| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
What's interesting is how SP has loads of new voters and PvdA underperforming but still SP loses a seat. I guess many of them still flocked to Wilders. I'm really happy Wilders didn't become the largest but with nearly all votes counted he still looking to be the second largest. And that's with him cancelling half of his campaigning and dropping out of debates and the shittiest election programme ever with only a half A4 paper of points. It still stings a lot. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On March 16 2017 11:19 Sent. wrote: Maybe I'm underestimating the average European voter but I think his familiarity with Trump's presidency should be limited to knowing that: 1) He tried to ban muslims from some Middle-Eastern countries from entering the US but the judiciary stopped him and he's at war with it now 2) Some of his men have suspicious ties to Russia 3) He wasn't joking about building the wall None of these things should make a FN/UKIP/AfD supporter feel like "aw shit those anti-establishment guys are terrible, I'll stop voting for them now". Indeed. The difference is that it will make all others feel like, “not this s*** in my home”. There was a record for voter registerations in France this year, and apparently a surge had been noticed just after Trump was elected. On March 16 2017 18:50 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: That's brutal for PvdA. Basically only the old people who voted PvdA all their lives voted for them.Nearly 50% above 65 years old lol. Oh, look, another social-democrat party bit the dust. I wonder how many losses they need to realize how catastrophic they are and how stupid it is to govern with the right. Maybe losing 75% of their seats will teach them this hard lesson. But after all, getting steamrolled in every intermediary election, being the most unpopular government in the Vth Republic and even losing the primary to the left wing of their party didn't even make the French ““social-democrats”” think about this, they're still persuased their political line is fine... | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6248 Posts
On March 16 2017 19:18 TheDwf wrote: Indeed. The difference is that it will make all others feel like, “not this s*** in my home”. There was a record for voter registerations in France this year, and apparently a surge had been noticed just after Trump was elected. Oh, look, another social-democrat party bit the dust. I wonder how many losses they need to realize how catastrophic they are and how stupid it is to govern with the right. Maybe losing 75% of their seats will teach them this hard lesson. But after all, getting steamrolled in every intermediary election, being the most unpopular government in the Vth Republic and even losing the primary to the left wing of their party didn't even make the French ““social-democrats”” think about this, they're still persuased their political line is fine... Not sure what they could've done differently. Going further to the left they're only getting into SP territory (which also lost a seat). A lot of their votes probably went to GL and D66 which are very popular with the young. Young people seem to be more interested in being green and liberal on social issues (drugs etc.). The PvdA had a hard time competing with someone like Klaver though. Even I thought he was a really good candidate while I'm not a GL voter at all. They also didn't really have an option but to govern with the VVD in the last election. A coalition on the left would've been impossible seat wise. They'd need either D66 or CDA. But such a coalition probably wouldn't be acceptable for CDA especially since they had a terrible election themselves. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On March 16 2017 19:40 RvB wrote: Not sure what they could've done differently. Going further to the left they're only getting into SP territory (which also lost a seat). A lot of their votes probably went to GL and D66 which are very popular with the young. Young people seem to be more interested in being green and liberal on social issues (drugs etc.). The PvdA had a hard time competing with someone like Klaver though. Even I thought he was a really good candidate while I'm not a GL voter at all. The anti-austerity left got 28 seats, the pro-austerity one got 9. What they could—should—have done differently seems pretty clear, no? | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
On March 16 2017 19:18 TheDwf wrote: Indeed. The difference is that it will make all others feel like, “not this s*** in my home”. There was a record for voter registerations in France this year, and apparently a surge had been noticed just after Trump was elected. Oh, look, another social-democrat party bit the dust. I wonder how many losses they need to realize how catastrophic they are and how stupid it is to govern with the right. Maybe losing 75% of their seats will teach them this hard lesson. But after all, getting steamrolled in every intermediary election, being the most unpopular government in the Vth Republic and even losing the primary to the left wing of their party didn't even make the French ““social-democrats”” think about this, they're still persuased their political line is fine... That hardly seems very tolerant of you. Of course their political line is fine, even if it doesn't get a lot of votes. Everyone is entitled to their own political opinion, are they not? I'm not at all just saying this because my party didn't get in. -_- Oh well, the other party I would have voted for wouldn't have been better off with my vote anyway. Or maybe I should have voted along my education level, location, age and gender(ish) and gone with PVV. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6248 Posts
On March 16 2017 19:46 TheDwf wrote: The anti-austerity left got 28 seats, the pro-austerity one got 9. What they could—should—have done differently seems pretty clear, no? But they pretty much had to govern with the VVD and pretty much all parties were in favour of reducing the budget deficit. The discussion was more how we should do this (tax raises vs spending cuts). | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On March 16 2017 19:47 a_flayer wrote: That hardly seems very tolerant of you. Of course their political line is fine, even if it doesn't get a lot of votes. Everyone is entitled to their own political opinion, are they not? I'm not at all just saying this because my party didn't get in. -_- Oh well, the other party I would have voted for wouldn't have been better off with my vote anyway. Or maybe I should have voted along my location, age and gender(ish) and gone with VVD. You didn't understand. It's not a matter of being “right or wrong” in the absolute. If you're a left-wing party, here's how it works: your social base votes for you because they want certain things from you. If you don't deliver and do the opposite (story of Hollande's mandate, for example), they punish you. Hard. If you're elected on some anti-austerity platform, then do austerity you're going to get stomped at the next elections. And rightfully so. After those electoral sanctions, you have two choices: correct your political line so that it respects what your social base expects from you, or ignore reality and keep crashing into the wall. This is why social-democracy took/is taking huge losses in many European countries, until they finally realize what went wrong and stop their drift to the right. | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
| ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
@our German friends: got some echo from Macron's visit to Merkel? | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
A Turkish minister has claimed "holy wars will soon begin" in Europe, in spite of the defeat of far-right leader Geert Wilders in the Netherlands elections. Mevlut Cavusoglu, Turkey’s foreign minister, did not welcome the victory for Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s centre-right People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD). “Now the election is over in the Netherlands...when you look at the many parties you see there is no difference between the social democrats and fascist Wilders,” he said according to a translation by Hurriyet. “All have the same mentality. Where will you go? Where are you taking Europe? You have begun to collapse Europe. You are dragging Europe into the abyss. Holy wars will soon begin in Europe.” | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6248 Posts
On March 16 2017 19:56 TheDwf wrote: You didn't understand. It's not a matter of being “right or wrong” in the absolute. If you're a left-wing party, here's how it works: your social base votes for you because they want certain things from you. If you don't deliver and do the opposite (story of Hollande's mandate, for example), they punish you. Hard. If you're elected on some anti-austerity platform, then do austerity you're going to get stomped at the next elections. And rightfully so. After those electoral sanctions, you have two choices: correct your political line so that it respects what your social base expects from you, or ignore reality and keep crashing into the wall. This is why social-democracy took/is taking huge losses in many European countries, until they finally realize what went wrong and stop their drift to the right. Except that they did get elected on a platform to bring the budget in balance on the long term. I looked up for you what PvdA, SP and GL points were on this in 2012. It's in Dutch so sorry for that but I couldn't find an english source. PvdA streven naar structureel begrotingsevenwicht in 2017, niet blindstaren op 3 procent in 2013. Strive for a structural balanced budget in 2017, don't get fixated on the 3% norm in 2013 SP Nederland houdt niet vast aan de opgelegde drie procent begrotingsnorm, uiterlijk in 2015 wordt het begrotingstekort terug gebracht onder de drie procent The Netherlands will not adhere to the 3% norm, the budget deficit will be under 3% before 2015. GL -Er wordt een verstandig begrotingsbeleid gevoerd. De tekorten worden 'zo snel als verantwoord' weggewerkt. Op termijn wordt gestreefd naar een structureel overschot op de begroting. A deficit has to be reduced responsible. In the long term you'll have to strive to a structural surplus on the budget. So PvdA and GL are pretty much the same. SP only wants to reduce the deficit to 3% in 2015 but that meant either increased taxes or austerity anyway. The PvdA didn't lose any seats to the SP this election though so I don't really agree with your analysis. http://www.nu.nl/politiek/2829544/hoofdpunten-pvda-verkiezingsprogramma.html http://www.volkskrant.nl/politiek/dit-zijn-de-hoofdpunten-uit-het-groenlinks-verkiezingsprogramma~a3266900/ https://www.parlement.com/id/vj1tk1gitjxj/sp_en_tweede_kamerverkiezingen_2012 | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
this government is wrong in so many ways. idk how the Turkish people here can be in favour of someone so blatantly delusional. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18838 Posts
On March 16 2017 20:16 RvB wrote: Claiming that stated goals necessarily imply particular methods of action is not very convincing, particularly when you're making that reference through untranslated Dutch. For example, "SP only wants to reduce the deficit to 3% in 2015 but that meant either increased taxes or austerity anyway," totally ignores the possibility that SP only paid lip service to a 3% reduction in the deficit and instead planned to effect policy elsewhere. Except that they did get elected on a platform to bring the budget in balance on the long term. I looked up for you what PvdA, SP and GL points were on this in 2012. It's in Dutch so sorry for that but I couldn't find an english source. PvdA streven naar structureel begrotingsevenwicht in 2017, niet blindstaren op 3 procent in 2013. Strive for a structural balanced budget in 2017, don't get fixated on the 3% norm in 2013 SP Nederland houdt niet vast aan de opgelegde drie procent begrotingsnorm, uiterlijk in 2015 wordt het begrotingstekort terug gebracht onder de drie procent The Netherlands will not adhere to the 3% norm, the budget deficit will be under 3% before 2015. GL -Er wordt een verstandig begrotingsbeleid gevoerd. De tekorten worden 'zo snel als verantwoord' weggewerkt. Op termijn wordt gestreefd naar een structureel overschot op de begroting. A deficit has to be reduced responsible. In the long term you'll have to strive to a structural surplus on the budget. So PvdA and GL are pretty much the same. SP only wants to reduce the deficit to 3% in 2015 but that meant either increased taxes or austerity anyway. The PvdA didn't lose any seats to the SP this election though so I don't really agree with your analysis. http://www.nu.nl/politiek/2829544/hoofdpunten-pvda-verkiezingsprogramma.html http://www.volkskrant.nl/politiek/dit-zijn-de-hoofdpunten-uit-het-groenlinks-verkiezingsprogramma~a3266900/ https://www.parlement.com/id/vj1tk1gitjxj/sp_en_tweede_kamerverkiezingen_2012 | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6248 Posts
On March 16 2017 20:12 TheDwf wrote: Also lol @ polls and medias for grossly overestimating Wilders' score. It's just always the same story, “look! the far-right wolf will eat us all!” @our German friends: got some echo from Macron's visit to Merkel? Only the media actually. The polls were decently accurate. Here's a picture of peilingwijzer. They aggregrated all the polls. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/baqks2C.png) Only the VVD is a big difference with the polls in the end. http://www.volkskrant.nl/politiek/opiniepeilers-voorspelden-de-grote-trends-verbazingwekkend-goed~a4475120/ | ||
|
HolydaKing
21254 Posts
On March 16 2017 20:12 TheDwf wrote: Also lol @ polls and medias for grossly overestimating Wilders' score. It's just always the same story, “look! the far-right wolf will eat us all!” @our German friends: got some echo from Macron's visit to Merkel? Not much that I know of. International news mostly are about Turkey going banana, Trump and the dutch election atm. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On March 16 2017 20:16 RvB wrote: Except that they did get elected on a platform to bring the budget in balance on the long term. I looked up for you what PvdA, SP and GL points were on this in 2012. It's in Dutch so sorry for that but I couldn't find an english source. Well, the French anti-austerity left also claims that the budget will be balanced eventually, but of course the methods differ (and above all, who pays). This kind of electoral sanction for the pro-austerity left is a recurring pattern; but I am not aware of the Dutch specifics, so indeed maybe I made some abusive generalization and it's possible that something else played. If there's some specialist of the Dutch left around here, his analysis of the results are welcome. (From what I understood the PvdA votes went to GL?) On March 16 2017 20:21 RvB wrote: Only the media actually. The polls were decently accurate. Here's a picture of peilingwijzer. They aggregrated all the polls. + Show Spoiler + Only the VVD is a big difference with the polls in the end. http://www.volkskrant.nl/politiek/opiniepeilers-voorspelden-de-grote-trends-verbazingwekkend-goed~a4475120/ Yeah, near the end Wilders did drop in the polls, but I remember him being super high a few weeks ago, no? French media were all hysteric about the “populist Wilders” (trying to make the situation akin to Le Pen here so hard), as usual they missed the rest of the picture... | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18107 Posts
On March 16 2017 20:16 RvB wrote: Except that they did get elected on a platform to bring the budget in balance on the long term. I looked up for you what PvdA, SP and GL points were on this in 2012. It's in Dutch so sorry for that but I couldn't find an english source. PvdA streven naar structureel begrotingsevenwicht in 2017, niet blindstaren op 3 procent in 2013. Strive for a structural balanced budget in 2017, don't get fixated on the 3% norm in 2013 SP Nederland houdt niet vast aan de opgelegde drie procent begrotingsnorm, uiterlijk in 2015 wordt het begrotingstekort terug gebracht onder de drie procent The Netherlands will not adhere to the 3% norm, the budget deficit will be under 3% before 2015. GL -Er wordt een verstandig begrotingsbeleid gevoerd. De tekorten worden 'zo snel als verantwoord' weggewerkt. Op termijn wordt gestreefd naar een structureel overschot op de begroting. A deficit has to be reduced responsible. In the long term you'll have to strive to a structural surplus on the budget. So PvdA and GL are pretty much the same. SP only wants to reduce the deficit to 3% in 2015 but that meant either increased taxes or austerity anyway. The PvdA didn't lose any seats to the SP this election though so I don't really agree with your analysis. http://www.nu.nl/politiek/2829544/hoofdpunten-pvda-verkiezingsprogramma.html http://www.volkskrant.nl/politiek/dit-zijn-de-hoofdpunten-uit-het-groenlinks-verkiezingsprogramma~a3266900/ https://www.parlement.com/id/vj1tk1gitjxj/sp_en_tweede_kamerverkiezingen_2012 That last point is not necessarily true. The PvdA may very well have lost votes to the SP, while SP meanwhile lost votes to PVV/GL. You need a lot more detailed info than just whether or not voters are new voters or repeat voters. That said, the PvdA may very well have lost because of austerity. Whereas austerity was more-or-less imposed by European government (fiercely lobbied for by, among other, Dutch members of the European parliament), the PvdA was not really in favour of it, and its voters may have been quite vehemently opposed. But austerity was the name of the game for anybody willing to govern. The VVD voters are generally fiscally conservative and austerity is a good thing to them, so they don't get punished for implementing austerity measures, meanwhile the PvdA got destroyed for it. More generally: the impression I got from the government the last 4 years was a center-right government: or in other words, the PvdA got very little of their key points implemented in policy, and they simply failed at one of either governing, or advertising their wins. Dijsselbloem was successful and very popular (and Timmermans before that as well, while the VVD ministers had some serious scandals), but he is far from a poster boy for the PvdA, and rather than taking those (his) wins, their campaign was mostly based on distancing themselves from their own implemented policy decisions. That's some serious failure right there, and they were quite obviously punished for it. | ||
Kipsate
Netherlands45349 Posts
| ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
I'm really starting to get uncomfortable with that whole situation. Between Bannon-esque attitudes (ranging from full Breitbart to the more moderate Mad Dog anti-Iran position) in the US as well as the general anti-Muslim atmosphere all across Europe, and Turkey recently joining that relatively hardcore Islamist faction under Erdogan in opposition to it all... the ISIS propaganda seems rather on-point, doesn't it? This 'holy war' thing seems to be coming at us from all sides. Hell, it started with Bush invading Iraq because "god told him to do it". Why are religious people such nutjobs? | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
WardiTV Korean Royale
LAN Event
OSC
The PondCast
LAN Event
Replay Cast
OSC
LAN Event
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
