** The Swedish Election - Sep 9 **

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Do you have proportional representation?

Yes. our parliament has 349 seats, and parties get seats in proportion to the share of the votes (you need to get over atleast 4% of the vote to get into parliament).



In 2014, the biggest party (The Social Democrats) got 113 seats. The Christian Democrats got the fewest with 17 seats.

Be patient with me.  Under Sweden proportional representation ... can a party select a candidate that never ran?  

You mean if they can put a person in a seat that hasn't been "in the run" so to speak? No. The parties put people on the ballot, and they get in, in the order listed - this can be "overruled" by people indvidually voting a person up by checking one of them on the ballot:




... there are people who leave their party during their time in the parliament, and they stay put and are called "politisk vilde "political savage/untamed/on the lose". 

It seems confusing.  But remember all I do when I vote is select a candidate.  The person with the most votes win.  But I am going to do a little reading up.  By the way great thread!!! 

Think of it this way --

-- In Sweden we do not vote for candidates, we vote for parties. The Party decides on its people and forms a list, in the order they should get into parliament depending on the amount of seats the party wins.

The names chosen by the Party are listed on the ballots, so you can if you wish check a specific individual. This system has only been in place since 1998 though. And most people don't, they just vote for the party.

"The voter now (since 1998) has the opportunity - but not the obligation - to tick the person on the ballot paper that she wishes to be elected first by all, if, on the other hand, he does not select a candidate, the non-voting goes to the top of the list."

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Do you have proportional representation?

Yes. our parliament has 349 seats, and parties get seats in proportion to the share of the votes (you need to get over atleast 4% of the vote to get into parliament).



In 2014, the biggest party (The Social Democrats) got 113 seats. The Christian Democrats got the fewest with 17 seats.

Be patient with me.  Under Sweden proportional representation ... can a party select a candidate that never ran?  

You mean if they can put a person in a seat that hasn't been "in the run" so to speak? No. The parties put people on the ballot, and they get in, in the order listed - this can be "overruled" by people indvidually voting a person up by checking one of them on the ballot:




... there are people who leave their party during their time in the parliament, and they stay put and are called "politisk vilde "political savage/untamed/on the lose". 

It seems confusing.  But remember all I do when I vote is select a candidate.  The person with the most votes win.  But I am going to do a little reading up.  By the way great thread!!! 

Think of it this way --

-- In Sweden we do not vote for candidates, we vote for parties. The Party decides on its people and forms a list, in the order they should get into parliament depending on the amount of seats the party wins.

The names chosen by the Party are listed on the ballots, so you can if you wish check a specific individual. This system has only been in place since 1998 though. And most people don't, they just vote for the party.

"The voter now (since 1998) has the opportunity - but not the obligation - to tick the person on the ballot paper that she wishes to be elected first by all, if, on the other hand, he does not select a candidate, the non-voting goes to the top of the list."

Are these list made public before you vote?  So you can research the parties candidates they the plan to send to parliament.

Yes, but like I said - in Sweden by tradition we vote more for the party and their policies/visions/politics and not specific individuals. 

Stockholm (AFP) - Sweden's "naive" approach to integrating asylum seekers has opened the door to the far-right, an outspoken lawmaker told AFP ahead of elections expected to see the country's once-marginal anti-immigration party make gains.

Amineh Kakabaveh is an Iranian Kurdish ex-peshmerga fighter who sought asylum herself in Sweden in the 1990s and has been a member of parliament since 2008.

She has been a vocal critic of Sweden's handling of the 400,000 asylum seekers taken in since 2012, including 160,000 in 2015 alone, the highest number in Europe per capita.

Sweden is "increasingly divided", said the 40-year-old politician, whose views have earned her enemies among her own formerly-communist Left Party who accuse her of stigmatising immigrants.

Yet Kakabaveh is ruthless in her criticism of Sweden's shortcomings on integrating immigrants, giving it a failing grade. 

"We have been naive. We have not been brave. We had no plan," she said, adding that this has enabled a rise in "fundamentalism" in Sweden's suburbs that has fuelled the far-right.

"Sweden has been having integration problems for 20 years," Kakabaveh tells AFP in an interview just days before the election.

"This is why the Sweden Democrats (SD), a racist party, is now (poised to be) the second biggest party," she says.

SD, an anti-immigration party created in 1988 by ex-neo-Nazis, is tipped to win around 20 percent of votes, according to an average of seven polling institutes in the final weeks of the campaign.

That would put SD just behind Prime Minister Stefan Lofven's Social Democrats, and neck-and-neck with the conservative Moderates Party.

Kakabaveh is worried about all the asylum seekers who have fled "from war, dictatorships, Islamic dictatorships, and regimes like Daesh (the Islamic State group)."

Sweden is "increasingly divided," she says, clad in a red dress, red cardigan and high heels.

"All red -- I'm a socialist!" she says with a laugh.

"This multicultural society has been poorly constructed over the past two decades, and that has led to a separation of communities." 

The issue is so infected that it's taboo to talk about, she says.

"SD has occupied the public debate even though it has ideas that have nothing to do with wanting to help the most vulnerable in society. Now they're heroes because the others don't dare rise to the challenge," she says.

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mcgruff10 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Do you have proportional representation?

Yes. our parliament has 349 seats, and parties get seats in proportion to the share of the votes (you need to get over atleast 4% of the vote to get into parliament).



In 2014, the biggest party (The Social Democrats) got 113 seats. The Christian Democrats got the fewest with 17 seats.

Be patient with me.  Under Sweden proportional representation ... can a party select a candidate that never ran?  

You mean if they can put a person in a seat that hasn't been "in the run" so to speak? No. The parties put people on the ballot, and they get in, in the order listed - this can be "overruled" by people indvidually voting a person up by checking one of them on the ballot:




... there are people who leave their party during their time in the parliament, and they stay put and are called "politisk vilde "political savage/untamed/on the lose". 

It seems confusing.  But remember all I do when I vote is select a candidate.  The person with the most votes win.  But I am going to do a little reading up.  By the way great thread!!! 

Think of it this way --

-- In Sweden we do not vote for candidates, we vote for parties. The Party decides on its people and forms a list, in the order they should get into parliament depending on the amount of seats the party wins.

The names chosen by the Party are listed on the ballots, so you can if you wish check a specific individual. This system has only been in place since 1998 though. And most people don't, they just vote for the party.

"The voter now (since 1998) has the opportunity - but not the obligation - to tick the person on the ballot paper that she wishes to be elected first by all, if, on the other hand, he does not select a candidate, the non-voting goes to the top of the list."

That's such a foreign concept to me: vote for the party and then they pick the person to represent you. Do you find that to be positive?  
So you get one vote?
So this is very similar to our house of representatives where every candidate is up for reelection.  

I never thought of it being a negative (or having the time to focus on what people making up the party, its mostly the party leader you see in debates etc), the order of the people is on the ballot and you can tick another choice of if you want to "upvote"  someone. Do you think having only two parties in your "Parliament" as a negative?

You get one vote for the national election, one for county and one for municipality.  Here are my three ballots, Yellow is National. Blue is County. White is Municipality:




here are my voting ballots in their envelopes and my voting card. 



Every citizen get one sent to them, and you show it together with some kind of ID. The election day is on Sunday, but you can vote for like 2-3 weeks before, or mail your voting ballots etc.

Here are voting booths:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

unsung said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mcgruff10 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Do you have proportional representation?

Yes. our parliament has 349 seats, and parties get seats in proportion to the share of the votes (you need to get over atleast 4% of the vote to get into parliament).



In 2014, the biggest party (The Social Democrats) got 113 seats. The Christian Democrats got the fewest with 17 seats.

Be patient with me.  Under Sweden proportional representation ... can a party select a candidate that never ran?  

You mean if they can put a person in a seat that hasn't been "in the run" so to speak? No. The parties put people on the ballot, and they get in, in the order listed - this can be "overruled" by people indvidually voting a person up by checking one of them on the ballot:




... there are people who leave their party during their time in the parliament, and they stay put and are called "politisk vilde "political savage/untamed/on the lose". 

It seems confusing.  But remember all I do when I vote is select a candidate.  The person with the most votes win.  But I am going to do a little reading up.  By the way great thread!!! 

Think of it this way --

-- In Sweden we do not vote for candidates, we vote for parties. The Party decides on its people and forms a list, in the order they should get into parliament depending on the amount of seats the party wins.

The names chosen by the Party are listed on the ballots, so you can if you wish check a specific individual. This system has only been in place since 1998 though. And most people don't, they just vote for the party.

"The voter now (since 1998) has the opportunity - but not the obligation - to tick the person on the ballot paper that she wishes to be elected first by all, if, on the other hand, he does not select a candidate, the non-voting goes to the top of the list."

That's such a foreign concept to me: vote for the party and then they pick the person to represent you. Do you find that to be positive?  
So you get one vote?
So this is very similar to our house of representatives where every candidate is up for reelection.  

I never thought of it being a negative (or having the time to focus on what people making up the party, its mostly the party leader you see in debates etc), the order of the people is on the ballot and you can tick another choice of if you want to "upvote"  someone. Do you think having only two parties in your "Parliament" as a negative?

You get one vote for the national election, one for county and one for municipality.  Here are my three ballots, Yellow is National. Blue is County. White is Municipality:




here are my voting ballots in their envelopes and my voting card. 



Every citizen get one sent to them, and you show it together with some kind of ID. The election day is on Sunday, but you can vote for like 2-3 weeks before, or mail your voting ballots etc.

Here are voting booths:

How racist.

?

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

unsung said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mcgruff10 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Do you have proportional representation?

Yes. our parliament has 349 seats, and parties get seats in proportion to the share of the votes (you need to get over atleast 4% of the vote to get into parliament).



In 2014, the biggest party (The Social Democrats) got 113 seats. The Christian Democrats got the fewest with 17 seats.

Be patient with me.  Under Sweden proportional representation ... can a party select a candidate that never ran?  

You mean if they can put a person in a seat that hasn't been "in the run" so to speak? No. The parties put people on the ballot, and they get in, in the order listed - this can be "overruled" by people indvidually voting a person up by checking one of them on the ballot:




... there are people who leave their party during their time in the parliament, and they stay put and are called "politisk vilde "political savage/untamed/on the lose". 

It seems confusing.  But remember all I do when I vote is select a candidate.  The person with the most votes win.  But I am going to do a little reading up.  By the way great thread!!! 

Think of it this way --

-- In Sweden we do not vote for candidates, we vote for parties. The Party decides on its people and forms a list, in the order they should get into parliament depending on the amount of seats the party wins.

The names chosen by the Party are listed on the ballots, so you can if you wish check a specific individual. This system has only been in place since 1998 though. And most people don't, they just vote for the party.

"The voter now (since 1998) has the opportunity - but not the obligation - to tick the person on the ballot paper that she wishes to be elected first by all, if, on the other hand, he does not select a candidate, the non-voting goes to the top of the list."

That's such a foreign concept to me: vote for the party and then they pick the person to represent you. Do you find that to be positive?  
So you get one vote?
So this is very similar to our house of representatives where every candidate is up for reelection.  

I never thought of it being a negative (or having the time to focus on what people making up the party, its mostly the party leader you see in debates etc), the order of the people is on the ballot and you can tick another choice of if you want to "upvote"  someone. Do you think having only two parties in your "Parliament" as a negative?

You get one vote for the national election, one for county and one for municipality.  Here are my three ballots, Yellow is National. Blue is County. White is Municipality:




here are my voting ballots in their envelopes and my voting card. 



Every citizen get one sent to them, and you show it together with some kind of ID. The election day is on Sunday, but you can vote for like 2-3 weeks before, or mail your voting ballots etc.

Here are voting booths:

How racist.

?

that was confusing.  When do you know the results?  And who do want to win?

The Election was yesterday, and the results are in. They are waiting for Wednesday though - for more votes coming from abroad etc.

The results so far are  pretty absurd.

"The Allience" (rightwinged) did a better result than expected and are toe-to-toe with the "red-green block" (leftwinged).

Bot goth 40%, and the the racist party SD got 18%.

Right now, the "red-green block" has 144 seats, The Allience 143 seats. And SD 62 seats. So the red-green is only 0,3% bigger.




So, now the parties making up The Allience says that the prime minister and government should resign - and The Allience should be given the chance to form a government. Because they together are bigger then the government ( "The Left Party" is not officially a part of the government). The Social Democrats and The Green Party together got 32,7%. 

The Prime Minster will not resign though, because of his party being the biggest and together with The Left Party they are, as seen above, 0,3% bigger.

It seems though, that he wants to break up The Allience and lure The Liberals and The Centerparty into the government - completely ditching The Left Party (which The Liberals and The Centerparty will never work with).

And if they can not agree across the aisle, to shut out SD - they will have to somehow work with SD to get the vote for the government/budget through in the parliament. Which both blocks have said they will not do, but the right-winged parties are a bit shakey on this as of late.

So it's a bit chaotic.

Here is the election breakdown:



The Red-green Block
The Left Party - 7,9% (not part of the government, but supporting it)
The Social Democrats - 28,4% (worst election for them ever, historically they have always been the biggest party)
The Green Party - 4,3%

The Allience
The Christian Democrats - 6,4%
The Center Party - 8,6%
The Liberals - 5,5%
The Moderates - 19,8%

Racist Scum
The Swedish Democrats - 17,6%

Party almost getting in last election (but now crashed).
Feminist Initiative - 0,4%

Votes counted: 6 247 190

People eligible to vote: 7 495 927
Voter turnout: 83,3%


Here is The Swedish Democrats stance:

"Now, Jimmie Åkesson (party leader of The Swedish Democrats) sets the ultimatum to the other parties and opens up to force away Prime Minister Stefan Löfven. "We will vote no to all governments that do not give us influence," he says."

Spiritual_Chaos said:

unsung said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mcgruff10 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Meltdown99 said:

Do you have proportional representation?

Yes. our parliament has 349 seats, and parties get seats in proportion to the share of the votes (you need to get over atleast 4% of the vote to get into parliament).



In 2014, the biggest party (The Social Democrats) got 113 seats. The Christian Democrats got the fewest with 17 seats.

Be patient with me.  Under Sweden proportional representation ... can a party select a candidate that never ran?  

You mean if they can put a person in a seat that hasn't been "in the run" so to speak? No. The parties put people on the ballot, and they get in, in the order listed - this can be "overruled" by people indvidually voting a person up by checking one of them on the ballot:




... there are people who leave their party during their time in the parliament, and they stay put and are called "politisk vilde "political savage/untamed/on the lose". 

It seems confusing.  But remember all I do when I vote is select a candidate.  The person with the most votes win.  But I am going to do a little reading up.  By the way great thread!!! 

Think of it this way --

-- In Sweden we do not vote for candidates, we vote for parties. The Party decides on its people and forms a list, in the order they should get into parliament depending on the amount of seats the party wins.

The names chosen by the Party are listed on the ballots, so you can if you wish check a specific individual. This system has only been in place since 1998 though. And most people don't, they just vote for the party.

"The voter now (since 1998) has the opportunity - but not the obligation - to tick the person on the ballot paper that she wishes to be elected first by all, if, on the other hand, he does not select a candidate, the non-voting goes to the top of the list."

That's such a foreign concept to me: vote for the party and then they pick the person to represent you. Do you find that to be positive?  
So you get one vote?
So this is very similar to our house of representatives where every candidate is up for reelection.  

I never thought of it being a negative (or having the time to focus on what people making up the party, its mostly the party leader you see in debates etc), the order of the people is on the ballot and you can tick another choice of if you want to "upvote"  someone. Do you think having only two parties in your "Parliament" as a negative?

You get one vote for the national election, one for county and one for municipality.  Here are my three ballots, Yellow is National. Blue is County. White is Municipality:




here are my voting ballots in their envelopes and my voting card. 



Every citizen get one sent to them, and you show it together with some kind of ID. The election day is on Sunday, but you can vote for like 2-3 weeks before, or mail your voting ballots etc.

Here are voting booths:

How racist.

?