Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2017 14:23:56 GMT
With 95.1% counted (as of this morning) the centre-left is 7,000 votes ahead of the centre-right. There is a commission looking at the election law (their proposal will take effect from 2025), and renewed debate about lowering the threshold. I think that such an approach is somewhat curious. They want the benefits of being smaller, ideologically-purer outfits and then stress their identity as part of a larger bloc when it suits them. I do not follow. Its an official commission that is evaluating the electoral law. And its various political observers and academics that have raised the issue of the threshold, not the small parties that have complained. Its not the first time that the losing side has had more votes than the winning, so its a recurring theme. It can hurt both sides, but the issue is whether its fair, and whether it makes any sense to have a 4% threshold in the Norwegian system. ... Neither Red nor the Greens campaigned as part of a bloc (and Labour distanced itself from both of them). It was only the media that counted them as part of a "red-green" bloc. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Sept 12, 2017 15:05:31 GMT
Fair enough, @odo, I assumed the calls were coming from minor parties.
|
|
thetop
Labour
[k4r]
Posts: 945
|
Post by thetop on Sept 12, 2017 16:00:24 GMT
With 95.1% counted (as of this morning) the centre-left is 7,000 votes ahead of the centre-right. There is a commission looking at the election law (their proposal will take effect from 2025), and renewed debate about lowering the threshold. I think that such an approach is somewhat curious. They want the benefits of being smaller, ideologically-purer outfits and then stress their identity as part of a larger bloc when it suits them. I've always appreciated that element of PR-assisted blocs: effectively giving the voters the ultimate decision on which factions and what prominence they want to build their left & right big tent 'parties' from. Free from fear of hurting the wider coalition by voting elsewhere - within limits - and as such I think a reduction to 3% would be a better threshold. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2017 18:02:59 GMT
The count is still registered at 99.8%, but Centre has gotten a seat from Progress, so its 88-81 between the "blocs" now.
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,137 
|
Post by Foggy on Sept 12, 2017 18:09:05 GMT
Neither Red nor the Greens campaigned as part of a bloc (and Labour distanced itself from both of them). It was only the media that counted them as part of a "red-green" bloc. This is an important point, I think. Any change to the electoral law which formalised the 'bloc' nature of Norwegian politics would mean you end up with something like one of the less functional Italian voting systems, which wouldn't be desirable for anyone. Worth nothing also that the sole Green MP from Oslo is not going to be the same person as in the Parliament just gone. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Sept 12, 2017 19:28:56 GMT
I think that such an approach is somewhat curious. They want the benefits of being smaller, ideologically-purer outfits and then stress their identity as part of a larger bloc when it suits them. I've always appreciated that element of PR-assisted blocs: effectively giving the voters the ultimate decision on which factions and what prominence they want to build their left & right big tent 'parties' from. Free from fear of hurting the wider coalition by voting elsewhere - within limits - and as such I think a reduction to 3% would be a better threshold. I can understand that argument, even if I don't agree with it. With electoral law as with education, nobody will ever get what they want. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2017 20:26:18 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2017 20:40:33 GMT
In both 2005 and 2009 the centre-right got more votes than the "red-greens", who won both elections. In 2009 by no less than 49,070 votes. So even before this election two out of the last three elections had been won by the side that lost the popular vote, which is why the topic is on the agenda of the electoral law commission.
The will commission also be evaluating the overrepresentation of the small counties and underrepresentation of especially Greater Oslo, and has a mandate to look at anything they find relevant.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Sept 12, 2017 20:58:36 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 8:33:03 GMT
This is the 2nd worst Labour election since 1924 (a moderate breakaway Social Democratic Labour Party existed 1921-27), only the "disaster election" in 2001 with 24.3% was worse, but they were in government back then.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 15:41:26 GMT
Aftenposten had an analysis pointing out (the obvious) that Oslo is a deeply divided city. Høyre got over 50% in wealthy Vestre Aker and Ullern (both with the highest turnout as well 88.5 and 86.8), while Labour got over 50% in the satellite town Groruddalen (with a turnout nearly 20% lower). SV and Red had their best results in the eastern parts of central Oslo. They got nearly 30% combined in Gamle Oslo ("Old Oslo") and around 25% in Grünerløkka. Venstre declined in most of the city, but gained in the Conservative bastions in the west (almost certainly tactical votes from Høyre supporters) and end up with 8.4%, which is better than in 2013. Among election day votes they got: Ullern 14.8 (+4.1) Vestre Aker 14.1 (+3.5) ... "The East End and West End (Bokmål: østkanten og vestkanten, Nynorsk: austkanten og vestkanten) are used as names for the two parts of Oslo, Norway, formed by the economic and socially segregating separation line that has historically passed along the street Uelands gate. The Akerselva river is often seen as a boundary between west and east, but it is imprecise, because there are working-class neighbourhoods on both sides of the river.
The West End was built in the 1840s, and has since the 17th century been a common land area, with the area behind the castle as an exit point. The East End grew around the new industry and along the passageways to the east. Around 1890, the division between east and west was prominent and most districts of the city were marked by class, either by working-class or bourgeois class. This division was reflected in architecture, but also in politics in that the Conservative Party and the Labour Party were, taken together, much more dominant than in other parts of Norway. The dialects have traditionally been quite different, and there has been a sharp distinction line between the sociolects of the two parts of the city, but this has somewhat diminished in the latest decades."en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_End_and_West_End_of_Oslo |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 16:13:11 GMT
Støre has said that Labour is willing to support the government opening up for so-called consequence evaluations of oil exploitation around Lofoten (the Labour congress has approved support for drilling in the zones south of Lofoten, but not further north). This has so far been blocked by the cooperation agreement between the government and Venstre & KrF, but if no new agreement is made the pro-extraction parties (Labour and the government) could proceed. Environmentalists and fisheries organisations are up in arms and the Greens threaten to present a motion of no confidence if they do it in order to force Labour to choose between oil extraction and toppling the government, though KrF or Venstre would have to support this as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Sept 13, 2017 19:56:01 GMT
It sounds like Oslo has the same west-of-the-river-east-of-the-river divide that marks that other great Norwegian city, Hull.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 20:26:30 GMT
It sounds like Oslo has the same west-of-the-river-east-of-the-river divide that marks that other great Norwegian city, Hull. Well, sort of. It doesn't neatly follow the river, there are quintessentially eastern neighborhoods west of Akerselva. |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,137
|
Post by Foggy on Sept 13, 2017 20:34:02 GMT
It sounds like Oslo has the same west-of-the-river-east-of-the-river divide that marks that other great Norwegian city, Hull. What would be the Oslovian equivalent of Kingston Rovers, I wonder? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2017 19:40:19 GMT
The election result with the Danish 2% threshold: Red 4 (+3) Socialist Left 10 (-1) Labour 49 (nc) Greens 5 (+4) Centre 18 (-1) Total 86 (+5) Liberals 7 (-1) Christian Democrats 7 (-1) Conservatives 42 (-3) Progress 27 (nc) Total 83 (-5) A 3% threshold gives a razor thin 85-84 victory to the centre-right, and a 5% threshold a similar win to the centre-left. www.nrk.no/norge/sett-sperregrensen-_-se-hvilket-flertall-du-far-1.13688704 |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Sept 14, 2017 20:58:07 GMT
It sounds like Oslo has the same west-of-the-river-east-of-the-river divide that marks that other great Norwegian city, Hull. What would be the Oslovian equivalent of Kingston Rovers, I wonder? Widnes Vikings! |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,137
|
Post by Foggy on Sept 14, 2017 21:27:25 GMT
What would be the Oslovian equivalent of Kingston Rovers, I wonder? Widnes Vikings! D'oh! Of course they are.  |
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,846
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Sept 18, 2017 9:27:59 GMT
|
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,846
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Sept 18, 2017 9:32:14 GMT
|
|
