Text 33268, 141 rader
Skriven 2009-06-10 16:30:16 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
     Kommentar till en text av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
Ärende: Well?
=============
Hello Bob,

On Wednesday June 10 2009 06:09, you wrote to me:

 MV>> Why? I think having a well defined target group and a clear POV is
 MV>> a strong point.

 RB> If the target group is big enough. But face it: 1% of the vote is
 RB> _not_ big enough, and even double or triple that won't bring much
 RB> improvement.

1% is the votes they got in Germany where they only just starterd. Their target
group is much bigger than tat 1%. In Swden they got over 7% and that is good
enough for one, possibly two votes in EP.

If the had gotten 7% in a Dutch election for parliament that would have given
then 10 seats, which would be a landslide. very few political partoies ever got
10 seats at the first round.

 MV>> That may be so, but as I wrote you can not please everyone. The
 MV>> Pirate Party has obviously chosen for the younger generation as
 MV>> their target audience, And it worked. If they would change their
 MV>> programme to please you, they would no doubt lose a lot of votes
 MV>> on the other side of the generation gap.

 RB> It's not a question of "pleasing everyone", but of removing an
 RB> irritation that might conceiveably prevent some from voting for the
 RB> party.

Whatver you do, you will annoy someone and make him not vpote for you. It *is*
a matter of "pleasing everyone".

 RB>>> Maybe, but not many think of that when they hear about the latest
 RB>>> piracy around the Somalian coast.

 MV>> How do you know that? Have you asked the voters who voted for the
 MV>> PP?

 RB> The better question would be: Have you asked those who _didn't_ vote
 RB> for them?

Let me ask you then. Did you vote for the PP and if not, why not?

 RB> Aside from that, you'd have to be blind not to see the headlines here
 RB> after each act of piracy - and the mismanaged GSG9 (elite rapid
 RB> deployment force) operation didn't help improve the image.

Sure. You'd also have to be blind not to see the headlines about that Air
France plane that went down in the Atlantic. Neither have anything to do wth
the PP.

 MV>> I think you overestimate the effect of the association.

 RB> OK, then I suggest you form a party called "Child Porn Party" and see
 RB> how many votes you get.

Hmm, there actually is - or was - a political party called like that. They want
to ease the laws on sex with children....

 RB>  Negative associations are _not_ conducive to success in politics.

But the negative associatin exists onl;y in *your* mind.

 RB>>>>> particularly in view of the problems off Somalia.

 RB>>> No comment on that, I see.

 MV>> What is there to comment?

 RB> Try: "Oh, I hadn't thought about that."

Indeed I never thought about that. And since I never thought about it, I never
thought about mentioning that i never thought about it either.

Anyway, I *like* the name Pirate Party. It appeals to me. If it puts some
others off, so be it. i woud be very disapponted if they flip-flopped and
changed the name just because someone like you is irritated by it. in fact,
they may lose my vote when they do that.

 MV>> Of course they do. They just don't associate the Pirate Party with
 MV>> the pirates in Somalia.

 RB> Even if true - and on what facts do you want to base that statement? -

Because I have never heard anyone complain about the name before. You are the
first - and so far the only one - I know that makes an issue out of it.

 MV>> No, Wilders did not win because of a clever sounding name.

 RB> Of course not, but he also didn't throw sand in his own machine by
 RB> using a name with negative connotations for the party.

And neither does the PP as far as i am concerned.

 MV>> It is not a very good name in my view. To vague and non-descript.

 RB> And if you think the name is unimportant, let me remind you that
 RB> politics is nothing but words. A good politician never underestimates
 RB> the importance of that.

But of course. That name is one of the reasons I like the PP. I like the name,
it sticks out among the many nondescript "please everyone" names.

 RB>>> If you're interested in ideology instead of votes. But if you're
 RB>>> not interested in votes, why go into politics to begin with?

 MV>> Of course they are interested in votes. But you can not please
 MV>> everyone, trying that is often counter productive.

 RB> So concentrate on the minority?

IIRC it has never happened in the history of Dutch politcts that a party got an
absolute majority. Every party is a minority.

Of course a party needs votes to achieve its goals. But if a party starts
changing their goals and image in an attempt to get votes they are not worth a
penny in my eyes.

 MV>> I think changing the name would cost them a lot more votes than it
 MV>> would get them.

 RB> We may never know.

What I dio know is if they change the name, they lose my symphaty and possibly
my vote. I do not like flip-floppers.

 RB> But I think you are trying to equate a small minority (who voted for
 RB> the PP) with the majority of voters (who didn't).

Like Björn I just do not care all that much about the people who did not vote
for the PP. I prefer a party that stand for what they stand for and sticks with
that. And if that makes some people not vote for them, so be it. Can't please
everyone. In fact one does NOT WANT to please everyone. If a political party
has a clear and well defined goal, it automatically means that they oppose
those with opposite goals. So those with opposite goals will not for for them.
So be it.

Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)