PR for Beginners(A Dutch Election Thread)

[Shrillland]

Yay! Now then, in the news the last few days:

Some municipalities still have polling issues for the three-day vote: https://nos.nl/artikel/2369778-gemeenten-zijn-grotendeels-voorbereid-op-verkiezingen-maar-lopen-vast-op-details.html

Rutte's requesting parties not make promises about coalitions: https://nos.nl/artikel/2369469-vvd-leider-rutte-roept-partijen-op-in-verkiezingsstrijd-geen-beloften-te-doen.html

Even as NOS at 3 showed the similarities between the major parties' manifestos showing what the most likely coalitions will be: https://nos.nl/artikel/2369605-overeenkomsten-in-de-verkiezingsprogramma-s-wat-alle-partijen-willen.html

One of the things showcased was Klaver and Marijnissen both ssaying that higher education must reopen out of the strict lockdown that's currently going on in the Netherlands: https://nos.nl/artikel/2369719-klaver-groenlinks-en-marijnissen-sp-hoger-onderwijs-moet-weer-open.html

Rutte requesting that parties not make promises comes down to him requesting that they stop criticising his policies.

Ah, so it's a threat to CDA and D66 more than anything else.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Rutte requesting that parties not make promises comes down to him requesting that they stop criticising his policies.

Ah, so it's a threat to CDA and D66 more than anything else.

Well, more of a hollow request in the name of ‘coming together’, which suits him because he knows he is going to win the election handily.

[Brilinako]

Yay! Now then, in the news the last few days:

Some municipalities still have polling issues for the three-day vote: https://nos.nl/artikel/2369778-gemeenten-zijn-grotendeels-voorbereid-op-verkiezingen-maar-lopen-vast-op-details.html

Rutte's requesting parties not make promises about coalitions: https://nos.nl/artikel/2369469-vvd-leider-rutte-roept-partijen-op-in-verkiezingsstrijd-geen-beloften-te-doen.html

Even as NOS at 3 showed the similarities between the major parties' manifestos showing what the most likely coalitions will be: https://nos.nl/artikel/2369605-overeenkomsten-in-de-verkiezingsprogramma-s-wat-alle-partijen-willen.html

One of the things showcased was Klaver and Marijnissen both ssaying that higher education must reopen out of the strict lockdown that's currently going on in the Netherlands: https://nos.nl/artikel/2369719-klaver-groenlinks-en-marijnissen-sp-hoger-onderwijs-moet-weer-open.html

If the current lockdown is "strict" then I'm the prime minister of Ecuador. People are still allowed to freely leave their house between 4:30am and 9:00pm and schools are partially open. We even have a Hitlerite politician and groups which advocate for putting 6 million+ Dutch citizens in hotels away from family and friends for an egoistic ending to the lockdown.

[HC Eredivisie]

Most of these point me to 50Plus except the jongerenkieswijzer who says CU/FvD/PVV.

I wonder how much of the creators bias is reflected in all of these. Through selection of these specific questions, phrasing, interpretation of answers...
I have heard several people e.g. claim that kieskompas tends to steer them closer to christian parties than the other stemwijzers.

True, Kieskompas put me close to the CDA with 50Plus not far behind.

[Vrijstaat Limburg]

Goojendaag lèève metse,

It’s been a strange couple of weeks, hasn’t it? The parties have ceased campaigning as they used to,with good reason if you ask me. This’ll be the first ever election I’ll have the privilege of participating in, and I’m happy to say that I’m looking forward to the seventeenth of March.

I haven’t quite made up my mind about what representative I’ll vote for. As an advocate for preferential voting, I know for sure that I won’t be voting for any party leader, as those candidates are often, if not always, the most ambitious, unreliable and power hungry people of their respective parties (Sorry if I’m a bit of a pessimist on that front). Besides, I’m greatly dissatisfied with the fact that the vast majority of these party leaders live in the highly-populated heartland of the country (The Randstad) and I feel that they could never represent my provincial interests.

Currently, I feel that the right honourable Roelof Bisschop of the Reformed Political Party (Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij) might be a good representatives in the Commons. His track record is clean and consistent, he’s uncontroversial and experienced, and his party’s got some good talking points, particularly regarding combatting the Netherlands’ leading cause of death, defending economic liberty and supporting large families with many children. There’s some major disagreements I have with the party’s platform and positions, but I feel that these reservations pale in comparison to the threats our society faces today, which we could only ever hope to defeat as one people, united and indivisible.

I’m still wholly undecided though. Not too long ago, I thought Dion Graus of the Freedom Party (Partij voor de Vrijheid) would represent me well. He hails from the same area as I do, and he seemed far more tame than his fraction peers. His love for animals and staunch protective stance regarding their rights was certainly something I felt was very admirable. I even wanted to campaign for the guy, but once these accusations regarding sexual misconduct were solidified by reports from the media, I immediatelt dropped such a thought. I also considered spoiling my ballot, as I’m very unhappy about the lack of representation the lesser-populated provinces have to endure, as well as the way our abhorrent electoral system neglects rural, sparsely populated regions.

If anybody has any thoughts or tips for a first-timer such as myself, feel free to share them with me! As I mentioned previously, I’m totally undecided, so if there’s any people who want to try and convince me to vote a certain way. There’s a decent chance you’ll win me over, and even if you don’t, I’d genuinely be happy to hear your thoughts! Listening to other people’s opinions is absolutely critical for a functional democracy, and even if we end up disagreeing, that’s cool too, as long as the conversation remains civil and respectful.

[The Blaatschapen]

Goojendaag lèève metse,

It’s been a strange couple of weeks, hasn’t it? The parties have ceased campaigning as they used to,with good reason if you ask me. This’ll be the first ever election I’ll have the privilege of participating in, and I’m happy to say that I’m looking forward to the seventeenth of March.

I haven’t quite made up my mind about what representative I’ll vote for. As an advocate for preferential voting, I know for sure that I won’t be voting for any party leader, as those candidates are often, if not always, the most ambitious, unreliable and power hungry people of their respective parties (Sorry if I’m a bit of a pessimist on that front). Besides, I’m greatly dissatisfied with the fact that the vast majority of these party leaders live in the highly-populated heartland of the country (The Randstad) and I feel that they could never represent my provincial interests.

Currently, I feel that the right honourable Roelof Bisschop of the Reformed Political Party (Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij) might be a good representatives in the Commons. His track record is clean and consistent, he’s uncontroversial and experienced, and his party’s got some good talking points, particularly regarding combatting the Netherlands’ leading cause of death, defending economic liberty and supporting large families with many children. There’s some major disagreements I have with the party’s platform and positions, but I feel that these reservations pale in comparison to the threats our society faces today, which we could only ever hope to defeat as one people, united and indivisible.

I’m still wholly undecided though. Not too long ago, I thought Dion Graus of the Freedom Party (Partij voor de Vrijheid) would represent me well. He hails from the same area as I do, and he seemed far more tame than his fraction peers. His love for animals and staunch protective stance regarding their rights was certainly something I felt was very admirable. I even wanted to campaign for the guy, but once these accusations regarding sexual misconduct were solidified by reports from the media, I immediatelt dropped such a thought. I also considered spoiling my ballot, as I’m very unhappy about the lack of representation the lesser-populated provinces have to endure, as well as the way our abhorrent electoral system neglects rural, sparsely populated regions.

If anybody has any thoughts or tips for a first-timer such as myself, feel free to share them with me! As I mentioned previously, I’m totally undecided, so if there’s any people who want to try and convince me to vote a certain way. There’s a decent chance you’ll win me over, and even if you don’t, I’d genuinely be happy to hear your thoughts! Listening to other people’s opinions is absolutely critical for a functional democracy, and even if we end up disagreeing, that’s cool too, as long as the conversation remains civil and respectful.

What is the dutch leading cause of death?

Anyway, I agree with voting lower on the ballot, I've always done it myself. I tend to vote for a candidate from the south as well.


The SGP will be a party that ends up sidelined in any policy making, and also not really stretching the Overton window. Principled, sure. Effective, barely.

Think of voting as public transport. Vote the party that will get you closest to where you want to be. None are perfect, and after the vote it is pretty much out of your hands. So don't feel too betrayed when if any coalition making, your important points are traded out. It sucks, but it's not something you can personally do much about.

[Vrijstaat Limburg]

Goojendaag lèève metse,

It’s been a strange couple of weeks, hasn’t it? The parties have ceased campaigning as they used to,with good reason if you ask me. This’ll be the first ever election I’ll have the privilege of participating in, and I’m happy to say that I’m looking forward to the seventeenth of March.

I haven’t quite made up my mind about what representative I’ll vote for. As an advocate for preferential voting, I know for sure that I won’t be voting for any party leader, as those candidates are often, if not always, the most ambitious, unreliable and power hungry people of their respective parties (Sorry if I’m a bit of a pessimist on that front). Besides, I’m greatly dissatisfied with the fact that the vast majority of these party leaders live in the highly-populated heartland of the country (The Randstad) and I feel that they could never represent my provincial interests.

Currently, I feel that the right honourable Roelof Bisschop of the Reformed Political Party (Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij) might be a good representatives in the Commons. His track record is clean and consistent, he’s uncontroversial and experienced, and his party’s got some good talking points, particularly regarding combatting the Netherlands’ leading cause of death, defending economic liberty and supporting large families with many children. There’s some major disagreements I have with the party’s platform and positions, but I feel that these reservations pale in comparison to the threats our society faces today, which we could only ever hope to defeat as one people, united and indivisible.

I’m still wholly undecided though. Not too long ago, I thought Dion Graus of the Freedom Party (Partij voor de Vrijheid) would represent me well. He hails from the same area as I do, and he seemed far more tame than his fraction peers. His love for animals and staunch protective stance regarding their rights was certainly something I felt was very admirable. I even wanted to campaign for the guy, but once these accusations regarding sexual misconduct were solidified by reports from the media, I immediatelt dropped such a thought. I also considered spoiling my ballot, as I’m very unhappy about the lack of representation the lesser-populated provinces have to endure, as well as the way our abhorrent electoral system neglects rural, sparsely populated regions.

If anybody has any thoughts or tips for a first-timer such as myself, feel free to share them with me! As I mentioned previously, I’m totally undecided, so if there’s any people who want to try and convince me to vote a certain way. There’s a decent chance you’ll win me over, and even if you don’t, I’d genuinely be happy to hear your thoughts! Listening to other people’s opinions is absolutely critical for a functional democracy, and even if we end up disagreeing, that’s cool too, as long as the conversation remains civil and respectful.

What is the dutch leading cause of death?

Anyway, I agree with voting lower on the ballot, I've always done it myself. I tend to vote for a candidate from the south as well.


The SGP will be a party that ends up sidelined in any policy making, and also not really stretching the Overton window. Principled, sure. Effective, barely.

Think of voting as public transport. Vote the party that will get you closest to where you want to be. None are perfect, and after the vote it is pretty much out of your hands. So don't feel too betrayed when if any coalition making, your important points are traded out. It sucks, but it's not something you can personally do much about.

The leading cause of death in the Netherlands is abortion. According to FIOM, a Dutch health organisation, approximately 30000 abortions are carried out each year. Contrast that with the second-most frequent cause of death: dementia (Ca. 16000 cases), or the third: lung cancer (ca. 10000 cases a year) according to this article by thestate-sponsored Volksgezondheid en Zorg website.

I’m really uncomfortable with voting for the Christian Democrats, as I feel that their position as a party that has been in power for all of modern memory equals to one of of corruption, nepotism and uneffectiveness. I can’t recognize it anymore, and I feel that the once-colossal KVP could not find itself in its contemporary positions either. The way provincial voters have just been used to vote in more and more urbanites through the CDA is particularly disgusting. I’ve got a couple of close friends who have decided to join the CDA, and though I love them with all my heart, I fear that they are essentially opportunistic, which is why I made the tough call of decisively barring the CDA from the list of parties that I would potentially vote for. Other than that, I’m still fairly open-minded.

There’s a set of ideals which I hold very close, a set of ideals that I would not want to violate. This makes it so that I will find it extremely difficult to vote for any party that celebrates the hell that is a modern, secular society, that seeks to besmirch the sanctity of marriage, or that applauds, encourages and supports the killing of children. This has always been extremely difficult for me to balance when it comes to politics, and supporting the SGP and its representatives would be a tad hypocritical; they are one of the most vocally supportive political parties when it comes to recognizing and helping Israel, and considering the fact that that particular state has got some blood on its hand, including the blood of children, you would always have to give up some moral or other to vote. (This is, among other reasons, why I thought about spoiling my vote. I may still do it, I’m just really unsure about whom I should vote for). For me, voting is trying to find a particular person whose interests align most with the interests of the Limburgic people instead of my own personal preferences, but the thought process behind such a decision is really hard and can be emotionslly tiring.

If anybody that’s read my piece has come this far, I’d just like to apologize if I’ve potentially caused you any offence. Abortion can be a very touchy subject, and many people have extremely tragic stories to tell regarding that social phenomenon. I’m not trying to turn this thread into one dedicated to abortion, so if anybody reading this has any questions or remarks regarding that particular subject, I’m just going to go ahead and recommend you shoot me a TG and/or mention it in the dedicated thread.

Also: If I may have broken forum rules by primarily writing about morals and abortion in a Dutch election thread, I’d like to earnestly apologize, too.

[The Blaatschapen]

What is the dutch leading cause of death?

Anyway, I agree with voting lower on the ballot, I've always done it myself. I tend to vote for a candidate from the south as well.


The SGP will be a party that ends up sidelined in any policy making, and also not really stretching the Overton window. Principled, sure. Effective, barely.

Think of voting as public transport. Vote the party that will get you closest to where you want to be. None are perfect, and after the vote it is pretty much out of your hands. So don't feel too betrayed when if any coalition making, your important points are traded out. It sucks, but it's not something you can personally do much about.

The leading cause of death in the Netherlands is abortion. According to FIOM, a Dutch health organisation, approximately 30000 abortions are carried out each year. Contrast that with the second-most frequent cause of death: dementia (Ca. 16000 cases), or the third: lung cancer (ca. 10000 cases a year) according to this article by thestate-sponsored Volksgezondheid en Zorg website.

That isn't a cause of death. Fetuses aren't people.

I’m really uncomfortable with voting for the Christian Democrats, as I feel that their position as a party that has been in power for all of modern memory equals to one of of corruption, nepotism and uneffectiveness. I can’t recognize it anymore, and I feel that the once-colossal KVP could not find itself in its contemporary positions either. The way provincial voters have just been used to vote in more and more urbanites through the CDA is particularly disgusting. I’ve got a couple of close friends who have decided to join the CDA, and though I love them with all my heart, I fear that they are essentially opportunistic, which is why I made the tough call of decisively barring the CDA from the list of parties that I would potentially vote for. Other than that, I’m still fairly open-minded.

There’s a set of ideals which I hold very close, a set of ideals that I would not want to violate. This makes it so that I will find it extremely difficult to vote for any party that celebrates the hell that is a modern, secular society, that seeks to besmirch the sanctity of marriage, or that applauds, encourages and supports the killing of children. This has always been extremely difficult for me to balance when it comes to politics, and supporting the SGP and its representatives would be a tad hypocritical; they are one of the most vocally supportive political parties when it comes to recognizing and helping Israel, and considering the fact that that particular state has got some blood on its hand, including the blood of children, you would always have to give up some moral or other to vote. (This is, among other reasons, why I thought about spoiling my vote. I may still do it, I’m just really unsure about whom I should vote for). For me, voting is trying to find a particular person whose interests align most with the interests of the Limburgic people instead of my own personal preferences, but the thought process behind such a decision is really hard and can be emotionslly tiring.

The SGP is well known for its advancement of the Limburgers. What with their core demographic being not there and all.

Don't get me wrong, like I said before, the SGP are a principled bunch. But they won't pay much attention to the happenings in Limburg. It won't gain them many votes, and the staunch conservatives there are probably better served with a party that somewhat represents the province and its interests.

[HC Eredivisie]

But otherwise you're feeling okay?

What is the dutch leading cause of death?

I wanted to say life but abortion is pretty close to that.

I tend to vote for a candidate from the south as well.

I think it's a bit sad when you vote for a person because he's from your general direction. It's like taking the green bus because you like the colour but the blue one goes to where you want to go. Then again, I just pick the first person on the list.

any party that celebrates the hell that is a modern, secular society, that seeks to besmirch the sanctity of marriage, or that applauds, encourages and supports the killing of children.

I want all of this even when you say it like this.

[Vrijstaat Limburg]

The leading cause of death in the Netherlands is abortion. According to FIOM, a Dutch health organisation, approximately 30000 abortions are carried out each year. Contrast that with the second-most frequent cause of death: dementia (Ca. 16000 cases), or the third: lung cancer (ca. 10000 cases a year) according to this article by thestate-sponsored Volksgezondheid en Zorg website.

That isn't a cause of death. Fetuses aren't people.

This has certainly always been a prevailing notion on certain discussion threads on this subforum.

I’m really uncomfortable with voting for the Christian Democrats, as I feel that their position as a party that has been in power for all of modern memory equals to one of of corruption, nepotism and uneffectiveness. I can’t recognize it anymore, and I feel that the once-colossal KVP could not find itself in its contemporary positions either. The way provincial voters have just been used to vote in more and more urbanites through the CDA is particularly disgusting. I’ve got a couple of close friends who have decided to join the CDA, and though I love them with all my heart, I fear that they are essentially opportunistic, which is why I made the tough call of decisively barring the CDA from the list of parties that I would potentially vote for. Other than that, I’m still fairly open-minded.

There’s a set of ideals which I hold very close, a set of ideals that I would not want to violate. This makes it so that I will find it extremely difficult to vote for any party that celebrates the hell that is a modern, secular society, that seeks to besmirch the sanctity of marriage, or that applauds, encourages and supports the killing of children. This has always been extremely difficult for me to balance when it comes to politics, and supporting the SGP and its representatives would be a tad hypocritical; they are one of the most vocally supportive political parties when it comes to recognizing and helping Israel, and considering the fact that that particular state has got some blood on its hand, including the blood of children, you would always have to give up some moral or other to vote. (This is, among other reasons, why I thought about spoiling my vote. I may still do it, I’m just really unsure about whom I should vote for). For me, voting is trying to find a particular person whose interests align most with the interests of the Limburgic people instead of my own personal preferences, but the thought process behind such a decision is really hard and can be emotionslly tiring.

The SGP is well known for its advancement of the Limburgers. What with their core demographic being not there and all.

Don't get me wrong, like I said before, the SGP are a principled bunch. But they won't pay much attention to the happenings in Limburg. It won't gain them many votes, and the staunch conservatives there are probably better served with a party that somewhat represents the province and its interests.

I completely get your point, and you're giving me some great input that I appreciate a lot, but, if I may be frank, the SGP are one of the few parties that rally against the decay of social norms and conventions, the gradual abolishment of the nuclear family and the expansion of the leading cause of death in the Netherlands. Besides the fact that the SGP leadership don't share my religion, I'm glad to say that they are brethren in Christ. Besides the fact that the SGP leadership don't share my exact geographic location, I'm glad to say that they too are rural country folk. Besides the fact that the SGP are not overly concerned with local issues, I'm glad that there are local politicians, belonging to local parties, that will ensure my quality of life on a microeconomic and mesoeconomic scale. Allow me to put it this way: If I had to ride a rough road as to not be complicit in the death of a child, I would do it. If I had to lose my job due to greater unemployment to save a human child, I would do it. If I had to watch as my culture, my language and my customs were snubbed out in my lifetime due to cultural imperialism and neglect so that a child might live, I would do that too, and at no point would I ever have any regrets.

Sure, the CDA might try to promise me sturdy roads, better housing and greater employment in so-called "shrinking areas" (krimpregio's), but I won't ever forget the fact that the Appèl violated the trust of its voters in 1980, when it managed to pull that unholy Wet Afbreking Zwangerschap through the House of Commons with a scandalous 76-74 victory. So too did it pass through the upper chamber, with the same highly undemocratic 38-37 vote. Abortion in the Netherlands was never a product of the will of the people, but was forced through parliament by special interest groups, corrupt kleptocrats and lobbyists, which can clearly be seen in the way it just narrowly entered into Dutch law.

It's this outrageous betrayal from both the CDA and the CU that make the SGP the only viable option for someone who feels that the sanctity of human life should be respected, and though I'm not sure whether I would agree with the epithet 'staunch conservatives', I know most certainly that there is no other party to rely on that both seeks to fulfill the will of God and acts righteously, without blatantly betraying its base.

[The Blaatschapen]

That isn't a cause of death. Fetuses aren't people.

This has certainly always been a prevailing notion on certain discussion threads on this subforum.

The SGP is well known for its advancement of the Limburgers. What with their core demographic being not there and all.

Don't get me wrong, like I said before, the SGP are a principled bunch. But they won't pay much attention to the happenings in Limburg. It won't gain them many votes, and the staunch conservatives there are probably better served with a party that somewhat represents the province and its interests.

I completely get your point, and you're giving me some great input that I appreciate a lot, but, if I may be frank, the SGP are one of the few parties that rally against the decay of social norms and conventions, the gradual abolishment of the nuclear family and the expansion of the leading cause of death in the Netherlands. Besides the fact that the SGP leadership don't share my religion, I'm glad to say that they are brethren in Christ. Besides the fact that the SGP leadership don't share my exact geographic location, I'm glad to say that they too are rural country folk. Besides the fact that the SGP are not overly concerned with local issues, I'm glad that there are local politicians, belonging to local parties, that will ensure my quality of life on a microeconomic and mesoeconomic scale. Allow me to put it this way: If I had to ride a rough road as to not be complicit in the death of a child, I would do it. If I had to lose my job due to greater unemployment to save a human child, I would do it. If I had to watch as my culture, my language and my customs were snubbed out in my lifetime due to cultural imperialism and neglect so that a child might live, I would do that too, and at no point would I ever have any regrets.

Sure, the CDA might try to promise me sturdy roads, better housing and greater employment in so-called "shrinking areas" (krimpregio's), but I won't ever forget the fact that the Appèl violated the trust of its voters in 1980, when it managed to pull that unholy Wet Afbreking Zwangerschap through the House of Commons with a scandalous 76-74 victory. So too did it pass through the upper chamber, with the same highly undemocratic 38-37 vote. Abortion in the Netherlands was never a product of the will of the people, but was forced through parliament by special interest groups, corrupt kleptocrats and lobbyists, which can clearly be seen in the way it just narrowly entered into Dutch law.

It's this outrageous betrayal from both the CDA and the CU that make the SGP the only viable option for someone who feels that the sanctity of human life should be respected, and though I'm not sure whether I would agree with the epithet 'staunch conservatives', I know most certainly that there is no other party to rely on that both seeks to fulfill the will of God and acts righteously, without blatantly betraying its base.

How can a first time voter never forget something that happened from well before they were born?

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

That isn't a cause of death. Fetuses aren't people.

This has certainly always been a prevailing notion on certain discussion threads on this subforum.

The SGP is well known for its advancement of the Limburgers. What with their core demographic being not there and all.

Don't get me wrong, like I said before, the SGP are a principled bunch. But they won't pay much attention to the happenings in Limburg. It won't gain them many votes, and the staunch conservatives there are probably better served with a party that somewhat represents the province and its interests.

I completely get your point, and you're giving me some great input that I appreciate a lot, but, if I may be frank, the SGP are one of the few parties that rally against the decay of social norms and conventions, the gradual abolishment of the nuclear family and the expansion of the leading cause of death in the Netherlands. Besides the fact that the SGP leadership don't share my religion, I'm glad to say that they are brethren in Christ. Besides the fact that the SGP leadership don't share my exact geographic location, I'm glad to say that they too are rural country folk. Besides the fact that the SGP are not overly concerned with local issues, I'm glad that there are local politicians, belonging to local parties, that will ensure my quality of life on a microeconomic and mesoeconomic scale. Allow me to put it this way: If I had to ride a rough road as to not be complicit in the death of a child, I would do it. If I had to lose my job due to greater unemployment to save a human child, I would do it. If I had to watch as my culture, my language and my customs were snubbed out in my lifetime due to cultural imperialism and neglect so that a child might live, I would do that too, and at no point would I ever have any regrets.

Sure, the CDA might try to promise me sturdy roads, better housing and greater employment in so-called "shrinking areas" (krimpregio's), but I won't ever forget the fact that the Appèl violated the trust of its voters in 1980, when it managed to pull that unholy Wet Afbreking Zwangerschap through the House of Commons with a scandalous 76-74 victory. So too did it pass through the upper chamber, with the same highly undemocratic 38-37 vote. Abortion in the Netherlands was never a product of the will of the people, but was forced through parliament by special interest groups, corrupt kleptocrats and lobbyists, which can clearly be seen in the way it just narrowly entered into Dutch law.

It's this outrageous betrayal from both the CDA and the CU that make the SGP the only viable option for someone who feels that the sanctity of human life should be respected, and though I'm not sure whether I would agree with the epithet 'staunch conservatives', I know most certainly that there is no other party to rely on that both seeks to fulfill the will of God and acts righteously, without blatantly betraying its base.

A description of your views would not be 'staunch conservative' either. It would be reactionary. And there are reactionary parties that go with it.

I would ask you not to vote for those parties, because SGP, FvD, JA21 and PVV don't have the wellbeing of Dutch citizens at heart. There are more concerned with keeping some kind of social order than actually helping people get healthcare or a living wage.

I myself find it strange that the pro-life party, who thinks that life begins at conceptio and that all life is sacred, favours the death penalty.

[Vrijstaat Limburg]

I tend to vote for a candidate from the south as well.

I think it's a bit sad when you vote for a person because he's from your general direction. It's like taking the green bus because you like the colour but the blue one goes to where you want to go. Then again, I just pick the first person on the list.

any party that celebrates the hell that is a modern, secular society, that seeks to besmirch the sanctity of marriage, or that applauds, encourages and supports the killing of children.

I want all of this even when you say it like this.

I don't want to assume that you're from the Randstad, but considering the fact that it is the most densely populated area in the Netherlands, I'm going to assume that you either live there, or in some or other urban environment, somewhere vaguely in the West. I have found that people that grow up in those urban environments tend to adopt a very rootless metropolitan lifestyle, wherein they are socialized to believe that one's background or origin plays no part in their behaviour or identity. In that "Hollander Mindsetting", as I tend to call it, a person's background or place of birth is little more than a purely cosmetic personality trait. The fact that someone who is from some place might actually try to promote that place's interests is not something many Hollanders would have to ponder, considering the fact that their region has been strictly prioritized and overdeveloped for the last 500 years, which means that they would not need any regional representation, because they easily have the greatest population, and therefore the greatest representation in parliament.

It's that same "Hollander Mindsetting" that I alluded to that normalizes the artificially-created societal transformation into secular modernity, the decaying of the corner stone of society and the killing of children, and that, given enough time, will promote it and see it as the 'new normal'. To say that all these three phenomena are commonplace and status quo is entirely uncontroversial, and perhaps a "modern conservative" in the Netherlands is one that supports these changes, and embraces them as the "new normal". This would certainly correspond with the CDA's political agenda, which is arguably very progressive, particularly when we are talking about socio-economic questions and the way we should shape our society.

EDIT: I forgot to mention this, but I want to apologize for any offence I may have caused about bluntly making assumptions about yourself. I apologize if I have done so.

[Vrijstaat Limburg]

This has certainly always been a prevailing notion on certain discussion threads on this subforum.




I completely get your point, and you're giving me some great input that I appreciate a lot, but, if I may be frank, the SGP are one of the few parties that rally against the decay of social norms and conventions, the gradual abolishment of the nuclear family and the expansion of the leading cause of death in the Netherlands. Besides the fact that the SGP leadership don't share my religion, I'm glad to say that they are brethren in Christ. Besides the fact that the SGP leadership don't share my exact geographic location, I'm glad to say that they too are rural country folk. Besides the fact that the SGP are not overly concerned with local issues, I'm glad that there are local politicians, belonging to local parties, that will ensure my quality of life on a microeconomic and mesoeconomic scale. Allow me to put it this way: If I had to ride a rough road as to not be complicit in the death of a child, I would do it. If I had to lose my job due to greater unemployment to save a human child, I would do it. If I had to watch as my culture, my language and my customs were snubbed out in my lifetime due to cultural imperialism and neglect so that a child might live, I would do that too, and at no point would I ever have any regrets.

Sure, the CDA might try to promise me sturdy roads, better housing and greater employment in so-called "shrinking areas" (krimpregio's), but I won't ever forget the fact that the Appèl violated the trust of its voters in 1980, when it managed to pull that unholy Wet Afbreking Zwangerschap through the House of Commons with a scandalous 76-74 victory. So too did it pass through the upper chamber, with the same highly undemocratic 38-37 vote. Abortion in the Netherlands was never a product of the will of the people, but was forced through parliament by special interest groups, corrupt kleptocrats and lobbyists, which can clearly be seen in the way it just narrowly entered into Dutch law.

It's this outrageous betrayal from both the CDA and the CU that make the SGP the only viable option for someone who feels that the sanctity of human life should be respected, and though I'm not sure whether I would agree with the epithet 'staunch conservatives', I know most certainly that there is no other party to rely on that both seeks to fulfill the will of God and acts righteously, without blatantly betraying its base.

A description of your views would not be 'staunch conservative' either. It would be reactionary. And there are reactionary parties that go with it.

I would ask you not to vote for those parties, because SGP, FvD, JA21 and PVV don't have the wellbeing of Dutch citizens at heart. There are more concerned with keeping some kind of social order than actually helping people get healthcare or a living wage.

I myself find it strange that the pro-life party, who thinks that life begins at conceptio and that all life is sacred, favours the death penalty.

That's a very interesting opinion, and I thank you for sharing it. I'm unsure as to what degree my views should be considered "reactionary", as I have unfortunately only given out so very little about what I believe, and because that term has frequently been overused, often without a correct definition. In the Marxist terminology, anybody who wishes to rewind time to the feudal society that stood before the advent of market capitalism is a reactionary. I would not describe myself as a person who would want to wind back the clock to such a time, on the contrary: I am a republican and wholeheartedly support the re-abolition of the Dutch monarchy. I'm honestly not sure how productive using the word 'reactionary' is, particularly if you throw it out without any further explanation or substance, because it can be interpreted in a whole of number of ways, and doesn't give any information that is truly reflective of my positions.

Furthermore, I wouldn't agree that FvD, JA21 and PVV are reactionary. PVV is, without a single doubt in my mind, the logical consequence of the social and moral decadence of modern society. It doesn't strive to re-invent the wheel, nor does it argue for feudalism. JA21 is a very party, and, from what I've seen, I'd call them liberal conservative and little more than that. Forum voor Democratie, on the other hand, is a fascist organisation, and should not be named "reactionary" as it gives a tainted representation of that organisation's goals.

I'd like to give you some food for thought: That social order that you mentioned, do you not think that that might play a role in your living wage or healthcare? Would there be modern medicine, or a structured healthcare system like the one we have the privilege of enjoying without that social order? Humanity is predisposed to living in communal groups, and the effort to seperate ourselves from social roles and expectations is truly modern. Most societies that chose to shut themselves from God's love have fared very badly, and I would argue that further secularization would have extremely bad consequences on the society at large. It's apparent that our collective evaluation of human life, and the reverence that we have towards it, has drastically changed in the last century, and it's up to the new generation to see to it that we create a liveable planet for mankind.

[Vrijstaat Limburg]

This has certainly always been a prevailing notion on certain discussion threads on this subforum.




I completely get your point, and you're giving me some great input that I appreciate a lot, but, if I may be frank, the SGP are one of the few parties that rally against the decay of social norms and conventions, the gradual abolishment of the nuclear family and the expansion of the leading cause of death in the Netherlands. Besides the fact that the SGP leadership don't share my religion, I'm glad to say that they are brethren in Christ. Besides the fact that the SGP leadership don't share my exact geographic location, I'm glad to say that they too are rural country folk. Besides the fact that the SGP are not overly concerned with local issues, I'm glad that there are local politicians, belonging to local parties, that will ensure my quality of life on a microeconomic and mesoeconomic scale. Allow me to put it this way: If I had to ride a rough road as to not be complicit in the death of a child, I would do it. If I had to lose my job due to greater unemployment to save a human child, I would do it. If I had to watch as my culture, my language and my customs were snubbed out in my lifetime due to cultural imperialism and neglect so that a child might live, I would do that too, and at no point would I ever have any regrets.

Sure, the CDA might try to promise me sturdy roads, better housing and greater employment in so-called "shrinking areas" (krimpregio's), but I won't ever forget the fact that the Appèl violated the trust of its voters in 1980, when it managed to pull that unholy Wet Afbreking Zwangerschap through the House of Commons with a scandalous 76-74 victory. So too did it pass through the upper chamber, with the same highly undemocratic 38-37 vote. Abortion in the Netherlands was never a product of the will of the people, but was forced through parliament by special interest groups, corrupt kleptocrats and lobbyists, which can clearly be seen in the way it just narrowly entered into Dutch law.

It's this outrageous betrayal from both the CDA and the CU that make the SGP the only viable option for someone who feels that the sanctity of human life should be respected, and though I'm not sure whether I would agree with the epithet 'staunch conservatives', I know most certainly that there is no other party to rely on that both seeks to fulfill the will of God and acts righteously, without blatantly betraying its base.

How can a first time voter never forget something that happened from well before they were born?

Fair point! Maybe I was born on a leap day?

On second thought, maybe that's not how that works... Oh well. Still, it's important to read up on your history!

[The Blaatschapen]

How can a first time voter never forget something that happened from well before they were born?

Fair point! Maybe I was born on a leap day?

On second thought, maybe that's not how that works... Oh well. Still, it's important to read up on your history!

Oh definitely.

Republiek van rivaliteiten: Nederland sinds 1813 by Piet de Rooy is a great work btw that explains quite well the Dutch history of how we became a country in the 19th and 20th century.

[The Alma Mater]

The leading cause of death in the Netherlands is abortion.

By that logic it is not abortions but miscarriages. Or "abortions by God" if you prefer. Unsure what party would stop those.

[Astral Traveller]

I doubt we will see anyone else than Rutte as our prime minister, again. I personally support CDA and DENK.

[Vrijstaat Limburg]

The leading cause of death in the Netherlands is abortion.

By that logic it is not abortions but miscarriages. Or "abortions by God" if you prefer. Unsure what party would stop those.

That claim is categorically incorrect.

The last CBS figure regarding miscarriages in the Netherlands was published in 1998, so that statistic is outdated. Several reliable sources fling around the number 20,000, but I have yet to find a single source to back that number up.

Even if there were 20,000 miscarriages per year, as some of the health organisations I’ve found online state, it would not be the leasing cause of death in the Netherlands. We could even tag on another five thousand if we wanted, totalling our number to 25,000. This is still less than the number of abortions committed each year, which, I have already stated and supported with relevant scientific evidence, numbers in the thirty thousands per year.

According to Book one of the Burgerlijk Wetboek, however, children who die in miscarriages are not to be recognized as people. The government instead notifies that children who die in miscarriages are “to be treated as though they had never existed at all”. Plasterk and Van der Steur released that information after inquiries from the SP and D66.

When women lose a child in a miscarriage, we would always sympathize with the fact that they lost their children, not their “fetuses”. The fact that the state essentially treats unborn children who died due to medical complications the same as children who died because their mothers willed it so is horrifying. It shows that the executive and judicial branches of government have completely lost all connection to the people, and that abortion has totally been embraced by the entrenched political elites. They have seen fit to fund and normalize it, and suppression of any and all debates surrounding the morality of the killing of children is now undeniably commonplace.

Miscarriages are absolutely tragic, and all should be done to minimize fatalities, but when compared to that existential threat that is abortion, I feel we should choose our priorities wisely, and correctly assess the statistics, instead of blindly making assumptions about what the leading cause of death in this country might be.

[The Alma Mater]

By that logic it is not abortions but miscarriages. Or "abortions by God" if you prefer. Unsure what party would stop those.

That claim is categorically incorrect.

No it is not. Between 30 and 50% of all pregnancies naturally end in miscarriage. Usually due to the fertilised egg not implanting right at the beginning and it ending up in a tampax. So that is about 150.000 deaths per year in the Netherlands alone.

The problem is that most women will not notice this at all. And unless you want to check every tampax of a sexually active woman (or ban all sexual activity except under strict regulation) I do not see a solution. Except ofc ignoring it; which is what everyone does currently.

[Vrijstaat Limburg]

That claim is categorically incorrect.

No it is not. Between 30 and 50% of all pregnancies naturally end in miscarriage. Usually due to the fertilised egg not implanting right at the beginning and it ending up in a tampax. So that is about 150.000 deaths per year in the Netherlands alone.

The problem is that most women will not notice this at all. And unless you want to check every tampax of a sexually active woman (or ban all sexual activity except under strict regulation) I do not see a solution. Except ofc ignoring it; which is what everyone does currently.

The only thing worse than ignoring it is sending out incorrect information. I don't want to call it misleading, as I feel that term has often been used in bad faith, and I wouldn't want to attribute it to you as I don't know your motivation, but saying that there are 150000 miscarriages in the Netherlands alone is simply false.

According to this statistic by the Central Bureau of Statistic (CBS), there are approximately 170,000 annual births in the Netherlands. If 20,000 pregnancies result in miscarriage, as I rightfully asserted with plenty of reliable sources earlier, that would mean that about 11-12% of all pregnancies end in miscarriages. The 30%-50% statistic is (when compared to state documents and medical sources) overblown and unrealistic. There is not a single source that I could find that even tries to assert your 150,000 figure, so if you could supply me with one, that would be fantastic.

[Astral Traveller]

The moral difference between miscarriage and abortion is that the former is not done by human conscious action, whilst the latter is. In the realm of moral theology, politics can not influence that which God has ordained (ie actions outside human agency) since politics is limited to how a state should function with laws, interior, warfare, and so forth. It is therefore nonsensical to debate whether a thing outside human conscious control can be deemed morally right or wrong. Just like having a heart attack cannot be morally wrong or right.

However, abortion is a conscious choice a human makes. And therefore, in the field of moral theology, it can be reasonated.

[The Alma Mater]

The moral difference between miscarriage and abortion is that the former is not done by human conscious action, whilst the latter is.

True, but when talking about causes of death that does not matter. Murder is a cause of death. Cancer is a cause of death. Jumping from a skyscraper is a cause of death. And if you count a fertilised egg as human, failure to implant is a cause of death.


****
In other news, the late night show "Zondag met Lubach", known internationally for the viral hit "America first, the Netherlands second" , has also created a stemwijzer.

In the form of a classic King's Quest inspired adventure game; where you meet all kinds of magical beings (with names that refer to existing politicians) that force you to make choices, like "Will you listen to Henk Troll talking about the plight of the Elderly for hours" etc - leading you to the "guild", aka the party, where you belong.

https://keezersquest.nl/

[Shrillland]

With just under two weeks before voting, CDA is now proposing reducing unemployment benefits to one year from the current two: https://nos.nl/artikel/2371225-cda-tijd-gekomen-om-ww-uitkering-terug-te-brengen-tot-een-jaar.html

Rutte also announced that his statement in a Sunday debate on building a new nuclear power plant in Groningen was a little premature after most MPs rejected it: https://nos.nl/artikel/2371164-rutte-draait-bij-toch-geen-kerncentrale-in-groningen.html

And here's NOS' campaign blog for the latest: https://nos.nl/liveblog/2371133-campagneblog-hoekstra-cda-wil-ww-inkorten-kamermeerderheid-wil-geen-kerncentrale-in-groningen.html

[Shrillland]

With just a week left, here's my prediction for the coalition.

Given Hoekstra's continued belligerence and the common ground found between D66 and PvdA, I think that the new coalition will be either VVD-CDA-D66-PvdA-CU or VVD-D66-PvdA-CU-PvdD. Now that PvdD says they're willing to be in a government for the first time, I think Rutte might take them up on it to maintain a broad ideological coalition if CDA decides to bow out.

I'm also adding Volt Nederland to the OP as their consistent poll numbers now warrant it.