Politics and Elections in the Netherlands: Rutte III era

[DavidB.]

were PvdD not invoted to the left-Islam bloc?

They don't "do" alliances with anybody - and presumably no coalitions either.

[DavidB.]

also will Aboutaleb lose his position if  the PvdA is weakened?

He was re-elected to a second six-year term in May 2014, so he has 2.5 more years. He is popular and not very controversial, so I imagine that most parties would support his re-election regardless of his political background. However, May 2020 would also be a very convenient moment for him to call it quits and enter the national stage if Rutte III is still in office, as he does have national ambitions and the next GE is set to be held in March 2021.

[MAINEiac4434]

were PvdD not invoted to the left-Islam bloc?

They don't "do" alliances with anybody - and presumably no coalitions either.

Isn’t their whole raison d’être not gaining power and just bringing attention to animal issues?

[DavidB.]

were PvdD not invoted to the left-Islam bloc?

They don't "do" alliances with anybody - and presumably no coalitions either.

Isn’t their whole raison d’être not gaining power and just bringing attention to animal issues?

Yeah, basically. That, and arguing for a radically different, green, non-capitalist economy. They will not make any compromises in that.

[MAINEiac4434]

were PvdD not invoted to the left-Islam bloc?

They don't "do" alliances with anybody - and presumably no coalitions either.

Isn’t their whole raison d’être not gaining power and just bringing attention to animal issues?

Yeah, basically. That, and arguing for a radically different, green, non-capitalist economy. They will not make any compromises in that.

I suppose they have to...I imagine half their voting base would splinter off if they ever compromised.

[DavidB.]

Hilarious: approximately 40 local PvdA branches will stand in the election under a different name not linked to the national PvdA, so that it will appear as if they are a local party. They do so because of the negative image of the PvdA. In the past, local branches were explicitly ordered to avoid doing so even when engaging in so-called progressive alliances, where the PvdA would run one list together with other left-wing parties. But now the party has changed its position. "To us, the point is that you have a progressive agenda and are truly rooted in society. The choice of the name of the list, that's up to the local people with their expertise." For example, the PvdA in Cranendonck is now named "Pro6", and the PvdA Nederweert is "Nederweert Different".

[Zinneke]

Hilarious: approximately 40 local PvdA branches will stand in the election under a different name not linked to the national PvdA, so that it will appear as if they are a local party. They do so because of the negative image of the PvdA. In the past, local branches were explicitly ordered to avoid doing so even when engaging in so-called progressive alliances, where the PvdA would run one list together with other left-wing parties. But now the party has changed its position. "To us, the point is that you have a progressive agenda and are truly rooted in society. The choice of the name of the list, that's up to the local people with their expertise." For example, the PvdA in Cranendonck is now named "Pro6", and the PvdA Nederweert is "Nederweert Different".

sp.a doing the same here, although I think in both cases the other reason than the poor brand is that it opens their list to grassroots, usually single issue movements that have evolved outside the party structures (PTB were particularly effective at this in their strongholds). I imagine one of the key criticisms aimed at the social democratic parties in our countries is their internal machinations take precedence over real issues. add to that the fact that some people want to influence local politics without necessarily joining a party.

tldr This is probably going to be a long term trend in local party politics, these guys are just doing it earlier because of the "brand" problem.

[DavidB.]

You are right, this is a process that had already been taking place on the left; it has just been accelerated now.

The Hague poll (I&O; compared to 2014 result):
VVD 7 (+3)
D66 6 (-2)
De Mos 6 (+3)
GL 5 (+3)
PVV 4 (-3)
PvdA 4 (-2)
CDA 3 (-)
PvdD 2 (+1)
City Party 2 (-3)
SP 2 (+1)
50Plus 2 (+2)
Islam Democrats 1 (-1)
CU-SGP 1 (-)
PvdE 0 (-1)
NIDA 0

Very good poll for the VVD and for De Mos.

[Zinneke]

https://twitter.com/joostvanspanje/status/967428230595727360?s=20

This was an interesting take. I'm still unconvinced though. I wonder what the Dutch posters think

[Leading Political Consultant Ma Anand Sheela]

https://twitter.com/joostvanspanje/status/967428230595727360?s=20

This was an interesting take. I'm still unconvinced though. I wonder what the Dutch posters think

What was it supposedly down to then?

[mvd10]

I guess it's possible. In 2010 the PvdA was in Balkenende 3 and the coalition deal definitely wasn't a bad deal for the PvdA but they still polled at roughly 20 seats a few months before the election. In 2012 they had been in opposition for Rutte 1 (VVD-CDA with PVV support) for 2 years and they polled at 15 seats or so. Both times they got bailed out by a shiny new leader and a classic left/right horserace (VVD vs PvdA). Asscher definitely wasn't as respected as Job Cohen or as charismatic as Diederik Samsom, and there wasn't anything remotely close to a left/right horserace (economic issues took the backseat in 2017). A lot of the PvdA 2012 votes were borrowed votes that were bound to leave the PvdA (the same goes for VVD 2012). PvdA lost quite a lot of votes to D66 and even VVD/CDA, if these voters had voted PvdA in 2017 they could have won 20 seats, and I don't think these voters left the PvdA because it was too right-wing.

But I still think the coalition explains a lot of the PvdA loss. Perhaps Rutte 2's economic policies were supported by voters (but only in hindsight, in 2014 or so Rutte was really unpopular), but we shouldn't forget that D66/CU/SGP voted for most of Rutte's agenda, and CDA voters probably also broadly supported it. So I think most of the support comes from VVD/CDA/D66/CU/SGP/whatever is left of the PvdA, people who voted PvdA in 2012 and voted GL/SP/PVV or abstained in 2017 probably didn't really like the coalition.

In the first few weeks after the coalition agreement conventional wisdom was that the PvdA actually got the best deal, but in the end it was a lack of visibility that killed them as the junior partner always is going to be less visible than the party that delivers the PM.

[DavidB.]

Dutch voters do tend to vote prospectively rather than retrospectively, and I do think that the fact that the PvdA weren't able to (credibly) profile themselves as a party on the left and that other parties had a much clearer profile was the direct factor that led to their loss. In that sense I suppose the authors of the NKO position paper might be right.

However, the fact that the PvdA completely failed to do so has everything to do with the fact that they defended and carried out not-so left-wing policies in the government. So their participation in the government still matters a lot in an indirect way. The VVD "owned" the baggage of the government and won the election with it, but this baggage was less popular with PvdA voters and therefore the PvdA decided to run on a different message. The message was never clear: Asscher explicitly preferred to come up with a nuanced story nobody really understood. The bottom line, to me, remains: the PvdA hadn't lost as much as they did if they had not done in the government what they did.

I do think, however, that Samsom will now feel as if he has been proven right. He foresaw this and said he would unapologetically run on the government's achievements. I think he would have lost just as many seats, though.

[DavidB.]

The SP Rotterdam have received a lot of criticism for their decision to participate in the alliance with PvdA, GL and NIDA, particularly since NIDA have defended Turkey's operation in Afrin, something the national SP vehemently oppose. SP MP Sadet Karabulut, who is Kurdish, already tweeted that "this was a local decision...", implying that she isn't too happy with it. Meanwhile, NIDA (and surprisingly not DENK) have been endorsed by the Dutch branch of the AK Party: apparently, some AK person, a former CDA city council member, is on the NIDA list.

Meanwhile, voters are receiving their voting card(s): I have received both.

[DavidB.]

Referendum poll (EenVandaag/Ipsos): 48% support the intelligence law, 32% oppose it, 20% don't know.

[Zinneke]

The SP Rotterdam have received a lot of criticism for their decision to participate in the alliance with PvdA, GL and NIDA, particularly since NIDA have defended Turkey's operation in Afrin, something the national SP vehemently oppose. SP MP Sadet Karabulut, who is Kurdish, already tweeted that "this was a local decision...", implying that she isn't too happy with it. Meanwhile, NIDA (and surprisingly not DENK) have been endorsed by the Dutch branch of the AK Party: apparently, some AK person, a former CDA city council member, is on the NIDA list.

Meanwhile, voters are receiving their voting card(s): I have received both.

Do you not have a seperate one for provincial and local anymore?

[DavidB.]

New s p i c y remarks by Yernaz Ramautarsing, #2 FvD candidate in Amsterdam, which were leaked from a WhatsApp discussion group. Which only lowlifes do, but I love the gossip anyway. Now published in De Telegraaf.

Snippets:
- Society becomes less intelligent because of LGBT emancipation, as gay people have higher IQs on average and now do not procreate anymore.
- Taxes can be compared to rape.
- When people in the WhatsApp group confront Ramautarsing, who is black, with Baudet's quote that he would like to live in a "predominantly white country", Ramautarsing says he "has no problem understanding this due to the threats from non-white countries. It would be different if he wanted to keep out pro-Western pharmacists because of their skin color. White immigrants usually cause less trouble and cost the state less."
- About white people: "Seldom seen a race with so much self-hatred who feel such little need for self-preservation. White people crazy." But also: "I am the result of racial mixing. I am not opposed to diversity."
- On Trump: "Travel ban was a good one [in street lingo, D.] as well. 9/10 in geopolitics this year. Recognize the Armenian genocide and kidnap Bouterse and it would be 10/10."

I heard through the grapevine that there is more to follow.

Do you not have a seperate one for provincial and local anymore?

The next provincial elections will take place in March 2019, so the government can enjoy its majority in the Senate for (somewhat more than) one more year. This time it's only local elections and the referendum.

[DavidB.]

Told you so. De Volkskrant published a much larger article on the same WhatsApp group, in which about 50 people, members of various political youth organizations (including the FvD youth), discussed politics. Three eventually snitched because they noticed that they started to consider "extreme" remarks about refugees to be normal simply due to the exposure to them.

More Yernaz R. remarks:

- "Keeping the Netherlands dominantly white has nothing to do with ethnonationalism. It simply has to do with having enough children and watching out with migration."

- Supports the death penalty: "cheaper to execute a pedosexual than to incarcerate him for life" + "we could have popped Volkert van der Graaf [murderer of Pim Fortuyn, D.] and Mohammed B. [murderer of Theo van Gogh, D.] immediately."

- Supports a free market for organs. Opposes the new donor law: "The best reason not to become a donor is the fear that your organs will be used to save Antifa thugs and contribute to the destruction of the West."

- Ramautarsing shared articles about straight men having sex with each other: "1) this leads to clicks 2) it makes them seem pro-gay 3) they don't give a sh**t about the traditional family." These articles "destruct the nuclear family" and "men who have sex with men are not straight." He also opposes polyamorous relationships.

- During a lecture on the death penalty: "Hahahaha international law."

Some more (and more extreme) statements from members of the FvD youth were also published, perhaps to make it seem more "incriminating", but it does not seem as if Ramautarsing endorsed such remarks, otherwise this would surely have been published by VK. It is also mentioned that more left-wing people in the group made racist statements towards Ramautarsing ("house negro"; "slave of his master Thierry").

All in all a dumpster fire, but at the same time I think the traditional media and many of their readers do not understand the specific dynamics in WhatsApp groups like these. Those are all not necessarily completely serious statements.

Ramautarsing's statement: "I want to have nothing to do with racism. As a Dutchman with a Surinamese background who grew up in the Bijlmer, I know what discrimination means and in politics I wish to dedicate myself to fighting it. My words have been wrongly interpreted, which I regret."

[DavidB.]

Ramautarsing resigned: he will not take up his seat if (when) he is elected in Amsterdam. Says there was a big amount of trolling in the group and he defended positions he doesn't really support, and says he absolutely rejects the idea that LGBT rights have made society less smart.

The snitches were doxxed on GeenStijl: one of them, Mathijs Kramer, is a D66 candidate in Dordrecht. How low can you go?

[Zinneke]

The snitches were doxxed on GeenStijl: one of them, Mathijs Kramer, is a D66 candidate in Dordrecht. How low can you go?

I'd say promoting bizarre pseudo-scientific racial theories, homophobia and saying the NL should not accept immigrants with down syndrome "because we already have enough downies who cost a ton" is already a lower bar.

[DavidB.]

That last statement about people with Down syndrome was not by Ramautarsing but by some other FvD member in that group:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No mention of Ramautarsing saying anything about this -- and it would definitely have been included had he voiced his support for this position.

While Ramautarsing's statement about gay rights making society less intelligent was ridiculous, I don't see why it's homophobic as he did not call for rolling back gay rights.

Apparently this group was meant as a closed group in which all sorts of sometimes crazy viewpoints were discussed (including far-left ones and pro-jihadi ones), without taboos. Ramautarsing obviously made a big mistake by continuing to participate in these discussions, because from day one it should have been obvious that someday this information would be leaked. But people who are triggered because they are confronted with un-PC and sometimes ridiculous viewpoints should just get out of the kitchen if they can't stand the heat.

[Zinneke]

That last statement about people with Down syndrome was not by Ramautarsing but by some other FvD member in that group:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No mention of Ramautarsing saying anything about this -- and it would definitely have been included had he voiced his support for this position.

While Ramautarsing's statement about gay rights making society less intelligent was ridiculous, I don't see why it's homophobic as he did not call for rolling back gay rights.

Apparently this group was meant as a closed group in which all sorts of sometimes crazy viewpoints were discussed (including far-left ones and pro-jihadi ones), without taboos. Ramautarsing obviously made a big mistake by continuing to participate in these discussions, because from day one it should have been obvious that someday this information would be leaked. But people who are triggered because they are confronted with un-PC and sometimes ridiculous viewpoints should just get out of the kitchen if they can't stand the heat.

Some impressive head-in-sand and whataboutery in here.

Panic starting to set into the JFvD ranks I see.

[DavidB.]

It's called context. Wouldn't expect you to get it, but others who read this might. I am always the first one to post about FvD scandals in this thread, just like I post about other parties' scandals, but I also try to offer context; the type of context De Volkskrant might not offer.

Panic starting to set into the JFvD ranks I see.

You should ask a JFvD member. I have no idea.

[EPG]

Do young people really believe they can write trash, then expect to seek power over people without standing by their words? Just because it's on the internet? Probably not - instead, anyone who has been active in youth politics will know this kind of personality, attention-seeking and ultimately self-destructive.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I think it's a learning curve: a lot of young people are steeped in irony and memes, and believe that its all very clever and funny to argue from absurd directions and use taboo references to nasty regimes, or jokingly argue for diabolical causes. Unfortunately this often spectacularly backfires offline, as we've seen many times from both left and right wing activists.

[DavidB.]

I think it's a learning curve: a lot of young people are steeped in irony and memes, and believe that its all very clever and funny to argue from absurd directions and use taboo references to nasty regimes, or jokingly argue for diabolical causes. Unfortunately this often spectacularly backfires offline, as we've seen many times from both left and right wing activists.

Completely agreed. Of course it was a mistake for Ramautarsing to assume he would be fine with so many people in that group rejecting his worldview and him, but it is through the free exchange of ideas that people learn things and adapt their views. This should of course happen behind closed doors. The problem is that a WhatsApp group can seem "behind closed doors"  but suddenly literally make headlines in quality newspapers.

On the one hand, "what has been seen cannot be unseen" and for this reason Ramautarsing basically had to go. On the other hand, it is a sad state of affairs when every online statement by somebody in the past, ever, can be used to discredit this person. It makes us less free.

Do young people really believe they can write trash, then expect to seek power over people without standing by their words? Just because it's on the internet? Probably not - instead, anyone who has been active in youth politics will know this kind of personality, attention-seeking and ultimately self-destructive.

The biggest cancer in youth politics is not people who make absurd, provocative statements because they're young and they're experimenting and learning, but people who have no views whatsoever (or brains, for that matter) and lick themselves all the way up.