Swedish election - could it end in violent revolution ?

[Kitschum]

"Niggardly"? Never, ever heard the word.

"njugg" in Swedish

[Nikolai]

No, it's just that I get "Deutschland erwache" associations out of that particular phrase. I know it was accidental but you might want to avoid it in the future.

Btw, the picture is a group of Nazis holding a banner that says "Sweden wake up" ...standing around in a park at 5 am. You can't make this stuff up.

The phrase is very normal in Norway.

[Meticulous Man]

.

[BlackCat]

maybe if you made any actaul arguments i could.

Uhn, no offense, but I asked if you could translate your own gibberish into something comprehensible

do you have big tv debates like this http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/va...icle7737923.ab in denmark? iam going to guess you do, but i couldnt find any articles about them on the net. could only find articles about tv-duels between the two biggest parties.

Well, you guessed right - we do have similiar debates Though, there is a small difference. If I get that article right, then SD wasn't there wich I as a dane find a bit strange (not because of SD's policies etc, but simply because a party that is almos certain to get over the 4 % limit isn't represented).

Again, that is probably due to the differences in how parties is allowed to join the game - here you need a pretty strong support to be considered eligible , but when you are that, you participate on (almost) same terms as already represented parties. For example our Christ democrats that hasn't been able to pass our 2 % limit for years, but has been able to collect enough subscribers (?) to be considered an electable party - they would have been invited to a simliar session as that article describes.

At a typical election every electable party will be given a chance to present their program in a 1/2 hour program - first the party are allowed to air their own presentation of their party program and are then grilled by a cople of journalists. Please note that even non represented parties get this.

Just before the actual voting, there is a grand debate where all parties is given equal speaking time - also those not in parliament.

[BlackCat]

Just to clarify - if I was a swede, I wouldn't vote SD just as I as a dane doesn't vote DF, but neither do I vote for EL (enhedslisten), but despite I think that they are just as outdated as DNSAP, I still support that they are heard on same level as all other parties

[BlackCat]

Nah, don't worry, they are just still trying to wake up after the swedish suppresion they had to endure after they were stolen from us

[Nikolai]

In Norwegian TV debates, even the silly sofa commies in Red, who got something like 0.2% or 0.4% in the last election, is represented...

[BlackCat]

In Norwegian TV debates, even the silly sofa commies in Red, who got something like 0.2% or 0.4% in the last election, is represented...

I guess that our dear swedes probably would have invited such a party into the warmt of accepted parties - they do after all have an almost recocnisable smell

[Kitschum]

I do think SD should have been invited to participate, but I'm not crying rivers that they aren't. It's enough of a farce as it is. Commie parties that can't get 0.1% should not, however.

In a perfect world only the two biggest parties (m and s) would be allowed in TV debates. All the others are pretty useless and really need to be destroyed.

[BlackCat]

Why not just ban all parties except the largest - that would solve all these annoying things that democracy brings ?

[BlackCat]

It was on purpose that I only mentioned democracy in the previous post - that is a concept that swedes can in some way understand and post answers to.

Another concept is "free speech". That should have been a part of previous post, but since it's a concept unknown to swedes, I prefer to make this second post that they can ignore

[a.kitman]

Uhn, no offense, but I asked if you could translate your own gibberish into something comprehensible



Well, you guessed right - we do have similiar debates Though, there is a small difference. If I get that article right, then SD wasn't there wich I as a dane find a bit strange (not because of SD's policies etc, but simply because a party that is almos certain to get over the 4 % limit isn't represented).

Again, that is probably due to the differences in how parties is allowed to join the game - here you need a pretty strong support to be considered eligible , but when you are that, you participate on (almost) same terms as already represented parties. For example our Christ democrats that hasn't been able to pass our 2 % limit for years, but has been able to collect enough subscribers (?) to be considered an electable party - they would have been invited to a simliar session as that article describes.

At a typical election every electable party will be given a chance to present their program in a 1/2 hour program - first the party are allowed to air their own presentation of their party program and are then grilled by a cople of journalists. Please note that even non represented parties get this.

Just before the actual voting, there is a grand debate where all parties is given equal speaking time - also those not in parliament.

do you have any articles about said debates. also the reason SD are not there isnt that they might not make the 4% but the fact that they didnt make it last year. and as such are not in the parlament.
atleast its a clear cutoff, and a rule that doesnt disciminate political views in anyway. unlike you we have alot more parties and haveing a clear cutoff is better then someone arbitrary picking one.

and other then the debate in question it works about the same in sweden as in denmark. all the party leaders get interviewed all over the place and SD gets just as many.

if we merge you and Nikolai in this thread, we have jimmie akesson(leader of SD). you two have basicly played out there entire election strategy in here.

[a.kitman]

It was on purpose that I only mentioned democracy in the previous post - that is a concept that swedes can in some way understand and post answers to.

Another concept is "free speech". That should have been a part of previous post, but since it's a concept unknown to swedes, I prefer to make this second post that they can ignore

could you be anymore boring?

[Kitschum]

Why not just ban all parties except the largest - that would solve all these annoying things that democracy brings ?

Ask any American. There's a great deal of difference between two parties and one.

Having only two parties would present the voters with a choice of two clearly defined alternatives. Not like now, when nobody can be quite sure which parties will cooperate and who will be invited into the government.

I must say though that I'm quite pleased with the recent set up we've got going. The Red-Green bloc and the Alliance are practically like only two parties. It's just that I don't want to hear from all of the incompetents in the small parties. Capable and pragmatic people are drawn to big and moderate parties, while smaller parties attract kooks and idealists.

[a.kitman]

i dont like the bloc thing we got going right now at all. it makes it really hard for the smaller parties on either side stand out and really make an impact. it also makes the campaigns dirtier cus they know there is no chance they are going to work whit the other side anyway.

i wish we hade more smaller parties whit a chance to get elected. even if sometimes that means you have to put up whit racist media whores. when they get votes its a clear sign the other parties are doing something wrong.