Electoral Research shows that VB and NVA still have potential, whilst the traditional parties have problems.
demorgen.be/politiek/kiezersonderzoek-toont-a...Posted Jan 8, 2020, 12:14 PM UTC
1791
demorgen.be
The reasons younger people voted for VB (from Knack):
- The VN migration pact
- The murder on Julie Van Espen
- The terror attacks
- The Schild & Vrienden troubles
All of this combined with effective FB campaigns.
10
Why does the murder on Julie Van Espen impact the votes for VB? I thought she was murdered by a belgian instead of a foreigner?
6
I think because it made people think that the (judicial) system just didn't work, and so they voted for a party that promoted radical change in that regard.
Furthermore VB ran some pretty good campaigns on Facebook about how the murder was unacceptable, all the fault of the failing system, etc...
25
Furthermore VB ran some pretty good campaigns on Facebook about how the murder was unacceptable, all the fault of the failing system, etc...
Which is scary, because I saw none of those adverts. How am I supposed to make a weighted decision, if I don’t have all the info? How can I even discus politics at the xmas table, if all around have differrent information. I think it’s time to review election propaganda rules.
New rule: targetted propaganda is made illegal. Want to send out a promo? Fine, but it goes to all citizens within the electoral area. Because right now, we have no democratic control over what promises are made to which group.
2
Yeah our democracy isn't adapted to social media and targeted advertising. But I think we should do more then just ban targeted advertising, there should be a limit on it for parties, especially outside election campaigns.
1
Because VB's message is also consistently:"we need to be tough on crime!"
What exactly they mean by that is anyone's guess of course, the vaguer you are, the more voters you attract.
14
they ran a big campaign about not letting dangerous people out on parole or something along those lines.
11
Because VB usually also campaigns for a tougher justice system. Which is one of the things I actually agree with even.
11
So showing that fascism is on the rise in our country makes it more acceptable for fascists-sympathizers to crawl out of the woodwork?
-6†
To maybe be a bit hyperbolic: I think most of those don't believe S&V are fascists. Some might think so because they might share some opinions and fear what that says about them. Others because their working definition of fascism is literal Nazis, and particularly Nazis that are full in power and persecuting and executing minorities. If you only understand the disease from its terminal stages it's hard to diagnose it from its early stages.
7
I think that most people just didn't see the whole documentary, but heard about the contreversy and then the only real "proof" that the VRT had of the facism and racism in S&V where some memes.
Now I personally agree that if you take together all those memes + the chat messages + the actions of S&V that that makes a compelling case that they are a racist and proto facist (not full facist, but the beginning stages of it) movement. But to most people these memes probaby just looked like some edgy memes, especially since they didn't know the whole context. And then they think, well that isn't that racist. And then Dries van Langenhove plays into that and strats calling the VRT left leaning and all his bullshit, and they tend to believe him.
5
I guess people didn't see them as fascists but as free speech warriors oppressed by PC culture or whatever.
3
[removed]
1
lmao and these are the same people decrying american-style politics being imported here even though VB (and N-VA) are literally cribbing from Trump's playbook.
0
I am not surprised at all. The longer it takes to form a government, the more those traditional parties will lose.
3
It takes longer because the presence of extreme parties makes it harder. So that's not helping.
3
I'm thinking these differences will increase even more ...
Knowing there were 110+ cases where more then 30 000 euros were payed out and 1 case where 90 000 euro was payed out.
1†
I'm thinking these differences will increase even more ...
Knowing there were 110+ cases where more then 30 000 euros were payed out and 1 case where 90 000 euro was payed out.
So, VB is against paying out child benefits?
1
But 110 to Belgiums and refugees combined really isn't that big of a number. We have 6 million people in Flanders.
0†
In that case I'm available for 90 k. 1 Guy isn't that big a number. We have 6 million people in Flanders
6
Simply don't pay taxes, there's 6 million people in Flanders, so your fraud isn't that big of a number really.
10
What are you even arguing for here.
0
But it's a shitload of money if you are on the receiving end.
... not for a politician offcourse, they make this kind of money just going to boardmeetings.
3
In a period of six years no less. And they're all payouts that should have happened earlier, but were delayed for some reason.
2
[deleted]
1
Met spa wordt er blijkbaar wel gefokt. Lowest upside and biggest aversion.
0
?
Groen, PVDA and VB have bigger aversion.
2
My eyes failed me.
4
Zolang dat ge het erger vindt dat een huis meer dan 90.000 euro kost ipv 90.000 euro te geven aan mensen die reeds eten, woning, medische zorgen en onderwijs gratis krijgen, gaat het er niet beter op worden.
-4†
Komaan 1 gezin op 2500 aanvragen krijgt 90 000 euro omdat ze een gehandicapte zoon hebben en dat betekent dat we alle asielzoekers teveel gratis geven?
9
Dat is niet wat ik zeg. Ik zeg dat het voor sommige partijen erger is dat 90.000 euro geen huis is terwijl een gewone burger sowiets heeft van: 90.000 euro? Er is ook een reden dat ze dit afschaffen, je krijgt al alle nodige voorzieningen. Eenmaal je burger bent krijg je dat kindergeld wel. Voor mij mag het nog strenger zoals in Denemarken waar je eerst een paar jaar rechten opbouwt tot je volledig staatsburgerschap krijgt met alles er op en er aan.
8
Zolang dat ge het erger vindt dat een huis meer dan 90.000 euro kost ipv 90.000 euro te geven aan mensen die reeds eten, woning, medische zorgen en onderwijs gratis krijgen, gaat het er niet beter op worden.
Dit is absolute quatsch. Zelfs dat ene specifieke geval ging het slechts om één gezinslid dat op een moment niet in orde was. De overgrote massa van die verlate uitbetalingen gaat overigens om roomwitte autochtonen.
1
Wat heeft huidskleur met deze discussie te maken? Wat maakt het uit dat dit een extreem geval is? Ik snap u redenatie niet.
1
Wat heeft huidskleur met deze discussie te maken?
Dat is altijd het achterliggende sentiment, het mentale beeld dat hierachter zit: "Die bruin komen naar hier om te profiteren", "Die bruin krijgen alles voor niks!"
Wat maakt het uit dat dit een extreem geval is? Ik snap u redenatie niet.
De zin "90.000 euro te geven aan mensen die reeds eten, woning, medische zorgen en onderwijs gratis krijgen" geeft de indruk dat het algemeen is terwijl het een extreme uitzondering is. Dat is een statement van het kaliber "ga maar in de petrochemie werken, daar kan je 90000 per maand verdienen".
Het is overigens niet "gegeven", ze hadden er recht op zoals alle andere die kinderbijslag krijgen. Als dat niet zo was zou hetzelfde bedrag ook teruggevorderd worden. Of moeten we dat ook zo laten?
1
Dat is altijd het achterliggende sentiment, het mentale beeld dat hierachter zit: "Die bruin komen naar hier om te profiteren", "Die bruin krijgen alles voor niks!"
Neen, dit gaat over het correct verdelen van de financiële middelen bij de mensen die het nodig hebben. Na de laatste staatshervorming werd Vlaanderen bevoegd voor kinderbijslag, onder de regering Bourgeois werd dit dan ook uitgewerkt. Nu blijkt dat daar een paar uitwassen in zitten, vandaar de uitspraak van Jambon dat sommige mensen een huis cadeau kregen, wat inderdaad een hyperbool is maar wel een grond van waarheid heeft.
Een democratische meerderheid heeft beslist om de kinderbijslag te hervormen en enkel fouten er uit te halen, zoals én alle voorzieningen krijgen én kinderbijslag. Jij kan het daar niet mee eens zijn maar dan moet je gewoon een democratische meerderheid vinden die dit wel wil, alleen ga je dit niet vinden om dat het gewoon geen faire verdeling is en dat er mensen zijn die meer behoevend zijn.
geeft de indruk dat het algemeen is terwijl het een extreme uitzondering is.
Wat maakt dat uit dat het een uitzondering is? Ik vind je hele comment wel typerend voor links. Een beetje de moraalridder uithangen en iedereen die tegen ons slecht migratie en asielbeleid is op één hoop gooien en als racisten proberen te profileren. Mij maakt je huidskleur of oorsprong geen fuck uit, wel de mate waarin je geïntegreerd bent, maar ik snap dat het groen goed uitkomt want zij halen best wel wat stemmen door NVA als racisten te framen en dan verschieten ze dat VB blijft groeien terwijl ze verdedigen dat iemand recht heeft op 90000 euro naast alle voorzieningen die ze reeds kregen tijdens hun asielprocedure. Een gewone mens snapt daar geen hol van en denkt er het zijne van.
1
Some interesting data:
Other interesting information: only 16 % of voters is for Flemish Independence
25 % of NVA voters want independence, 33% of VB voters want it.
Only 1 in three Flemish want " more Flanders and less Belgium". So there was no support for confederalism either.
edit: also PVDA is the least popular party with (new) young voters, only 6000 of the new voters in 2019 voted for them.
edit 2: 22 % of VB voters are for an unitary Belgium, and 12 % of NVA voters are for an unitary Belgium.
edit 3: for 1 in three voters immigration was the most important topic that decided their vote in 2019.
Source for the edits: Knack.
The quoted numbers suggest or don't preclude a question like:
Question: What's your opinion on the future of Belgium regarding the regions ?
A. Flanders independent (16% of total)
B. Confederalism (33% of total)
C. Unitary Belgium (22% VB / 12% NVA / ??% of total)
D. No opinion / no change (??% of total)
In which case one should add the A and B answers into 49% wants "more Flanders and less Belgium"
Of course there could he that kind of question. However I can't see the document itself so thats pure speculation.
I agree, can't consult the document either.
You presented a speculative conclusion ("So there was no support for confederalism either") based on a single 16% number, I presented another on 2 :D
Or 55% wants the status quo or more Belgium
Funny to see that despite a lot of effort there still is more aversion to pvda/groen/spa then NVA.
Kinda suprised about groen in that regard.
As for "consider to vote" well if you have been burned so many times by the more traditional parties its only normal people stop doing that or even consider that.
I think a lot of that aversion comes from personal aversion against Almaci/Calvo. Which is kind of shallow, but also totally understandable.
Youre forgetting the worst: Van Besien.
True, if it weren't for him - I would have voted differently in 2019.
I don't doubt their poor communication plays a big factor. Being constantly attacked is one thing, but failing to defend is another.
Don't underestimate the hate of boomers for Greta and Anna. Christmas dinner was quiet and eye opener.
Nobody likes foreigners telling you off. Even less so when they're kids.
I see you also have an interesting family ;)
I also heard a whole lot of gen x’ers hate on Greta and climate change as a whole at my workplace. I feel out of place a lot as someone from the early 90ies.
Well the electoral campaign for a while was very polarized between NVA and Groen. Especially about the bedrijfswagens. But Groen didn't manage to get votes from that polarization (wich shows their lacking political strategy and leadership). PVDA is still an extreme party, so I don't think the aversion is unexpected.
And well sp.a: tis de schuld van de sossen !
I agree that pvda is an extreme party, but so is VB... which makes me question this reasoning.
PVDA just isn't that well known yet. And they haven't had the same scandals that VB had (with their racism sometimes leaking out into the public).
There's also a different 'barrier' to voting VB vs PVDA. VB-ers have been consistently in parliament since the 80s. Filip Dewinter has the longest 'ancieniteit' of any politician in the Flemish parliament (it's why Herman De Croo stayed around to take the oaths).
It's in some ways less of a taboo that VB-ers are in parliament.
Usualy in that both damage each other but here it seems the lack of answers really hurt groen not on only in the votes but also potential voters. People simply didnt care about environment and looked at immigration mainly.
I remember reading an opinion piece that stated right wing parties usually got more out of being in fierce debates than left wing parties, as they are more used to being challenged and thus debating.
Whereas left wing parties usually live more in their bubble.
It's an interesting thesis.
Knack article gives 35% for Groen and 38% for PVDA in the aversion category.
Thx, I edited it.
No no, almost 50% voted for VB and NVA so that means they definitely support confederalism!
50% have no idea what they voted for.
Feel free to propose why other parties who I misalign with on other key issues should be my preferential choice then.
Cause if I vote for any of those, I'd also be voting against my own views on a variety of topics.
The only way to find a party that alligns 100% with your views, is to create one yourself. My problem is not with the people who make an informed choice and “de bluts met de buil nemen”. My problem is with people who vote VB but then are surprised when you point out the anti-lgbt stance of the party or the incompetence/absenteisme of their MPs (even in the Femish parliament). People who really can’t grasp that “republic Vlaanderen” is art 1 in the statutes of NVA but who are fervent Belgians. I
It’s like drinkinh whiskey and refusing to accept there’s alcohol in it. Or voting socialist for lower taxes. Sense, it makes none.
Exactly. I'm sick and tired of people acting like ignorance is an excuse. It requires zero effort to look up what a party stands for.
We know what parties stand for. We also know that we can't get 100% congruency with what we vote for unfortunately. Stop pretending we are idiots or monoliths.
I'd love to have a party that aligns more with my views than NVA, but the others obviously have their own flaws that I judge of greater magnitude.
So the 3 parties of the Flemish government are the 3 parties with the least collective aversion against them.
What if we repeat this test on the federal level with all parties, and keep adding the parties with the least aversion against them to a coalition until a majority has been reached?
[deleted]