You mean the voters can know, expect many to say the coming months 'the established parties are too powerful, if we vote on him again he can become the biggest party and then he can realise his plans'. Not gonna happen, but I'd say it's too soon to be sure it actually was for the better.

[–] MoonRaven 11 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Some are already saying that he couldn't do things because he wasn't big enough and the other parties stopped him...

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 days ago

True. However, the things he wanted to do may not have been good things, so that would then be a blessing.

[–] fraksken@infosec.pub 8 points 4 days ago

Let's hope so. It didn't go so well in Germany in the 30's

[–] Vinny_93@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago

You overestimate PVV voters

[–] Taalnazi@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

I dunno...

There's the SP, an immigrant-skeptical left wing party.

And yet it hasn't gotten all the votes that Wilders got - because a lot of people think the PVV is fighting for their labourers - when in practice it isn't at all.

The PVV talked about restricting immigration, voted against because Wilders is half Indonesian and his wife Hungarian.

The PVV talked about robbing the 'woke elite'. Wilders received millions which he didn't give to the 'silent majority', Henk and Ingrid. Wilders himself then can be called 'woke' by his own measure.

The PVV talks about freedom but wants to make life harsher for everybody.

If those people want to 'worship' someone as a leader, they gotta look at the SP, not the PVV. That party actually comes up for the labourer.

And the SP is also for actual less bureaucracy - not more by making all sorts of exceptions to rules and exceptions.

Thing is, you gotta tell that to PVV voters to sell it to 'em. Tell 'em the SP is against woke, and that the PVV became woke, by thinking it's a special snowflake.

[–] cornshark@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Why would we encourage anyone to vote for a party that's against woke? Are there no systemic injustices in their society to fight against?

[–] Taalnazi@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

There absolutely are systemic injustices. And the SP does want to combat those. But the issue is, you gotta win over the far right voters by making them believe that a vote on SP is more of a vote against woke than the PVV ever could be, regardless of whether the SP is actually "anti-woke". For context, I think the term "woke" is stupid and mostly used to discard actual constructive statements so people don't address their own problems.

Left wing voters already know the PVV is bad. But far right voters are so deep buried in their thought, that you won't convince them by saying it'll be all right if we put up climate measures etc. They're victims of large capitalist industries' brainwashing.

So we need to label stuff that is commonly labelled "far right" as woke. And to label stuff that is commonly labelled "far left" as "common sense".

Combat them with their own logic, by their own logic. They want to worship a leader and follow one; so we need to teach them that the true and only leader is the one that WORKS, instead of YELLING. We need to be fierce about these wordings, more than the PVV ever can be.

[–] Redredme@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I seriously cannot vote for a party which slogan was/is:

Vote no. Vote SP. (In Dutch this rhymes)

Really, with that slogan it just is a lost vote. They're against everything. Or so it seems. Like Wilders the SP does not want to rule. Because ruling in NL means making a compromise. And they can't. They wont do it. And thats been proven during the Roemer years. They could rule.. but didn't. Couldn't risk it. Couldn't compromise.

Like Wilders they want to stand at the sidelines screaming and fuming about everything which is wrong in their eyes. That's the only way how they can legitimise their existence.

It's better to vote for real parties who are not afraid of the Fallout of ruling in NL. Those who accept the probable hit to their popularity because they think the change they can achieve is worth it.

But SP, PVV, JA21, PvdD even GL of old.. they don't really want to rule. And i should also include DENK here. I'm a bit torn about NSC and BBB because they tried to rule but when faced with the harsh reality of being in government and finding those compromises they buckled. I Guess they're finished because what they stand for, while laudable in some ways, just isn't realistic. There are too many farmers in NL. There is too much nitrogen. A small country cannot produce the most pigs in the EU. It's not sustainable.

NSC is build on the promise of being right, doing the right thing. But whats right for you can be very wrong for me...

Anyway, a vote for one of those is a lost vote.

And to add: Whoever thought it a good idea to put Timmermans at the front of the left.. they are out of their minds. He is not charismatic, comes over as your annoying math school teacher you hated and left national politics not because he was so well regarded. There are so many very cool politicians on the left but Timmermans is not one of them. I just can't wrap my head around that one.

Timmermans will lose them (again) the vote. Do something more with Lahlah. Or whoever. As long as its not the failed EU climate pope, Paulus de boskabouter , Timmerfrans or whatever nickname he carries these days.

He is the face of everything which was wrong with the PvdA.

[–] Taalnazi@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

I think Timmermans is actually doing right. But the issue is the social media indoctrination of people into voting AGAINST what would improve their lives most: taxing the rich.

So, if the far right manages to play that game, we need to play that game - and dirtier than they do.