Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

The Netherlands Election - Exit Polls Shows Incumbent Winning


DonLever

Recommended Posts

Dutch exit poll: Liberal party may get 31 seats. Freedom party 19 seats

 

Soft performance for Wilders

Wilders' Freedom party was expected to earn about 22 seats. It looks like they will finish in a three-way tie for second place with only 19. That way behind the Liberal party that will win 31 seats according to the first exit poll.

 

The Freedom party will tie with the Christian Democrats and Democrats D66. The Christian Union will get 6 seats, Greens 16 seats and Socialists 14 seats.

 

Here is how the percentages breakdown according to a separate Ipsos exit poll:

  • VVD-ALDE: 21%
  • CDA-EPP 13%
  • PVV-ENF 13%
  • D66-ALDE 13%
  • GL-G/EFA 11%
  • SP-LEFT 9%
  • PvdA-S&D 6%        
  •  

http://news.forexlive.com/!/exit-poll-liberal-party-may-get-31-seats-freedom-party-19-seats-20170315

 

Second exit poll has identical results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Kragar said:

If refugees and other immigrants can adapt and co-exist among more liberal Western cultures, it's all fine.

 

For Rotterdam's mayor to drop an F-bomb in reference to those who are not willing to accept the culture of their new, chosen home sounds pretty clear that there are issues to be dealt with.

 

And, he is right.  We have advanced our cultures to be increasingly more appreciative of women's and LGBT rights, among others, that are typically not well respected in many Islamic countries.  Many Muslims who come to our countries do seem to embrace this, but for those that won't, we have no need of them and they should go somewhere where their views are shared.

 

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/dutch-muslim-mayor-to-other-muslims-accept-western-values-or-go-back-home/

 

 

I've met a lot of older Christians that don't have women's rights or LGBT top of mind either. Its a dangerous slope you're talking about. People are free to think what they want, but their actions have to fall within our set of laws. There's no actual movement to turn those back, nor would the majority of us let that happen.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

Dutch exit poll: Liberal party may get 31 seats. Freedom party 19 seats

 

Soft performance for Wilders

Wilders' Freedom party was expected to earn about 22 seats. It looks like they will finish in a three-way tie for second place with only 19. That way behind the Liberal party that will win 31 seats according to the first exit poll.

 

The Freedom party will tie with the Christian Democrats and Democrats D66. The Christian Union will get 6 seats, Greens 16 seats and Socialists 14 seats.

 

Here is how the percentages breakdown according to a separate Ipsos exit poll:

  • VVD-ALDE: 21%
  • CDA-EPP 13%
  • PVV-ENF 13%
  • D66-ALDE 13%
  • GL-G/EFA 11%
  • SP-LEFT 9%
  • PvdA-S&D 6%        
  •  

http://news.forexlive.com/!/exit-poll-liberal-party-may-get-31-seats-freedom-party-19-seats-20170315

 

Second exit poll has identical results.

Dutch politics should be....interesting for the next few years, to say the least, with these results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, S'all Good Man said:

I've met a lot of older Christians that don't have women's rights or LGBT top of mind either. Its a dangerous slope you're talking about. People are free to think what they want, but their actions have to fall within our set of laws. There's no actual movement to turn those back, nor would the majority of us let that happen.

 

 

I agree, but were those older Christians already citizens?  Hands are tied when it comes to citizens... you can't prevent them from being in the country, you can only hope they soften their views.  If they aren't citizens, I wouldn't want more of them coming into the country trying hard to reverse much of our progress on women's & LGBT rights.  I was referring to Muslims since that was what was being discussed in the Netherlands, but it doesn't ultimately matter what the faith is as opposed to how determined the follower is.

 

People who choose to move to a country should be coming to embrace that country as home, and should not be trying to impose their culture on that country.  There is nothing wrong with sharing elements of your home culture, and we have seen the benefits of that in our cities.  But when that home culture conflicts with the new culture on fundamental levels, as in the case between fundamental Islam and Western civilization, then there are problems... problems which are extremely difficult to solve.

 

You talk about the "majority of us"... the majority changes over time.  Your numbers posted earlier seem reasonable, with regards to needing immigration to support the country's standards of living.  However, the reason why that is needed is because Westerners are not procreating at a sustainable rate.  This is clearly visible in Europe and NA.  If all goes well with that immigration, those newcomers (who are more likely to procreate at higher rates than we do today) embrace Canadian and American culture and our counties thrive as they have in the past.  If for some reason it doesn't, and those coming in hold to their views, sooner or later that majority dissipates, and our countries can change for the worse.  It may be long after you and I have grown old and died, but the possibility still shouldn't be neglected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Kragar said:

I agree, but were those older Christians already citizens?  Hands are tied when it comes to citizens... you can't prevent them from being in the country, you can only hope they soften their views.  If they aren't citizens, I wouldn't want more of them coming into the country trying hard to reverse much of our progress on women's & LGBT rights.  I was referring to Muslims since that was what was being discussed in the Netherlands, but it doesn't ultimately matter what the faith is as opposed to how determined the follower is.

 

People who choose to move to a country should be coming to embrace that country as home, and should not be trying to impose their culture on that country.  There is nothing wrong with sharing elements of your home culture, and we have seen the benefits of that in our cities.  But when that home culture conflicts with the new culture on fundamental levels, as in the case between fundamental Islam and Western civilization, then there are problems... problems which are extremely difficult to solve.

 

You talk about the "majority of us"... the majority changes over time.  Your numbers posted earlier seem reasonable, with regards to needing immigration to support the country's standards of living.  However, the reason why that is needed is because Westerners are not procreating at a sustainable rate.  This is clearly visible in Europe and NA.  If all goes well with that immigration, those newcomers (who are more likely to procreate at higher rates than we do today) embrace Canadian and American culture and our counties thrive as they have in the past.  If for some reason it doesn't, and those coming in hold to their views, sooner or later that majority dissipates, and our countries can change for the worse.  It may be long after you and I have grown old and died, but the possibility still shouldn't be neglected.

Those are all very good points.

 

I'm not concerned at all with new immigrants changing the progression of our laws. Why? Situations like the niqab debate e.g. showed that there are reasonable variations on our rights and freedoms that someone outside of a certain culture didn't think about. Sure a lot of folks didn't like it, but it didn't fundamentally change anything. Same with the older debate over Sikh's and the RCMP, big fluff at the time, now we have Sajan running our military and I really like the statement that makes about Canada at international meetings.

 

We can't forget that we have some fundamental principles in our constitution here that can't be easily brushed aside. You hear people actually worried about things like Sharia law making its way here, but that's utterly ridiculous. Some people may want it, ain't gonna happen. Its utterly in conflict with our constitution.

 

I do agree that people should embrace Canada, but am also old enough to know that its probably a lot of people's kids that will be more in line with that, while the older ones among us are more rigid.

 

People are allowed to bring their beliefs and are required to stay within our laws, I don't see anything really effecting that balance when it comes right down to it. What does freak me out is blanket profiling like this Dutch guy is doing, there we can see real harm.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said:

Those are all very good points.

 

I'm not concerned at all with new immigrants changing the progression of our laws. Why? Situations like the niqab debate e.g. showed that there are reasonable variations on our rights and freedoms that someone outside of a certain culture didn't think about. Sure a lot of folks didn't like it, but it didn't fundamentally change anything. Same with the older debate over Sikh's and the RCMP, big fluff at the time, now we have Sajan running our military and I really like the statement that makes about Canada at international meetings.

 

We can't forget that we have some fundamental principles in our constitution here that can't be easily brushed aside. You hear people actually worried about things like Sharia law making its way here, but that's utterly ridiculous. Some people may want it, ain't gonna happen. Its utterly in conflict with our constitution.

 

I do agree that people should embrace Canada, but am also old enough to know that its probably a lot of people's kids that will be more in line with that, while the older ones among us are more rigid.

 

People are allowed to bring their beliefs and are required to stay within our laws, I don't see anything really effecting that balance when it comes right down to it. What does freak me out is blanket profiling like this Dutch guy is doing, there we can see real harm.

 

 

Did you notice that the "Dutch" guy is Moroccan (and Muslim)? 

 

Regardless, I think you are correct on many points.  Whether niqab or turban, we can generally find a way to get along.

 

Constitutions change.  Not easily, but it happens.  More easily, the interpretations of it change, and judges make mistakes.  It's the best we have, no doubt, but it's not foolproof.  As long as the young people do embrace their new homes, I think it is reasonably safe to say you are right and there is nothing to worry about.  However it is also young people that can more easily turn to fundamentalism (we adults are generally set in our ways).  If enough kids stick to the old ways, then then the future can be less bright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kragar said:

Did you notice that the "Dutch" guy is Moroccan (and Muslim)? 

 

Regardless, I think you are correct on many points.  Whether niqab or turban, we can generally find a way to get along.

 

Constitutions change.  Not easily, but it happens.  More easily, the interpretations of it change, and judges make mistakes.  It's the best we have, no doubt, but it's not foolproof.  As long as the young people do embrace their new homes, I think it is reasonably safe to say you are right and there is nothing to worry about.  However it is also young people that can more easily turn to fundamentalism (we adults are generally set in our ways).  If enough kids stick to the old ways, then then the future can be less bright.

Yah fundamentalism is a freaky thing to be sure, particularly the lone-wolf self-radicalized ones, there's just no way to know when they are coming. Closing the doors to an entire group isn't the path to change that, in fact I think thats a great way to get more self-radicalized people who are here already to starting "planning".

 

Constitutions do change, but come one, we can't even open it up to elect senators, let alone fundamentalist law :lol:

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been loosely following through Twitter as I've been following one of the politicians since her days as a privacy advocate (ok, and even before that when she was a fetish model).

Quote

Just like the Party of the Animals, the Dutch Pirate Party (Piratenpartij in Dutch) is not a single-issue party, says party leader Ancilla van de Leest in an interview at the Dutch VICE headquarters, because: "digitization affects everything."

 

Most people probably still think of the Pirate Party as the political mouthpiece of the hacker community – people 'who do something with computers' and preach the exotic gospel of Internet security and privacy. And they would be right. 

 

But it's for a good reason that van de Leest keeps dropping the word 'movement', because the best way of looking at the Pirates is as an emancipatory movement of the betas, or "nerds", as van de Leest calls herself in their campaign movie. Her goal is to create more technological awareness in Dutch Parliament. [Editor's note: van de Leest was formerly a fetish model and columnist for FHM magazine under the name "Ancilla Tilla", and has been a privacy advocate for years.] 

 

Dutch politicians mainly consist of alphas and gammas – people who have little understanding of the technological developments and are stuck in a linear reactionary mindset. Privacy, robotics, genetics, artificial intelligence and nanotechnology are issues that should be subjects for discussion, but are hardly on the political radar, as evidenced by nearly all election programs.

 

There is a serious lack of the necessary technological knowledge in Dutch Parliament, "and that's why we need nerds," van de Leest says. Today will show whether the Dutch agree: in pre-election polling, the party had one seat. [Editor's note the Netherlands has a system of proportional representation]. Just one, to put the gigantic subject of privacy, digital technology and technological process on the political map. 

...

More at the link, but they're gaining ground (notably with the recent Icelandic elections, where they tripled their seats after the Panama Papers scandal) on traditional parties as people both become very wary of privacy issues and even more wary of long standing politicians and where their loyalties lie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like 2nd place for Wilders, eating into the Rutte's lead.  Between that and the appearance that Rutte's party (and others) adopted some of Wilders' immigration platform, his supporters can take some satisfaction away from the election despite the likelihood that Rutte will continue to lead the country.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-netherlands-election-open-idUSKBN16M0MB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mayor of Rotterdam is pretty loved in the city. He has spoken out on numerous occasions about topics a lot of mayors wouldn't think of.

 

The Dutch political system is a little strange, there is too many political parties imo.

 

While the government is on the conservative side. It's completely different than in NA. The top tax bracket is 52% and they have a lot more social services.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...