The Big Bad Swedish Politics & News Thread

[The Lord Marbury]

Alliance: 32.5%
Red-Greens: 36.4%

Having permanent party blocks seems silly in a situation where neither bloc is going to get a majority.

A great deal of people, including Stefan Löfven would be inclined to agree with you there. However when bloc politics has been the norm for decades and the last major cross-bloc cooperation was the Social Democratic-Centre deal of the mid-90s, change doesn't come easy. And the rightward drift of the Liberals and the Centre Party in particular on economic policy and labour policy also makes such deals far more difficult. The Social Democrats are also showing signs of leaving behind the Göran Persson-style welfare and economic policies of the 90s and 2000s and are moving somewhat leftward, which means that the distance becomes even greater. Still, the degree of disunity in the Alliance at the moment hasn't been this great since before its creation in 2004, and we'll have to wait and see just how unified they'll be in next year's election. I'm beginning to doubt whether we'll even see a real detailed joint manifesto this time around like in the past three elections, and instead the Alliance will mostly exist in name only. And of course the Red-Green parties will run on their own separate manifestos just like in the last election.

-----

Speaking of polls, here's SIFO's latest:

Left: 7.1% (+0.2)
Social Democrat: 28.7% (+1.2)
Green: 4.5% (-0.4)

Liberals: 5.7% (+0.1)
Centre: 14.2% (+2.4)
Moderate: 18.4 (-2.0)
Christian Democrat: 2.8% (-0.8 )

Sweden Democrat: 16.7% (-0.1)
Others: 1.9% (-0.8 )

Alliance: 41.0% (-0.4)
Red-Greens: 40.3% (+1.0)

[ANNIE LÖÖF LAUGHS MANIACALLY]
 

[The Lord Marbury]

What is the base of the Sweden democrats, it seems to be more stronger in areas in the south, which are largely right-wing?

Who do the working class vote for in Sweden?

It is indeed stronger in southern Sweden and its base increasingly consists of people who previously used to vote for the Moderates. Their recent growth in the larger cities reflect that, as it generally corresponds to drops for the Moderates. Before 2014 people used to talk about SD voters as young and uneducated, but the last election shows that their average voter is male, middle-aged with middle incomes and former Moderates who grew disillusioned in the party under Reinfeldt. However in 2010 when they first entered parliament their voters mostly came from non-voters and roughly equal shares of former Social Democrats and Moderates.

Working class voters generally vote centre-left and Social Democratic in particular as Swedes have historically voted along economic lines, even if that has lessened over time, especially with the emergence of SD.

In other news there's also a new poll by Novus of which parties have issue ownership over the ten most important issues to the voters. The polling period was obviously before Friday's attack. We'll see if the government will eventually get a bump for that as another Novus poll for SVT showed that 62% of Swedes were happy with Löfven's performance in the aftermath of the attack, and his approvals have increased from 26% last year to 37% now, which admittedly is from a very low level. The government as a whole has seen a similar bump.

Healthcare
Social Democrats - 20%
Left - 10%
Moderates - 8%

Education/schools
Social Democrats - 17%
Liberals - 15%
Moderates - 9%

Immigration/integration
Sweden Democrats - 26%
Social Democrats - 16%
Centre - 11%

Law and order
Moderates - 18%
Social Democrats - 16%
Sweden Democrats - 14%

Elderly care
Social Democrats - 18%
Left - 9%
Sweden Democrats - 8%

Jobs/employment
Social Democrats - 20%
Moderates - 18%
Centre - 8%

The economy
Moderates - 26%
Social Democrats - 22%
Centre - 6%

Environment/climate change
Greens - 23%
Centre - 20%
Social Democrats - 9%

Pensions
Social Democrats - 19%
Moderates - 8%
Left - 7%
Sweden Democrats - 7%

Housing
Social Democrats - 17%
Moderates - 12%
Centre - 7%
Left - 7%

It is kind of funny how the Moderates have spent so much time and political capital on their immigration policies and yet they can't even break into the top three there. Only 7% think that they have the best immigration/integration policies, but they should look at it from the bright side; at least they're ahead of the Left Party by 1%.

[The Lord Marbury]

What do you see as difference between SD and other Scandinavian rigt-wing populists? Are Finns Party or Norvegian Progress party or DFP more moderate as SDM?

Well the main differences is obviously where the parties have their roots. Originally the Norwegian Progress Party was more of an anti-tax libertarian protest movement; Still very much populist but not necessarily anti-immigration populists as that was something which came in over time. The DPP and the True Finns also grew out of other populist protest parties, the Danish Progress Party and the Finnish Rural Party respectively. The Sweden Democrats on the other hand grew out of the neo-nazi organisation Keep Sweden Swedish and for the first few years of the party's existence the leadership and membership was quite happy to be flag-waving and swastika-wearing neo-nazis out in public. Nowadays Åkesson and the rest of the leadership are of course doing everything they can to sweep all that under the rug, but those brown stains don't wash away so easy.

Why do the Liberals poll so well on education?

That's because they've defined themselves as the education party for the past 15 years or so, and their leader and former Minister for Education Jan Björklund in particular has been known for focusing on education since long before he ever became leader. They used to hold a big lead over all other parties on education, so big in fact that the Social Democrats' post-election analysis after 2006 said that the party should avoid focusing on education in 2010 because they had no chance of bridging the gap. That of course changed during the last years of the Reinfeldt government has anger and frustration with Björklund coming from teachers and students along with a renewed focus on education from the Social Democrats after Löfven became leader resulted in dropping poll numbers. The drop which finally made the cup run over was the truly awful results for Swedish schools in the 2013 PISA study, after which the Social Democrats opened up big lead on the issue. However since entering government the Social Democrats have lost ground as well, and since the Liberals are still seen as the definitive education party on the right they are the ones who benefit.

What are the most significant differences between Liberals and Center? Do the differences consist mainly in what issues they prioritize? In terms of priorities, I feel like I'd be likelier to vote for the Liberals than Center, but I'd definitely prefer a Center-led Alliance than a Moderate-led one, and I don't understand why the parties don't just merge. Obviously this would have been an inaccurate analysis quite recently, when Center were a chiefly agrarian party, but their move towards picking up urban voters seems to have landed them in virtually the same space. Is "historical reasons" the entire explanation? Are there politicians in either party who advocate merger?

Well while merging the two parties is something which has been discussed now and then throughout the years, with the closest it ever was to come to fruition being in 1973 when Centre Party said no in spite of their leader being in favour. The biggest differences between the two parties is that they've grown out of very different movements and social groups, which still shapes their ideologies today, even if it's not as superficially obvious as it used to be.

The Liberals have their roots in the Liberal Coalition Party of the early 1900s which then was a leftwing party which governed and pushed through universal sufferage together with Social Democrats, before splitting over the issue of prohibition only to reunite some 10 years later under the name Folkpartiet (The People's Party). Their post-war leader Bertil Ohlin who was the main opponent of Tage Erlander during the 50s came to define their social liberal ideology of being centrist and anti-socialist while in favour of a welfare state without nationalisations. During the 70s when the Centre Party was the dominant force of the right they drifted further leftwards and in the 80s Bengt Westerberg took leadership of the party and lead on a course which focused on social issues, healthcare and gender equality. When the party then participated the Bildt government of the early 90s it pushed through the first father-reserved month in the parental leave system, an expansion of assitance for people with physical or intellectual disabilities, and so forth. However during the 2000s the party has more and more turned away from their social liberal roots and approached conservative liberalism with a focus on education as previously mentioned, especially in terms of discipline and grades, as well as flirtations with some anti-immigrant sentiments during the 2002 election in particular. As the Moderates became more centrist during the Reinfeldt era the Liberals also moved right on defence and are currently positioning themselves as the most pro-defence party in the Alliance. The means that the Liberals today are this strange mish-mash of social liberalism and conservative liberalism, with one faction wanting to talk about feminism, disability care and "soft issues", while there's a vehemently pro-NATO, pro-defence faction in the leadership that wants to talk about "hard issues" like placing Patriot missiles on Gotland and getting more discipline in schools. No one really knows what kind of party the Liberals want to be, and I somehow doubt that they know either.

The Centre Party as you said come out of an agrarian tradition and because of that their liberalism is something which has been slowly tacked on over time as farmers as a social group shrank and the party couldn't survive solely on being the party of farmers. Before Fälldin's leadership and the 1970s they were happy to cooperate with either side of the political spectrum, which resulted in the Social Democratic-Centre coalition of the 50s, but ever since then they've defined themselves as centrist, environmentalist and social liberal party on the right of centre. The budget deals with the Social Democrats in the wake of the 1990s economic crisis was the exception and from Maud Olofssons leadership onwards they've moved further right and begun actively courting young, small-L liberal voters in the cities, something which has finally paid off now with the Moderate crisis. But their core voters are still people living in rural areas and in spite of their success in the cities that is important to remember, as that still shapes big parts of their policies. Just as the Liberal base of middle to upper-class acedemics in cities shape a significant part of their policies.

In spite of being an increasingly liberal and sometimes libertarian-leaning party the Centre Party quite happily supports increased subsidies for farmers, decentralistion of powers to counties and municipalities and is the most eurosceptic party among the Alliance, even if that has lessened over time. Their environmentalist streak also brings with it a continued opposition to nuclear power. This is in contrast to the Liberals who are generally sceptical of subsidies* and by far the most pro-EU and pro-nuclear party in the Swedish parliament. Not to mention the key issue of the Centre Party being decentralistic at heart while the Liberals have long argued that powers over education should be transferred from the municipalities to the national government. I don't think any issue symbolises the ideological differences between the Centre Party and the Liberals more than decentralisation vs. centralisation.

*Admittedly the Centre Party is very anti-subsidy in rhetoric as well, though in actual policy its more a question of what's being subsidised. But of course a subsidy for something they like is not even a subsidy in their eyes so it would be utterly baffling to call it that....

[The Lord Marbury]

New DN/Ipsos poll out today.
http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/dnipsos-alliansvaljarna-foredrar-loof-som-statsminister/

Who would you rather have as Prime Minister....

...Anna Kinberg Batra or Annie Lööf?

All voters
Anna Kinberg Batra (M): 35%
Annie Lööf (C): 65%

Alliance voters
Anna Kinberg Batra (M): 41%
Annie Lööf (C): 59%

Red-Green voters
Anna Kinberg Batra (M): 15%
Annie Lööf (C): 85%

Sweden Democrat voters
Anna Kinberg Batra (M): 63%
Annie Lööf (C): 37%

Moderate voters
Anna Kinberg Batra (M): 70%
Annie Lööf (C): 30%

Centre voters
Anna Kinberg Batra (M): 8%
Annie Lööf (C): 92%

Social Democratic voters
Anna Kinberg Batra (M): 16%
Annie Lööf (C): 84%

...Stefan Löfven or Anna Kinberg Batra?

All voters
Stefan Löfven (S): 53%
Anna Kinberg Batra (M): 47%

Alliance voters
Stefan Löfven (S): 24%
Anna Kinberg Batra (M): 76%

Red-Green voters
Stefan Löfven (S): 96%
Anna Kinberg Batra (M): 4%

Sweden Democrat voters
Stefan Löfven (S): 27%
Anna Kinberg Batra (M): 73%

Moderate voters
Stefan Löfven (S): 5%
Anna Kinberg Batra (M): 95%

Centre voters
Stefan Löfven (S): 39%
Anna Kinberg Batra (M): 61%

Social Democratic voters
Stefan Löfven (S): 99%
Anna Kinberg Batra (M): 1%

...Stefan Löfven or Annie Lööf?

All voters
Stefan Löfven (S): 49%
Annie Lööf (C): 51%

Alliance voters
Stefan Löfven (S): 16%
Annie Lööf (C): 84%

Red-Green voters
Stefan Löfven (S): 89%
Annie Lööf (C): 11%

Sweden Democrat voters
Stefan Löfven (S): 40%
Annie Lööf (C): 60%

Moderate voters
Stefan Löfven (S): 20%
Annie Lööf (C): 80%

Centre voters
Stefan Löfven (S): 6%
Annie Lööf (C): 94%

Social Democratic voters
Stefan Löfven (S): 96%
Annie Lööf (C): 4%

....Stefan Löfven, Annie Lööf, Anna Kinberg Batra or Jimmie Åkesson?
Stefan Löfven (S): 37%
Annie Lööf (C): 27%
Anna Kinberg Batra (M): 18%
Jimmie Åkesson (SD): 18%

Oh lord, please don't let AKB's ratings crater disastrously just yet and have the Moderates replace her before the election with someone who's actually somewhat popular and charismatic. With her at the helm we could actually have a small chance to win next year.

[The Lord Marbury]

Who are these SD voters who would prefer Löfven over AKB? I get that some SD voters used to vote S, but I would have expected these voters to hate the left-wing government more than the relatively SD-friendly opposition leader, especially given immigration being so salient.

Well there's partly the fact that as you say that some SD voters used to be Social Democrats back in the day, but there's also the big contrast between Löfven and AKB. In Löfven you have a working class man from the countryside who's not generally considered part of the progressive social liberal left, but rather a traditional "gråsosse" who doesn't have any problem with tacking right on crime while simultaneously going left on economic issues. In Kinberg Batra you have someone who seems very academic in her public appearances, is from one of the wealthiest parts of Stockholm (think the Chelsea of Sweden), and prior to becoming leader was most famous for saying that people from Stockholm were smarter that hillbillies. It makes sense that some Sweden Democrats, especially from rural Sweden, would prefer Löfven over AKB.

[The Lord Marbury]

Anyway, I don't really think you can put too much blame on Kinberg-Batra personally for the Moderates currently awful polling numbers. I mean don't get me wrong, she obviously lacks charisma and has the whole "snobbish" problem going on but I seriously doubt any other Moderate politician would be doing better at the moment.

The problem, as I see it, is that M's turn to the right has alienated their centrist and progressive voters while their former voters on the right who has jumped ship to SD still don't trust them on immigration and feels as if the party isn't genuine in their support for more restrictive immigration policies.

The party could choose a more Conservative leader and win some SD voters but would alienate their centrist flank even more... or they could choose someone more Liberal and pro-immigration and keep bleeding support to SD. Either strategy would result in the same dismal or even worse support than now. 

If AKB's was to leave, I have a hard time seeing who could realistically replace her? Elmsäter-Svärd and Björling has left politics, Ask and Billström  are spent forces, Svantesson is too socially-conservative (especially on abortion), Hanif Bali is too young and too radical and so on.

The only three people I could see are Ulf Kristersson, Karin Enström or Peter Danielsson and I don't think either of those are likable or charismatic enough to do anything for the voters to save M's numbers.

Johan Forsell would of course also be an alternative. But it would be a shame to spoil the party's most promising future leader on an election that looks like it'll go terribly wrong for the party.     

That much is certainly true, the Moderate Party's problems run much deeper than AKB as a result of the divide between liberals and conservatives that was brewing somewhat silently in the background before SD entered the Riksdag having opened up into a big chasm straight through the middle of the party's voting bloc. Although the party leadership certainly have made some strategic errors and used some misguided PR strategies which have only served to exacerbate the problems. I do think that another leader may have done somewhat better than AKB (I'm thinking of Catharina Elmsäter-Svärd in particular), but "better" in that case would likely just mean about level or slightly below the 2014 result or more of a slow decline like what we saw before february, instead of the sharp drop we've seen now.

I don't think that getting a new leader would do them much good at this stage either; It may give them a brief bump in the opinion polls just as a result of a fresh face effect but it won't bring much more than that. Changing leaders just a year before an election could also backfire as it doesn't exactly exude an air of stability. Löfven and the Social Democrats would however miss having an opponent that is so easily painted as posh now when they're trying to go back to basics by focusing more on Löfven's working class background rather than try and sell him as this big statesman meeting world leaders.

While I do think that most of the party knows the risks of changing leader, if they still went through with a change I'm guessing that Ulf Kristersson and Elisabeth Svantesson are the two likeliest choices. In spite of Svantesson's positions on social issues she's supposedly very well liked within the party, so I wouldn't rule her out at least. And in spite of my vehement dislike of him and the general unlikely nature of it ever happening, a part of me would like to see Hanif Bali suddenly become leader. Just to see what would happen to the Alliance with him as leader of the largest party, and what he would do when suddenly faced with having to modify his message to reach people beyond his loyal followers.

However if there's any change in the leadership of the Moderates at this point in time my bet is that it would be far more likely for Tomas Tobé to get the boot as party secretary rather than AKB as leader.

[The Lord Marbury]

New SvD/SIFO poll:

Left: 7.8% (-0.4)
Social Democrats: 29.2% (-0.7)
Greens: 5.0% (+1.8 )

Liberals: 5.5% (+0.1)
Centre: 13.0% (-0.8 )
Moderate: 18.1% (+0.6)
Christian Democrats: 2.6% (-0.3)

Sweden Democrats: 16.5% (-0.2)

Alliance: 39.9% (-0.4)
Red-Greens: 42.0% (+0.7)

This poll seems to indicate that the drop of the Moderates and the massive gains of the Centre Party have levelled off for now, while the sudden drop from the Greens in the aftermath of the terrorist attack may have just been a blip as Greens voters briefly moved to the Social Democrats. We'll just have to wait and see. But as usual very little is happening in the grand scheme of things; The situation is between the blocs is pretty much level, as it has been ever since the last election, which is pretty bad news for the Alliance since an opposition should be leading the government by about 10-20 points at this stage in the parliamentary term. Although if you take into account the Sweden Democrats the opposition certainly does lead the government by that much, but that's just bad news for everyone involved.

[The Lord Marbury]

In some shocking news, there were a few bad headlines for the Moderates yesterday. First Expressen ran a story about how MPs were very critical of the party leadership at a meeting of the Moderates' Riksdag group today; A meeting which the party leader, party secretary, parliamentary group leader and deputy parliamentary group leader did not attend. The main part of the criticism was that the leadership is entirely lacking a coherent strategy and is far too reliant on staffers without political experience. The party's head of opinion analysis Per "when they go low we kick them in the balls" Nilsson also said that best case scenario for M in the big SCB poll coming on Thursday is probably 18%, with a worst case scenario at around 14,5%.
http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/interna-kritiken-kinberg-batras-framtid-hotad/

Later in the day Dagens Industri published a story behind a paywall (although Aftonbladet were kind enough to report on the jist of it) where it's said that several sources independent of one another within the Moderates have said that Anna Kinberg Batra will be forced to resign. The Moderates in Stockholm are apparently the ones who are the most dissatisfied with AKB, while the Moderates in Skåne are said to be slightly less unhappy but not exactly over the moon with her performance. Though I'm wondering if this actually could be happening or if it's all just a bunch of noise. After all, AKB's greatest strength is that the list of possible replacements isn't particularly long and doesn't fill anyone with excitement. One of the benefits of having all your strongest opponents leave politics in 2014/2015, I guess.
http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/BQpPg/uppgifter-stort-internt-missnoje-med-akb-kan-tvingas-avga

Now today, Lars-Ingvar Ljungman, chair of the Moderate nominating committee accuses the critics of Anna Kinberg Batra of being "spoiled"; Only used to the good times under Reinfeldt and Borg and inexperienced with having to deal with hardships without being able to hide behind those two. He demands that the "trench warfare" and "spreading of rumours" should end and people should focus on policy development instead of fighting about the leadership. Comments which are obviously going to make everyone much happier and calmer. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
http://www.dn.se/nyheter/politik/ljungman-m-det-far-vara-slut-med-skyttegravskrig/

According to Dagens Industri, the big thing which has a lot of Moderates spooked recently is an internal poll which shows them severely losing support in Stockholm, which is usually their big stronghold. In the City of Stockholm they've apparently dropped to 14% and fourth place, compared to the numbers around 30% which they've been used to for the past few decades, and meanwhile in Stockholm County where they've averaged around 40% since 2006 in SCB polls their numbers seem to have halved to 19%.

[The Lord Marbury]

Christian Gustavsson, Chair of the Moderates in Östergötland County and a member of the party board, becomes the first Moderate in a position of leadership to openly call for Anna Kinberg Batra's resignation.
http://corren.se/nyheter/linkoping/nu-kraver-han-partiledarens-avgang-om4681582.aspx

[The Lord Marbury]

The SCB poll is out. Almost 9000 people have been polled, with the result being the highest poll number for the Centre Party since 1990, and the lowest for the Greens since 2005 in SBC's polls. The change is since the last poll in November.

Left: 6.3% (-1.4)
Social Democrats: 31.1% (+1.9)
Green: 4.5% (±0)

Liberal: 5.0% (±0)
Centre: 11.3% (+4.2)
Moderate: 18.1% (-4.7)
Christian Democrats: 3.2% (+0.1)

Sweden Democrats: 18.4% (+0.8 )

Other: 2.2%

Red-Greens: 41.6% (Government: 35.6%)
Alliance: 37.6%

Meanwhile the Liberals are feeling jealous of all the fighting in the Moderates and therefore the Liberals in Uppsala, Örebro, Järfälla and Nynäshamn want to replace Jan Björklund as leader with Birgitta Ohlsson at the party conference in November.
http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/flera-vill-byta-ut-jan-bjorklund/

[The Lord Marbury]

I call this piece "Liberal conservatism; An illustration"

[The Lord Marbury]

The Alliance have announced that they will put forward a vote of no confidence against three government ministers for their role in the handling of the leaks in the Transport Agency, which Jimmie Åkesson have announced he'll support as well so we'll likely have three new ministers in a few weeks. The ministers facing the confidence vote are Minister for Infrastructure Anna Johansson (S), Minister for Home Affairs Anders Ygeman (S) and Minister for Defence Peter Hultqvist (S). So looks like the Alliance gets to have the show of force they wanted after all, not surprising at all to see that they jumped at the chance here before the Constitutional Affairs Committee has even gotten their investigation going. It also distracts people from talking too much about the fact that the outsourcing of the Transport Agency's (and other agencies) IT system started under the Alliance government I suppose.

[The Lord Marbury]

Home Affairs Minister Anders Ygeman and Infrastructure Minister Anna Johansson have left the government, along with Health Minister Gabriel Wikström who's been on sick leave since the beginning of may for depression.

Tomas Eneroth (S), Social Democratic parliamentary group leader becomes the new Minister for Infrastructure
Justice- and Migration Minister Morgan Johansson (S) becomes Minister for Justice and Home Affairs
Social Security Minister Annika Strandhäll (S) who's been acting Health Minister since Wikström went on leave takes over those duties permanently, with her title changed to Minister for Health and Social Affairs.
Helene Fritzon (S) joins the government as the new Minister for Migration.
Anders Ygeman will (likely) be elected as the Social Democrats' new parliamentary group leader.

Peter Hultqvist stays on as Minister for Defence.

[The Lord Marbury]

Home Affairs Minister Anders Ygeman and Infrastructure Minister Anna Johansson have left the government, along with Health Minister Gabriel Wikström who's been on sick leave since the beginning of may for depression.

Tomas Eneroth (S), Social Democratic parliamentary group leader becomes the new Minister for Infrastructure
Justice- and Migration Minister Morgan Johansson (S) becomes Minister for Justice and Home Affairs
Social Security Minister Annika Strandhäll (S) who's been acting Health Minister since Wikström went on leave takes over those duties permanently, with her title changed to Minister for Health and Social Affairs.
Helene Fritzon (S) joins the government as the new Minister for Migration.
Anders Ygeman will (likely) be elected as the Social Democrats' new parliamentary group leader.

Peter Hultqvist stays on as Minister for Defence.

So now the question is whether the Alliance will follow through on its no-confidence vote against the Minister for Defence

Pretty much. Even if Hultqvist still loses a no-confidence vote this was probably still one of the best moves Löfven could've made strategically. He gets rid of Johansson who's the minister responsible for the Transport Agency as well as Ygeman who's responsible for Säpo (though he sort of gets moved sideways by becoming parliamentary group leader) while at the same time he keeps Hultqvist which is the minister which the Alliance have by far the weakest case against. It doesn't hurt either that up until now Hultqvist has been well liked or at least respected by the right for the way he has performed as Defence Minister and that defence writers/journalists along with former Moderate Defence Minister Mikael Odenberg are coming to his defence and are calling him the most effective defence minister in recent years. It's gonna be a lot more difficult for the Alliance to just bring down him, especially as none of the agencies involved in this mess are under purview of him and the Defence Ministry.

Even so my guess is that the Alliance will still follow through with the no-confidence vote, if just because they've already said that they lack confidence in Hultqvist (along with the 2 now previous ministers) and they can't very well change their mind after one day without looking like total buffoons.

[The Lord Marbury]

 Some polls out today which seem to confirm that Löfven made a smart move yesterday and that the Alliance just got too trigger happy by including Hultqvist in the no-confidence vote.

TV4/Sifo poll: Should the Alliance hold a vote of no confidence in Defence Minister Peter Hultqvist?
Yes: 27%
No: 51%
Don't know/unsure: 23%

Aftonbladet/Inizio poll: Stefan Löfven has reshuffled the cabinet and have let Anna Johansson and Anders Ygeman leave the government but kept Peter Hultqvist as Defence Minister. Did he make the right choice or the wrong choice?
Right choice: 55.4%
Wrong choice: 31.5%
Don't know/unsure: 13.1%

[The Lord Marbury]

To nuance the picture somewhat, while a majority of the public doesn't want a Vote of No Confidence against Hultqvist, most people are still very disappointed by the government's handling of the situation:

According to a poll from NOVUS conducted on July 27 found that 60% of voters thought the government had handled the situation badly, while only 30% thought they had handled it in a good way, with 10% unsure.

So this has on the whole probably hurt the government, even if Löfven managed to save some of the fall with his reshuffle.  

Just to clarify, I didn't post the numbers in my previous post to make it look like the government came out unscathed of the situtiation. With the nature of the scandal I thought it was obvious that they have taken quite the hit. Though I hadn't seen the particular polling numbers you posted.

I think some commentator on SR (I think it was either Ramberg or Furtenbach) described it in a good way, with this scandal the Alliance have moved ten steps forward, but with Löfven's move on thursday he managed to push them three steps back.

Though I wonder how the fact that the no confidence vote and security leak will be present in the political discussion for the coming months will influence polling. My best guess is like almost every other big event this term (at least bloc-wise).... not much. Maybe some tiny movement in favour of either bloc but otherwise nothing spectacular happens. If the focus is kept on the scandal itself it'll probably move in the Alliance's favour, if the focus is kept on Peter Hultqvist and his ability to serve as Defence Minister it could move back in the Red-Green's favour. But generally there won't be any big changes.

I also strongly suspect if Hultqvist is forced out in September and Löfven manages to stay in Rosenbad after next year's election, he'll probably return to the cabinet then. I suspect the same for Ygeman. It probably won't be the case for Johansson as she hasn't exactly been a spectacular minister, and she would likely only get brought back if Löfven felt there was some need to placate the Social Democratic district in Gothenburg. But there are other ways to do that.

[The Lord Marbury]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4760606/amp/Sweden-ex-Chancellor-sorry-exposing-party.html

'I blacked out': Sweden's former chancellor apologises after exposing himself and challenging guests at a party to a penis measuring competition – but his ex-Playboy model fiancée defends him

@KTHopkins Anders. I love you. I think you are fantastic. Do not be ashamed. You rocked the party xx #StandwithAnders https://t.co/tGx9TlecDv https://t.co/bVWAzw29EY

This world is getting too goddamn weird, I want to get off.

[The Lord Marbury]

Expressen/Demoskop poll:

Left: 7.4% (-0.6)
Social Democrats: 28.4% (+1.4)
Greens: 4.4% (-0.5)

Liberals: 6.4% (-0.3)
Centre: 12.9% (+1.0)
Moderate: 17.2% (+1.5)
Christian Democrats: 4.0% (+1.4)

Sweden Democrats: 16.6% (-3.5)
Feminist Initiative: 1.6% (-0.2)

Alliance: 40.5% (+3.6)
Red-Greens: 40.2% (+0.3)

Big drop for the Sweden Democrats, and the best result for the Social Democrats in a Demoskop poll since March 2015. The IT-scandal doesn't appear to have an especially negative impact on the government's standing in the polls.

[The Lord Marbury]

Another poll, this time from SVT/Novus which seems to confirm some of the trends seen in the Demoskop poll. Though the SD drop is smaller and the S gain is bigger and there's no significant changes for the Alliance as a whole this time. Still no cause for celebration though, because in spite of  how little I care to admit it we in the left actually do need the Greens to stay in parliament.

Left: 7.6% (-0.8 )
Social Democrats: 29.3% (+2.0)
Greens: 3.9% (-0.6)

Liberals: 5.5% (-0.3)
Centre: 12.8% (+0.3)
Moderate: 15.2% (-0.7)
Christian Democrats: 4.3% (+1.0)

Sweden Democrats: 18.7% (-1.3)
Feminist Initiative: 1.6% (-0.2)

Alliance: 37.8% (+0.3)
Red-Greens: 40.6% (+0.8 )

[The Lord Marbury]

New poll from SvD/Sifo. Not exactly any big changes, though S is back at 30%.

Left: 6.4% (-1.3)
Social Democratic: 30.0% (+0.8 )
Green: 4.1% (+0.1)

Liberal: 6.2% (±0)
Centre: 12.4% (-1.0)
Moderate: 16.2% (+0.3)
Christian Democrats: 3.6% (+0.7)

Sweden Democrats: 18.3% (+0.3)
Others: 3.0% (+0.2)

Alliance: 38.4% (±0)
Red-Greens: 40.5% (-0.4)

Also in the news today, according to Expressen, the government and their Left Party budget partner is going for a Hultqvist-style strategy when it comes to the three tax hikes the Alliance are threatening votes of no confidence in individual cabinet members over. The planned changes in the threshold for national income tax and changes in 3:12 rules will be scrapped but the air travel tax will remain. However the Finance Minister's press secretary refuses to confirm any deal having been reached.

This is beyond ridiculous.

For the simple reason that the Alliance feel the need to show some kind of strength when they're unable unify over the issue of how they should govern when there's a Red-Green plurality in a hung parliament, they do this. Yes of course they don't like the particular policies put forward, but if a majority of the Riksdag can't tolerate a government's fiscal policy you bring it down by presenting an alternative budget or with a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister. But because they can't agree on how to act after such a vote goes through they settle for this weird halfway point, which is taking out individual members of the cabinet. An instrument which in the past has only really been used when a cabinet member has done something extremely irresponsible, not for implementing a budget which the cabinet has collectively approved.

[The Lord Marbury]

http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/katastrofsiffror-for-kinberg-batra-i-ny-dnipsos-matning/

https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/annu-ett-kommunalrad-kraver-batras-avgang

New DN/Ipsos poll and the results aren't great for AKB to say the least. Meanwhile SVT is reporting that a majority of Moderate municipal commissioners in Stockholm County lacks confidence in her ability to lead the party. Something tells me that her press conference today about wanting Sweden to set a target to spend 2% of GDP on defence won't get a lot of coverage, at least not for the reasons she wanted.

Who do you want to see as Prime Minister?

All voters:
Stefan Löfven (Social Democratic): 24%
Someone else: 20%
Don't know: 19%
Annie Lööf (Centre): 17%
Jimmie Åkesson (Sweden Democrat): 14%
Anna Kinberg Batra (Moderate): 6%

Support for the leader in their respective party:
Stefan Löfven (Social Democratic):78%
Annie Lööf (Centre): 76%
Jimmie Åkesson (Sweden Democrat): 70%
Anna Kinberg Batra (Moderate): 30%

Alliance voters:
Annie Lööf (Centre): 44%
Anna Kinberg Batra (Moderate): 17%

[The Lord Marbury]

http://www.di.se/nyheter/ungdomsforbundet-kraver-anna-kinberg-batras-avgang/

MUF is demanding Anna Kinberg Batra's resignation, with their Chair Benjamin Dousa saying that the entire Moderate Youth League doesn't have confidence in Anna Kinberg Batra's leadership.

It's beginning to look like this is it for AKB. If she survives now it'll only be because the party can't find someone who's both willing to take over and happens to be an acceptable leader to the entire party.

[The Lord Marbury]

For the simple reason that the Alliance feel the need to show some kind of strength when they're unable unify over the issue of how they should govern when there's a Red-Green plurality in a hung parliament, they do this. Yes of course they don't like the particular policies put forward, but if a majority of the Riksdag can't tolerate a government's fiscal policy you bring it down by presenting an alternative budget or with a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister. But because they can't agree on how to act after such a vote goes through they settle for this weird halfway point, which is taking out individual members of the cabinet. An instrument which in the past has only really been used when a cabinet member has done something extremely irresponsible, not for implementing a budget which the cabinet has collectively approved.

I agree, that this constant drama with Alliance taking down individual ministers etc is a weird charade to try to cover for the fact that they are keeping the centre-left government in power. But with their big disagreements internally, it is perhaps not a bad strategy per se to try to wear down the government while not having to face the dilemma of how to take over power. Hopefully a new Moderate leader (who could that be?) can say clearly that they need to cooperate with the Sweden Democrats, whether in a Danish or Norwegian model. AKB has, if nothing else, at least been a useful figure in starting this process. A new leader can then take the step fully. If the Centre Party and/or Liberals reject this, then the Moderates must let go of the whole Alliance project and try to clearly align two sides in Sweden according to the cultural differences, which is likely to be a succesful strategy.

Well it's a bad strategy for anyone who's thinking long term. It the Alliance sets a precedence that's it's fine for a parliamentary majority to bring down individual cabinet members because of a budget that the government has approved collectively, you can bet that the Social Democrats won't shirk from using the same tool against a centre-right government should the situation ever arise. Thus continuing the escalation in conflict and worsening of cross-party relations.

I cannot in any way see the Moderates putting such an ultimatum against the two centrist parties, they've already seen what happened to their poll numbers when they opened up for working with SD in January, openly confronting C and L over SD cooperation would be tantamount to giving up on those Reinfeldt liberals in Stockholm who've already moved over to C without any guarantee of winning back a significant number of voters from SD. I can't see any leader doing that. Maybe if Hanif Bali somehow got the leadership, but right now the only realistic way I see that happening is if you only allow his Twitter followers to vote.

The problem here is that the same municipal politicians who wanted AKB to move closer to SD are now blaming her for the party's bad poll numbers, failing to take into account that the big drop in Stockholm County in particular kicked off with AKB's opening to SD. Admittedly the party had stagnated and been in a slow decline for the past few months prior, but SD announcement opened the floodgates.

In terms of successor, I don't see a lot of impressive figures on the horizon. But I guess those you've got are...

Ulf Kristersson, 53 (Spokesperson on Economic Policy)
Fredrik Reinfeldt old nemesis in the youth league who saw himself and his neo-liberal/libertarian wing being defeated for the chairmanship of the Moderate Youth League in 1993 by Reinfeldt and his conservatives. Is better in the debates than Batra, but that's not saying much, and he didn't want the job in 2015 so the question is if that has changed now. As Economic Policy Spokesperson he's also strongly associated with the AKB leadership, so the question is if he's the most attractive option if you want to give the impression of a fresh start. He also has an old scandal from 2008 when he was Stockholm's Municipal Commissioner for Social Affairs where he rented an apartment from a charity which was reserved for severely ill or homeless individuals.

Elisabeth Svantesson, 49 (Spokesperson on Employment Policy)
Seen by party members as a good speaker who comes off straightforward in interviews, and was one of the people who was out early signaling a shift in the party's migration and integration policies. On the negative side she's known for presenting zero new propostions before parliament during her time as Employment Minister, something which her opponent both now and then, Ylva Johansson, never fails to bring up. She also has a background some controversial conservative christian organisations, such as Livets Ord (Swedish branch of Word of Faith) and the anti-abortion group Yes to Life, with there being some clips from debate shows from the late 80s/early 90s where she argued against abortion and homosexuality. She also joined the party as an adult, which means that she doesn't have a network of old friends and potential supporters from the youth league.

Johan Forssell, 37 (Spokesperson on Social Security Policy)
Former Chair of the Moderate Youth League and Chief of Staff in the Prime Minister's Office who's been an MP since 2010. On M's conservative side and one of the proponents of a stricter immigration policy. Not that well known and may be seen as too young and unproven which could rule him out.

Wild cards (don't really see any of them getting):

Mikael Odenberg, 63 (fmr. Minister for Defence)
The former Defence Minister has made himself known as a critic of Kinberg Batra, both when it comes to the now-dead December Agreement and her opening towards SD. Is liked by a lot of people for his principled resignation from the Reinfeldt Cabinet over defence cuts, but probably isn't enough to get the leadership. Doesn't do himself any favours with his support for Peter Hultqvist and opening for coalition between the Moderates and Social Democrats, and he has also said he doesn't think the party wants someone his age.

Carl Bildt, 68 (fmr. Prime Minister, fmr. Minister for Foreign Affairs)
Probably the most experienced politician the party has along with Reinfeldt, having been Prime Minister 91-94 and Foreign Minister 06-14. Very skilled in debates and interviews. But while he is well liked for his performance on the foreign policy arena, his track record of domestic achievements are marred in the economic crisis of the 1990s. His controversial involvements with companies like Gazprom and Lundin Oil are there in the background too. Probably doesn't feel like coming back to the mud-slining of Swedish domestic politics after spending 20 years trying to be a statesman.

Anders Borg, 49 (fmr. Minister for Finance)
Popular former Finance Minister who would've easily gotten the job in 2015 if he wanted it, and probably could've gotten it this spring if the coup against AKB had succeeded then. But recent scandals involving sexist slurs and indecent exposure have definitely ruled him out of any leadership role in the Moderates for the foreseeable future.

[The Lord Marbury]

Anna Kinberg Batra has announced that she will step down as leader of the Moderates, whilst at the same time being quite harsh towards her critics, accusing them of engaging in self-injury over the past few days.

[The Lord Marbury]

Maybe there's some small superficial similarities but I don't think it goes any further than that.

My guess is that the job is Ulf Kristersson's if he wants it, though Elisabeth Svantesson has apparently grown in popularity among rank and file Moderates out in the country in the past years. Forssell suffers from the problem that he is still quite obscure and his lack of experience, especially considering he's not even been a member of the party board, could be a downside when the party is electing a new leader so close to an election.