The Great Nordic Thread

[politicus]

Other main points:

- Significantly lower taxes and fees. Low income tax credit raised,  tax cuts for high incomes (basically ditch progressive taxation). Social benefits and income transfers only for the very weak (disabled, mentally ill, drug addicts, homeless etc.), not the middle class.
- Rolling back EU-membership. All supranational arrangements to be scrapped - only interstate cooperation (sounds a bit unrealistic - but they might land on EEC).
- Immigrants to be sorted by knowledge and country of origin.
- Temporary border control at times with high migration or security threats.
- Educational system should promote respect for Danish and Western traditions, hard work and the value of individual social responsibility.

[politicus]

So it's basically a mix of LA views on fiscal issues, DPP views on immigration/EU issues and mainstream Danish conservative views on social issues... Seems exactly like the new Dutch VNL party. That will be quite an electoral niche, especially since Liberal Alliance has recently shifted toward more eurosceptical and immigration-critical positions. If successful, this new party might, indeed, hurt the Conservatives, Liberal Alliance, and possibly Venstre more than DPP, it seems to me. But are they actually to the "right" (odd word in this context, but you know what I mean) of DPP on the EU and immigration? Does DPP officially want to leave the EU?

I am not convinced it is a small niche. About 12-15% of the population are right wing on everything IMO. A big part of DPP belongs in this segment, but vote for them for lack of alternatives. I wouldn't  be surprised if DPP right wingers (like the Krarup clan - the rev. Søren Krarup and his four daughters + his cousins son Christian Langballe and their Tidehverv movement - search the forum if you don't know them - I have written about them before) and possibly also MEP Morten Messerschmidt (though he has moved a bit left on economics and is likely too fond of being in office) starts jumping ship if this becomes successful.

Denmark also has an influential group of National Conservative and self described "National Liberal" intellectuals (Kasper Støvring, Torben Mark Petersen, Michael Böss, Jesper M. Rosenløv and Søren Hviid Pedersen - with the University of Southern Denmark in Odense as a "stronghold" for the right - relatively speaking, still leftist dominance of course) and professional debaters/bloggers/writers like Michael Jalving, the Selsings (Rune and Eva Agnete), Sørine Godtfredsen + psychiatrist Henrik Day Poulsen whose views align much more closely with this project than LA and DPP. If some of the top names from this group joins them it could make a big difference. Jalving is the guy the NatCons are really hoping would lead them, but he seems uninterested in electoral politics. We are talking about a dozen people who either writes for Berlingske and JP (which Uhrskov Jensen also does btw) or are "public intellectuals". In the Krarup-clan I would also consider the leader of Trykkefrihedsselskabet Katrine Winkel Holm and her sisters Agnete Raahauge, both theologians, as public intellectuals. Their sister Marie Krarup would be the most likely DPP MP to join We Cons.

DPP are against EU, but pro the inner market. They are against Schengen and everything that puts EU law above the Danish Constitution. So exactly the same as We Conservatives, as I interpret it.

DPP has moved away from wanting to sort immigrants according to religion (which has alienated the hardcore Islamophobes). Thulesen Dahl has stated that "there is freedom of religion and adherence to Western values is more important than faith or country of origin". Both parties seems prepared to challenge the refugee convention and only allow quota refugees. We Conservatives are a bit more pro-importing experts, but DPP is lenient on this as well. I think We Cons. will in realty be slightly to the right, since they are seemingly prepared to sort based on country of origin and say so out loud - most DPPs would prefer the same, but the leadership has forbidden candidates to actually say this as part of their mainstreaming process.


Michael Jalving

So in short, big potential, but far from certain We Cons can unleash it - it is just the best bid so far.

[politicus]

The Conservative People's Party and the Liberals are both pro-EU and in favor of following international refugee conventions to the dot, so they aren't really satisfactory for (at least the core of) this segment.

LA is "open borders, closed coffers" on immigration, which is a far cry from the "only-Westernes with very few exceptions" message of WeCons. On EU LA only states that the "EU should only focus on the Inner Market", but are not really prepared to take the consequences of this and they lack the principled "nothing above the Constitution" approach. They are also Liberal (duh..) on civil rights issues, which limits their ability to be "tough as nails" on crime. LA recently supported giving citizenship to people convicted of misdemeanors and small felonies, who had gotten a dispensation by the previous government, a decision the Liberals wanted to reverse. WeCons seems to be willing to be very restrictive on citizenship - which is a big deal for this segment. Zero tolerance on giving citizenship to anyone who has ever broken Danish law + not giving it to people with a non-Western background, who aren't married to Danes, would appeal to many. LA is 100% economically focused on this and deride the ethno-natioalist/cultural cohesion dimension. It is after all a party founded by people from Radikale with an influx of primarily Liberals. Even if they get votes from ex-Conservaties it isn't a Conservative or Nationalist party.

LA also wants to abolish the Danish opt-out on defence, which contradicts with the NATO-only sentiment of the hard right.

I am not saying WeCons can manage to mobilize this segment, but there is an opening. The Conservative People's Party is the most redundant party in Danish politics and DPP and LA have voter segments that disagree with them on a range of central issues.

[politicus]

There is also the culture thing, which I think I understand better than you because I come from an old Conservative family, while you likely come from a Social Democratic background. There are people, who basically agree with the entire economic policy of LA, but would never vote for a party founded by members of Radikale Venstre. Radikale is seen as the party of traitors, the party inspired by Viggo "what good will it do" Hørup, the party that was the driving force behind disarming Denmark in the 30s, that cost us Southern Sleswick both in 1920 and 1945/46, the party behind cultural radicalism, which opposed NATO for decades and (important for some) the party behind the 1983 refugee law and a lax and permissive attitude towards Islam.

I remember the contempt with which my grandfather (the son of two resistance fighters) always talked about them as "the party that has a picture of Eric Scavenius hanging in their main office" (Danish Foreign Minister during WW1 and PM 1942-43 and a strong defender of cooperation with the German occupiers - the scion of a noble landed gentry family, so also a class traitor). In some families having ever been member of Radikale is seen as sign of a flawed character, a moral blemish which can never be eradicated. It is okay to have been a Socialist in your youth because "we all get wiser as we age and youthful idealism is part of life", but given that Radikale comes from the same class background (more or less) as Conservatives this takes on an bourgeois internecine war dimension.

You SDs can be annoyed at the arrogance and self righteousness of Radikale, but you do not despise them as the arch-Conservatives do. My grandparents (and my mother) were/are in many ways on the left of the Conservatives and I have drifted leftwards for most of my adult life on most issues, but I still feel I understand these people. And to this day I personally basically think of Radikale as "the party of traitors", it is a deeply rooted sentiment. Liberal Alliance is often derided as "Radikale Højre", the right wing of Radikale Venstre. WeCons would obviously be completely free of this stigma in these circles - it is founded by "their own ilk".

While this feeling is much less prevalent among young people it still matters to enough people to make a difference. Some vote for DPP and Cons despite agreeing a lot more with LA on economic matters and welfare.

[politicus]

If Lars Seier Christensen will be financing the new "We Conservatives" party, will he/Saxo Bank then quit bankrolling Liberal Alliance? That might be a big deal for LA (well, figuratively...). Or have they become independent of his "help" recently?

Yes he has pulled the plug and said they are strong enough to be on their own now. He won't finance WeCons - it is a rival to LA after all (but also a supplement, so he won't mind them). What I imagine is that Peter Seier Christensen has access to his network. Lars Seier Christensen started out in Conservative Youth Copenhagen (at time known to house quite a few anarchy-capitalists, but also people from the old upper class) long before he became a stockbroker and he has lots of wealthy Conservative businessmen, stockbrokers and investment bankers in his network. No matter what your personal net worth is you are not quite an ordinary citizen if your brother is a dollar billionaire and you have a good relationship with him.

[politicus]

The Danish Minister of Defence has Carl Holst has resigned (for the reasons Diouf has mentioned earlier in thread). His replacement will be presented to the Queen in about 7 hours.

[politicus]

Former Minister of Taxes and Political Spokesman Peter Christensen (40), who didn't get reelected to the Folketing earlier this year, is new Minister of Defence after Holst. An unexpected comeback for Christensen, who had claimed he was done with politics. He is from the same region, Southern Jutland (= Northern Sleswick), as Holst, which may have played a role.

[politicus]

Brevik feels sorry for himself, again:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34401166

He is a coward, so I highly doubt he will to through with it, but if he goes on hunger strike and continues to the dangerous stage they should let him die. Suicide is the best option in this case.

[politicus]

Tbh keeping Brievik alive to reveal the self-style master race defender is basically a huge whiny bitch is a pretty good decision.

Politicus, I doubt he would go through with a hunger strike. He's a manchild.

Well, I said so as well in the first sentence, I was just making a general comment.

I doubt it has much effect keeping Breivik alive one way or the other, he is basically irrelevant (to anyone but the relatives and comrades of his victims).

[politicus]

@ingeman: The January poll saying 12.8% of Danes wanted a party to the right of DPP was analyzed by social scientist Johannes Andersen, and his conclusion was they could mostly be described as "homeless classical Conservatives (Andersen may not always be the sharpest analyst out there, but still worth taking into account). The group was - as one would expect - mainly male, and it had an overweight of 50+ and - more surprisingly - 18-29 year olds, a large part of them living in "the periphery.

Ideally such a party should therefore be led by a middle aged masculine Jutlandic guy (former army officer in his mid 40s turned successful businessman would work well), and the three founders do not fit that bill, but they have other strengths. Looking at the three founders we got a mid 40s Rungsted based private sector employee, who dabbles as a freelance writer and whose brother happens to be a billionaire, a 38 year old self employed female architect and former Elsinore city councillor, who got divorced and decided to leave local politics to take care of her three boys. So a soft profile, which would be relatable to many women, but not too soft IMO, still fairly successful and not from the Whisky Belt, but provincial North Zealand (Jutlanders won't care, but we “Devil Islanders” will ). Third founder Svend Pedersen is a 50 something Valby guy, who seems to be an arch-Copnhagener, he is a former LA parliamentary candidate and was excluded from LA in 2013 together with the previously mentioned economist Torben Mark Petersen and four other "National Liberals" for "damaging the party" (= having immigration views unacceptable to former Radikale such as Samuelsen and Ammitzbøll). There is a Hard Right in LA and it is mainly "Metro Copenhenhagen”.

If we try to look at the potential in different regions and traditional Conservative strongholds we get:

Elsinore:

Vermund is born and raised in Snekkersten (an Elsinore suburb) and still lives there. Elsinore has it's share of integration problems, the largest Roma population in Denmark + some big ghetto like housing estates with rapidly rising crime and harassment of ethnic Danes to the immediate south. I could see a home town girl like Vermund with a solid network among local Conservative grassroots doing quite well up there.


Whisky Belt:

Not nearly as monolithic as generally presented, but let's just generalize to make it a bit easier. Despite voting for the Liberals and LA in large number there are lots of ancestral Conservatives up there. They prefer things to be nice, but they really hate taxes and aren't all that liberal. Some could be persuaded to switch to WeCons, but on the other hand they are sheltered from any real negative effects of the multiethnic experiment. They are also generally scared of anything that would jeopardize our relationship with the EU, but there are of course multigenerational National Conservatives in especially Gentofte (whose ancestors secured the only “No” vote to the sale of the Danish Westindies outside of North Jutland).


Frederiksberg/Copenhagen:

Old school Frederiksberg conservatives would never vote for such a party (but they are a dying breed anyway). Copenhagen has some segments that would among the current LA right wing (but that includes a lot of MRAs and WeCons are getting a female chairman).


Vallensbæk/Dragør:

Not in Dragør, much too moderate, don't know Vallensbæk well enough to say, but inclined to say no.


Odense:

Odense has major integration problems and the largest crime rate per capita of the four "big four” (Copenhagen is only #3 behind Århus), and problems spreading into the nice villa neighbourhoods from their ghetto areas. So I wouldn't rule out Odense.


Jutland

Seen from a Jutlandic POV the party is founded by three "Copenhageners", but Vermund doesn't have the Whisky Belt vibe and her non-aggressive, plainspoken, down to earth style would work well in Jutland.


Southern Jutland (old North Sleswick)

Most Nationalist area in Denmark for obvious historical reasons, has a (very) hard right core of about 15-20% among voters and became a major DPP stronghold this time. 12%+ of farmers also voted LA because they thought the Libs had gone soft on taxes and the farmers are culturally closer to National Conservatism than LA style soft libertarianism. Definitely a target area.


SE Jutland:

Has a surprisingly high level of far right types (the Dane's Party got 0.7% in Fredericia in the municipal elections), but anti-immigration types are likely to either stay or become DPP. Vejle with Bredballe (a surprisingly wealthy area and Rolf Sloth Henriksen from Dansk Kultur as vicar with a local fanbase), would be my best guess for a target area, but nothing major for them there.


Århus:

Home town of ORG, Vederfølner, Ultra White Pride and the strongest Dane's Party chapter. Second largest crime rate per capita among “the big four”. Ghetto problems in the Western part are increasingly affecting the villa owners in Brabrand and adjacent areas: gardens are being invaded, trees cut, cars vandalized, things nicked with no reaction from the police most of the time, too small fry — you got scared (upper) middle class voters who perceive DPP as too vulgar out there, so WeCons could do well. The old street fighters are getting respectable and might consider DPP too soft, there are apparently a high number of middle class types among them.

Affluent Riisskov has seen it's beach “invaded” by minority boys since they let a busline go out there from Gellerup (about 12 years ago, but the effects have been delayed). Girls are being harrased and groped, gardens invaded, their lilly white upper class world no longer feels safe. They would never admit it, but I could see some of them vote WeCons, they are the types, that consider DPP vulgar, but would agree with them on immigration and crime.

Biggest problems in Århus would be keeping the non-respectable far right out, while ideally still getting their votes.


North Jutland:

Strong right wing Conservative tradition. Tax hating is widespread on the right up there, as evidenced by the success of the old Progress Party (not all due to folksy Kirsten J.) and it is receptive to populism. Has a leftist SD, which provokes a counter reaction among some. Very anti-Copenhagen, so WeCons should thread carefully up there.

Red Aalborg (the city, not the schnaps.. ) has always produced many right wingers, the core of the Århus ORG lodge is from Ålborg, Riis-Knudsen had his fans etc. Some might take the chance for a legit “hiding place” (which could then become a problem for WeCons).


Rest of Jutland:

There are plenty of tax hating/xenophobic West- and Mid-Jutlanders as the old Progress Party vote in the Glistrup era showed, but WeCons would be too bad a cultural fit in the old Liberal heartland.
Viborg has a strong Conservative tradition, but is too moderate and has hardly any minorities.


Social groups:

A large minority of the 12.8% would be in the group well known foghorn Lars Trier Mogensen was vilified for calling "white trash", they fit culturally much better in with DPP, but as evidenced by UKIP economically right wing parties led by wealthy tax haters can do well (heck, even Glistrup was a rich tax hater despite his folksiness). If WeCons goes right of DPP I wouldn't rule out they get votes on places you wouldn't imagine, such as Lollland.

Farmers are an interesting group. There aren't many of them left, but they feel vilified and ignored and are starting to move away from the Liberals, so far mostly to LA, but WeCons would be a better cultural fit with their emphasis on traditions and national cohesion. It depends how they structure their message and what their agricultural and environmental policies will be.

[politicus]

WeCons and Danish Unity are negotiating about establishing a joint list for the next election and collecting signatures together, that would definitely improve their chances. But it also likely means the immigration policy in their common electoral platform will be tougher than the WeCons founders had imagined. Both parties say they are optimistic about reaching a compromise.

EDIT: The historic Højre ("the Right") is registered by somebody else until Christmas 2016, so they won't be called that, but had considered it.

[politicus]

The WeCons founders have published a "kronik" (a long opinion piece about a subject - dunno the proper English term, its a traditional essay style Danish newspaper genre) in Business daily Børsen.

From the intro:

"It is time for Conservatism. In our neighboring countries experiencing Conservative parties are growing. The people aspire parties who want to preserve the culture and values peculiar to each country, create economic freedom for the individual to decide for themselves how to organize their lives and to ensure that social services from the public only goes to societys weakest.

Denmark lacks such a party, that both stands for a classic, Conservative value policy and a bourgeois economic policy. And a party that is based on facts and will develop society based on knowledge and experience rather than to revolutionize in based on faith and ideology.

This is the reason that we will gather conservative forces in a classic Conservative party. Our freedom and our values ​​are not universal. They are based on a Protestant, democratic foundation that our ancestors have fought for, and which we must pass on to our descendants.

We will ensure that we Danes never become a minority in our own country. And we take the experience of decades of integration seriously.

We, as Danes have ourselves the sole right to decide how many and which foreigners are granted residence in Denmark. We will therefore challenge (international) conventions and intergovernmental agreements that limit our self-determination and thus the Danish democracy.

But we must not insulate ourselves. We are every day becoming both richer and wiser thanks to trade with other countries. ... We will follow in the footsteps of Britain's efforts to reform the EU and based on their experiences in assessing whether a reform is possible, or whether we achieve a better society for the Danes by completely withdraw from the EU and instead establish cooperation under the same conditions as Switzerland, Norway and possible the UK.

We will ensure a society that is strong enough to protect the weak, but too weak to break the strong. The state has become so large and mighty that the individual is powerless against the government. We will do away with the idea that all problems can be solved if we just spend a little more money on what is not working - a way we would never act in our own economy, we as society should therefore not be involved in managing other people's money."

[politicus]

Beside the obvious thing, they didn't believe in man-made global warming and they wanted to raise the development aid to the third world.

Why? That surely seems unexpected to me.

Perhaps as quid quo pro for reduced migration.

There is old social responsibility theme in Danish Conservatism. They see themselves as different from the egoistic Liberals in that they want to take care of the very weak and encourage private social responsibility as a virtue. The old standard attack line on the welfare state from the Conservative right is that the richest 90% pays for the poorest 90%, so they see the problem not in helping the bottom 10%, but in the bureaucratic and wasteful transfer between the 80% in the "middle class", which should just finance their own needs.

If you are serious about the "near area" solution on refugees, you need to fund it. I think for LA (which have had similar thoughts) it is just a gimmick, but WeCons likely believe in it, so this makes perfect sense. It would be against Conservative tradition to just stay full egoist (or that is how they would view it).

[politicus]

I do believe that 12,8% want a party to the right of DPP, but on immigration. Those 12,8% may not like the other things wecons represent. Also there's a thin edge between being to the right of DPP and going full racist, relative few voters like the latter.
There was a interview with Vermund and Seier in "Cordua og Steno" yesterday, I think you should hear it, it was interesting. Beside the obvious thing, they didn't believe in man-made global warming and they wanted to raise the development aid to the third world.

Well, their potential voters would agree (most of them), and it gives them a clear edge to the Conservative People's Party. Mette Abildgaard, who is pretty right wing, has just been out saying that CPP - unlike the other Blue Bloc parties - can't accept any lowering of the (fairly ambitious) climate goals of the previous government. "There is room for economic growth and ambitious CO2 reduction" was her core message.

[politicus]

Morten Uhrskov has said Danish Unity and WeCons will have to agree on immigration, EU and economic policy, and presumably they could easily agree on defence, foreign policy, law and order, education, church and culture. But they won't try to agree on everything. And the environment is actually an area where they differ quite a bit. It is of course not something they prioritize highly, but Danish Unity are actually fairly green (but with a funny nationalist taint - protecting "native animal races" and preserve our open landscapes - aka the ones from the 19th so-called "fatherland songs").

From their platform:

- Denmark should strive to become independent of fossile fuels.

- Preserve all nature types. It is our duty as society to preserve the nature forms and animal species that are native to Denmark. Among them the old Danish farm animal species, which are often treatened by extinction.

- Pollution in production should be limited as far as possible, and preferably wholly eliminated.

- The large scale pig farms have reached a maximum in number and size. Denmark can't increase it's pig production any more. Wants number of pigs confined by a quota to the arable land area of the farm.

- Economic aid to farmers giving up production land for regenerating nature. Farmers giving up marginal land should be hired as nature caretakers.

- Farmers should receive economic aid to introduce new technology which can reduce their use of pesticides and fungicides to a minimum.

- Supports the ecology scheme and wants it developed further and make it more attractive for farmers to switch to organic farming.

- Increased quality of drinking water.

- Stop for building on or otherwise developing the remaining open land. Against urban sprawl.

- Nature preservation and caretaking should be taken away from municipalities and be a state responsibility as municipalities haven't done a good enough job and are too easily influenced by local business interests.

- The industrialization of animal husbandry is undignified, and it furthermore leads to low quality and unhealthy food. Better animal welfare, smaller production units and lower use of medicin for farm animals.

Pretty far from climate change deniers.. but of course, no one support Danish Unity for their environmental policies, but its actually the most progressive for any party to the right of Radikale IMO.

[politicus]

Well it is a very classic blue green set of policies. Small is Beautiful, green and pleasant lands, small local farmer employing local boys to dig the potatoes etc.

Sure, but it conflicts quite a bit with the climate change deniers from the right wing of the business and finance community, that WeCons are connected too.

Especially the LA "National Liberal" circles Svend Pedersen is connected to are extremely anti-green.

Danish Unity is filled with idealistic country bumpkins and also has anti-parliamentarian, participatory democracy ideals. It will be a bit of a culture clash. Though, the membership has risen rapidly in recent years, so the original members may be marginalized by now.

[politicus]

All the parties accept the 100 percent renewable aim, no?

Liberals and Cons do, but the Liberals want to go slower than the current schedule. Cons are the only ones that support the goal of a 40% reduction of CO2 by 2020.

DPPs position is that Denmark is too small to matter on climate change, so they want a "realistic" climate policy. They also want all public support to the windmill industry eliminated since it requires double capacity with backup systems. DK should only have a few windmills for demonstration purposes. "Conversion to renewable energy is an unrealistic goal and will never work".
 
LA are outright climate change deniers and claims the IPCC is a political project. Also claim securing growth and increased wealth so we can pay for damages caused by climate changes if they were to happen is the best course of action. They generally trivialize the issue and claim there are "many advantages to a warmer climate". So a mix between denial and trivializing. All climate goals should be scrapped and subsidies to bio fuel etc ended asap. Stop for all conversion to renewable energy.

EDIT: Based on statements by their climate policy spokesperson Villum Christensen (a former Liberal), party chairman Anders Samuelsen stated climate change is man made in June (but left a door open for "90% man made/10% other").

[politicus]

Huh, I always assumed that LA were more like D66 or something than outright deniers.

Objectively LA is the most right wing party on almost anything and they are certainly the most anti-green.

[politicus]

Sorry, it was the position of their climate spokesperson Villum Christensen (a former Liberal). Anders Samuelsen "corrected" him in June and said climate change is man made "maybe 100%, maybe 95 or 90%, but that isn't important". It doesn't really change their policies, though. And VC is by all accounts much more in line with the membership than Samuelsen.

The way I see it the former Radikale got themselves a party that is much more right wing than they bargained for and are struggling to control the beast they created.

[politicus]

New Gallup poll has the Icelandic Pirates on 34.6%. The Pirates now have a five months 30%+ streak since the April 30 Gallup poll. Worst PP result since June. Ottar Proppé might have stabilized BF above the threshold (second poll they are above), but so far no gain.

Left Greens 10.6%   
SDA 10.1%   
Pirates 34.6%   
BF 5.6%   
PP 10.1%   
IP 24.4%
--------------
Right Greens 0.8%
Democracy Watch 0.7%
Dawn 0.5%
Others 2.6%

[politicus]

The fascinating thing with these polls is the stability. Except a few outliers almost all variation in the last five months has been within the margin of error, so basically the Icelandic party system has seemingly stabilized in a surreal scenario - for now. If there were wild swings it would be harder to take this seriously, but a third  of Icelandic electorate seems to have made up their mind that they are fed up the establishment and want constitutional reforms and public ownership to natural resources, no matter how the economy goes. Everyone in the pundit class, the business world and the political establishment are waiting for the Pirates to implode, but so far they have waited five months (and a couple of months before that when they rose).

[politicus]

The fascinating thing with these polls is the stability. Except a few outliers almost all variation in the last five months has been within the margin of error, so basically the Icelandic party system has seemingly stabilized in a surreal scenario - for now. If there were wild swings it would be harder to take this seriously, but a third  of Icelandic electorate seems to have made up their mind that they are fed up the establishment and want constitutional reforms and public ownership to natural resources, no matter how the economy goes. Everyone in the pundit class, the business world and the political establishment are waiting for the Pirates to implode, but so far they have waited five months (and a couple of months before that when they rose).

The Icelandic Donald Trumps.

Very far from him in both style, attitude and content. I can hardly imagine any public figure in the Western world more different from Trump than Birgitta Jonsdottir.

[politicus]

New big survey (done for the Ministry of Children, Education and Equality) of living conditions for gays from ethnic minorities.

13% have been exposed to violence from family members due to sexuality, and another 20% have been threatened with violence vs. 1% of ethnically Danish gays being violently abused or threatened by family members.

20% have experienced social expulsion from their family and 16% have felt under surveillance. 33% have considered suicide within the last year.

Told parents about being gay ethnic Danes/ethnic minorities:

Mum 79%/44%

Dad 68%/31%

Despite the high "considering suicide" number the survey is in many ways good news and shows that New Danes generally have attitudes closer to ethnic Danes than the population in the countries their families originated from, but that a minority has strongly negative attitudes and behaviour. It has been criticized for not openly dealing with ethnicity and the role of Islam in its conclusions. Sort of pussy footing around the obvious. "New Danes" is a far too diverse group to treat as one entity in a survey like this (and they did ask about both ethnicity and religion).

It says that "strongly religious groups" are much more negative, discriminatory and abusive than more secular and there there is "a strong correlation" between being very religious and being Muslim, with a Spearman-test showing a coefficient between being "strongly religious" and being Muslim of 0.43, but this is omitted from the conclusion.

Not sure whether it should have been in the conclusion, but obviously always a bit stupid to imply something in such a half-assed way.

[politicus]

New Gallup poll has the Libs on lowest level in 24 years, contrary to what you might think it isnt because of their voters leaving for DPP.

There was a Norstat poll having them on 17.3% in mid-September, but Gallup is still "the big one" among DK pollsters. LA and the Alternative/Red Greens who are gaining the largest relative share, while SD and DPP are fairly stable with c. 2% down/up compared to election result.

SD 25,8 (-0.5)
Radikale 4,6 (nc)
Cons 3,5 (+0.1)
SPP 3,8 (-0.4)
LA 8,1 (+0.6)
KD 0,8 (nc)
DPP 21,5 (+0.4)
Libs 17,6 (-1.9)
Red Greens 8,3 (+0.5)
The Alternative 5,5 (+0.7)

All within the margin of error, but the Liberals had expected the election result to be their floor, and it seems they can go lower. Even without DPP gaining (much). Also unusual with Red Greens and Alternative gaining at the same time, usually it has been one up/one down.

(in reality this is a rather boring poll, but since its "historic" with the Libs 24 year low, I felt it should be in thread)

[politicus]

On the topic of whether WeCons has a chance Kasper Elbjørn, author and co-founder of the Libertarian think tank Cepos and himself a prominent member of the Conservatives, says the National Conservative "Whites" are becoming more assertive in the party and dominate the Conservative youth org KU, at least among active members.

("White" is this context means anti-Red with a reference to the Finnish civil war, "the Reds" being the moderate Frederiksberg or Christmas-Møller Conservatives, or Red Tories to use an English term for similar positions)

"White wing is especially strongly represented among the young Conservatives. There is a big part, which are extremely active in the youth organization, but who aren't even members of the parent party. Young Conservatives are mostly nationalist opponents of the EU, who are tired of the parent party's swing to the left".

Elbjørn gives an example of the prevailing nationalism among Conservative adolescents:

"There is, for example, many who can not understand why we per definition cooperate with the US against Putin when they identify with Putin's nationalism. They acknowledge and understand Putin's argument for annexing the Crimea, although of course, they are (at the same time) critical of breaking international law."

So one aspect of this is that WeCons might take over a big part of the Conservative youth wing - perhaps even a majority. This will in itself provide some organizational strength and the "Whites" are a lot more active than the moderates, so also a pool of motivated volunteers for campagns etc.

Among the three founders former LA parliamentary candidate Svend Pedersen is out, but I think that might be an advantage given that the "National Liberals" he represents include too many hardcore MRA-types and this would likely turn away more potential voters than they could gain on it - and not fit well with having a female leader.

(regarding the name I guess the Putin sympathy could put the White Russians from the Russian civil war in play as well.. but not their intention)

EDIT: Besides Reds and Whites KU also has a Libertarian/anarcho-capitalist Black wing (which is strong in Copenhagen and Lars Seier-Christensen used to belong to back in the days). Danish youth politicians on the right often ironically style themselves as "blacks" if they want to destroy the welfare state, the Liberal youths right wing do too.
These types aren't really Conservatives, but defend their "Conservatism" by saying a strong civil society can only develop if the evil state withdraws it claws. So "White wing" is both defined against Reds ("leftists") and Blacks ("Libertarians").