The gain of political style: how Jetten and Bontenbal made the difference
The elections finally seemed to be about substance again. Housing, migration, healthcare and security were widely discussed. Yet once more, political style took centre stage - because both Rob Jetten and Henri Bontenbal won through a deliberate use of style.
There’s nothing wrong with that, I should add right away. Political style isn’t a layer of polish meant to give political positions a bit of shine. It’s about your political motives, your values and principles. Political style, in that sense, lies at the heart of politics.
Jetten consistently set his positive and enthusiastic demeanour against Wilders’ stream of negativity, portraying him as a whiny toddler who did nothing but complain and achieve nothing. Bontenbal positioned himself as a decent politician who behaved normally - in contrast to others who insulted one another and constantly interrupted.
For Jetten, it was about the 'vibe'
Strikingly, both politicians themselves indicated that they considered their political style particularly important. Jetten, for instance, said in De Volkskrant that he found the left–right debate the least interesting one. For him, it was more about the ‘vibe’ a voter feels with a party. He described other centrist parties as ‘a dull, washed-out affair that only wants to project calm and stability’. He said he preferred to lead ‘an eager team that gives it their all in the coalition’.
‘Can we manage to stay true to ourselves?’
After the elections, Bontenbal told NOS: ‘What mattered most to me when we entered the campaign was: can we manage to stay true to ourselves? Can we continue in the political style we started two years ago? At the end of the campaign, can I look at myself in the mirror?’ He went on to say that he was incredibly proud that ‘we did everything exactly the way we wanted to, in the style we ourselves wanted to embody’.
Pim Fortuyn
This suggests a growing awareness that political style truly matters. The contrast between substance and style is a false one. Political style is built from what a politician thinks, does and says. This triad was already identified by Fortuyn as crucial to restoring political trust: ‘I say what I think, and I do what I say’. Through political style, a politician shows voters what they can expect in terms of substance. It creates clarity in an uncertain world, where positions are always temporary and may shift as the world changes.
Voters do understand that positions can change - as long as they feel that a politician approaches things in the same way they do. For that, it’s essential that politicians, like Jetten and Bontenbal, are deliberate about their style, so it’s immediately clear what kind of politician they are. Are they pragmatic doers (like Rutte was), or more idealistic go-getters (like Jetten)? Are they calm, measured collaborators (like Bontenbal), activist dissenters (like Ouwehand), or angry citizens (like Wilders)?
Timmermans remained pale
Not all politicians came out well in terms of style. With Timmermans, it was clear what his ideas were about housing, migration, healthcare and security. But as a person, he remained pale - and that certainly worked against him.
‘It starts with a conscious choice by politicians, but also by political parties’
It’s not easy for politicians to consistently express who they are and align what they think, do and say - especially when faced with a hate campaign. Still, it starts with a conscious choice by politicians, but also by political parties, for a political style that suits them. One that clearly shows what they think and do as politicians. When they succeed in doing that, voters can tell whether that politician truly represents them or not.
Carola Schoor is an expert on political style. She is programme director at the Centre for Professional Learning at Leiden University and gives workshops on political style for professionals in the political domain.