The Big Bad Swedish Politics & News Thread

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

Small but welcome victory against the gig economy's abuse of workers: the Swedish Transportation Workers' Union signed a collective agreement with Foodora after over a year of negotiations.

The new agreement include increased salaries and compensation for bids during certain times, annual salary increases, compensation for maintenance of bicycles and work clothes as well as pensions and insurance that are in line with Transport's other collective agreements. Routines and guidelines regarding how the parties should work for the bicycle and moped bidders' best working environment must also be updated.

The collective agreement covers the company's operations, including bicycle and moped bids. The Transport Workers' Union fought for a long time for this to also apply to Foodora's car drivers, which they eventually succeeded in doing.

Unfortunately, some 30% of Foodora's bids come from drivers who work for Hungry Delivery, and thus are not included in this agreement. But still, over 2,000 workers in Sweden will now be covered by this agreement.

Foodora is a German company that has been accused to stealing workers' wages and abusing classification of workers as independent contractors, as well as acting punitively against workers who speak out against the company. Every step taken to reign in these gig companies is a step towards progress.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

The Liberals's Party Board have announced that their goal in 2022 is to return a centre-right government. If they manage to stay in government, they almost certainly would join an M+KD government, even if it had external support from SD.

If they manage to survive, even narrowly, that would greatly boost the chances of a conservative government. If they narrowly miss the threshold, however, they could take hundreds of thousands of votes and a dozen seats with them, and risk such a government (not unlike FI narrowly missing in 2014 and taking 195,000 votes and 15 seats that could have boosted the centre-left coalition).

The declaration must be confirmed by the party council vote as well.

[Estrella]

The Liberals's Party Board have announced that their goal in 2022 is to return a centre-right government. If they manage to stay in government, they almost certainly would join an M+KD government, even if it had external support from SD.

If they manage to survive, even narrowly, that would greatly boost the chances of a conservative government. If they narrowly miss the threshold, however, they could take hundreds of thousands of votes and a dozen seats with them, and risk such a government (not unlike FI narrowly missing in 2014 and taking 195,000 votes and 15 seats that could have boosted the centre-left coalition).

The declaration must be confirmed by the party council vote as well.

How did Liberals even get to where they are now? I know this isn't the first time they're trying to shift to the right (there was some anti-immigration stuff in the early 2000s), but they've always been essentially a classical liberal party, right?. Surely it would have made more sense for Centre to do this and for Liberals to be led by someone like Annie Lööf* and transform into sort-of libertarians?

* There's, um, this: youtube.com/watch?v=4F1QdZoqPsI

[The Lord Marbury]

The Liberals's Party Board have announced that their goal in 2022 is to return a centre-right government. If they manage to stay in government, they almost certainly would join an M+KD government, even if it had external support from SD.

If they manage to survive, even narrowly, that would greatly boost the chances of a conservative government. If they narrowly miss the threshold, however, they could take hundreds of thousands of votes and a dozen seats with them, and risk such a government (not unlike FI narrowly missing in 2014 and taking 195,000 votes and 15 seats that could have boosted the centre-left coalition).

The declaration must be confirmed by the party council vote as well.

How did Liberals even get to where they are now? I know this isn't the first time they're trying to shift to the right (there was some anti-immigration stuff in the early 2000s), but they've always been essentially a classical liberal party, right?. Surely it would have made more sense for Centre to do this and for Liberals to be led by someone like Annie Lööf* and transform into sort-of libertarians?

* There's, um, this: youtube.com/watch?v=4F1QdZoqPsI

Eh, the term classical liberal isn't really the most fitting description of the Liberals now or historically. They've mostly been a social liberal party which had strong ties to the temperance movement for most of the 20th century (and were therefore strong defenders of the state monopoly on alcohol sales) and during the 60s and 70s they were definitely the party on the centre-right that was the closest to the left. During the 80s and 90s the most libertarian-ish politicians you could find were usually members of the Moderates (the youth league in particular) and later that became the case in the Centre Party. That was generally a result of then-leader Maud Olofsson actively seeking to move the Centre Party rightwards in order to be seen as a more reliable part of the centre-right after the party's budget deals with the Social Democrats from 95-97. This could be said to be the origin of the libertarian streak you find in the Centre Party today.

The dividing line within the Liberals ever since the 90s hasn't really been between classical liberals and conservative liberals, but between social liberals and conservative liberals. Where the social liberal wing represents the traditional Liberal position of emphasising support for various social programs, gender equality and the social safety net, and the conservative liberals were inspired by the success of Venstre in Denmark and placed emphasis on issues concerning law and order, integration and immigration.

The conservative liberal lean that the party has now can be explained by how key members of the leadership (including Sabuni herself) were closely involved with the previous conservative liberal turn in the early 2000s which saw a spectacular success in the 2002 election. They seem to be under the impression that returning to what worked for them then will be what's going to revive their fortunes once more. Which seems kind of naive since they didn't have three parties to their right competing about which one can be the most anti-immigrant in 2002, so their positioning actually made them stand out from the rest back then, unlike today.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

New poll from Demoskop shows Moderates narrowly take the lead as the largest party:



Should be noted that Aftonbladet is a social democratic newspaper that is openly affiliated with the SAP and LO (Swedish Trade Confederation), and that polls by Demoskop are unusually pessimistic about the SAP and Greens and unusually bullish on the Moderates. (But that doesn't mean it's necessarily wrong, of course)

It is interesting that they include the Liberals in that little pie chart as part of the January Agreement while excluding the Left Party from that share. Adding the Left Party would give the Red-Greens+Centre 49.2%, while subtracting the Liberals would give the Red-Greens+Centre 46,5%, and further subtracting the Greens would leave just 43,4%.

Since late-March 2020, only three polls have shown a party other than the SAP in the lead, but given that all pollsters find a renewed Moderate surge, Liberal death spiral, and Greens perilously on the edge, a dark-blue conservative government is still my expectation for next year. But we've still got exactly 18 months to go until September 2022.

I am curious, however, if Stefan Löfvén will step down at the end of this year or perhaps in 2022 to let someone else Magdalena Andersson take the reins as PM and fight next year's election campaign on their own. He seems exhausted, both personally and politically, and is associated with the past 7 years as part of a shaky minority government that relies heavily on liberal parties and struggles to gain consistent public support.

[crals]

The Liberals's Party Board have announced that their goal in 2022 is to return a centre-right government. If they manage to stay in government, they almost certainly would join an M+KD government, even if it had external support from SD.

If they manage to survive, even narrowly, that would greatly boost the chances of a conservative government. If they narrowly miss the threshold, however, they could take hundreds of thousands of votes and a dozen seats with them, and risk such a government (not unlike FI narrowly missing in 2014 and taking 195,000 votes and 15 seats that could have boosted the centre-left coalition).

The declaration must be confirmed by the party council vote as well.

How did Liberals even get to where they are now? I know this isn't the first time they're trying to shift to the right (there was some anti-immigration stuff in the early 2000s), but they've always been essentially a classical liberal party, right?. Surely it would have made more sense for Centre to do this and for Liberals to be led by someone like Annie Lööf* and transform into sort-of libertarians?

* There's, um, this: youtube.com/watch?v=4F1QdZoqPsI

Eh, the term classical liberal isn't really the most fitting description of the Liberals now or historically. They've mostly been a social liberal party which had strong ties to the temperance movement for most of the 20th century (and were therefore strong defenders of the state monopoly on alcohol sales) and during the 60s and 70s they were definitely the party on the centre-right that was the closest to the left. During the 80s and 90s the most libertarian-ish politicians you could find were usually members of the Moderates (the youth league in particular) and later that became the case in the Centre Party. That was generally a result of then-leader Maud Olofsson actively seeking to move the Centre Party rightwards in order to be seen as a more reliable part of the centre-right after the party's budget deals with the Social Democrats from 95-97. This could be said to be the origin of the libertarian streak you find in the Centre Party today.

The dividing line within the Liberals ever since the 90s hasn't really been between classical liberals and conservative liberals, but between social liberals and conservative liberals. Where the social liberal wing represents the traditional Liberal position of emphasising support for various social programs, gender equality and the social safety net, and the conservative liberals were inspired by the success of Venstre in Denmark and placed emphasis on issues concerning law and order, integration and immigration.

The conservative liberal lean that the party has now can be explained by how key members of the leadership (including Sabuni herself) were closely involved with the previous conservative liberal turn in the early 2000s which saw a spectacular success in the 2002 election. They seem to be under the impression that returning to what worked for them then will be what's going to revive their fortunes once more. Which seems kind of naive since they didn't have three parties to their right competing about which one can be the most anti-immigrant in 2002, so their positioning actually made them stand out from the rest back then, unlike today.

Then what's the difference between conservative liberals and, well, conservatives?

[njwes]

In a general context (not talking specifically about Sweden here) conservatives would probably put a greater weight on Tradition with a capital T, be less devoted to the free market, and perhaps more communitarian in outlook, than liberal-conservatives.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

In an interview today, Annie Lööf said that the Centre Party would be prepared to enter into government with the Social Democrats and Greens after the 2022 election.

She said that the door to joining a M+KD(+L?) government is closed so long as they are prepared to negotiate a budget with SD. Of course, she also reiterated that she opposes giving the Left Party influence on the budget as well.

..............

So, this just increases the likelihood of a conservative bloc on one hand vs. a Red-Green block awkwardly in a de facto alliance with the Centre Party on the other.

But hard to see how an SAP + Centre relationship doesn't end in disaster for at least one of the parties. Lööf is still a Thatcherite which would be suicide for the SAP, while the Centre cannot just shift left suddenly. It's an irreconcilable arrangement.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

The Liberals have voted to endorse opening talks with SD at their party congress. 59 in favor, 31 opposed, 1 abstention.

[It's Perro Sanxe wot won it]

But hard to see how an SAP + Centre relationship doesn't end in disaster for at least one of the parties. Lööf is still a Thatcherite which would be suicide for the SAP, while the Centre cannot just shift left suddenly. It's an irreconcilable arrangement.

Exactly how right-wing is C? How comparable is its ideology to parties like the Norwegian and Finnish Centre? And, long-term, what are the chances of it shifting to the centre-left and becoming more like, for example, Radikale Venstre?

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

But hard to see how an SAP + Centre relationship doesn't end in disaster for at least one of the parties. Lööf is still a Thatcherite which would be suicide for the SAP, while the Centre cannot just shift left suddenly. It's an irreconcilable arrangement.

Exactly how right-wing is C? How comparable is its ideology to parties like the Norwegian and Finnish Centre? And, long-term, what are the chances of it shifting to the centre-left and becoming more like, for example, Radikale Venstre?

Swedish Centre is extremely neoliberal right now under Lööf, at least at the national level. Local chapters are still a mix of left, right, and center liberalism depending on the region in question, but at the national level it is very right-wing in economics (in some cases, moreso than the Moderates) while being more liberal in social/cultural issues.

Finnish Centre under Sipilä was similar, but since the 2019 election debacle and Sipilä"s government being unpopular and seen as a failure, has moved more in line with Norwegian Centre of claiming the "progressive center", a mix of left- and center-liberalism while working with the centre-left bloc.

Going to a more left-liberal stance would require getting rid of Lööf and risks sending the party back to its pre-Lööf struggles of being permanently in that 4-6% range. Lööf's enviro-feminist libertarianism is what has attracted many voters from the Moderates and Liberals, especially young women in urban areas,  and revived the party. I don't see it happening unless the party starts sinking in the polls again, which I also don't see happening because Centre is now fulfilling demand for such a party.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

Then what's the difference between conservative liberals and, well, conservatives?

It can be hard to wrap your brain around due to the superficial similarities but there is a meaningful difference. Liberalism and Conservatism are very broad terms that encompass a lot of different shades and flavors depending on time, place, and party. Over the past 40 years, it has gotten much more difficult to differentiate between conservative liberalism and liberal conservatism, because in practice they often align.

I would say that, generally speaking, conservative liberalism still puts great emphasis on internal economic freedom, while embracing conservative stances on social/cultural issues such as crime, law & order, immigration, and integration. I think the best example of this would be Norway's Progress Party, which supports radically neoliberal economics on things such as taxes and the welfare state, while still embracing anti-EU nationalism and being strongly anti-refugee and anti-Islam.

Meanwhile, conservatism values stability to a much greater extent, and will embrace anti-liberal policies to achieve it when needed. For example, see how the Moderates in Sweden have moved to the center regarding the welfare state since 2006, embracing certain pillars of it (e.g. state-funded healthcare) while allowing more private competition. A national state-funded healthcare system can be seen as conservative if it avoids a more statist approach from a left-wing party or undercuts the support of left-wing parties, and thus preferable by conservative parties as a way of preserving the existing order. Conservative parties could also embrace things such as higher taxes to fund defense or infrastructure projects, or restricting free trade to protect domestic interests (think back to the way conservatives were often aligned with the industrial and landed elites and would embrace tariffs to protect those industries and the elites' profits). They could also embrace carbon taxes and environmental regulations to combat climate change, while conservative liberal parties will still prefer market-based solutions (or in the case of the Progress Party, reject climate change science entirely). On immigration, conservatives could be either restrictive (if more national conservative) or more permissive (if liberal conservative). More authoritarian conservatives could start to erode political rights and freedoms that would put them in conflict with conservative liberals. The Progress Party of Norway opposed legalizing same-sex marriage in 2008, while both the Swedish Liberals and Moderates all voted in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage in 2009.

It's obviously very hard to pin down the differences between conservative liberalism and conservatism in a general sense, because it depends so heavily on the specific country, parties, issues, and time period. But I hope this was somewhat helpful?  

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

But hard to see how an SAP + Centre relationship doesn't end in disaster for at least one of the parties. Lööf is still a Thatcherite which would be suicide for the SAP, while the Centre cannot just shift left suddenly. It's an irreconcilable arrangement.

Exactly how right-wing is C? How comparable is its ideology to parties like the Norwegian and Finnish Centre? And, long-term, what are the chances of it shifting to the centre-left and becoming more like, for example, Radikale Venstre?

Swedish Centre is extremely neoliberal right now under Lööf, at least at the national level. Local chapters are still a mix of left, right, and center liberalism depending on the region in question, but at the national level it is very right-wing in economics (in some cases, moreso than the Moderates) while being more liberal in social/cultural issues.

Finnish Centre under Sipilä was similar, but since the 2019 election debacle and Sipilä"s government being unpopular and seen as a failure, has moved more in line with Norwegian Centre of claiming the "progressive center", a mix of left- and center-liberalism while working with the centre-left bloc.

Going to a more left-liberal stance would require getting rid of Lööf and risks sending the party back to its pre-Lööf struggles of being permanently in that 4-6% range. Lööf's enviro-feminist libertarianism is what has attracted many voters from the Moderates and Liberals, especially young women in urban areas,  and revived the party. I don't see it happening unless the party starts sinking in the polls again, which I also don't see happening because Centre is now fulfilling demand for such a party.

Of course, despite having moved a bit in different directions, the Finnish, Norwegian and Swedish Centre Parties are all three still united in the common goal to exterminate wolfs.

Anyway, my experience from the inside is that the broader membership of the Swedish Centre Party is a lot less economically right-wing than our reputation. Especially those members who've joined from 2014 and onward are a lot less libertarian and much more centrist, which I also think is the reason that so few internally have been critical about the idea of possibly joining a red-green government outright.

   

[The Lord Marbury]

I wonder how much C will feel pressured to move somewhat leftward economically by more and more of their voters identifying as left leaning. Or at least pressured to tone down the more overt criticism of the labour movement (see: F*** Facket Forever, most of the things Martin Ådahl says). IIRC, SVT's exit poll from both the Riksdag and European parliament election as well as later polls by SCB showed an increasing number of C voters identifying as leftwing. Of course nowhere near the number of voters who identified as rightwing or centrist, but one can imagine that that number will only grow the longer they're working with S and the more intertwined the idea of a centre-right government becomes with a government dependent on SD. Then again as the Greens have shown, too much trust shouldn't be placed in young-ish middle class women voters living in larger cities. One election could pass and they'll have jumped ship to a different party.

Also, I maintain that C should never enter into a coalition with S until Maud Olofsson has passed away. Only because her body would turn over in her grave so fast at the notion of C sharing Rosenbad with Göran Persson's party that when hooked up to a generator it could be used as a source of renewable energy that would cover 50% of Sweden's electricity demand. As a bonus one could also wait until former Mayor of Umeå Lennart Holmlund passes as his body would cover the remaining 50 percent due to the anger caused by S governing with C.

[The Lord Marbury]

https://www.svd.se/missnoje-pyr-under-loof-jag-kanner-mig-lurad
Funny coincidence with all the talk about the Centre Party in this thread. SvD just published a long piece about the internal discussions within the party. As it is behind a paywall, here's a few choice quotes translated into english:

Spoiler alert! Click Show to show the content.

Show

At the edge of Vindeln where they transported pine logs downstream in the past her conference centre is located. It is what it is during the pandemic. Pretty empty.

”You know”, she says after a while, ”I was probably the most angered by the timing. Us small business owners are fighting with a government which doesn’t care about us. Life’s works are being crushed. Divorces. Suicides. And right when it’s at its worst she goes out and says that she’ll join a government with a party that is the entire problem. It is such a mockery of everyone who goes to bed at night feeling that they don’t know how to provide for their family.”

She, that’s Annie Lööf.

”When I read that article in Expressen I went into a state of chock for a few days.”

Helena Lundgren, she’s the one who’s pissed off.

”No, I didn’t love the January Agreement, but I’ve defended it. In front of business owners, hunters and land owners. I’ve said what she said: That we wouldbe a thorn in the side of Löfven and that we would bring down the government if it didn’t do what we wanted it to. And then I get to hear in a newspaper that we’ll join a government with the Social Democrats! I feel tricked.”

---------

Her dad was a municipal commissioner in Vindeln before she became one.

”I don’t belong to this new voter base which seems to have grabbed the attention of the entire party leadership. I’m a traditional Centre Party member, I’ve grown up in this party.”

And her grandfather before him.

”Where I live and work, the life I and many along with me want to lead, for us and our lifestyle the Greens are a bigger threat than the Sweden Democrats. I cheered when Maud brought us home to the rightwing.”

Maud Olofsson, the goddess of the Norrland prairie. What does she think when the Centre Party is left alone if the rest of the old Alliance goes somewhere else?

Västerbotten doesn’t surprise.

Here a young Annie Johansson met her harshest resistance in the battle for the leadership in 2011. And now Helena Lundgren and the chapter in Vindeln have nominated the MP Helena Lindahl to fill the vacancy on the party board and executive committee that Fredrick Federley left behind. The Helena Lindahl who was the sole member of the parliamentary group to vote against the January Agreement.

”I got to say what I wanted to say by voting no. I had promised the voters something different. You’ll have to evaluate the agreement afterwards, what came out of it in the end.”

She thinks for a long while over the phone

”I am from Robertsfors -  when I got nominated for the parliamentary list it was Rolf, Maud’s husband, who led the election committee. Here the Social Democrats have been dominant in so many municipalities for so many years that, yes, it’s difficult to see anything positive with Social Democrats. And many fear the Greens.”

------

Several people say that it’s strategically clever to take the centre ground in Swedish politics.
”It is an amazing position. If everyone are forced to choose between S and M there’s actually an alternative: C. We who aren’t a part of any bloc”, an MP says.

It is a true picture of the mood in the party.

The description of everyone being happy and content and that disagreements about strategic choices doesn’t really exist.

Only, with Centre Party members it’s like this: A completely different description can also be true, at the same time. In parallel with the support for the leadership. Take the reactions to the interview in Expressen. Because something really happened.

MPs called the parliamentary group leader. Local politicians texted the party secretary. The districts were contacted by their members. The side organisations as well. There were fights in Facebook threads.

That kind of information can come out if you promise not to reveal the leaker’s identity.

That picture is also true.

--------

Around the country Centre Party members have for the past weeks discussed government formation with their leader at district conferences, while Liberals have discussed it in the papers and at party councils broadcast on live TV.

In Västerbotten, in Maud-land, Lars Weinehall was the chair.

”I have the same views that I’ve always had”, he says, ”but our company have moved to the right”

He is growing older, but from 2001 to 2011 he was an important voice on the executive committee.

”The Christian Democrats is a completely different party today. The Moderates have at least in words transformed into something different from what it was when Maud lead our party. I mourn that. And people trust Annie when she explains herself.”

--------

There are differences in what an exit can look like. For Staffan Danielsson (former MP) ATL was important. Annonsblad till Tidskrift för Lantmän.

The paper farmers have read since 1884.

”My view was and is that the Centre Party should support an Alliance government, even if some support from the Sweden Democrats is required”, he wrote in ATL last Friday.

And with those words he ended his membership.
[...]
He’s sitting at home at the farm in Östergötland and explains over the phone.

”There’s a culture in the party where the leadership is charismatic and knows best and you should think like they do. Now they’ve made an 180 degree turn from wanting a Kristersson government to saying that they can accept a Löfven government. Everyone is on board with that. They do whatever Annie says.”
[...]
”It’s not the same party that I joined in 1970. We’ve been emptied of some rural voters and had a big addition of good-hearted women and young people in the big cities”

He knows that he’s pretty lonely in his view of the Sweden Democrats. Most members agree with the party leader that Jimmie Åkesson’s ideas are so repugnant that nothing can be more important than opposing him.
[...]
Municipal politicians.
 
They can list instances of rudeness they’ve experienced from Moderates - people they until recently thought they were familiar with. There is a sadness over the destroyed relationship with Ulf Kristersson.

These two things strengthen Annie Lööf internally.

But even among those who think that the leadership’s choices are the right ones, there’s a discontent over the process. How this has happened.

”There’s no debate, not about policy or government formation. It’s strange. Especially if you have knowledge of other parties’ internal processes and know how many debates they’re having.”, a municipal politician says.

--------

This spring it’s not only time for the confidence council to meet, it’s time to begin nominations. The competition for seats in the Riksdag can cause rumblings in any party. But in the party that Annie Lööf leads people mostly seem to be on the way out.

Kristina Yngwe, chair of the Committee on Environment and Agriculture. Magnus Ek who have been the leader of the youth league. Fredrik Christensson, spokesperson on education policy. Johanna Jönsson who made a name for herself as spokesperson on migration policy.

All want to leave the Riksdag. They’re young. They’re not leaving under grand protests, first and foremost it seems to be for personal reasons, but they’re leaving.

”They were the ones you saw leading the party forward”, an experienced Centre Party representative says.

It is said than an additional three MPs, at least, won’t run for another term. If that’s true it’s a big turnaround in a parliamentary group with 31 members. Additionally, in the party leadership there’s a vacancy on both deputy leader positions: Fredrick Federley and Anders W Jonsson are out.
One could point out that the majority of the people who are leaving are individuals who have supported the January Agreement, encouraged the path the party leader has chosen.

That’s probably not the important bit. The important bit is the there’s a shift happening within the quiet party.

Annie Lööf’s power base will be replaced with a new one.

---------

”There are three big parties and two of them need to work together in some way. We think that should be the Social Democrats and the Moderates”, a person close to the party leader says.

Annie Lööf did not manage to find much understanding for that idea during the months long government formation process. Instead the Swedes lost trust in her when she didn’t want to pick sides. The idea that Swedish politics shouldn’t be divided in two blocs haven’t become easier to sell since Ulf Kristersson opened the door to the Sweden Democrats and Nyamko Sabuni decided to bolt.
 
In that situation there’s not a lot of choice left for the Centre Party representative who’ve said that it wants to be part of a government. And then the negotiating position weakens. We won’t get as many concessions from Stefan Löfven a second time, several in the party are saying.

Something also seems to have happened in the younger generations. The old Centre Party is a deeply pragmatic party. The strategy document Future Agenda 2030 is a pamphlet for pragmatism, with proud writings about how they’re governing in a large number of municipalities and regions, in several different constellations.

They call it taking responsibility.

But how pragmatic can you be if you’re building your party on principles around who you can’t work with? What happens with the pragmatic Centre soul when Annie Lööf’s fight for values comes first?

When you call around in the party several people - those who are younger and from cities - say that it’s better to go into opposition than to be a part of costly governing coalitions.

Yes, on the surface there’s a state of complete calm in the party. Individual municipal politicians complain, nothing more. But beneath the surface something different is happening, at the same time.

A changing party can change in unexpected ways.

Many of those who joined since Maud Olofsson’s time, the children of the Alliance, carry a sense of loathing - yes, that’s the right word - towards the Social Democrats.

Those who join the party now or when it’s governing with Stefan Löfven will hardly feel the same.

The changing position builds in a conflict within the membership ranks.

One person which could be referred to as member of the ’Stureplan Centre’ expresses it like this:
”The party leadership is doing everything right but it feels so wrong. The members have changed, not least in Stockholm.”

There are more than Helena Lundgren in the forest up in Västerbotten and Staffan Danielsson on the farm in Östergötland who no longer recognise their party.

”It hurts every time I say it”, a big city Centre Party member says, ”but in a situation where I’m forced to choose I’ll say yes to a Social Democratic government. But it sucks.”

Notes:
1) There is no possible way that I could've been surprised by the fact that some of the leading critics of the January Agreement are from Västerbotten. This totally checks out with the degree of disdain I felt from C members I met when I lived in Umeå and was still a member of S. Also, as someone who grew up in Norrland surrounded by plenty of left-leaning people who despised Maud Olofsson, I found it hilarious to see her described as a "goddess of the Norrland prairies". Especially considering that you can't really find much of a prairie anywhere in Norrland.

I wonder how a prolonged S-C partnership on the national level will impact the party in the North. Especially in those places like Vindeln and Robertsfors where C have been the main opposition party to S and pretty much see them as sworn enemies.

Also, "the Greens are a bigger threat than the Sweden Democrats". Strong words, but unsurprising to read. I wouldn't even be surprised to hear a Social Democrat from somewhere in the rural north saying that the Greens and Sweden Democrats are equally distasteful.

2) Those people who are still wondering why C and L haven't just merged to form a single liberal party need only read the sections about how much (or little) transparency there's been in regards to internal debates to understand how different the party cultures are.

3) Is there's actually any C member left who is saddened by Staffan Danielsson leaving the party?

4) Maybe I should feel pity for those C members who are genuinely despairing in this new political landscape where they feel like their only option is supporting an S-led government. But I can't help but to think back to those CUF (and LUF) members I met in Umeå around the time of the 2014 election. Those who were utterly convinced that if any party would break the cordon sanitaire around SD it would be S. Obviously because S completely lacked principles and would do anything for power, unlike the brave and principled defenders of democracy that you could find in the four Alliance parties. I just can't help but to feel a little bit of schadenfreude.

[Lord Halifax]

I wonder how a prolonged S-C partnership on the national level will impact the party in the North. Especially in those places like Vindeln and Robertsfors where C have been the main opposition party to S and pretty much see them as sworn enemies.

Could M pick up some C defectors in the North? I know there are significant cultural differences, but they still seem like the most obvious alternative.

[The Lord Marbury]

I wonder how a prolonged S-C partnership on the national level will impact the party in the North. Especially in those places like Vindeln and Robertsfors where C have been the main opposition party to S and pretty much see them as sworn enemies.

Could M pick up some C defectors in the North? I know there are significant cultural differences, but they still seem like the most obvious alternative.

Yeah I guess they'd be the main benefactors of any future defections there. Not exactly a perfect fit, but considering that L barely exists north of Dalälven (outside of some of the larger cities and towns), M is probably the best alternative.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

Notes:
1) There is no possible way that I could've been surprised by the fact that some of the leading critics of the January Agreement are from Västerbotten. This totally checks out with the degree of disdain I felt from C members I met when I lived in Umeå and was still a member of S. Also, as someone who grew up in Norrland surrounded by plenty of left-leaning people who despised Maud Olofsson, I found it hilarious to see her described as a "goddess of the Norrland prairies". Especially considering that you can't really find much of a prairie anywhere in Norrland.

I wonder how a prolonged S-C partnership on the national level will impact the party in the North. Especially in those places like Vindeln and Robertsfors where C have been the main opposition party to S and pretty much see them as sworn enemies.

[SNIP]

4) Maybe I should feel pity for those C members who are genuinely despairing in this new political landscape where they feel like their only option is supporting an S-led government. But I can't help but to think back to those CUF (and LUF) members I met in Umeå around the time of the 2014 election. Those who were utterly convinced that if any party would break the cordon sanitaire around SD it would be S. Obviously because S completely lacked principles and would do anything for power, unlike the brave and principled defenders of democracy that you could find in the four Alliance parties. I just can't help but to feel a little bit of schadenfreude.

Actually, why is this the case? Why is Västerbotten's Centre Party so hostile to the SAP? In most other northern regions, don't they usually work together? I know Västerbotten has a peculiar history but I don't understand the region too well.

[The Lord Marbury]

Notes:
1) There is no possible way that I could've been surprised by the fact that some of the leading critics of the January Agreement are from Västerbotten. This totally checks out with the degree of disdain I felt from C members I met when I lived in Umeå and was still a member of S. Also, as someone who grew up in Norrland surrounded by plenty of left-leaning people who despised Maud Olofsson, I found it hilarious to see her described as a "goddess of the Norrland prairies". Especially considering that you can't really find much of a prairie anywhere in Norrland.

I wonder how a prolonged S-C partnership on the national level will impact the party in the North. Especially in those places like Vindeln and Robertsfors where C have been the main opposition party to S and pretty much see them as sworn enemies.

[SNIP]

4) Maybe I should feel pity for those C members who are genuinely despairing in this new political landscape where they feel like their only option is supporting an S-led government. But I can't help but to think back to those CUF (and LUF) members I met in Umeå around the time of the 2014 election. Those who were utterly convinced that if any party would break the cordon sanitaire around SD it would be S. Obviously because S completely lacked principles and would do anything for power, unlike the brave and principled defenders of democracy that you could find in the four Alliance parties. I just can't help but to feel a little bit of schadenfreude.

Actually, why is this the case? Why is Västerbotten's Centre Party so hostile to the SAP? In most other northern regions, don't they usually work together? I know Västerbotten has a peculiar history but I don't understand the region too well.

Eh, not really. There's a few exceptions here and there like Sundsvall where S, C and V have formed the majority together since 2014, but generally S and C in all of the northern regions have been deeply opposed to one another for decades. There are plenty of municipalities in the north where it's not the Moderates who are the main opposition party to the Social Democrats, but the Centre Party. Additionally, there are plenty of municipalities where the Social Democrats have been deeply entrenched in power for nearly a century so pretty much ever single other party on the council is opposed to them. This is how you end up with situations like in Överkalix during the 2014-2018 term, where V, C, M and MP banded together to form a coalition that kicked the Social Democrats out of office.

S and C working together in a few municipalities and regions has become somewhat more common following the emergence of the Sweden Democrats, but it's still seen as unusual.

[Estrella]

Notes:
1) There is no possible way that I could've been surprised by the fact that some of the leading critics of the January Agreement are from Västerbotten. This totally checks out with the degree of disdain I felt from C members I met when I lived in Umeå and was still a member of S. Also, as someone who grew up in Norrland surrounded by plenty of left-leaning people who despised Maud Olofsson, I found it hilarious to see her described as a "goddess of the Norrland prairies". Especially considering that you can't really find much of a prairie anywhere in Norrland.

I wonder how a prolonged S-C partnership on the national level will impact the party in the North. Especially in those places like Vindeln and Robertsfors where C have been the main opposition party to S and pretty much see them as sworn enemies.

[SNIP]

4) Maybe I should feel pity for those C members who are genuinely despairing in this new political landscape where they feel like their only option is supporting an S-led government. But I can't help but to think back to those CUF (and LUF) members I met in Umeå around the time of the 2014 election. Those who were utterly convinced that if any party would break the cordon sanitaire around SD it would be S. Obviously because S completely lacked principles and would do anything for power, unlike the brave and principled defenders of democracy that you could find in the four Alliance parties. I just can't help but to feel a little bit of schadenfreude.

Actually, why is this the case? Why is Västerbotten's Centre Party so hostile to the SAP? In most other northern regions, don't they usually work together? I know Västerbotten has a peculiar history but I don't understand the region too well.

Can you tell us more about that?

[Helsinkian]

Looks like the cordon sanitaire against the Sweden Democrats is coming to an end, as the Moderates, Liberals and Christian Democrats have published a joint immigration policy proposal with the Sweden Democrats.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

Uhhhh there might be a snap election in Sweden?

Left is threatening vote of no confidence over housing market reforms. Of course, the Sweden Democrats are hopping onboard with this, so they'd have enough votes to bring forward a motion, and if all the other Alliance parties (other than Centre) join, they'd have enough votes to pass the motion, leading to the government resigning and possibly a snap election

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

Current polling average:

Centre-left+Centre: 51%
Conservative Bloc: 49%

Greens right at 4% threshold, Liberals below at 3%


I would argue that the center right has the hardest time in an upcoming election, because many Moderate voters are no longer willing to strategically vote for the Liberals, who have been bleeding votes to Center and the Moderates.  Meanwhile many Social Democratic voters are still perfectly happy to strategically vote for the Greens and save them

Of course, that's assuming these numbers don't change much, which isn't at all a given

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

I don't think the vote of no confidence will go through for several reasons:

1. The housing proposal only affects 1% of residences
2. This could backfire severely against the Left if they are seen as jeopardizing the current government
3. It could also backfire against the conservative bloc if they are seen as creating drama when there's still a pandemic
4. Regular elections are a year away, voters will be mad if subjected to yet more political drama on top of the past several years

Of course on the other hand the new Left Party leader is an unknown quantity, she has made housing a hill to die on and she could be willing to risk it all.

So we'll see

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

I don't think the vote of no confidence will go through for several reasons:

The Left Party has pushed it to far to back out know.

What I think will happen is, the motion pass but Löfven doesn't call an early election and thus the Speaker is assigned to lead formation talks for a new government and we have a repeat of what happened in 2018.

After a few meetings, the Spealer proposes Ulf Kristersson as the new PM. Social Democrats, Greens, Centre and Left party vote no, thus Kristersson is not confirmed.

A few more meetings with the Speaker, and he proposes Löfven should return as PM. He isn't confirmed either as the Left party still says no.

Kristersson is proposed as PM again, voted down again.

Then the Left party either relents after Löfven and Lööf give them some empty promises and some sort of small symbolic victory, and Löfven returns, or the Speaker concludes that all his attempts to find a new government has failed and new elections are called.

Either way, I'll be eating popcorn all the way.