The Dutch point of view on American elections

[DutchLiberal]

Hi all,

I probably wrote this message in my head at least a hundred times, but I never got around to actually writing it, because I kept thinking: would it really add something to the ongoing discussions on DU? But then I saw the well-received post by an Australian DU'er, and thought I'd take a chance as well. And why not? I mean: what are you going to do if my post sucks? Invade us? ;-)

With this post, I wanted to comfort you a little. You know, I read so many posts on why the U.S. media suck, that the American people are 'sheeple' who will swallow anything they're being told, and they let the media pick their presidents for them. I want to provide some perspective. It's not you. It's universal.

U.S. elections are not only a hot topic in American media, but in Dutch media also. Even now. It's clear not only Americans want Bush gone as soon as possible, but the Dutch, too, and I'm certain the sentiment is the same in almost all places in the world. (Well, maybe Bin Laden wants him to stay in power, because nobody helped *his* case as much as George Bush.) However, don't think we are one bit more informed about U.S. politics than those who just watch U.S. mainstream media.

For instance, I bet 99% of the Dutch cannot name any other Democratic presidential candidate besides Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. And we know that for the Republican party, Guiliani is running, and some old dude who sang "bomb bomb Iran" once. Other candidates don't get mentioned at all. One time, the leading left newspaper 'Volkskrant' ('People's paper' -yes, it sounds crappy in English) reported on a Congressional hearing. The article mentioned "presidential candidates Clinton and Obama" and "senator Joseph Biden". Of course I wrote to them to tell them Joe is running too, but alas, no response. Dutch media believe it's already a done deal: Hillary will run against Guiliani, and it's probable she will win.

And to the Dutch, that's fine. We don't believe there's much debate in the U.S. whether or not each of them would make a great president. We're under the impression that Hillary is loved and admired universally by all Democrats. And the Dutch love her too. They don't know she voted for the Iraq war, or for the Patriot Act. They know her husband is Bill Clinton, so she *must* be the best choice for president!

Then there's Guiliani. The story about the criticism of New York firefighters was mentioned maybe twice, and only on in-depth news programs. I would be surprised if anybody would know about it. To the Dutch, Guiliani is still the 'hero' of 9/11, 'America's mayor', and a very 'liberal' man (pro-choice, pro-gay). He won't be our first choice, but we think he would be 100% better than George Bush.

So, you can see: don't be too hard on your media and your own fellow citizens. Yes, the media are crappy and a lot of people too lazy to follow what's *really* going on. They just eat what the media is feeding them. But at least you can comfort yourself by saying they do exactly the same in liberal Holland. ("Were you can smoke hasj in church and Janet Jackson's nipple is on their flag!" --Bill Maher)

[robinlynne]

1. an old guy who sang bomb bomb Iran? who is that?

and thank-you for your post. But I'm shocked, bomb bomb Iran?

[Chovexani]

2. McCain

Who am I sorry to say is one of my Senators. :puke:

[DutchLiberal]

3. You're kidding me, right? I know you are!

Unplugged McCain sings 'bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran'

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/McCain_unplugged_Bomb_bomb_bomb_bomb_0419.html

He even made himself look more like an ass than the time John Ashcroft sang "Let the eagle soar". :rofl:

[robinlynne]

4. oh my god, I didn't know.

[DutchLiberal]

5. You didn't? Well, I guess it's hard to keep up with all those jackasses.

Personally, I was more appalled with Tom Tancredo's comments about bombing Mecca and Medina back to the stone ages because "that would teach them a lesson". :crazy: Unfortunately, that didn't make the Dutch news. I suppose the editors figured: "you know, we can't keep reporting *every* batshit thing they say".

[Cha]

6. Sorry...two wrongs don't make it

right..without the corporatemediawhores there would be no bush..but it's really nice to see you can think for yourself and support someone like Kucinich who is a man of Peace and not just some corporatewhore, business as usual, that the propoganda machines spits out at us.

The ghoul needs to be expose for what he is and that would be worse than bushit, if that's possible, rudy's the guy.

Like to hear your views from other countries..especially since this is the opposite from the one up North pushin' hillary on us.

[DutchLiberal]

8. I know, you're right about the media. We are different in that we would never have drivel like Fox

on the air for longer than a day. It would simply be impossible for people like O'Reilly and Hannity (or Beck or Blitzer) to stay on the air in The Netherlands. The public outrage over the kind of comments those nuts make would be so big, they would've been fired right away.

It's also due to lowlifes like them, that a stereotype has evolved about Americans, saying Americans are 'dumb' or 'ignorant'. Well, if you watch Fox and believe that's what all Americans believe in, I can't blame people who think that. But fortunately, more and more people realize that it's *not* what a majority of Americans believe in (just as we know most of Americans want Bush gone as bad as we do). I try to help by spreading Olbermann, Colbert and Maher around. (You should read Dutch comments: "wow, finally an American tv host who isn't batshit.")

It's thanks to DU that I have discovered who Dennis Kucinich is (or Mike Gravel, Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, and yes, even Ron Paul).

The Dutch media at least have an excuse for not reporting on other candidates than the front-runners: it's not our election and not our candidates, and there's much more other news. But American media should know better. (Well, I'm sure they do, but they just *want* to pull only the front-runners.)

[Cha]

9. Viva The Netherlands!~

I see you joined DU on July 4th, too..our Birthday! :)

And, you're right about The Dutch media not being obligated to know all the truth there is to know about American politics because our m$$m has done an excellent job of hiding the truth from a lot of Americans over the years(unfortunately for them the internet is overpowering with the truth)..and the foreign countries might just pick up wire services and they can be just as bad as fauxnoise.

The US corporatemediawhores made a deal with the devil aka/karl rove when he was pushing bushit on us in 2000 and they never looked back. They're traitors to their country but as long as it doesn't interfer with their bottom line they're happy as pigs in shite.

Anyway, your English is excellent..did you learn from a wee tot?

[DutchLiberal]

10. I guess Dutch media think they will attract more viewers if it's about Clinton or Guiliani.

It's all about the ratings, and they attract more people by talking about politicians we already know. Otherwise, they would have to go through the trouble of *gasp* explaining who the other candidates are, and viewers would have to *gasp!* think beyond "Clinton; I remember that name" and "Guiliani; wasn't that the brave mayor?" Unfortunately, even public television has become increasingly about ratings too (not surprisingly, thanks to right-wing government's legislation).

Thanks for the compliment. Not sure what a "wee tot" is, but I have been taught English since the last year of middle school (what you would call sixth grade), and then every year in high school (one of the only subjects which were obligated for every student). Besides, most of the required reading in college is in English. But most of my English, I learned from television and the movies, since they're not dubbed but subtitled in Holland. And writing, I learned most of all in practice, on tons of message boards like this one.

And the spell-check really helps sometimes. :P Even if I know nothing is wrong with my posts, I still do a spell-check, just so I can click "Ignore" every time when Guiliani or O'Reilly gets highlighted. :evilgrin:

[nealmhughes]

13. Wee tot is "klein knaap". Wee is Scottish. Tot short for Tottler.

Do people in the Nederlands read The Guardian or The Independent?

[DutchLiberal]

14. I guess some do.

They're not as available as mainstream British newspapers, but I think one could find them in the library. I use them both (online) regularly, because they're great sources of information.

[ShortnFiery]

20. It's not just FOX ... it's the entire mainstream M$M that lies to us every damn day. n/t

[DutchLiberal]

25. I know. I was using Fox as an example.

I check DU videos every day, so I know what tools are on the air. ;)

[iverglas]

11. whozat??

the one up North pushin' hillary on us

Probably one of the Liberal Party shills from the Canada forum ... It's your own fault, you people, for letting them get away with pretending their politics have anything to do with the left, just because their party is called "Liberal" and it isn't quite as far on the right side of the spectrum as most of your own politicians are. No self-respecting lefty/progressive site in Canada would let 'em anywhere near!

(Me, I'd pick Kucinich as king of the world for life, just not as the Democratic candidate for president of the US this election. Well, not really as king of the world for life, that would have to be a Canadian, but you know what I mean.)

[rucky]

7. I think you just described most American voters, too. n/t

[ooga booga]

12. I hope that DU's foreign correspondents will continue to send

in their impressions of the American political scene. I think a lot of us enjoy it. I know I do. Besides, we Americans are famously self-absorbed, and we enjoy the attention. What the Dutch, the Australians, the Brits, etc. are saying and thinking just might help us all take a fresh look at all of the craziness - past, present and future.

Right now, we're in this very frustrating holding pattern waiting for Iowa and New Hampshire to start to bring the Democratic and Republican races into more focus. So, it seems a good time to hear from you offshore DUers. Personally, I hope that you'll continue to stay tuned to DU through the whole election and weigh in whenever.

[DutchLiberal]

15. Thank you. What's absurd to us, is campaigns start a year and a half before elections.

In The Netherlands, political parties start campaigns one or two months before an election. I guess the American people want Bush gone so badly, they already want to start cheering for the next, hopefully Democratic, president.

With regard to the "craziness": the Dutch are appalled when they see three presidential candidates in a fully developed industrialized Western country, state they don't believe in evolution. We are even more appalled by the fact that the question is even *raised* at a debate. Same goes for questions about the candidates' relationship to God. That would literally be impossible in The Netherlands. Yes, there are politicians who work on a Christian platform and talk about their beliefs in tv shows, but *not* in a debate, because it's not the right place to do so. Also, christian politicians are a small minority in our country. We look at US politics and ask ourselves where the separation of church and state is...

We also don't think a 'debate' on American television is a real debate. We see it as a question-and-answer session, where candidates are not allowed to interrupt and directly debate one another. Then what's the point of having them all up on stage? Then you might just as well have eight separate interviews with the candidates. I want to see them discuss their plans with each other. also, how do you expect to understand candidates' plans and stances if you allow them only to talk one minute about each subject?

Here's an example of a Dutch political debate (01:40) in which this time, only the two candidates of the leading parties participate (the one without the tie is a social-democrat and the one with the glasses is a christian-democrat). Notice how they constantly interrupt each other and how they are given the time to elaborate about economic issues:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kH-nRrHcd4w

And this is commercial tv!

[ooga booga]

16. good observations

I would say that you're right "real debates" don't seem to exist at this point. Everyone is still playing it safe. As we get deeper into this election, we'll see debates that are more and more like the Dutch one in this example. However, its more important to our candidates that the perspective voters THINK they are seeing a debate. They only do it because it's expected and for the chance to get one up on the competition. They also fear debate formats because they're afraid of making mistakes. I wonder though if any of our so-called debates matter one wit. Bush butchered the first debate against Kerry in 2004, and then, he may have had a earphone coaching him for the next one. He still won.

As for evolution being controversial, I am also appalled. It goes to the lower educational standard in this country versus most of the rest of the industrialized world. I think that Einstein's theory of relativity would also be controversial in conservative Christian circles if they understood it a bit better. I've been reading a bit of John Shelby Spong, and I am now more and more convinced that unless Christianity can "evolve" to allow for the aggressive advance of scientific knowledge that it's not going to have much of a future.

[DutchLiberal]

17. I still see a big difference between e.g. the Bush-Kerry debates and Dutch debates.

Debates between two presidential candidates are still a question-and-answer session. First, Bush gets to respond in two minutes, during which Kerry can't interrupt. Then Kerry may react for again only two minutes. Then Bush may add another 30 second comment... And then it's on to the next subject. There aren't any confrontations.

To give you an example of Dutch debates with more candidates involved, and more confrontation between politicians, this is an important tv-debate held in 2006:
http://www.eenvandaag.nl/index.php?module=PX_Story&func=view&cid=2&sid=31333#

It begins with questions directed at individual candidates, but it is interesting to watch from 07:30 minutes into the debate (you can do that by selecting full screen) where a frontal confrontation occurs between the Socialist party-leader and the Liberal-party (right-wing)-leader.

[beachmom]

23. Kerry debated Newt Gingrich this year on global climate change,

and it was barely moderated at all. They asked each other questions, and had a good debate, much like you describe happening in Holland. Kerry would have much rather had that kind of debate with Bush, but we all know Bush is a wuss and not that good a debater, against an intellectual powerhouse like Kerry, anyway.

[DutchLiberal]

24. I'm not trying to pass off Holland, or Dutch debates as supreme, by the way.

Not that you were implying I did that, but I just realized I might come off as such. It's just too bad presidential debates are not like the Kerry-Gingrich debate. If it were, candidates like Bush and Guiliani would be crushed instantly.

[ooga booga]

27. Here there's a lot of risk management

The debates here between the final Democratic and Republican nominees are negotiated nearly into oblivion. The two sides haggle for all sorts of byzantine conditions. They want to keep their candidate out of trouble with a whole list of limitations. That's why I said that it's supposed to look like a debate, but whether it actually IS one is incidental to perception that one took place.

We have candidates who can't handle debates well, but who must engage in them anyway. Bush was certainly in over his head. The last time Senator Jim Bunting of Kentucky was in a debate his handlers insisted that he do it remotely from RNC headquarters in Washington. His opponent was bright and articulate and more than Bunting could handle on his own. The debate took place with Bunting participating remotely from Washington undoubtedly with coaching in the wings. The Republicans succeeded. Bunting was re-elected despite being unable to handle a debate on his own.

The Dutch way is simply a real debate with real candidates who can think on their feet. Unfortunately, we allow for smoke and mirrors and substandard candidates, and we get the kind of elected officials that we deserve.

[DutchLiberal]

28. Also, I can't stand they give so little time to candidates who are not in the 'top three'.

It's a self-fulfilling circle: we won't give them much time, because they're quite unknown. They are quite unknown, because they're not getting much time.

Also, would you agree American debates almost never get issues like: how are the candidates going to pay for their plans? Which programs do they have to cut in order to get the money they need etc.? Dutch politicians can harrass each other over 0,0001% in their budget.

[harun]

18. Thanks for the post, I love hearing foreign perspectives like this (n/t)

[ShortnFiery]

19. No, our USA media are part of The Fifth Column. Unlike in the USA, Dutch politicians REPRESENT

the people *before* the almighty Gods - the corporations who comprise the Military Industrial Complex.

NO FUCKING SLACK FOR THE TREASONOUS MAIN STREAM MEDIA!

M$M: PsyOps and Dumbing Down Americans 24/7 :puke:

Mainstream media (corporate funded):
Television networks, large US newspapers, AM radio, NPR and PBS mislead via selective presentation, distortion and distractions (sex, pop culture, consumerism, sports). Mainstream media has extensive ties to CIA and the profit motive distorts their integrity on the most critical stories.

[DutchLiberal]

26. Don't think all Dutch politicians have the people's best interests at heart.

And also, Dutch media are gradually becoming more sensationalist, like in the US.

[beachmom]

21. Yep. The Germans are quite similar in their thinking.

They all think Hillary will be president, and are pleased since they love Bill. I hadn't heard their views on Guiliani, so that is interesting.

[ShortnFiery]

22. Yes, but the GERMANS now have a representative government, now the USA does not!

It's not cute when we know that our government has turned into a plutocracy. It's not "cute" at all and we will soon morph into a police state UNLESS LARGE NUMBERS of American Citizens pull their head's out of their asses and DEMAND CHANGE. :(