Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Roderick

Elections in the Lowlands!

Recommended Posts

Today, the Netherlands decide how this country will shape up over the coming four years. Yes, Election-Day! Will we finally get a left-wing cabinet to right the wrongs of our hardening society? Or will the Forces of Evil yet again prevail and after over 20 years of right-wing rule continue their mad bid for privatisation and leading us into ever-escalating wars?

Tonight, we will know! Who are you voting for? I'm going outside again today in my nice red SP (Socialist Party) sweater, hopefully getting them some more airtime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

none of the above, but apperently that's not possible.

so I'm going to vote d66, based on principles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Woo, politics!

I'm voting GroenLinks (again), based purely on their program.

I've seen very little of the debates due to not having a TV but somehow it makes me feel my decision is more informed. When I tell people what I'm voting for, they usually respond with a comment about the party leader's personality or "credibility" (geloofwaardigheid, that silly word), but that's not what this is about. Other people tell me to vote PvdA to avoid a right-wing cabinet, but that's not what this is about either. I vote whichever party most closely matches my beliefs and my priorities and that's it.

I hope SP kicks ass today. Those guys have got one heck of a campaign. And I secretly would love to see Marijnissen in an executive position.

D'66 is totally the best choice if you're voting on the right. Elmuerte, I have to ask, which parts of their program convinced you? D'66 voters often have a very specific reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
D'66 is totally the best choice if you're voting on the right. Elmuerte, I have to ask, which parts of their program convinced you? D'66 voters often have a very specific reason.

I haven't dug through all programs to extract the real content and their views on certain subjects. The actions they want to take a nice to know, but (unless the get asolute power) they will have get other parties to agree.

So, to get back on subject. I've looked mostly at freedom and privacy. D66 is one of the few parties that doesn't want to limit freedom and privacy. To know how parties think about these subjects you usually have to look into the subject of security.

An other important factor was the behavior of the parties, and not only during the campaign. How they work in order to try to make the country a better place. Blaming others for problems without providing (actual) aid makes you and obstacle. Sure D66 did a few things I didn't agree on, or at least, too late. But at least they admitted their guilt and took responsibility for their behavior. But I still think it was a bad move.

Another thing I looked for is hypocrisy (lack off it ofcourse). For example the two scales of discrimination. e.g. We are all equal but some are more equal than others. Positive discrimination is also a bad thing.

In the end, I had to choose from the lesser of X evils.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always had to choose between lesser evils. Not once did a party convince me 100%. I'm one of those 'floaters', if you know what I mean.

This time I'll probably vote for a right-wing party, because I don't want to see a full left-wing government. (I'm not happy with a full right-wing government either, though)

My problem right now is that I agree with a lot of SP's and PvdA's points. Especially on the health care issue. On the economical issues I tend to agree more with VVD and CDA. It's frustrating!

Groenlinks is a party I'll never vote for, because they're leaning too much on principles and are not realistic. The SP used to be the same way (against everything, but without feasible alternatives), but I'm glad they've changed.

--Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've always had to choose between lesser evils. Not once did a party convince me 100%. I'm one of those 'floaters', if you know what I mean.

not being conviced for 100% doesn't make it evil. I would say below 66% it would start to become evil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there are two important points, there's always party X that I support on point 1, and party Y that I support on point 2. And it gets really annoying when party X is left, and Y is right.

Does that make sense?

--Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This time I'll probably vote for a right-wing party
Then please vote D'66 :) :) It combines liberal and social ideas in a pretty agreeable way. Don't vote VVD or CDA please even if you agree more with their stance on the economy. "Strategic votes" for the lose.

</political brownnosing>

I'm not 100% convinced by GroenLinks either. Just to pick something random: they want animal rights in the consitution, which I think is horseshit. But most of their viewpoints match mine, so I'm happy to be voting for them. I think GroenLinks is slightly more pragmatic than SP though, particularly in how they look at the economy, or the EU, etc. But I also agree SP has really turned around from their purely opposition party mentality and is focusing more on actual solutions.

Anyway. When will the results be in? Maybe I will watch a live stream tonight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Groenlinks has the right intentions, but I strongly disagree with their stance on certain issues that I find important.

I disagree with their stance on Schiphol, for example, because I *do* feel it's an important asset to our economy, and it *does* need to expand. I also disagree with the extra tax on flying, which will make it more difficult for me to travel overseas. :) PvdA is the only party that I support on Schiphol, because I don't agree with VVD and CDA on selling it out either. (I'm an opponent of privatizing altogether)

Groenlinks ideas about the mortgage interest issue are totally unacceptable to me as well. They want to ditch it altogether, which will make it even harder for me to buy a home (which I'm currently trying to do). SP's policy would be much more fair in this regard. Frankly, though, I'm with CDA on this issue: Hands off!

And finally, their 'paradepaardje', the environment. The environmental changes we're facing are taking place on a much larger scale, making it pointless to restrict the things we do between the borders of our puny country. I believe it will hurt our economy and only advantage the big industries in China and the USA, who of course continue to pollute our world, and on a much larger scale to boot. I've read the short version of their program, and I couldn't find anything about what to do about this problem in cooperation with Europe. If you want to fight pollution, fight for it on a larger battleground.

I do agree with a lot of things (Euthanasia being an important one), but unfortunately for them there are more parties with a similar stance on these subjects.

--Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Marek; D66 is the way to go if you're right but you don't want to be associated with the a-social policies of our current government. Pechtold is a very agreeable man and the party seems one of nuance and fairness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

D'66 and I aren't really conflicting on the, for me, important issues, which is a good sign. I do have feel some hesitation, though. Not because of their program obviously, but because of how they screwed up only a while ago. Today D'66 doesn't seem to be able to make a difference anymore, making my vote kind of powerless, and maybe even pointless. At least, that's how it feels.

--Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
D'66 and I aren't really conflicting on the, for me, important issues, which is a good sign. I do have feel some hesitation, though. Not because of their program obviously, but because of how they screwed up only a while ago.

Every ruling party\minister has screwed up more than once and they will always do. Ofcourse some take responsibility and others don't.

Ofcourse they only screwup D66 made the last time was when their bluff was called. The other (2) things were not screwups, they were just failures in the execution of their ideas (or as I prefer to "believe" they were screwed by VVD and CDA (mostlye the former)). It's actually ironic, Verdonk screwed up (more than once), but only D66 suffered from that. They actuallt did the "left" side a favour.

Ahh well... we'll see what will happend at ... 23:00'ish (depending how fasts those retards are with counting the paper votes).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally get what you're saying about the environmental issues but, sadly, none of the parties seem to make it a huge point. GroenLinks makes it a slightly bigger point than the others, so I'm settling for them on that issue.

After seeing An Inconvenient Truth (after reading various magazine articles that confirmed its scientific accuracy) climate change has really become my number one issue. My believe/hope is that if an individual country takes the lead and develops new technologies (for renewable energy and so forth) it can export those technologies and have a global impact that way. If every country does nothing because every other country does nothing, nothing will ever happen.

As far as Schiphol goes, I'd say keep it at about this size. It's totally crammed in between cities already, and I have some doubts about the environmental effects of further expansion. I guess I wouldn't be fundamentally opposed to a landing strip in the north sea connected by underground rail, if the investment could pay itself off (but apparently it wouldn't, so that's off the table). I really don't see where else you could put more landing strips or terminals other than in places where it's really not welcomed.

The mortgage interest issue kind of escaped my attention. Well, shit. I'm likely to buy a house soon so maybe I should have read more about it. :getmecoat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My believe/hope is that if an individual country takes the lead and develops new technologies (for renewable energy and so forth) it can export those technologies and have a global impact that way.

We've already got that technology:

  • Nuclear Power
  • Hot Dry Rock
  • Tidal Power (not really reliable for constant energy)
  • Water current turbine (couldn't find a wikipedia article for that; it's like wind turbines but underwater; but it's quite reliable to deliver a constant stream of energy; the largest issue is transportation)
  • etc.

Ofcourse there are a few popular but aweful alternative forms for renewable energy:

Wind turbines

This is a very unreliable form of power production and you need reliable sources. And ofcourse there are people complaining about horizon polution (but screw that).

Solar power

It's good enough for initial heating of water. For electrical power it just doesn't produce enough. And it's also not very reliable (something with "nights" and stuff).

One of the biggest problems is that the people that make the decision what power to invest in are oblivious on the subject or complete retards.

For example an offshore wind turbine farm. Experts concluded that it wasn't a smart thing to do. But the goverment more or less ignored the whole report. Even the failed experiment in Denmark didn't convince them it wasn't a smart thing to do.

And ofocurse to develop these technologies you should make it interesting for companies and research institutions to do it here. Investing is research is often not a popular subject for political parties because they want results within 4 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Every ruling party\minister has screwed up more than once and they will always do. Ofcourse some take responsibility and others don't.

Ofcourse they only screwup D66 made the last time was when their bluff was called. The other (2) things were not screwups, they were just failures in the execution of their ideas (or as I prefer to "believe" they were screwed by VVD and CDA (mostlye the former)). It's actually ironic, Verdonk screwed up (more than once), but only D66 suffered from that. They actuallt did the "left" side a favour.

Ahh well... we'll see what will happend at ... 23:00'ish (depending how fasts those retards are with counting the paper votes).

You're totally right. Maybe I didn't word myself too well there, but the reason why I'm reluctant about voting D'66 is not because they made a mistake. It's about where this mistake has lead them. A party that lost its credibility, gravity, and most importantly, its power. The sad thing is that, like you said, the VVD had the biggest part in this. I'm sure they're being punished by the voter as well, but not as badly as they deserve.

--Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I know the tech is all there. But the cheaper and more efficient we can make that tech, the faster it will be adopted, and there's a lot that can be done in that area. (And of course there might be entirely new techs we haven't yet discovered.)

Nuclear power is not an option in my book unless literally the world depended on it. If we're going to replace shitty energy sources, let's replace them properly and not with something that still relies on a limited fuel source (uranium ore - it's plentiful but so was oil once) and leaves waste we can't deal with. Another thing I don't like about nuclear reactors is that they require a lot of security. So in summary, nuclear: :tmeh:

But yeah, wind power: :tdown:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
After seeing An Inconvenient Truth (after reading various magazine articles that confirmed its scientific accuracy) climate change has really become my number one issue. My believe/hope is that if an individual country takes the lead and develops new technologies (for renewable energy and so forth) it can export those technologies and have a global impact that way. If every country does nothing because every other country does nothing, nothing will ever happen.

True. That's why I'm disappointed that GroenLinks doesn't mention anything about addressing the problems Europe-wide. I mean, we like to play a big role in Europe, right? We're one of the biggest ''Europe investors''. Can't we at least use the power we yield with this money to raise a voice?

As far as Schiphol goes, I'd say keep it at about this size. It's totally crammed in between cities already, and I have some doubts about the environmental effects of further expansion. I guess I wouldn't be fundamentally opposed to a landing strip in the north sea connected by underground rail, if the investment could pay itself off (but apparently it wouldn't, so that's off the table). I really don't see where else you could put more landing strips or terminals other than in places where it's really not welcomed.

Your concerns about the environmental effects are noble, but people still want and need to travel. And if they can't reach their destinations through Schiphol, they'll reach it through Heathrow or any of the other airports around us. GroenLinks wants to enforce stricter environmental norms for Schiphol, which creates unfair competition. The amount of passengers won't decrease, like I said because they'll just fly via these airports, so it doesn't really help.

What's even more appalling is that GroenLinks wants to raise Kerosine taxes, in an attempt to make flying less attractive. Well, what can I say? I believe this would indeed help decrease passengers... But only DUTCH passengers, and passengers flying via Schiphol. The last group will simply, like I said, choose to fly via London or something. And as a Dutchman you're really out of luck when everybody around you can fly and see the world for affordable prices, and you can't.

Sorry for the constant GL bashing, but I just can't help myself. It's a party with the right intentions and the wrong solutions. It's a party which I disagree with the strongest of them all. Except for Groep Wilders.

--Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah I know the tech is all there. But the cheaper and more efficient we can make that tech, the faster it will be adopted, and there's a lot that can be done in that area. (And of course there might be entirely new techs we haven't yet discovered.)

Well.. it's not like coal is very cheap. It's starting to get quite expensive to reach the coal, and it's only going to increase.

Nuclear power is not an option in my book unless literally the world depended on it. If we're going to replace shitty energy sources, let's replace them properly and not with something that still relies on a limited fuel source (uranium ore - it's plentiful but so was oil once) and leaves waste we can't deal with. Another thing I don't like about nuclear reactors is that they require a lot of security. So in summary, nuclear: :tmeh:

Maybe. But if you want to reach 2040 (in case you believe that) you will need to start using nuclear power until you have better replacements. Right now nuclear power is a very good replacement for fosilfuel power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gentlemen, the people have spoken. All the current governmental parties have lost seats and the SP has come to a massive 26, making them the third biggest party in the land! Huzzah!

Now let's hope the formations will go such that the SP gets a part in the government, and that the cabinet won't fall again due to difficult power rearrangements and we'll have to vote again in a month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have my doubts SP will become a governing party. They can't create a left majority.

and I seriously don't hope that the by heart communistic party that is ruled with an iron fist gets to rule a part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh what? Iron fist? Where did you get that from?

After seeing the results I don't know whether I should be happy or sad. A right-wing coalition has been prevented, but I don't see many viable combinations here. CDA - PvdA - SP would be fine in my book, but it would never happen since CDA and SP won't be able to cooperate. So if SP is going to be an opposition party again, what will we get? CDA - PvdA - VVD (Paars 3)? ;( ;( ;( Or CDA - PvdA - CU? (Fuck) I don't know. The results are a giant clusterfuck.

Whatever spews forth will probably make me slightly happier than a completely right-wing cabinet but I can't say I trust there to be a stable, straighforward government (anywhere in the political spectrum) any time soon.

(Oh, by the way Erwin, don't mind the stuff about GL. It's not bashing as you clearly spent thought on the issues, and I'm not one to get offended by healthy disagreements. Good stuff :) )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geert Wilders won 9 seats. That's just unbelievable.

It's going to be very interesting to see how our new government will form. Last time it took as much as 5 months to form a cabinet, which was a record I believe, but I wouldn't be surprised if it would take even longer this time. :getmecoat

--Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah fucking Wilders. How did that happen?

Also (for entirely different reasons) ... the Party for Animals. TWO FUCKING SEATS. Let's give huge "Whhaaaaaaaaaaa?! :eek:" to that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×