|
|
Post by Antiochian on Sept 10, 2018 9:45:26 GMT
If we surged to 17.6% do you think we would be jumping up and claiming it as a victory for liberalism against the cosy Brexit consensus? Tbh I think we would  17.6% is dangerous for liberals. I remember Guido Westerwelle on telly singing "achtzehn Prozent!" to the tune of YMCA in 2002, that being their target. Promptly followed by that scourge of liberal election campaigns, an outlandish death (by skydive and of a human, rather than by shotgun and of a Great Dane). Cleggers took all the LibDem MPs skydiving without parachutes. Only when they were halfway to the ground did they realise he had stayed on the plane..  |
|
|
|
Post by Strontium Dog on Sept 10, 2018 10:48:58 GMT
It's quite interesting that the two main blocs each achieved the same sort of vote share that Lab and Con got here (and has consistently shown up in the polls) which we regard as a sign of two-party dominance. Obviously the difference is that in Sweden the rest is made up of the SD whereas we have LD, Greens, Celtic nationalists and UKIP in that space. (Also that in Sweden the main blocs are themselves coalitions opening up the possibility of some sort of coalition short of a Grand Coalition.) Still, in the event that the LDs here manage to surge to 17.6% of the vote while Lab and Con remain as they are, I look forward to that being hailed as a clear victory for liberalism. Not holding my breath though. And then a grand coalition to keep the Lib Dems out? We've had that for the best part of 100 years... |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Sept 10, 2018 10:51:48 GMT
And then a grand coalition to keep the Lib Dems out? We've had that for the best part of 100 years... Yeah that's right, Conservative and Labour are just pretending to disagree with each other to stop the Liberals getting in. Dream on dear. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Sept 10, 2018 10:55:14 GMT
A lot of people were saying those SD expectations were bunk, particularly if you believed non-Yougov polls. Are we now saying that because the commentariat believed the incorrect Yougov polls, the SDs did objectively worse yesterday? We are basically falling into the same trap as the commentariat did before the election, which is elevating perception above actual results. We should look at the SD results objectively: The Soc Dems had their worst result in a century, and the Moderates were close. The SDs got nearly 1 in 5 voters in the most moderate country In the world, and will hold the next govt to ransom, unless it is a GrandCo, in which case they will be the official opposition. (Win-win for them). Anyone spinning the line that populism has been defeated wants their head examining. We should be thankful that they didn't come second, or get over 20%. But just because the plane didn't crash into a nuclear power station doesn't mean the plane crash is good. Both this and The Bishop's post to which it is a response are perfectly fair. The big mainstream parties are in trouble all over the place (you could include Labour moderates and One Nation Tories in that). "Populists" are making gains. Both sides have big problems - populists because, quite often they aren't actually all that popular. They brand themselves as the alternative to the consensus yet in France, Germany, UK (treating UKIP as the populists) Sweden the consensus still polls 80% odd which is pretty much, well, a consensus. Different in Poland, Hungary and Italy though the jury's still out on Italy because there are two quite different populist parties. For mainstreamers the difficulty is that they've defined themselves in opposition to another mainstream party and they now have to either pay Danegeld to the populists or confirm the populists claim that its a populist vs GrandCo battle. Once populists are the only opposition then sooner or later they have to get into govt. |
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,723
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Sept 10, 2018 11:35:47 GMT
It will be interesting to see what happens within the main coalitions. Ebba Busch Thor's Christian Democrats has many older members unhappy with the free market lean of her leadership and dislike the party being placed in the usual left/right spectrum. The party could feasibly join a Social Democrat-led coalition government, but it would depend on support from the Liberals, who were formerly willing to work with left-wing politicians, but is more oriented to the right under Jan Björklund. The Centre Party is the Swedish Democrats' diametrical opposite on immigration and any drift to the SD position by the Moderate Party on this issue may cause them to look at realignment. Of course, would the Greens and Left be happy with this? The Greens and the Christian Democrats share environmental concerns, most of the parties are seen as socially liberal.
The Left might be a difficult sell on a realignment, not least as they are strongly Eurosceptic and the likes of the Liberals are strongly in favour of the European project.
This is all speculation, ignores personalities, and part of the fun we have after inconclusive general elections.
|
|
|
|
Post by Strontium Dog on Sept 10, 2018 11:48:12 GMT
We've had that for the best part of 100 years... Yeah that's right, Conservative and Labour are just pretending to disagree with each other to stop the Liberals getting in. Dream on dear. I was thinking more of the cozy little duopoly you have, maintained through visceral opposition to the fair voting systems we see on the continent. |
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Sept 10, 2018 20:02:01 GMT
|
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,839 
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Sept 10, 2018 23:09:38 GMT
Few disagreements: - The xenophobic element in Sweden is neither exceptionally old nor rural. - Are the British Tories so much more "socially" (=religiously/ethically) conservative? - C's Ms.Loof is indeed very popular, but i doubt, that she really has charisma. - At least i read nearly no SD-statements, that were directly racist; XenoPhobia usually mixes race with religion, language, habits aso. Thank You for Your efforts! |
|
WJ
Non-Aligned
Posts: 3,267
|
Post by WJ on Sept 11, 2018 7:39:51 GMT
Few disagreements: - The xenophobic element in Sweden is neither exceptionally old nor rural. - Are the British Tories so much more "socially" (=religiously/ethically) conservative? - C's Ms.Loof is indeed very popular, but i doubt, that she really has charisma. - At least i read nearly no SD-statements, that were directly racist; XenoPhobia usually mixes race with religion, language, habits aso. Thank You for Your efforts! The only point I disagree with here is about Lööf. Compared to other players in Swedish politics, she has charisma. |
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,839
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Sept 11, 2018 7:47:04 GMT
This is apparently a normal poll conducted on ElectionDay: It has generally too low numbers for SD. BlueCollars:  |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,029
|
Post by Sibboleth on Sept 12, 2018 0:22:21 GMT
|
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,839
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Sept 12, 2018 12:40:41 GMT
Few disagreements: - The xenophobic element in Sweden is neither exceptionally old nor rural. - Are the British Tories so much more "socially" (=religiously/ethically) conservative? - C's Ms.Loof is indeed very popular, but i doubt, that she really has charisma. - At least i read nearly no SD-statements, that were directly racist; XenoPhobia usually mixes race with religion, language, habits aso. Thank You for Your efforts! The only point I disagree with here is about Lööf. Compared to other players in Swedish politics, she has charisma. Watched her at YouTube and although i left "Center fär idioter", "Center for and by idiots" aso. aside i'd say, charisma on a very, very, very low level: She isn't a frustrated, unrelaxed, ressentiment-driven feminist, indeed, but no comparison to really charismatic ochlocrats like Hitler, Nasser, not even Lumumba and the like. An "unsexy" party like C is - apart from MP or FI - also the least likely home for such people. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Sept 12, 2018 13:05:38 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Sept 12, 2018 13:28:25 GMT
|
|
WJ
Non-Aligned
Posts: 3,267
|
Post by WJ on Sept 12, 2018 14:15:04 GMT
John was at Exeter at the same time as me. We were both on the University Challenge team together. Again this issue of ballot secrecy has come up. It is standard for those who want their ballot to be secret to take one from each party and then decide in the booth. They have a similar system in Spain, from what I saw of the Catalan election in December.
|
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,902
|
Post by Tony Otim on Sept 12, 2018 14:29:04 GMT
John was at Exeter at the same time as me. We were both on the University Challenge team together. Again this issue of ballot secrecy has come up. It is standard for those who want their ballot to be secret to take one from each party and then decide in the booth. They have a similar system in Spain, from what I saw of the Catalan election in December. The French system is fairly similar as well. |
|
WJ
Non-Aligned
Posts: 3,267
|
Post by WJ on Sept 12, 2018 19:09:48 GMT
23 districts left to declare and I'm heading to bed. Numbers have been static for awhile now, although C and SD have been switching a seat back and forth. Currently C are on 31 and SD on 62 seats, but that could switch back again with SD making the gain. V 28 +7 S 101 −12 MP 15 −10 SD 62 +13 L 19 ±0 C 31 +9 KD 23 +7 M 70 −14 The remaining ballots are almost all counted now. Not much has changed. S and KD are down 1 and L and MP are up one from the figures above. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Sept 12, 2018 19:12:33 GMT
What are the chances of another election within 12 months?
|
|
WJ
Non-Aligned
Posts: 3,267
|
Post by WJ on Sept 12, 2018 19:43:35 GMT
What are the chances of another election within 12 months? Early days still. Everyone is waiting for the dust to settle. S+V+MP Have 144 seats together, the Alliance have 143 and SD take the remaining 62. 25 districts have still to declare their postal/overseas ballots. There aren't any viable coalitions with the current numbers without the parties having to really bend their criteria. As things stand, everyone apart from KD and M have explicitly ruled out working with SD. L and C have more or less ruled out working with V and C are also unhappy about S. V have ruled out everyone apart from S and MP. MP have also ruled out working with M. Now assuming thay they stick to this the only option that makes a majority would be a grand coalition with S and M with either KD or, much more likely, L joining too. That would probably cause a political disaster sooner rather than later. A slightly less bad option would be S forming a minorty government with support from MP, C and L. Feasibly M, KD and SD could form a new alliance, though this would have a smaller majority than the S, L, C, MP and I'm not sure the other parties would suffer it to live. A new election probably won't solve the problem unfortunately though it might happen anyway. We came very close to it 4 years ago and the arithmetic is even worse now. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 12, 2018 21:33:15 GMT
The only point I disagree with here is about Lööf. Compared to other players in Swedish politics, she has charisma. Watched her at YouTube and although i left "Center fär idioter", "Center for and by idiots" aso. aside i'd say, charisma on a very, very, very low level: She isn't a frustrated, unrelaxed, ressentiment-driven feminist, indeed, but no comparison to really charismatic ochlocrats like Hitler, Nasser, not even Lumumba and the like. An "unsexy" party like C is - apart from MP or FI - also the least likely home for such people. One does not come across ochlocrat that often in polite conversation. The very concept of ochlocracy has always appeared to me to be an invention and non-subtle construct of the prevailing oligarchy. And of course profoundly un-democratic. The mob is that body of people one does not like and fears to have anywhere near decision taking or being even partially involved in politics. Once this was assumed to be a province of the right resisting the claims for votes and consideration by the proletariat. But now it is more a fear of the authoritarian left not wishing their intellectual inferiors to be permitted decisions on anything. But always the oligarchs are the same sort of people in their heads. I admit to being quite conflicted on this myself. |
|
