Geert Wilders’ Party Makes Strong Showing in Local Dutch Polls
March to power? Wilders addresses party members
Wonderful news. The Islam-realist that the left-wing press delight in falsely and lazily labelling as ‘far right’, confounds his critics as he proves his and his party’s resonance among ordinary people in the Netherlands:
Mr Wilders’s far-Right [ahem-Ed.] Party for Freedom (PVV) made a strong showing in local polls held Wednesday, while the traditionally strong Christian Democratic (CDA) and Labour (PvdA) parties lost support, early results showed.
The PVV came first and second in the only two of 394 municipalities it contested.
Jacqui Smith’s ban on anti-Muslim Dutch MP triggers diplomatic row with Holland
Controversial anti-Muslim MP banned from the UK because of public order fears
It was the strongest party with 21.6 per cent of the vote in Almere, a city of 187,000 people near the capital Amsterdam previously won by the PvdA, and came second in the seat of government, The Hague – the Netherlands’ third largest city with 442,000 residents.
“What is possible in The Hague and Almere is possible all over the country,” said Mr Wilders, who is awaiting a hate speech trial for calling Islam a fascist religion and likening the Koran to Hitler’s Mein Kampf.
Mr Wilders was arrested and deported from Heathrow in February 2009 after the Home Office banned him on the grounds “that his presence in the UK could foster hatred and threaten community harmony in light of his anti-Muslim rhetoric”.
This was the first municipal election for the PVV, with its mission of “fighting the Islamisation of the Netherlands”.
The Netherlands’ two biggest parties, the Christian Democratic Appeal and Labour Party, lost about two and six percentage points respectively with 93 per cent of the vote counted by Thursday morning, two weeks after their governing coalition collapsed at a national level.
The CDA of Jan Peter Balkenende, the outgoing prime minister, had dropped about two percentage points from 16.83 per cent in 2006.
The PvdA, the strongest party in the last round of municipal polls in 2006 with 23.45 per cent of the vote, now stood at about 16 per cent.
The CDA and PvdA had been in government nationally until January 20, when Wouter Bos, then finance minister and vice premier, withdrew his Labour party from the coalition in a spat over extending the Netherlands’ military presence in Afghanistan.
Mr Balkenende now leads an interim government until early national elections brought forward to June 9. Some 12 million Dutch out of a total population of 16.5 million were registered to vote in Wednesday’s elections, viewed as a test of political loyalties and far-Right leanings ahead of national polls.
Despite the lazy, dismissive tags he is labelled with by the dhimmi press in Europe, Wilders is articulate, well-read, surprisingly moderate in tone; and exhibits a rare passion for real democracy and Western values. He is lining up to bat not just for the Dutch people, but for all Westerners who value our liberal culture, our standards of human development, equality and shared values.
Some think he may be a Churchill for our times in the making. Let’s hope, unlike Churchill, he gets listened to in good time.
[Source: The Telegraph]
Please consider supporting Un:dhimmi by making a small donation to the site, in order to show your support and help us with our work.
Get Your Copy of The Documentary the Iranian Régime Doesn’t Want You to See
Posted in 
Tags: 
[...] Un:dhimmi – Geert Wilders’ Party Makes Strong Showing in Local Dutch Polls [...]
All the hype and political brovado but far from reality. The MSM is often targetted by the far-right but they sure are happy to use the sensationalism when it suites them.
What is the result of the elections and does Wilders really have a leading position? Frankly, no.
Perhaps the media and his supporters forget simple facts like Wilders’s party did and does not run in all seats. Similarly forgotten is that it is local elections of which we Dutch are notorious for judging things on local issues and protest votes unlike the national vote which is taken very seriously. Lastly, also forgotten is that clearly votes towards the PVV was this protest vote which is not a change of allignment towards Wilder’s policies but rather showing they are unhappy with their usual voting position and would like them to modify it.
Wilders has not attempted to take-on the real platform of national politics at all, in fact he has avoided it. In national politics he is in fact still the fringe radical with a small following and in the framework of how Dutch poliltics goes he has no chance of having an impact. Why is this? Simple, no other party, even those that follow the strong-right of the political system, will have anything to do with him and that is relfected even in the carving up of power after these local elections.
In the locations that Wilder’s party did well, the PVV are still unable to find partners to form a coalition, as the “second largest party” in places like The Hague, they are being ignored and will again not be part of the power-sharing.
It is more logical to point out that if anything, the PVV has shown their failure, they do not have out-right control of councils, the population has not fallen on their knees begging Wilders to take over, Rotterdam which is the key area was not contested and the more moderate but still far-right party that did take second place is also being completely ignored and add to that, it was Labour that one the main vote.
Wilders is and will be remembered for being the radical whom wanted to be “the leader”. His failure in mainstream politics led him to follow radical ideals – targetting minorities as a scapegoat for economic and social concerns, avoiding working to repair the problem by simply attacking and condemning.
In normal circumstances radicals like Wilders should be simply ignored except for one simple thing. The usual foolish liberal nicesness that is responsible for allowing uncontrolled immigration and allowing the establishment of foreign radical values in our country needs to be made into an important issue – but extremists like Wilders will polarize the issue instead of concentrating on finding the correct solution.
Donny vdH
Donny -thanks for writing in, we welcome all shades of opinion here. However we also reserve the right to disagree with them! We feel you’re woefully underplaying Wilders electability. He is going to surprise you come June.
Why? Well, in addition to his prominence and his undoubted resonance with ordinary Dutch voters, there’s another secret ingredient to his electoral momentum – the unpopularity of the Christian Democrats, who are forecast to lose massively at the election; with Wilders likely to be a chief beneficiary. The pollsters’ predictions range from a very strong showing indeed, to him becoming PM on the traditional basis of winning the highest number of seats.
On this reading, your assertion that no party will from a coalition with him becomes somewhat moot – they will have to deal with him.
We think you’re also wrong about his political stance – as is just about every MSM journo who lazily labels him ‘far-right’ and ‘extremist’. He is neither. He’s definitely of the right, but he is in reality a conservative with libertarian leanings, who just happens to take a radical stance on one issue. That issue is the Islamisation of Europe and in particular of the Netherlands – where even the most hide-bound multiculturalist liberal cannot deny it is causing deep-seated problems and resentment.
I understand how you may come to your opinion but I would argue as a seasoned voter, I know the smell and feel of my national and local electorate well enough. Wilders and the PVV are a fad, one of those arguments that come about when there are “issues” and though will never go away it will certainly dissapear when the issue is fixed. The problem is if the issue is able to be fixed correctly.
If anything, the PVV and Wilders did not really grow or expand in the last election at all, it was D66 that in fact got the major increased vote. CDa certainly is losing out from protest votes but there is no proof in any format that there will be any impact or improvement in PVV votes in national elections. There has always been a big difference between voting patters between local, provincial and national elections – that is a constant fact.
The issue of migration and integration certainly is important and I do not think anyone is denying that at all, it is the subject of dealing with it, the focus on what is the causes and the real problems and working on that instead of sensationalizing the issue is important because of the polarizing that it is creating. There is a strong case that the increased polarization between immigrant Muslims and locals is caused by Wilders.
Wilders considers that it is the religion and the teachings that is to blame, most disagree, considers each and every aspect of Muslim life to be wrong and simply wants the “problem” to go away. He argues that head-scalves is an issue. Others, including myelf, consider that radical elements within the community are to blame, that they are holding back the process of integration and that if that was forced correctly then the “problem” has gone away. Head-scalves are not an issue, burqas and viels are. Wilders believes in assimilation, people such as myself believe that is not correct at all but the goal is integration and is a must.
I certainly believe that immigrants must come with their hat in their hands in thanks for being “allowed” and “accepted” and refugees even more so. That they all should attempt to intigrate, support the norms and standards of the country and even be patriotic.
There is already in The Netherlands an existing Muslim community that is very well established, in fact so well integrated that you do not hear about them at all – but that does not mean they exist. Indonesians and Malays have been in here for more than a hundred years without much trouble at all. Wilders does not mention them at all.
The problem of the west in general including in my country is that in the early 1970s western nations started accepting political refugees as some form of slap on the face to certainly countries and it backfired on them badly. They did not bother to consider that these “persecuted” people were in fact radicals, criminals and terrorists and now they have had 30 plus years to build themselves up and imbedd themselves. They milk the liberal fools to the maximum and demand things that as far as I understand are in fact not even commonly demanded back in their countries.