Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Deadlock in Dutch election: exit polls

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Deadlock in Dutch election: exit polls

    Deadlock in Dutch election: exit polls
    June 10, 2010 - 8:09AM



    The Netherlands' main liberal and left-wing parties remained deadlocked after a general election Wednesday that left anti-immigrant leader Geert Wilders as the big winner, an exit poll showed.

    The Liberal party (VVD) led by Mark Rutte, which had campaigned on the need for deep spending cuts, and the Labour party (PvdA) of Job Cohen were tied on 31 seats each in the 150 seat parliament, said the poll carried out for the main Dutch media.

    But Wilders' Party for Freedom (PVV), which has demanded an end to immigration from Muslim countries and a ban on new mosques, celebrated taking its number of MPs from nine in the last parliament to 22.
    Advertisement: Story continues below

    The far-right leader with his distinctive shock of blonde hair called the result "magnificent".

    The Party for Freedom even beat the conservative Christian Democratic Action of outgoing Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende into fourth place. The Christian Democrats lost 20 seats and finished with 21, according to the Synovate poll.

    Balkenende reacted by resigning both his party's leadership and his seat in parliament.

    "I have informed the party chairman that I will lay down my party membership with immediate effect," said Balkenende, 54, stressing he was taking "political responsibility" for the state of affairs.

    The result left the VVD, which had 21 seats in the previous parliament, and the PvdA, which lost two seats, facing prolonged, tense coalition negotiations to see who will form the next government.

    The election was the first in a eurozone country since the Greek financial crisis erupted and has been closely watched to see how the public reacts to Europe's wave of austerity.

    The Liberals had led the Dutch pre-election polls with Rutte's promise to cut public spending by about 45 billion euros ($A66.29 billion) over the next four years and by 20 billion euros ($A29.46 billion) a year from 2015.

    But their support appeared to drain away in the final 48 hours of lobbying the public.

    Rutte had also promised to eradicate the public deficit which was 5.3 per cent of GDP last year, shrink the government and parliament, lower income taxes and cap civil servant pay rises while raising the retirement age by two years to 67.

    Labour had promised more "careful" savings, the retention of social benefits, and higher taxes for the rich.

    Rutte has set a target date of July 1 for the establishment of a new government.

    The maverick Wilders has earned notoriety around the world with his campaign to ban the Koran in a bid to "stop the Islamisation of the Netherlands".

    Wilders, who has called Islam a fascist religion and likens the Koran to Hitler's Mein Kampf, is known abroad for his 17-minute film, Fitna, which was termed "offensively anti-Islamic" by UN chief Ban Ki-moon.

    He goes on trial in the Netherlands in October on charges of inciting racial hatred against Muslims. He was barred from entering Britain in 2009 to stop him spreading "hatred and violent messages".

    Of the other parties, the Socialist Party got 16 seats, down from 25, the Greens got 11 seats (up from seven), the centrist D66 10 (up from 3) and the Christian Union five, down from six.
    In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

    Leibniz

  • #2
    Someone running under an Anti-Muslim banner gets 15% of the vote and people are surprised? That's a very strong voting block, and I wouldn't be surprised if the trend continues both in the next Dutch elections and in elections elsewhere. I don't know if banning the Koran is the way to go about it, but perhaps it's time a few blatantly anti-Muslim politicians were elected. Maybe it will give the Muslims a taste of their own medicine.

    To bring it back to an old topic for a minute; If western women can't walk around Saudi Arabia in western clothing, Muslim women shouldn't be allowed to walk around western nations wearing a burqa. Fair is fair, wouldn't you say?
    Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

    Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by bigross86 View Post
      To bring it back to an old topic for a minute; If western women can't walk around Saudi Arabia in western clothing, Muslim women shouldn't be allowed to walk around western nations wearing a burqa. Fair is fair, wouldn't you say?
      No no no no no...that would be racist.

      West = racist

      White = racist

      Capitalism = racist

      Christians = racist

      Anything anti-west, anti-white, anti-capitalism, and anti-christian is good because that's being "multi-cultural."
      "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

      Comment


      • #4
        To bring it back to an old topic for a minute; If western women can't walk around Saudi Arabia in western clothing, Muslim women shouldn't be allowed to walk around western nations wearing a burqa. Fair is fair, wouldn't you say?
        Saudi women aren't the ones making the law which offends you; why target a law at them to limit their choices?
        To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by bigross86 View Post
          Someone running under an Anti-Muslim banner gets 15% of the vote and people are surprised? That's a very strong voting block, and I wouldn't be surprised if the trend continues both in the next Dutch elections and in elections elsewhere. I don't know if banning the Koran is the way to go about it, but perhaps it's time a few blatantly anti-Muslim politicians were elected. Maybe it will give the Muslims a taste of their own medicine.
          I would have hoped most Europeans have had enough of demonising minorities, as well you should know.

          It's a vile platform he stands on, completely contrary to what European beliefs are - tolerance, equality of opportunity, freedom of speech, freedom of religion etc, Wilders is not the answer.

          Islamic fundamentalism is equally vile, but only when human rights are violated can the government step in, not before.
          Secularism should be enforced vigourously, civics and lingustics class for new immigrants, no religion, no exception in schools or public places, but banning clothing or being 'blatantly anti-muslim', get off it.

          At the minute a blatantly anti-Israel party would poll well here, should we give Ireland's smug and prosperous 3,000 Jews a taste of their own medicine?

          And if not, why not? You believe in action against distasteful minorities, when we're done dressing the Muslim women as we see fit (bikinis, says I) and throwing the men in jail/deporting the freaks, maybe we should move on to the next group down the list.

          The dangers of your thinking appear to elude you.

          Originally posted by bigross86 View Post
          To bring it back to an old topic for a minute; If western women can't walk around Saudi Arabia in western clothing, Muslim women shouldn't be allowed to walk around western nations wearing a burqa. Fair is fair, wouldn't you say?
          Yes, we should take our tolerance and equality cues from Saudia Arabia.

          That's who western European countries want to be compared to.
          Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative.
          - John Stuart Mill.

          Comment


          • #6
            And on the actual result, besides the PVV's advances it really is deadlock - it's a pity that the VVD and PvdA are tied because it gives them both an equal shot at claiming formateur, it probably would have been better if one got 32, and the other 30, they then would have had a mandate to be the clear leading party.

            It's hard to call what kind of coalition could be formed out of this, the PVV can smell power from their current position, but the CDA may play the biggest role as kingmaker yet.
            Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative.
            - John Stuart Mill.

            Comment


            • #7
              There's an old Jewish parable: A man came to one of the great sages, Shamai, and said I want to learn all of Scripture on one foot. Shamai kicked him out and rebuked him for his mockery. The man then went to the other great sage of the generation, Hillel, and made the same request. Hill answered: This is all of Scripture on one foot: Do unto others as you would have done unto you. The rest is commentary.

              The Torah also advocates an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. The commentary there says not an actual eye, as the Jews are really not all that bloodthirsty, rather the monetary value of an eye, based on a specific formula.

              Where am I going with this? I believe, not only due to my Jewish upbringing but that plays a part in it, that one good deed deserves another. If someone tries to play you, play them right back. In this case, if a Muslim is going to spread a pack of lies about me and call for my death, I don't see why they shouldn't get a taste of their own medicine.

              Sure, you can do it peacefully, or you can do it forcefully. Almost a decade after 9/11, I think it's time some folks realized that taking it up the ass from Muslim fundamentalists isn't gonna bring peace. So you go for the other option. You shut out all of Islam until they take care of their own problem, and cut the fundamentalists out from their own midst. Once the rabble raisers are gone, then you can sit down and talk peace. The problem is that even though America has begun to realize that, they do it in such a half assed and half hearted way that it's damn near worthless.
              Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

              Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by troung View Post
                Saudi women aren't the ones making the law which offends you; why target a law at them to limit their choices?
                99% of the western women aren't the ones making the laws that offend the Saudis; why target a law at them to limit their choices?
                Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

                Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

                Comment


                • #9
                  99% of the western women aren't the ones making the laws that offend the Saudis; why target a law at them to limit their choices?
                  Once again those women aren't the ones passing ANY laws in Saudi Arabia, so your solution is to punish them because you don't like what the unelected House of Saud does to them and other women.
                  To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by bigross86 View Post
                    There's an old Jewish parable: A man came to one of the great sages, Shamai, and said I want to learn all of Scripture on one foot. Shamai kicked him out and rebuked him for his mockery. The man then went to the other great sage of the generation, Hillel, and made the same request. Hill answered: This is all of Scripture on one foot: Do unto others as you would have done unto you. The rest is commentary.

                    The Torah also advocates an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. The commentary there says not an actual eye, as the Jews are really not all that bloodthirsty, rather the monetary value of an eye, based on a specific formula.

                    Where am I going with this? I believe, not only due to my Jewish upbringing but that plays a part in it, that one good deed deserves another. If someone tries to play you, play them right back. In this case, if a Muslim is going to spread a pack of lies about me and call for my death, I don't see why they shouldn't get a taste of their own medicine.

                    Sure, you can do it peacefully, or you can do it forcefully. Almost a decade after 9/11, I think it's time some folks realized that taking it up the ass from Muslim fundamentalists isn't gonna bring peace. So you go for the other option. You shut out all of Islam until they take care of their own problem, and cut the fundamentalists out from their own midst. Once the rabble raisers are gone, then you can sit down and talk peace. The problem is that even though America has begun to realize that, they do it in such a half assed and half hearted way that it's damn near worthless.

                    Using that logic (and I am being charitable by using that word) then if a Jew or a number of Jews misbehave or do things we don't like then we should just punish the whole Jewish community. Perhaps we could call it the 'Madoff principle' of collective guilt.

                    I won't pretend that I can put myself in your shoes or take on your perspective on this. This is obviously a lot more personal for you, but that doesn't make it right.

                    Just remember that once people start political movements based on eliminating ethnic & religious difference they won't stop at just one group.
                    Last edited by Bigfella; 11 Jun 10,, 01:15.
                    sigpic

                    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Let me rephrase for better clarity:

                      If a Muslim leader and entire community is going to spread a pack of lies about me and call for my death, I don't see why they shouldn't get a taste of their own medicine.
                      Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

                      Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by bigross86 View Post
                        Let me rephrase for better clarity:

                        If a Muslim leader and entire community is going to spread a pack of lies about me and call for my death, I don't see why they shouldn't get a taste of their own medicine.


                        What do you mean by 'entire community' here? All muslims in the world?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by bigross86 View Post
                          There's an old Jewish parable: A man came to one of the great sages, Shamai, and said I want to learn all of Scripture on one foot. Shamai kicked him out and rebuked him for his mockery. The man then went to the other great sage of the generation, Hillel, and made the same request. Hill answered: This is all of Scripture on one foot: Do unto others as you would have done unto you. The rest is commentary.

                          The Torah also advocates an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. The commentary there says not an actual eye, as the Jews are really not all that bloodthirsty, rather the monetary value of an eye, based on a specific formula.

                          Where am I going with this? I believe, not only due to my Jewish upbringing but that plays a part in it, that one good deed deserves another. If someone tries to play you, play them right back. In this case, if a Muslim is going to spread a pack of lies about me and call for my death, I don't see why they shouldn't get a taste of their own medicine.

                          Sure, you can do it peacefully, or you can do it forcefully. Almost a decade after 9/11, I think it's time some folks realized that taking it up the ass from Muslim fundamentalists isn't gonna bring peace. So you go for the other option. You shut out all of Islam until they take care of their own problem, and cut the fundamentalists out from their own midst. Once the rabble raisers are gone, then you can sit down and talk peace. The problem is that even though America has begun to realize that, they do it in such a half assed and half hearted way that it's damn near worthless.
                          I like the Jewish people and their values, and while it may just be tv schtick, to quote the West Wing 'Revenge is not Jewish'.

                          There's no question of 'taking it up the ass' from Islamic fundementalists, where they exist, they should be challeged, socially, rhetorically, intellectually, there should never be a fear to question someone's idea, and combat violence...but that's not what you're talking about, you're saying all Muslims are Islamists, or that they deserve to be punished for the existence of Islamists, who share their religion.

                          It's wrong, simple as, and makes a mockery of what liberal democracy is - freedom of speech and consience for everyone, not something that has to earned, but a right.

                          And of course what's ironic is that in your eagerness to curb rights you betray the very thing that sets you apart from the Islamists, and that is that you DON'T curb rights, regardless of how noxious you may personally find the views of a minority within a minority.
                          The only person who gains from the West betraying it's ideals is those who want to show the silent majority that the West is not what it claims to be.

                          And when they say that, do you seriously have the gall to claim they wouldn't be correct?
                          Last edited by crooks; 11 Jun 10,, 18:41.
                          Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative.
                          - John Stuart Mill.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Liberal democracies curb rights all the time in a vast array of ways. From sexual behaviour to use of language, privitisation of commons, and of course standard of dress.
                            I'd love to see this 'liberal democracy' where everyone is free to dress how they like and do what they like that y'all keep going on about. It certainly isn't Ireland or Australia.
                            In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                            Leibniz

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                              Liberal democracies curb rights all the time in a vast array of ways. From sexual behaviour to use of language, privitisation of commons, and of course standard of dress.
                              I'd love to see this 'liberal democracy' where everyone is free to dress how they like and do what they like that y'all keep going on about. It certainly isn't Ireland or Australia.
                              Personal freedoms are nowhere absolute; but thats disingenuous.

                              What matters is the world of difference in what exists between the West and Islamic countries; or even Islamic and the other non Western countries in the world.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X