Politics and Elections in the Netherlands: Rutte III era

[DavidB.]

The GL win isn't all that impressive if you look at the D66, SP and PvdA losses, which are bigger than GL's gains in almost all municipalities. Even in Amsterdam, where people speak of a left-wing "victory", the losses of SP and PvdA alone are bigger than the gains of GL, not even taking into account D66. Meanwhile, CDA gain a seat and FvD win three while the VVD remain stable, indicating that there must have been D66 -> VVD voter movement too.

However, voter movement from D66 to GL of course does strengthen a more left-wing pole in the system, which might have repercussions for coalition formation and policymaking. In Amsterdam, a government led by the economically illiterate luddites of GL might seriously jeopardize the expansion of Schiphol Airport, which is infuriating.

So who are the biggest winners and losers generally so far?

Winners: local parties, GL, VVD, DENK
Losers: D66, PvdA, SP, PVV, the left as a whole

Some local parties have really impressive results, especially in the Rotterdam metro's (lower) middle-class suburbs. In Barendrecht, Echt voor Barendrecht (EVB) got almost 50% of the vote and won 14 out of 29 seats. Independent New Spijkenisse (ONS) in Nissewaard was already by far the largest party but won an additional seat and now has 14 out of 37 seats. The same goes for Leefbaar Capelle in Capelle aan den IJssel, where Leefbaar Capelle now has 13 out of 33 seats. Inhabitants' Interest Hellevoetsluis in Hellevoetsluis has 12 out of 25 seats. In more middle-class Lansingerland, Leefbaar 3B gained two seats and now has 9 out of 33 seats. Most of these parties (but not all of them) have a profile very similar to that of Leefbaar Rotterdam.

[DavidB.]

Demographic breakdown for the referendum (probably based on the exit poll, so might be slightly skewed in favor of "for") by gender, education and age.

Partisan breakdown (based on GE17).

Percentage "against".


The polls really f**ked this one up; the only poll that came close was Peil.nl's last poll.

This result is disastrous for D66, because of course it will be (almost completely) ignored. VVD, CDA and CU voters won't care, but a lot of D66 voters will, and they take particular interest in privacy issues as well.

[DavidB.]

For those interested: Here the results for the local election by municipality, here for the referendum.

[EPG]

This result is disastrous for D66, because of course it will be (almost completely) ignored. VVD, CDA and CU voters won't care, but a lot of D66 voters will, and they take particular interest in privacy issues as well.

How disastrous is disastrous? Will they lose 6-8 seats?

[Diouf]

If we are in the business of comparing the referendum map with Britain, I would state that it is such a kind of map that would be needed in a referendum for a fairer electoral system in Britain The anti-establishment voters voting against the current system and the two old parties helped by young, well-educated urban voters, who will tend to be ideologically in favour of a fair electoral system.

[DavidB.]

This result is disastrous for D66, because of course it will be (almost completely) ignored. VVD, CDA and CU voters won't care, but a lot of D66 voters will, and they take particular interest in privacy issues as well.

How disastrous is disastrous? Will they lose 6-8 seats?

Yes, given D66's record of losing half their seats after governing I'd absolutely take a bet of D66 losing that amount of seats in the next general election (quote this post after the GE to make me look stupid). But just like with the PvdA's loss in 2012, it will probably be not directly due to D66 ignoring and abolishing the referendum but more because of the fact that alternatives (GL, but also VVD) would have a more attractive profile and less negative baggage.

Another consequence of this referendum is that Kajsa Ollongren's popularity has gone completely down the drain; this was already the case before the referendum took place, but if she will be perceived as not sufficiently respecting the result, her reputation will be even more damaged. She was widely considered to be Pechtold's most likely successor (and rumors about Pechtold being done with "The Hague" are getting increasingly loud), but as an alderwoman in Amsterdam she left a mixed impression at best, and she is now among the least popular ministers. Whoever thought that it would be a good idea to put her in charge of Interior Affairs, have her abolish the referendum, and make her push through a law deeply unpopular with a lot of D66 voters was really not quite smart.

[Leading Political Consultant Ma Anand Sheela]

Which is the third Muslim party?

Really happy with this result. De Mos and the VVD should now form a government, perhaps with CDA and D66. Absolutely brutal for the PVV. Shows that PVV voters do notice when the party performs well: only a small loss in Almere (from 9 to 7 seats is not great, but respectable), where they are generally doing a good job at representing voters, and huge losses in The Hague, where they are absolutely useless and an embarrassment. Apart from this, 15 parties is really a lot... and 3 Muslim parties with 1 seat each, lol.

NIDA, PvdE and Islam Democrats

Lol, Muslims are trying to be the new orthodox Calvinists...

Yes, considering how sectarian Dutch politics has historically been and still is at the fringes, I can't help but think that this should perhaps be considered proof that that particular subgroup of Muslims is actually integrating into Dutch society after all.

[Mike88]

Share of the vote, nationwide: (local elections)

32.7% Local parties
13.5% CDA
13.2% VVD
  9.0% D66
  8.4% GL
  7.3% PvdA
  3.9% CU
12.0% Others

Didn't find the national share for PVV, SP, DENK or FvD.

[SunSt0rm]

Result Referendum

For 46.5%
Against 49.5%
Blanc 4%

[DavidB.]

In The Hague, De Mos ended up with one fewer seat (from 9 to 8 ), the City Party with one more (from 2 to 3). In Rotterdam, hilariously, one seat shifted from the PVV (from 2 to 1) to DENK (from 3 to 4). In Amsterdam, the final result is as follows:

GL 10 (+4)
D66 8 (-6)
VVD 6 (-)
PvdA 5 (-5)
SP 3 (-3)
PvdD 3 (+2)
DENK 3 (+3)
FvD 3 (+3)
CDA 1 (-)
Elderly Party 1 (-)
ChristenUnie 1 (+1)
BIJ1 1 (+1)

So Sylvana has her seat after all, but only if she moves to Amsterdam before next Thursday, otherwise the number 2 on the list will be eligible to take up the BIJ1 seat.

[DavidB.]

The Hague has its excellent website up again, with results at borough, neighborhood and precinct level for both the referendum and the municipal election. Map:


It still feels unreal how I voted with young people, lefties and Muslim voters against conservative, security-oriented right-wingers in the referendum; even weirder because I haven't been in doubt about this vote for a second I also never had the idea that the referendum would be remotely close (except for the hours before the result) and still don't quite grasp what happened and how the polls got it so wrong. I'm so glad I still took the effort to convince less politically oriented friends of mine to vote against, and to have a big poster on my window, despite never even believing in it. Maybe young people really did convince their older family members and friends in the last week. And maybe the editorials in the quality newspapers convinced highly educated older people in the cities. I know the result is going to be ignored again, but it will have a political price and there is now more awareness regarding privacy issues in society.

The government, again, has handled the referendum really clumsily, essentially making exactly the same mistakes as in 2016. One or two days before the election, Rutte managed to make an incredibly disdainful statement: a journalist challenged him for abolishing the referendum, saying that people think it's nice to be able to vote in referendums because it allows them to have a little influence, and Rutte answered that "tv quizzes are also nice, and lacemaking is also nice, but ultimately this [politics] is about serious business."

[mvd10]

Lol Rutte. I also am a proud member of the 26% of VVD voters who oppose the intelligence services act .

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

What was the intelligence services act about anyway?

[_]

I'd like to try and understand the polls and how they got it so wrong.

Also, DavidB, mvd, can you both explain why you voted against this Act?  Would it have been a violation of privacy or what?

[DavidB.]

I oppose the law for several reasons.

First, the law would allow the intelligence and security services to share un-analyzed bulk data with foreign intelligence services. I'm down with cooperating with foreign intelligence services if necessary, but we have to know what we share before we share it. There are strict laws for our own government in terms of how long they can save information on telecommunication and internet from individuals (i.e. three years), but our allies may not necessarily have those laws and I think other countries should not have that much information about "non-problematic" Dutch nationals. Moreover, as Americans now know, governments change and today's ally may tomorrow have a very different view of the Netherlands and Dutch nationals.

Second, I am not convinced that we will be any safer under this law. Most terror suspects are already well-known to intelligence services, but the services were too busy concentrating on other potential threats. It makes no sense to increase the amount of information that intelligence services have to analyze. Instead, the intelligence services should have more permissions (and perhaps more resources) to focus on people that are already known to be potential threats.

Third, the law allows the government to store people's DNA and make a DNA bank. I think that's outright creepy and a clear case of government overreach.

Fourth, the government has been lying about why they deem the law necessary, as they have continued to argue throughout the campaign that under the current intelligence law, secret services are not allowed to wiretap communication through the cable, whereas the current law does in fact allow the secret services to do so (which was even acknowledged by the government in a parliamentary debate), though I think they currently need a warrant to do so, which I think is good. It is true, however, that the new law open up a lot more possibilities to collect data in entire neighborhoods just because a few problematic individuals would reside there. I think that is disproportional. By all means wiretap these individuals if necessary (with a warrant from a judge), but not entire neighborhoods.

Fifth, I generally think the erosion of privacy is a big problem, both because of tech companies and because of the government, and this law would have been an additional step back for privacy in the Netherlands. This was a very concrete opportunity to say "no" to this development. I want a government that protects me against companies that want to know everything about me, not a government that treats me as a suspect too.

----
31% of "against" voters were late deciders. Reasons for them to oppose the law:

Biggest reason: privacy, as it should be. Secondary: Sybrand Buma (CDA leader with national conservative profile who might be the biggest supporter of the law), the Cambridge Analytica scandal ("Facebookrel"), "lacemaking" (reference to Rutte's gaffe), the television debate, satirist Arjen Lubach's tv show (Dutch John Oliver and the person who popularized the referendum petition), the arrogant attitude of the government, Mark Rutte, and mistrust of the government.

I think many late deciders who voted "against" were PVV/50Plus voters.

[DavidB.]

The Hague's notorious Schilderswijk was won by the unholy trinity:

Today, mayor Pauline Krikke revealed that she had been robbed there earlier this month while waiting for the tram in the evening. Her bag was stolen. Interesting that we were only allowed to know this after the election.

[DC Al Fine]

I don't like the alt-right's use of the work cuck, but I had to admit, it seems fitting in this case.

[parochial boy]

I also never had the idea that the referendum would be remotely close (except for the hours before the result) and still don't quite grasp what happened and how the polls got it so wrong. I'm so glad I still took the effort to convince less politically oriented friends of mine to vote against, and to have a big poster on my window, despite never even believing in it.

Referendums are very tricky to poll - the Swiss pollsters get to practice them all the time and never seem to do much better than educated guessing.

As far as I can tell, it mostly comes down to a combination of
a) the nature of a referendum is that you can't weight by how people voted last time"è
b) For these sorts of topics, which are ones where people tend not to have strong, pre-existing opinions, they are far more susceptible to be swayed by the campaign than in a normal election or an referendum on a more "hot button" topic

[DavidB.]

Very good points! I have to say that there was one poll that was very accurate: Peil.nl had it 45-42 with 13% undecided slightly less than a week before the election.


In Emmen, PvdA candidate #12 Ugbaad Kilincci, who has a Somali background, was campaigning on Sunday before the election when some young guys started insulting her, calling her a "black monkey" and "headrag mongol" and saying that she had to "go back to Africa". The incident made it to the national media and sparked much outrage. At the end of the day, however, the PvdA won one seat in Emmen (from 6 to 7) and Kilincci made it to the council with 1007 preference votes, most of which were presumably cast out of sympathy following the incident.

[DavidB.]

YIKES... I feel dirty about agreeing with him!
https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/976953953823920129

[mvd10]

https://www.noties.nl/v/get.php?r=pp181203&f=Uitslagen+van+GR2018+naar+achtergrondkenmerken.pdf

Peil.nl results by some demographics: gender, age, education, smoking behaviour, income, religion, church visits, newspaper readership, website readership, watched television programmes, website readership, social media and more.

I always have doubts with Peil.nl's demographic data, but the results seem to make sense. Then again, in 2017 Peil.nl's crosstabs in their exit polls were much different from Ipsos', and I'm inclined to believe Ipsos' numbers (but Ipsos only gave results by age and education on the NOS).

[DavidB.]

For GE17 we don't need to rely on Ipsos exits anymore, because we have the NKO. Back then, Ipsos had said that youth turnout was lower than in GE12 (despite total turnout obviously being much higher), De Hond from Peil immediately wrote a sharp rebuttal and turned out to be entirely right based on NKO data. Peil's figures seem credible.

Read the NKO17 and was planning on making a post on that later, highlighting the most interesting findings.

[Leading Political Consultant Ma Anand Sheela]

smoking behaviour

Is this an actual thing Dutch pollsters ask about in connection to politics?

[Dr. MB]

Great news! This is a victory for civil liberties.

[DavidB.]

smoking behaviour

Is this an actual thing Dutch pollsters ask about in connection to politics?

It's one of De Hond's pet peeves to ask questions about irrelevant things (just like he asks you about owning actual pets). You're likely to find some correlation, but it will always be explained by class, age, education, income or ethnicity, so it is completely useless information. Meanwhile they'll never ask you about class, because that concept isn't supposed to exist in the Netherlands...