Good thing politicians aren't known for keeping their word. I'd almost wish they'd try. Because the resulting coalitions would need so many parties, would be so unwieldy and unpopular that they would discredit the whole system - as is happening in Germany.
A lot of "center-right" parties steal right-wing votes that want lower immigration, less climate insanity. They will lose even more of their voters if they actually follow through on not including him, and instead going for a crazy 6-party coalition just to exclude him. They will try to avoid that.
The establishment parties collectively have enough seats to form a government while excluding the PVV, the FVD and the Farmers party.
A brand new "centre-right" party just split off from the Christian Democrats in the final leg of the campaign and took everyone by surprise by eating up a lot of populist votes. It's exactly an "En Marche" or RFK Jr scenario where an establishment politician pops up pretending to be a more palatable populist, standing against the conventional parties, and people fall for it every time.
Note that Omtzigt, the 'new guy', split off from the Christian Democrats about two years ago when the PM tried to get him removed from the parliament for holding the government accountable. He actually stole fewer populist votes than expected. 35 seats for Geert Wilders is an absolute stunner, more than anyone expected. This will send shockwaves through all of Europe.
Count up the number of populist and semi-populist seats and you will find a great improvement. And if the new party does not deliver, his voters will simply move to the other ones.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not white pilled. I think that none of this will amount to anything. Just not for the reasons that you think.
The only truly "anti-establishment" parties in the Netherlands are the VVD, the FvD and the Famer-Citizen coalition. Now that support for the latter has collapsed, even combined with Wilders they'll get about a quarter of the seats. The most intelligent and thoughtful dissident leader is Thierry Baudet, and it looks as though the FvD may not even win a single seat, so say goodbye to all of his epic speeches. Overall, considering the momentum behind the Dutch farmers protests last year, this is pretty disappointing.
The obvious counterpoint: is looking at the effects of communism on countries that implemented it not an accurate way of judging that it is an inherently broken and abusive concept?
I'm not partial to one system or another (I honestly don't know which is better), but can someone post the case in favor of the US system vs. proportional representation?
And because parliamentary systems are fucking retarded, he won't be permitted to have any governing role.
The so called conservatives and center parties will join with the leftists.
They will certainly try, but this defeat is so immense that they will have a hard time doing it.
And if they do, they'll lose even more voters and end up in a worse situation.
My worst worry is that he will prove another Meloni.
A hard time doing it? Literally every other party has already sworn not to include him.
Good thing politicians aren't known for keeping their word. I'd almost wish they'd try. Because the resulting coalitions would need so many parties, would be so unwieldy and unpopular that they would discredit the whole system - as is happening in Germany.
A lot of "center-right" parties steal right-wing votes that want lower immigration, less climate insanity. They will lose even more of their voters if they actually follow through on not including him, and instead going for a crazy 6-party coalition just to exclude him. They will try to avoid that.
The establishment parties collectively have enough seats to form a government while excluding the PVV, the FVD and the Farmers party.
A brand new "centre-right" party just split off from the Christian Democrats in the final leg of the campaign and took everyone by surprise by eating up a lot of populist votes. It's exactly an "En Marche" or RFK Jr scenario where an establishment politician pops up pretending to be a more palatable populist, standing against the conventional parties, and people fall for it every time.
Note that Omtzigt, the 'new guy', split off from the Christian Democrats about two years ago when the PM tried to get him removed from the parliament for holding the government accountable. He actually stole fewer populist votes than expected. 35 seats for Geert Wilders is an absolute stunner, more than anyone expected. This will send shockwaves through all of Europe.
Count up the number of populist and semi-populist seats and you will find a great improvement. And if the new party does not deliver, his voters will simply move to the other ones.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not white pilled. I think that none of this will amount to anything. Just not for the reasons that you think.
The only truly "anti-establishment" parties in the Netherlands are the VVD, the FvD and the Famer-Citizen coalition. Now that support for the latter has collapsed, even combined with Wilders they'll get about a quarter of the seats. The most intelligent and thoughtful dissident leader is Thierry Baudet, and it looks as though the FvD may not even win a single seat, so say goodbye to all of his epic speeches. Overall, considering the momentum behind the Dutch farmers protests last year, this is pretty disappointing.
Geert Wilders has lived under armed guard, moving from safe house to safe house every single night, for more than 10 years. He's the real deal.
NSC is apparently walking back their tough talk about not working with PVV.
It looks like the center right parties are starting to realize they can either jump on for the win or this will be their last election.
You know how I know it isn't the right system?
By looking at the results.
Personal consequentialism is never a good way to determine the functionality, efficiency, stability, or utility of any system.
The obvious counterpoint: is looking at the effects of communism on countries that implemented it not an accurate way of judging that it is an inherently broken and abusive concept?
No it's the wrong system because it lets the people who outright lost the election collude to exclude the guy who won.
I'm not partial to one system or another (I honestly don't know which is better), but can someone post the case in favor of the US system vs. proportional representation?