Swedish election, 2018: Political Impasse, Löfven loses confidence vote

[Kosmos]

The most noteworthy development right now, IMO, is a relative surge in support for the Christian Democrats during the election campaign. The party has consistently polled badly in the last few years, sometimes under 3%, and speculation has been rife that they would be leaving parliament after this election. But in the last couple of weeks their numbers have improved; in two polls released on friday, KD is well above 4%. Much of this is attributed to a debate held on 14th August in which party leader Ebba Busch Thor did well was was declared the winner by some. She has been consistently aknowledged as being charismatic and a good debater since she took over the party in 2015, but up until now this has not helped their electoral fortunes. Until perhaps now, that is.

[Tender Branson]

I'm currently learning Swedish ...

Jag heter Tender och jag är från Österrike. Jag talar fortfarande dåligt svenska. Det är tidigt.





That will add to my Standard-German skills (my native language is Pinzgauerisch), English skills and Italian skills.

[DavidB.]

So let's get this straight one more time. The impression that I had, but I'm not sure if this is correct, is that if M+SD+KD+L = >50% of seats, an M minority government could be formed, sustained from the outside by L, KD and SD (in the sense that they wouldn't vote against the budget), and that M would take into account the policy preferences of these other parties. I realize that L and SD don't exactly like each other, but they don't have to be in a coalition with each other, they just need to tolerate the M govt.

If, however, these parties do not receive a majority... what happens? Does S get the initiative to form a government? How would that even work, if they would have to rely on both C and V? I realize this is unchartered territory, but I'm just thinking of the most likely course of action. How do Swedish analysts view this?

Also still astounded at the voting method in Sweden. Does nobody raise any environmental concerns with printing all these party-based ballots that are not going to be used? I really don't understand why they don't just have one ballot and let people tick a box to vote. I'm glad we do not use this system in the Netherlands - it would require half a rainforest to print the ballots with our number of parties.

[Leading Political Consultant Ma Anand Sheela]

The most noteworthy development right now, IMO, is a relative surge in support for the Christian Democrats during the election campaign. The party has consistently polled badly in the last few years, sometimes under 3%, and speculation has been rife that they would be leaving parliament after this election. But in the last couple of weeks their numbers have improved; in two polls released on friday, KD is well above 4%. Much of this is attributed to a debate held on 14th August in which party leader Ebba Busch Thor did well was was declared the winner by some. She has been consistently aknowledged as being charismatic and a good debater since she took over the party in 2015, but up until now this has not helped their electoral fortunes. Until perhaps now, that is.

The Greens have gone up a bit too and are now more securely above 4% - was this also to do with the debate?

[TheSaint250]

Sorry if these questions have been addressed recently, but:

1. Why are SD and M falling?
2. Why are SAP rising?
3. Why are KD rising (above the threshold finally, I might add)?
4. Am I right to assume that a left-leaning government is more of a possibility than any other time within recent months?

[Oliver]

Where can I find any information about the new municipal electoral system in Sweden?

They have introduced a 2% or 3% electoral threshold for municipal council elections.

[Diouf]

So let's get this straight one more time. The impression that I had, but I'm not sure if this is correct, is that if M+SD+KD+L = >50% of seats, an M minority government could be formed, sustained from the outside by L, KD and SD (in the sense that they wouldn't vote against the budget), and that M would take into account the policy preferences of these other parties. I realize that L and SD don't exactly like each other, but they don't have to be in a coalition with each other, they just need to tolerate the M govt.

If, however, these parties do not receive a majority... what happens? Does S get the initiative to form a government? How would that even work, if they would have to rely on both C and V? I realize this is unchartered territory, but I'm just thinking of the most likely course of action. How do Swedish analysts view this?

Also still astounded at the voting method in Sweden. Does nobody raise any environmental concerns with printing all these party-based ballots that are not going to be used? I really don't understand why they don't just have one ballot and let people tick a box to vote. I'm glad we do not use this system in the Netherlands - it would require half a rainforest to print the ballots with our number of parties.

So far, the Liberals are as clear as the Centre Party in rejecting a government based in anyway on the SD. The Moderates and Christian Democrats are slightly less hostile. Kristersson says the Moderates won't govern with or negotiate with Sweden Democrats, so he doesn't reject governing on their support. Busch Thor said the Christian Democrats could talk to Sweden Democrats, but not negotiate with them until the party was cleaned up (in terms of MPs deemed over the line). So theoretically a M-KD government supported by SD could be an option. But even in Sentio and YouGov polls, this majority rarely materializes. And even if it did, many in M and KD would still much prefer to go for some kind of Alliance government or even a cross-bloc government.

Most if not all of the Swedish parties would prefer to keep on pretending that the Sweden Democrats does not exist, and then let the biggest bloc between the Red-Greens and the Alliance govern, while the other bloc pretends to be in opposition. However, to their horror, the Alliance parties, KD and M in particular, realized that this was not really popular among members or voters. In the reverse scenario, Kristersson talks like he hopes that an Alliance government could rely on the Red Bloc not joining with SD to vote down his government. It is probably possible this could happen, but with Social Democrats putting all their focus on rejecting tax cuts and increasing welfare spending, they could hardly let an Allianse goverment rule without ensuring its wings were completely clipped. So there is probably a need for a more formalized cooperation or even coalition across the blocs this time. The Liberals talk positively about allowing a S-M government to be put in place. These three parties are close to a majority in the polling average and could perhaps be allowed by one additional small party. The distance between the two big parties economically seem so big that such a coalition would be painful.

You can see the most likely government according to Unibet below. Due to the economic difference between the two blocs, I think direct government cooperation across the blocs is less likely than (parts of) one bloc allowing the other bloc to govern in a very restricted way. What that restricted government would look like is hard to predict and somewhat depends on the election result. Allianse parties might demand a Social Democrat minority government where the "extreme" Greens and Left Party are kept away from government. The Social Democrats might not want to throw out any of the Allianse parties in particular, but would insist on very centrist budgets to allow such a government.

[Kosmos]

The most noteworthy development right now, IMO, is a relative surge in support for the Christian Democrats during the election campaign. The party has consistently polled badly in the last few years, sometimes under 3%, and speculation has been rife that they would be leaving parliament after this election. But in the last couple of weeks their numbers have improved; in two polls released on friday, KD is well above 4%. Much of this is attributed to a debate held on 14th August in which party leader Ebba Busch Thor did well was was declared the winner by some. She has been consistently aknowledged as being charismatic and a good debater since she took over the party in 2015, but up until now this has not helped their electoral fortunes. Until perhaps now, that is.

The Greens have gone up a bit too and are now more securely above 4% - was this also to do with the debate?

No, that almost definately has to do with the abnormally warm summer we've had, with a severe drought that ruined farmers crops, and a very large number of forest fires back in July. Some of them very widespread. The Greens were able to fairly successfully tie this to climate change, which has seen their support go up.

[DavidB.]

So let's get this straight one more time. The impression that I had, but I'm not sure if this is correct, is that if M+SD+KD+L = >50% of seats, an M minority government could be formed, sustained from the outside by L, KD and SD (in the sense that they wouldn't vote against the budget), and that M would take into account the policy preferences of these other parties. I realize that L and SD don't exactly like each other, but they don't have to be in a coalition with each other, they just need to tolerate the M govt.

If, however, these parties do not receive a majority... what happens? Does S get the initiative to form a government? How would that even work, if they would have to rely on both C and V? I realize this is unchartered territory, but I'm just thinking of the most likely course of action. How do Swedish analysts view this?

Also still astounded at the voting method in Sweden. Does nobody raise any environmental concerns with printing all these party-based ballots that are not going to be used? I really don't understand why they don't just have one ballot and let people tick a box to vote. I'm glad we do not use this system in the Netherlands - it would require half a rainforest to print the ballots with our number of parties.

So far, the Liberals are as clear as the Centre Party in rejecting a government based in anyway on the SD. The Moderates and Christian Democrats are slightly less hostile. Kristersson says the Moderates won't govern with or negotiate with Sweden Democrats, so he doesn't reject governing on their support. Busch Thor said the Christian Democrats could talk to Sweden Democrats, but not negotiate with them until the party was cleaned up (in terms of MPs deemed over the line). So theoretically a M-KD government supported by SD could be an option. But even in Sentio and YouGov polls, this majority rarely materializes. And even if it did, many in M and KD would still much prefer to go for some kind of Alliance government or even a cross-bloc government.

Most if not all of the Swedish parties would prefer to keep on pretending that the Sweden Democrats does not exist, and then let the biggest bloc between the Red-Greens and the Alliance govern, while the other bloc pretends to be in opposition. However, to their horror, the Alliance parties, KD and M in particular, realized that this was not really popular among members or voters. In the reverse scenario, Kristersson talks like he hopes that an Alliance government could rely on the Red Bloc not joining with SD to vote down his government. It is probably possible this could happen, but with Social Democrats putting all their focus on rejecting tax cuts and increasing welfare spending, they could hardly let an Allianse goverment rule without ensuring its wings were completely clipped. So there is probably a need for a more formalized cooperation or even coalition across the blocs this time. The Liberals talk positively about allowing a S-M government to be put in place. These three parties are close to a majority in the polling average and could perhaps be allowed by one additional small party. The distance between the two big parties economically seem so big that such a coalition would be painful.

You can see the most likely government according to Unibet below. Due to the economic difference between the two blocs, I think direct government cooperation across the blocs is less likely than (parts of) one bloc allowing the other bloc to govern in a very restricted way. What that restricted government would look like is hard to predict and somewhat depends on the election result. Allianse parties might demand a Social Democrat minority government where the "extreme" Greens and Left Party are kept away from government. The Social Democrats might not want to throw out any of the Allianse parties in particular, but would insist on very centrist budgets to allow such a government.

Thank you for this clear response. The obvious problem for the (former) Alliance with the "let's keep pretending SD don't exist" strategy is, of course, that SD gain more from the Alliance than from the left. This means that as long as SD keep gaining (and this strategy seems like a surefire way to ensure this), every election it will become a little more difficult for the Alliance to win more seats than the Red-Green parties. Which means the Alliance would have to continue upholding S governments and bleeding votes to SD until they change their strategy. A grand coalition would also be a kneefall for SD given Sweden's tradition of bloc politics.

[Leading Political Consultant Ma Anand Sheela]

The most noteworthy development right now, IMO, is a relative surge in support for the Christian Democrats during the election campaign. The party has consistently polled badly in the last few years, sometimes under 3%, and speculation has been rife that they would be leaving parliament after this election. But in the last couple of weeks their numbers have improved; in two polls released on friday, KD is well above 4%. Much of this is attributed to a debate held on 14th August in which party leader Ebba Busch Thor did well was was declared the winner by some. She has been consistently aknowledged as being charismatic and a good debater since she took over the party in 2015, but up until now this has not helped their electoral fortunes. Until perhaps now, that is.

The Greens have gone up a bit too and are now more securely above 4% - was this also to do with the debate?

No, that almost definately has to do with the abnormally warm summer we've had, with a severe drought that ruined farmers crops, and a very large number of forest fires back in July. Some of them very widespread. The Greens were able to fairly successfully tie this to climate change, which has seen their support go up.

Tack. I was aware of the awful summer Sweden had had but didn't know how that had impacted on politics. Interesting.

[Gustaf]

Sorry if these questions have been addressed recently, but:

1. Why are SD and M falling?
2. Why are SAP rising?
3. Why are KD rising (above the threshold finally, I might add)?
4. Am I right to assume that a left-leaning government is more of a possibility than any other time within recent months?

1. M I feel is not running a very effective Campaign and they're a bit caught in the middle trying to appeal to people who are a bit anti-immigration. SD I suspect are losing a Little support because immigration is a bit less politically dominant recently compared to the last few years and other parties are communicating their shifts on immigration to the voters.

2. Are they really? I Think incumbent governments tend to gain a Little during the Campaign.

3. As was noted their leader has done well in debates and as a small opposition party they get a lot more visibility during the Campaign.

4. Depends on your definition of left-leaning. But yes it's looking a lot more likely that there is a Red-Green plurality over the Alliance at this Point.

---------------------------------

In response to the discussion on government formation, the key problem is that there is no government anyone wants that can command a majority. This means parties will have to strike very painful compromises. Because these are all so painful, they all are basically decisions that in the past would have been ruled out as impossible. Essentially, something traditionally thought of as impossible will have to happen but it's hard to say which impossible thing will actually occur.

[Diouf]

2014 results, visualized by Henrik Lindberg

[Helsinkian]

Why the high C support on Gotland?

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

Why the high C support on Gotland?

Farmers

[DL]

Why are the Sweden Democrats so strong in Skane?

Also, it has always fascinated me how it is that Sweden may be one of the only countries in the industrialized world where the main metropolitan area (Stockholm) tends to be a bit of a right of centre stronghold. In almost every other country the main cities lean left compared to the rest of the country (e.g. London, Paris, Berlin, Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Vienna etc... in Europe, but also Toronto, Montreal, vancouver, New York, LA, Chicago etc...)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

This comes up every election, but the answer is mostly to do with the unusual pattern that industrialisation took in Sweden, with industry (and so the formation of working class identity etc) being concentrated mostly in small towns in the provinces.

[EPG]

The question's been asked before. Elswhere, it happens where incomes in the cities are much higher, or where there are very significant ethnic / linguistic regional divides.

[DL]

I would speculate that Stockholm would keep voting a bit more "right" than the rest of Sweden as long as the "right" consists of parties like the Moderates and Liberals who accept the small "l" liberal consensus among elite opinion (in other words as long as they are the Swedish equivalent of pro-EU Tories in the UK). If we get to a point where the parties of the right in Sweden start to become socially conservative and xenophobic and populist and Eurosceptic etc... then it could create a whole new cleavage and I wonder who would then start to win in Stockholm?

[freefair]

I would speculate that Stockholm would keep voting a bit more "right" than the rest of Sweden as long as the "right" consists of parties like the Moderates and Liberals who accept the small "l" liberal consensus among elite opinion (in other words as long as they are the Swedish equivalent of pro-EU Tories in the UK). If we get to a point where the parties of the right in Sweden start to become socially conservative and xenophobic and populist and Eurosceptic etc... then it could create a whole new cleavage and I wonder who would then start to win in Stockholm?

If the Moderates took that path, the Liberals would by definition be the main beneficiaries, it seems to me.

[DL]

I would speculate that Stockholm would keep voting a bit more "right" than the rest of Sweden as long as the "right" consists of parties like the Moderates and Liberals who accept the small "l" liberal consensus among elite opinion (in other words as long as they are the Swedish equivalent of pro-EU Tories in the UK). If we get to a point where the parties of the right in Sweden start to become socially conservative and xenophobic and populist and Eurosceptic etc... then it could create a whole new cleavage and I wonder who would then start to win in Stockholm?

If the Moderates took that path, the Liberals would by definition be the main beneficiaries, it seems to me.

...and if the main cleavage in Swedish politics moved from traditional left/right to more of an open/closed polarization...at what point would the Liberals and possibly the Centre Party split from the Moderates and there would be more of a shift towards a SAP/L/C centre left government that would isolate the SDs and Moderates

[EPG]

I would speculate that Stockholm would keep voting a bit more "right" than the rest of Sweden as long as the "right" consists of parties like the Moderates and Liberals who accept the small "l" liberal consensus among elite opinion (in other words as long as they are the Swedish equivalent of pro-EU Tories in the UK). If we get to a point where the parties of the right in Sweden start to become socially conservative and xenophobic and populist and Eurosceptic etc... then it could create a whole new cleavage and I wonder who would then start to win in Stockholm?

If the Moderates took that path, the Liberals would by definition be the main beneficiaries, it seems to me.

...and if the main cleavage in Swedish politics moved from traditional left/right to more of an open/closed polarization...at what point would the Liberals and possibly the Centre Party split from the Moderates and there would be more of a shift towards a SAP/L/C centre left government that would isolate the SDs and Moderates

It's still a couple of months away?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Why are the Sweden Democrats so strong in Skane?

Also, it has always fascinated me how it is that Sweden may be one of the only countries in the industrialized world where the main metropolitan area (Stockholm) tends to be a bit of a right of centre stronghold. In almost every other country the main cities lean left compared to the rest of the country (e.g. London, Paris, Berlin, Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Vienna etc... in Europe, but also Toronto, Montreal, vancouver, New York, LA, Chicago etc...)

In Europe it's still a pretty new phenomenon. Paris used to be a bastion of the French right up until the 2000s, and many of the largest Italian cities typically voted to the right.

[parochial boy]

Worth pointing out that in 2014 the combined left actually did very slightly better in Stockholm city than the country as a whole, largely thanks to the "new" left parties FI or MP.

Stockholm county as a whole is a matter, in part because places like Danderyd fall outside the actual municipality.

[Former President tack50]

Why are the Sweden Democrats so strong in Skane?

Also, it has always fascinated me how it is that Sweden may be one of the only countries in the industrialized world where the main metropolitan area (Stockholm) tends to be a bit of a right of centre stronghold. In almost every other country the main cities lean left compared to the rest of the country (e.g. London, Paris, Berlin, Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Vienna etc... in Europe, but also Toronto, Montreal, vancouver, New York, LA, Chicago etc...)

Well, I'm not so sure. Here Madrid (both the city and the region) is certainly a traditional right wing stronghold while the left gets bad results there. Barcelona is indeed a left wing stronghold though).

Another counterexample might be Portugal, with at least the Lisbon constituency being fairly representative of the results in Portugal at large.

So while it's very common for the main city to lean left, it's far from a 100% consistent rule.

I guess Stockholm is quite a "bourguesie" city? In that it tends to support parties on the right a lot.

[The Lord Marbury]

With the parliamentary elections not being the only elections were having in 13 days, I thought I'd post some municipal polls as well.

Starting off in my now former home, Novus has conducted a poll of the municipal election in Umeå, the largest city in northern Sweden.
Let's just say that the city didn't get the nickname "Red Umeå" for no reason. One might be tempted to see this as Jonas Sjöstedt-effect, given that Umeå is the home of the Left Party leader, but it's quite possible that it has more to do with local issues. From 2010 to 2014 the Social Democrats and Left held a majority on the council together, but in 2014 they went their separate ways and S formed a majority together with the Greens and the four Alliance parties. The Left has had a pretty benefitial position, being the biggest opposition party and was thus able to oppose unpopular policies like cuts to preschools and elderly care or the sale of 1600 municipal-owned flats (including student housing) to a Norwegian venture capitalist.

Also, given the new 3% threshold the three smallest parties would fail to get any seats according to this poll. Meaning that with the exit of the Worker's Party, Umeå won't have any trotskyists on its city council for the first time since 1998. 'Tis truly the end of an era.

Novus poll, Umeå municipal election
Social Democrats: 31.6% (-5.2)
Left: 18.8% (+5.7)
Moderate: 15.4% (-0.9)
Centre: 8.4% (+2.5)
Liberals: 7.5% (+1.4)
Sweden Democrats: 6.3% (+3.1)
Greens: 5.7% (-1.7)
Worker’s: 2.1% (-0.6)
Christian Democrats: 2.0% (-1.9)
Feminist Initiative: 1.2% (-2.7)

Meanwhile in my new home, Gothenburg, things are even weirder. Pretty much the entire political spectrum has been turned on its head by populist parties founded in opposition to the controversial railyway project Västlänken (the West Link) and the congestion charge implemented as part of an agreement in 2009 with the government to partially fund the West Link (and other parts of the West Swedish package, including new bridges and road tunnels), alongside money coming from the national budget.
The latest populist party, the Democrats, led and founded by former Moderate Martin Wannholt who was joined by a few Social Democrats and Greens who all had the common denominator of being held back from advancement in their own parties, currently looks like it's leading in the polls. However as the party didn't run in the 2014 election it has to both pay for ballots and be responsible for distributing them to the various polling places around the city, which could depress its numbers somewhat since it's likely they won't be able to get ballots to every polling station. Sure, people can write in the party if it's ballots aren't there, but there's a pretty good chance that some just wouldn't bother with that and just go for another party instead.

Sifo poll, Gothenburg municipal election
Democrats: 18.9% (new party)
Moderate: 16.7% (-5.6)
Left: 14.6% (+5.2)
Social Democrats: 14.2% (-8.2)
Sweden Democrats: 9.9% (+2.9)
Liberals: 6.8% (-1.3)
Greens: 5.6% (-5.1)
Centre: 4.2% (+2.0)
Feminist Initiative: 3.2% (-0.8 )
Vägvalet (Road Choice): 2.2% (-2.7)
Christian Democrats: 2.0% (-2.0)

Pro-West Link (Left, S+V+MP+FI): 37.6%
Pro-West Link (Right, M+L+C+KD): 29.7%
Anti-West Link (D+SD+VV): 31.0%

Also, since the last election Gothenburg has merged its four constituencies used for municipal elections into one city-wide constituency, meaning that the threshold is at 2% rather than 3, and VV and KD would therefore get in (if only barely) if these numbers were replicated on election day. A bare majority consisting of the Democrats, Moderates, Liberals, Centre, Road Choice and Christian Democrats would technically be possible under such circumstances. However considering that the Democrats raison d'etre is their opposition to the West Link, the question is how hell such a majority would solve the West Link issue when construction has already started and it's part of deal to get government funding for other important projects which are less controversial and desperately needed. So chaos it is, then.

Finally in Stockholm, things are looking somewhat more calm. The leftwing parties are going against historical trends by being stronger in Stockholm than the rest of the country (though not due to any strong performance from the Social Democrats), while if this result were to be replicated on election day the Moderates would get their worst municipal election result in 48 years in the nation's capital. Stockholm still has multiple constituencies, so the threshold is at 3%, but if the Feminist Initiative, Christian Democrats or both got slightly more on election day it could either mean a continued Red-Green-Pink majority or a slightly larger Alliance in a council with a Red-Green(-Pink) plurality.

Novus poll, Stockholm municipal election
Moderate: 22.1% (-5.1)
Social Democrats: 21.7% (-0.3)
Left: 13.1% (+4.2)
Greens: 11.1% (-3.2)
Liberals: 9.0% (+0.7)
Sweden Democrats: 8.3% (+3.1)
Centre: 7.3% (+2.6)
Feminist Initiative: 2.9% (-1.7)
Christian Democrats: 2.8% (-0.5)

I currently don't have any numbers for Malmö.