more now. The party is the biggest in Noord-Holland, Zuid-Holland and Flevoland and overperformed in the West compared to the other regions in the country. The pattern is quite similar to that of the LPF in 2002. It is clear that Forum are able to attract more higher educated and middle-class voters than the PVV, evidenced by better peformances in cities with many highly educated voters and by good performances in middle-class exurbia. Still, Forum perform best in suburbs and towns in the rural vicinity of big cities with a lot of lower middle-class voters. Edam-Volendam was expected: 40.7%. We received 24.9% in the white flight Rotterdam suburb of Nissewaard, a former PVV stronghold, and 27.9% in the depressing Rotterdam exurb of Hellevoetsluis (one of the best FVD municipalities in 2017 already). But we also ran up the score in some places where the PVV never did as well: for example, Christian fisherman town Katwijk (24.2%) and the VVD areas of the nouveau riche for which the PVV was too vulgar: 19.7% in Wassenaar, 15.4% in Laren and 17.3% in Blaricum. The party does markedly less well in "old money" areas: 11% and fourth place in Bloemendaal, 10.8% in Heemstede, 10.8% in Zeist, 10.3% in De Bilt. But what is most striking is that the overall FVD level was quite high across the country: it seems Forum attract people of all sorts of socio-economic backgrounds, resulting in a rather evenly spread vote. Outside the West, the party was strong in Western Noord-Brabant (the less traditional/religious, less well-off and more industrial part), Friesland (where the PVV never did well but gained relatively much in 2017) and the South of Limburg. I don't doubt we're going to see more maps with better insights than I can currently provide.

It is clear that FVD won less from CDA and especially VVD and more from the PVV than initially expected. The mechanism behind the vote transfers could be quite complicated. According to the Ipsos exit poll, SP -> Forum voter movement was limited, but looking at the results in South Limburg, where the PVV vote did hold up very well but FVD also did well, makes you think some SP voters did end up opting for Baudet.

Baudet didn't hold back in his epic 20-minute victory speech, in which he presented the metaphor of the Owl of Minerva flying out when the sun sets. This stands for Forum's rise in politics: it is almost too late, but now Forum is here to turn the tide. In the speech he also used some controversial tropes that have sparked the predictable and probably desired outrage, such as "boreal Europe" and "we are being called to the frontline."

Now we have a "problem". The people on the lists are capable and people who have earned their place, but we won many more seats than expected and may actually have trouble finding enough people for all the seats we're winning, as many people are candidates on both the Provincial and Senate lists or appear on the European list too. Forum leader Baudet today said the party wants to govern in Zuid-Holland and appointed former VVD leader Hans Wiegel as informateur. In Noord-Holland, the party has asked Paul Scheffer (PvdA) to do so. I don't think it's too likely the party will actually get to govern, but we'll see.

The VVD did not have such a bad night: again, its coalition partners are worse hit by the impopularity of the government than the VVD themselves. Losing first place for the first time since the European elections in 2014 won't cause them to lose sleep. Their vote held up well in Noord-Brabant, Gelderland and Zuid-Holland in particular, topping the poll in the former two provinces. That said, the VVD tend to perform much worse in second-order elections than in parliamentary elections (their 2015 performance wasn't that great either) and their result is still much lower than their general election result. The risk is, though, that VVD voters will find their way to Forum too once the government needs GL/PvdA support in the Senate. Forum's victory essentially pushes the government to seek support to their left and to become more left-wing, which makes VVD and CDA vulnerable.

Nobody talks about it, but this is an all-time low for the CDA in the Senate. But worse was expected. The problem for the CDA is structural, though. Especially in the West, the party seems to have lost many voters to Forum. In Zuid-Holland, the CDA lost 3 seats and ended up with four. It seems as if there may be a lot of people working in agriculture leaving for Forum: the climate agreement makes the CDA vulnerable to criticism. For instance, the Christian Democrats lost 8.7% in agricultural powerhouse Westland (FVD: 24.3%). The coalition is starting to take its toll for the CDA. The upside for them is that they still topped the poll in Limburg, Friesland, Overijssel and Zeeland, which is symbolically important.

More to follow.

[DavidB.]

How come Denk didn't get a seat? Turks not turning out?

Yeah, turnout was their problem. Especially among Muslim communities outside the big cities in the West, it seems. There are also too many provinces in which they just didn't manage to win even a single seat. In the end they only won three seats, one each in Noord-Holland, Zuid-Holland and Utrecht.

Continuing the analysis by party:

GroenLinks was the second biggest winner of the election. The extreme focus on climate issues obviously worked in their favor, as does Jesse Klaver's ability to articulate his points clearly and convincingly. He has become more experienced and matured over the last two years. Nine seats is a good result, which will make them the go-to partner for the government. They also topped the poll in the province of Utrecht, running up the score in Utrecht city where the terror attack took place: GL received 27.8% of the vote, an increase of 13.2% on a strongly increased turnout.

Difficult at the same time, because cooperating with the government may hurt their credibility in opposing that government in the next general election. At the same time, they are not actually that much further than they were two years ago: 9 Senate seats is the equivalent of 18 seats in parliament, a modest increase of 4 compared to the current setup. Ultimately, GL fail to attract a sufficient number of left-wingers that are older, focus on being left rather than on being green, and who live outside the "progressive belt" or the medium and big-sized cities. If Jesse Klaver were PvdA leader, the PvdA would undoubtedly be a contender for first place.

D66 and GL are communicating vessels almost everywhere: most of the GL gains came directly from D66, with the remainder mostly coming from SP and PvdA.

The PvdA can sigh a breath of relief. They lost one seat compared to their already atrocious 2015 result and end up with 7, but it could have been much worse. This result probably saved Lodewijk Asscher for now and the party can look up again. Topping the poll in Groningen and Drenthe is probably good for the morale too. There is light at the end of the tunnel.

"Could have been worse" is also a good summary for the D66 election result. Climate policy being the top issue in this election helped them, because it forced the government to take positions VVD and CDA were uncomfortable with, debunking the idea that D66 were just tricked into accepting Rutte's right-wing coalition agreement. D66 also made sure a coal power plant in Amsterdam will be closed sooner than expected, which Rob Jetten campaigned on. D66 are also one of the most anti-Forum parties and less willing to apply "civility" like GL leader Klaver, who tends to prefer to focus on ideas.

The PVV are arguably the biggest loser of the election. Forum manages to catch all the attention, and a lot of people ("realists" as some of them like to call themselves on Twitter, but it has nothing to do with Morgenthau or Waltz) prefer FVD and PVV equally - to them it's like flipping a coin. But Baudet receives much more attention than Wilders: the latter is old news, and it's largely his own fault for always avoiding to make compromises and never managing to get anything done. Wilders appeared on tv teary-eyed and had nothing but positive words to say about Baudet and his victory. Nobody knows how long the PVV will still last. 5 Senate seats is the equivalent of 10 seats in parliament. They lost half their seats in Zeeland, Noord-Holland, Zuid-Holland and Utrecht - mostly directly to Forum. Their vote held up better in Groningen, where they remained stable, and in Limburg, where they lost only two seats and still have seven, as many as Forum. In Southern Limburg, the PVV still came first in Sittard-Geleen (16.2% and 14.4% Forum), Brunssum (17.8% and 16% Forum), Landgraaf (21.6% and 14.6% Forum) and Kerkrade (PVV 20.7%, Forum 14.8%). Brabantic former smuggler village and undisputed number one PVV stronghold Rucphen also went for the PVV by 28.4% (Forum: 18.8%).

The SP were the biggest loser in absolute terms: from 9 to 4 seats, a loss of five. The 2015 provincial election was their second best election ever (after the 2006 GE) and came rather unexpected. This loss proves their failure to bind left-wingers to them and their organization. SP leader Marijnissen partly blames it on turnout, but they are also stuck between a rock and a hard place on immigration: actual skeptics of immigration who prioritize this issue will always vote for Forum or PVV, but under the Meyer/Marijnissen leadership the party did move right on immigration at least in terms of rhetoric, which has been off-putting to left-wing demographics with pro-immigration views. Judging by the local results I get the sense that some former SP voters did vote for FVD this time, particularly in the south, though the Ipsos exit poll (which was relatively inaccurate) casts doubt on this.

The ChristenUnie won a seat and seem to be able to successfully avoid the "Rutte coalition partner" curse. The secret: being open and honest about what they can and cannot achieve. They do have an electorate that will not walk away easily, but are also very transparent in difficult times (deportations of children, the abolishment of the dividend tax): they show their voters and the country why they make certain decisions, how they achieve certain things and how they cannot achieve other things, and how it affects them personally. A place where CU did lose a lot: Urk, where there is a lot of anger about Agriculture Minister Schouten (CU)'s defeat in Brussels regarding the ban on pulse fishing and where there were some ethnic tensions recently. CU lost 9.4% and came third on the former island with 17.3%, behind SGP (40.3%, -5%) and newcomer Forum (17.6%).

The PvdD continue their slow but steady way up: 1 seat in 2011, 2 in 2015 and 3 in 2019. They did particularly well in Amsterdam this time, where they came fifth with 8.8% - before Forum. The PvdD enter the Provincial States in Zeeland and Drenthe, gained a seat in Limburg, but lost a seat in Groningen.

The SGP also experienced a seat loss, I think the first one since Van der Staaij took over the party. The most logical reason for this loss is Forum's participation: there is a small number of voters who are conservative enough to vote for the SGP without actually being part of their own "pillar". Forum are sufficiently reactionary and nationalist for these people to be an attractive alternative. I am one of those who voted SGP in PS2015 and FVD in PS2019. It is interesting to see Forum did rather well in the Bible Belt - a well-known Dutch psephologist coined the term "LPF with the Bible" to indicate the Forum voting pattern. The general turnout increase probably hurt the SGP too. Losing one seat in populous Zuid-Holland and one in Utrecht (and one in Flevoland) caused the SGP to miss out on their second seat, which they gained in 2015, by a hair.

This wasn't DENK's election. Apart from the obvious laughter about DENK standing in provinces like Drenthe and Zeeland, connected to the more serious observation that provinces essentially work as electoral districts for the Senate and the DENK vote is spread in an unfortunate way for them, NIDA's participation in the most populous provinces NH and ZH didn't help either. NIDA missed out on seats, but took enough votes to deny DENK a Senate seat. Selçuk Öztürk, DENK's top candidate for the Senate, does not even speak acceptable Dutch, so I regard this as a good thing. Thank you, NIDA, very cool!

DENK did enter the PS in NH, ZH and Utrecht with one seat. See also my above response to Crabcake: it seems as if potential DENK voters outside Amsterdam, Rotterdam (+suburbs) and The Hague just couldn't be bothered to vote.