Sweden election results thread (Sept 14, 2014)

[Zinneke]

I wonder how Lund voted?

[Lurker]

The Red-Greens have only added on 2 seats net...

Terrible.

No, 'terrible' would be losing the election. It's a shame that 3% of left votes were effectively wasted, but we all knew that might happen.

Indeed, this was pretty much what we all expected. The only surprise being that SD got a higher share of the vote than most predicted, but that makes little difference. While this was obviously not one of the great Social Democratic victories, the centre-left will still be in a much better position than in the past eight years.

[politicus]

I wonder how Lund voted?

22,8% (+3,3) SAP/Social Democrats
22,6% (-9,5) Moderaterna/Moderates
12,2% (-0,6) Miljöpartiet/Greens
9,8% (-1,3) Folkpartiet/Liberals
9,3% (+4,3) Sverigedemokraterna/Sweden Democrats
6,4% (+0,6) Vänsterpartiet/Left
5,9% (+5,2) FI/Feminists
5,7% (-0,9) Centerpartiet/Center Party
4,0% (-1,0) Kristdemokraterna/Christian Democrats
Others 1,3% (-0,1)

[Donerail]

I wonder how Lund voted?

You can get specific results (in English) from Expressen.

[politicus]

I wonder how Lund voted?

You can get specific results (in English) from Expressen.

svt.se also has them all, just put the name of the municipality in here: http://valresultat.svt.se/

As you can see from the numbers I posted above  Lund has many of the typical university town features: Strong Greens and strong feminists and weak SAP due to lack of traditional working class voters. Given its demographics 9,3% for SD is a lot, but it is Scania where the party is strong (region with high immigration).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

And also here: http://www.val.se/val/val2014/valnatt/R/rike/index.html

O.K, not in English, but it isn't hard to work out what's what when the languages are so closely related...

[eric82oslo]

Don't think anyone posted the Riksdagen results for Stockholm city (only inner city, not the suburbs/exurbs):

1. M: 27.6% (better than nationally)
2. S: 21.7% (almost 10% worse than nationally)
3. MP: 11.1% (much better than nationally)
4. FP: 7.9% (better than nationally)
5. V: 7.8% (better than nationally)
6. F!: 7.2% (more than twice the national average)
7. C: 4.9% (a shockingly high number for a rural party! Their sister party in Norway only gets about 0.5% in Oslo)
8. KD: 4.3%

Remember that the capital or largest city usually gives you some clues on future trends.

In other words it's looking good for F!, MP, FP, V and M come 2018.
S however should be very worried about the future.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Er... no. Firstly... that's patent bullsh!t. And secondly Stockholm always votes way to the right of the rest of the country.

[eric82oslo]

Er... no. Firstly... that's patent bullsh!t. And secondly Stockholm always votes way to the right of the rest of the country.

I wouldn't call MP, V and F! right wing parties exactly.

The red green parties actually won the local elections in all the three major cities, Stockholm included.

[politicus]

Also C has adopted a number of Libertarian positions which is why it attracts yuppie types in Stockholm, and while its traditionally a rural party you cant really categorize it as such anymore, even if there are still a large segment of rural folks left in the party (wondering what the heck the leadership is doing with their old party).

[Hash]

Remember that the capital or largest city usually gives you some clues on future trends.

[eric82oslo]

Also C has adopted a number of Libertarian positions which is why it attracts yuppie types in Stockholm, and while its traditionally a rural party you cant really categorize it as such anymore, even if there are still a large segment of rural folks left in the party (wondering what the heck the leadership is doing with their old party).

Libertarian positions like free pot?

[You kip if you want to...]

Remember that the capital or largest city usually gives you some clues on future trends.

Hillary to win 90% of the PV, heard it here first

[eric82oslo]

Remember that the capital or largest city usually gives you some clues on future trends.

Well at least that's been the case in Norway. In the US as well.

Examples in Norway being Frp, SV, Høyre, Rødt and most recently The Green Party, all starting out as heavily centered around Oslo before going more national. Though Rødt is still mainly an Oslo/big city party, so maybe you could scrap that.

[SPQR]

Rome has voted to the left of the rest of Italy for a long time,didn't say much about future trends...

[Sol]

Remember that the capital or largest city usually gives you some clues on future trends.

Well at least that's been the case in Norway. In the US as well.

Ah yes, DC. THE bellwether of U.S. politics.

[eric82oslo]

Rome has voted to the left of the rest of Italy for a long time,didn't say much about future trends...

I was mostly talking about more or less new (or previously small) parties first making roots in the big cities - like Oslo and Stockholm - before expanding to include more/most of the country. It hasn't so much to do with the left-right axis (if anything at all), but about individual parties expanding from the center and outwards. Since F! is a pretty new party, it's natural that they get established there first. SD is a different story though, since they first established themselves in Malmö, and not Stockholm. That's an example of an exeption in my opinion, although Malmö is still the 3rd largest city, so not a very huge exception exactly.

[DL]

Why is it that Stockholm votes so much more to the right than the rest of Sweden while in Denmark Copenhagen is much more leftwing than the rest of Denmark...and Paris and Berlin are much more left in their voting than the rest of Germany and France.

[politicus]

Why is it that Stockholm votes so much more to the right than the rest of Sweden while in Denmark Copenhagen is much more leftwing than the rest of Denmark...and Paris and Berlin are much more left in their voting than the rest of Germany and France.

Regarding Stockholm it is expensive and with lots of well paid academics and white collar types working in administration, finance and the liberal professions and has few industrial workers.

Regarding Copenhagen its A. because the centre-right strongholds north of Copenhagen are not included in the constituency and B. because of its heritage as an industrial city with a large working class, while Stockholm was never an industrial city, this has given it a left wing tradition C. real estate in Copenhagen is also substantially cheaper (about half the price) than Stockholm, (which also affects the rent level), so more people with lower income lives there.

[DL]

I thought Paris was pretty right wing? They have generally had centre-right Mayors.

Umm that was true a generation ago but for the last 13 years Bertrand Delanoe of the Socialist Party has been mayor and Paris voted more heavily for Segolene Royale and Francois Hollande than the rest of France and this year Anne Hidalgo of the Socialists was elected mayor succeeding Delanoe - even in a year when socialists were doing badly in France due to Hollande's unpopularity.

BTW: I realize that real estate is very expensive in Stockholm and that it is a very white collar city etc... but what could be more expensive and white collar than London and yet the Labour Party tends to do much better in London than in the rest of England. Housing prices are stratospheric in New York and San Francisco and they are both very rich cities and yet they tend to elect the most ultra liberal Democrats at every level and Republicans are endangered species.

[H. Ross Peron]

Any possibility of the Social Democrats forming a government with the Left, Greens, and some of the smaller (and somewhat more moderate) Alliance parties-ie KD or C?

Also how accurate is Swedish Cheese's portrayal of F! as some sort of Rush Limbaugh caricature of feminists?

[politicus]

Any possibility of the Social Democrats forming a government with the Left, Greens, and some of the smaller (and somewhat more moderate) Alliance parties-ie KD or C?

The problem here is that the three small centre-right parties are to the right of the Moderates, so its not a logical combo (and certainly impossible if the Left should be included in the government).

[Tender Branson]

So, SD did much better than expected and the Feminists didn't get in after all ?

I already had a feeling that the late SD scandals wouldn't hurt them really (I shouldn't have listened to politicus on page 28 of the locked thread ... )

Also, turnout seems to be 86% when the remaining votes are counted.

[Lurker]

Any possibility of the Social Democrats forming a government with the Left, Greens, and some of the smaller (and somewhat more moderate) Alliance parties-ie KD or C?

Also how accurate is Swedish Cheese's portrayal of F! as some sort of Rush Limbaugh caricature of feminists?

No. The Alliance parties have already ruled it out. The chance of it was always very remote, even though many in the media (and the Social Democrats themselves) would have wished for it. There will be a minority government, in which the Social Democrats and Greens will take part (and maybe V, though I doubt it).

[politicus]

I realize that real estate is very expensive in Stockholm and that it is a very white collar city etc... but what could be more expensive and white collar than London and yet the Labour Party tends to do much better in London than in the rest of England. Housing prices are stratospheric in New York and San Francisco and they are both very rich cities and yet they tend to elect the most ultra liberal Democrats at every level and Republicans are endangered species.

In Europea industrialization is important. Cities without an industrial tradition tends to vote centre-right, cities with a strong industrial tradition are more left wing (Glasgow would be a case). De-industrialisation has left many relatively poor people in cities (like Copenhagen) and to the extent that they haven't been driven out by exorbitant housing prices, they are still there.
Both left wing tradition and the higher amount of relatively poor people living in cities with an industrial heritage make those cities more left wing.

In the US you have a bunch of social issues to blur the left/right picture and make poor areas vote right because of social issues, so its a different dynamic. In Scandinavia the poor=left and rich=right is generally pretty clear even if the rise of modern right wing populism in poorer areas tends to skew the picture nowadays (and it never fully applied to rural Denmark, where the Liberals are strong).

Immigrants also vote left in Europe, but this rarely explains the difference between cities, but is at least a factor to be considered.