Was It strategically a mistake of Rutte to conduct this television debate with Baudet?

Rather a strategic mistake of the other parties not to stop it through an emergency procedure, through the court or a serious complaint with BNNVARA.

This was contrary to the media law.Two parties have had a disproportionate transmission time and facilities in the public broadcasting

If people were going to sit there, it was probably people who would vote on either party, twas not a feed for a socialist if I

I think Baudet has been able to resist the relaxed Righswinger Rutte, but with his views has not made friends in The Hague where coalitions are forged because we have never had a party with an absolute majority

Baudet enters the road of Wilders, which once seemed a threat, his ego has kept him out of power

His response alone is the death of Rutte’s sister.Disgusting

Rutte thought to be able to talk to the lower abdomen of the Netherlands I think. Over the head of Baudet.In itself smart. It gave a lot of people the opportunity to see what Baudet really proposes and exhibiting it did have an effect, not necessarily in favour of the VVD. The dissatisfied part of the voters has now largely been cut off by Wilders and has a new stuntman. The poor attempt of the SP to appeal to those voters through the carpenter’s film also exposes this party. As also think this tries more frequently. Or the funny variant on it by Lubach which is also not dirty from what is demagogy.

The rapidly derived citizen only eats headlines and incised quotes.Common sense takes a bit more time and you won’t find that on the TV with any debate whatsoever. Politics must better organize the conversation with society and I do not mean to invite yellow vests into the turret. That was also an attempt to engage with the lower abdomen.

Fascinating times, but also nothing new under the sun.Bread and play, that’s all that’s needed eventually.

No.Rutte has completely destroyed Baudet in the debate and put it to the front.

  1. The point at the beginning that the presenter wanted to bait a subject and Baudet learn to talk further, was really super uncomfortable.
  2. What did Baudet wish to achieve when Rutte last cried?
  3. Baudet did not have a good answer to Ruttes accusations of woman unfriendliness outside 鈧?艙that moralizing finger 鈧?

Funny enough, he is the one who raises a moralising finger to women who use their rights and it has become really clear that he would prefer to turn it on. 鈧?艗i Love women 鈧?he said, but of course that’s something very different from standing behind their rights.

Although I doubt that it has yielded the VVD voices, it has also cost them and will have been a bash for Thierry Baudet and FvD.

Convenient.People is the choice presented: just Right or stupid right.

The reality is that you are not right ho茅ft to vote.Middle or left may also. Is even sensible in this time period. You just had to look at that debate and you knew it.

Difficult question.Strategic in party interest or national interest?

Rutte has been able to put his party down well and he has defended the EU.Also, are reasonable compared to Baudet.

The price to be paid for it?A platform to an extremist that does not want anything else than to normalise its extremism. Quite a bit of legitimacy that you will get when the prime Minister wants to debate you. The disproportionate amount of time on public service broadcasting is also not exactly fresh.

The risk he ran was also great.If the debate had gone the wrong way, this could have helped the FvD immensely. Bit like Cameron giving the Brexiteers space. Baudet has won something with this debate anyway; ‘t has been given the opportunity to show his alt-right propaganda film on national television.

Rutte has his party MSS.’ N Grace granted, but for that he has given undemocratic airtime to give legitimacy to ‘ n extremist. He may speak of happiness that Baudet has put himself in particular to hmmmmmmmmmm himself. It could have run differently.

That’s not easy to say.The elections will show.

I do not know the context about this debate in Dutch politics.

Grtn stign

Yes was very strategic also in the way of substantiation in the counter arguments of Rutte.The way of a teacher versus a rebellious pupil who only has his emotion out in an uncontrollable way and likes to call attention in the classroom, however, the teacher chooses not to go along with this emotion but designates the children in the classroom who the teacher is. At least I have experienced the debate in my personal perspective.

Many missteps have already been taken to see what has ended up, all public stunts

Leave a Reply