Ida Gabrielsson

Ida Gabrielsson questioned after a discussion with Martin Ådahl whether there was any other party that the Center Party considered sufficiently acceptable. She wrote that C had tolerated the Social Democrats and the Green Party because they had previously agreed to govern with bourgeois economic policy so that C would not collaborate with the Sweden Democrats. At the same time, she argued, C had criticized S for its migration policy and rejected the Left Party despite V agreeing with C on the issue. Gabrielsson contrasted this with what she described as a contradiction in the Center Party's rhetoric on decency. She pointed to ministers from the Moderates whom she considered increasingly Trump-like and accused them of going after journalists and conducting negative campaigns, as well as statements from the KD leader, the right's talk of voters as voting cattle, and comments from Member of Parliament Lars Beckman (M) and Alice Teodorescu (KD), whom she described as conspiracy theorists. She wrote that Ådahl and C seemed to believe that the former alliance parties did not really support their current policy, but had been kidnapped by SD and deep down wanted to return to the era of Fredrik Reinfeldt. Gabrielsson argued that Ådahl and Magdalena Andersson seemed to think that the parties would return to the center when the Tidö cooperation ended. She called the view condescending and emphasized that the changes could also have been made deliberately and voluntarily. During the election campaign, Gabrielsson stated, she had spoken with a leading center-right politician from Stockholm about more people voting for SD in the area where she grew up. She recounted that she had highlighted material and social reasons for dissatisfaction and mentioned a neighbor who worked almost around the clock on his farm and cleared snow in half of Norrland during the winters. According to Gabrielsson, the center-right politician had responded that a difficult life did not excuse a vote for SD, as others with difficult lives did not vote for the party. Gabrielsson also relayed that her father, who grew up in Ockelbo, used to refer to C and the farmers as "the right aristocracy." On Tuesday, he had told her that he had closed the door on a DN Kultur journalist who wanted to discuss the family's background and life in the countryside and in the industrial town of Åmotsbruk. Her father had also criticized C as the worst party of the day and said he preferred the party when it was at least a farmers' party. Gabrielsson wrote that she had corrected him, but at the same time agreed that a party with 7 percent could be perceived as self-satisfied if it assumed that others would follow its line. #Centerpartiet #Sverige #politik (translated)

Ida Gabrielsson wrote that she had difficulty understanding why the Social Democrats did not listen to the Left Party, both with regard to common electoral promises and to the interests of the Social Democrats and voters. She stated that the Left Party had said since the time after the January Agreement that the party would demand influence in a government if its mandate was needed. Since the mandates were now required for the Social Democrats to form a government, Gabrielsson argued that the Left Party should be included. For Magdalena Andersson to be elected, the Social Democrats, according to her, needed to accept this and begin working towards a four-party government. She referred to the fact that the Social Democrats had 28 percent, not 45, and wrote that the party therefore needed to share and cooperate in a coalition government. #politiksverige #koalitionsregering #valse2022 (translated)

Ida Gabrielsson wrote that she had difficulty understanding Thand Ringqvist's argument on Agenda that the Left Party and the Center Party were far apart. She claimed that the Center Party was not particularly close to any of the other parties with Magdalena Andersson as the prime ministerial candidate in economic policy. According to Gabrielsson, the Center Party had chosen the same prime ministerial candidate as the red-green parties to avoid governing with the Sweden Democrats, but the choice also meant that the party would have less influence on its bourgeois economic policy. Gabrielsson wrote that she did not want to decide which side the Center Party should choose, but felt that the party should have thought through the consequences before going to the election on Andersson. She argued that the Center Party's actions risked blocking both possible government alternatives. Since the election result, according to her, meant that the four parties' mandates were needed to choose Andersson as prime minister, she believed that the parties had to compromise. She emphasized that the business community had not voted and that each voter had had a vote. She also wrote that most red-green voters wanted to see a government with the Social Democrats, the Left Party, and the Green Party, while the voters of the Tidö parties had other favorites. According to Gabrielsson, parties should not negotiate with mandates from voters who had voted for another government alternative, and she believed that the election result must be reflected in politics. The Left Party wanted to be part of the government, according to her, to be able to implement reforms and agreements. Gabrielsson wrote that it was difficult to understand why the Center Party opposed the Left Party in the government and claimed that the Center Party's content in a possible agreement should be respected on the same terms. #politiksverige #val2023 #demokrati (translated)

Ida Gabrielsson wrote that she found it strange that people on the right seemed to oppose C's choice of side. According to her, no one benefited from the party remaining ambiguous, and after more than eight years, C should determine where it stood, regardless of whether it was right or left. She argued that having two clear blocks before the next election would make it easier for voters to take a stance, instead of parties referring to their own possible constellations. #politik #val2024 #partipolitik (translated)

Ida Gabrielsson wrote that she would not participate in Aktuellt that evening, but that the party secretary Maria Forsberg and Anders Ygeman (S) would do so. She stated that she had a cold but expected to be well by Sunday’s Agenda and Thand Ringqvist's seminar. #Aktuellt #Politik #Sverige (translated)

Anders Ygeman and I were on Aktuellt. C did not want to come. Those of us who were there agreed that we must move forward now, even though we did not have quite the same view on how. But the alleged V and M bloc seems to have no one arguing for it for long. Good! Four parties have won the election, and therefore we should govern together. V has erased our stance towards C, now it's time for C to do the same job. Without V in the government, agreements on policy will not hold; it will just be nice words on paper. Before we negotiate policy, we must of course agree on who will implement the policy and in what way; otherwise, the negotiations will be blind. S and MP now need to put pressure on C so that they also erase their stance. It's not about bickering but about making sure that all four are respected equally. That V should solve this by themselves when C even declines the invitation for coffee does not feel reasonable. Mutual trust can only be built if all parties’ voters are respected. I sent this to S, and I also think that MP needs to step up. Otherwise, nothing will happen if C is just allowed to remain in their own room. That MP claims during the election campaign that they want V involved is good, also for MP, whose voters have that perception. But talking about something is not the same as working for it, and more than V needs to do that if there is going to be a new government. So far, all pressure has been directed at V, even though V does not say no to any party in Magdalena Andersson's support and that our "stance" only pertains to our own party's right to influence. To be "neutral" in a situation where one party does not respect another is not being a good "friend." And without pressure on C to accept V equally, we will get no government negotiations where we can start to give and take in the actual policy. I believe that is what the voters want to see and expect from us! #politik #regering #val2023 (translated)

Thand Ringqvist continues the track on that “we have a new coalition with V and M” that now must be tested. Okay? 1. In light of the upset tones from the C leader, in such a non-political issue as a speaker election, it should be established that C will never join the Tidö coalition, SD ministers or not. Since even a vote for Norlén seems to be a red line for C. 2. Will V now be favored by S and try to be lured back? Since according to them, it is us and not C, who are part of this “coalition?” Kingmaker in the middle, etc.? 3. Can’t Thand Ringqvist, like Annie Lööf in 2018, get the exploratory mission? It could go as smoothly as possible! It’s unnecessary for others to explore when she has the answer within her. I mean, she doesn’t even need to meet anyone, barely go out, just decide which side she wants to govern with. Voila! Sweden has a new government, and we save on coffee and the bun too! #svpol #koalition #talmansval (translated)

Om Thand Ringqvist means that a cooperation in a government would "collapse," one wonders how she and C have thought they could govern a country when they are dependent on each other anyway? The government "collapsed" last time when C was involved in governing because they did not accept cooperation with all the parties on whose mandates the government rested. C refused to back down from 1 of 73 points and triggered a government crisis over market rents. C voted down their own budget and triggered a government crisis when MP chose to leave. My advice to prevent this from happening is to respect each other's mandates, cooperate and compromise. My assessment is that a four-party government is the way forward if stability is what is sought. And not the chaos that prevailed last time with agreements and parties on the outside. #politik #samarbete #regering (translated)

C and V do not have equal lines to "erase," would it have been better if V also went to the polls with demands on C outside? V has demands for itself, not against others. It is C that must respect the entire government support if Magdalena Andersson is to be elected. C needs to find another triumph than V outside the government, for we will not accept that. One cannot have as the most important question "no positions/influence" for a party one asks for mandates from. Last in the January agreement was the trophy C wanted to showcase to its conservative colleagues, LAS, market rents, and privatized employment agency. This time it is instead V outside. Or one could also try to cooperate. Just a thought. #politik #Sverige #regering (translated)

Strange that S and C are so angry if they really think V is a draw for the right. And why don't simply S, C, and MP report that V gets the exploratory assignment when they now believe V can succeed with what they themselves wanted, to attract us right-wing parties? None of them have succeeded so far, but now that V has made this coalition, new opportunities for broad agreements in the center realm are opening up, all according to S and C's dream scenario. Good night! #politik #koalition #Sverige (translated)

S ville regera med M meddelade Ardalan i valet, C vill egentligen också det men kan inte pga SD, MP har gjort upp högerut förut. Men nu ska alltså dessa partiers ledare gå in till Andreas Norlén och säga att han är beviset på att V och M är i en koalition som nu måste prövas, faktiskt. Stampa i golvet och gå ut och hålla samma PK som igår? Sekundärskammen är stor. Stackars herr talman, kanske ska dom bara gå direkt till riksdagens barnverksamhet istället? Så här kan man inte hålla på om vi ska få en ny regering. Har ”vi” vunnit valet är det vi som ska göra upp, och så hade det varit oavsett talman. Sluta sura och börja jobba. #Sverige #politik #riksdag

Otroligt fult att inte komma igår till Aktuellt när jag hade kunnat ge svar på tal, istället så ljuger C att V ”kommit överens i gruppledarkretsen” om talmansvalet när det inte har hänt. Samuel Gonzales V:s gruppledare har istället sagt motsatsen och det är samtliga gruppledare medveten om. #politik #Sverige #aktuellt

Sen kommer en sosse och säger att V ska vika ned oss med ett löfte om att ingå nästa period? Skulle inte tro det. Sen kommer en centerungdom och läser upp några talepunkter och låtsas kämpa för V-politik. Men vad är problemet med V i regeringen C? Hur kan nej till V i regeringen vara eran viktigaste fråga. Varför kan inte C ta fram en ”fråga” som C kan få av oss rödgröna istället. #politik #vänster #regering

Vill S att V lämnar vår gemensamma kartell som gör att S, V, MP och C får majoritet i riksdagen och som våra gruppledare lämnade in till talmannen gemensamt efter voteringen igår? Att V ingår i denna avgör att ”vår sida” får majoritet i utskotten. Samtidigt står S och C i Aktuellt och påstår helt skamlöst att vi har en koalition med M, trots att det är C som påstås ”kunna gå över” pga dom vägrar samarbeta, och alla vet att V aldrig skulle rösta på Ulf. Detta är den mest ohederliga teater jag någonsin upplevt. Ursäktade gårdagens utfall med att S sagt detta av ren frustration, men dom tänker alltså på riktigt argumentera för den här linjen som inte nån människa kan köpa? Och dessutom inte kommer få nej-sägaren C att flytta sig en millimeter. Vilken bubbla tar övriga rödgröna fram sina strategier i? Inte är det ifrån det vi brukar kalla verkligheten. #politik #riksdagen #koalition

Plötsligt händer det! Igår ställde C och S in sin medverkan i Aktuellt, beskedet om att Ygeman inte skulle komma fick jag när jag var på väg ut genom dörren. Men ikväll är dom där ihop utan mig istället, och dom verkar dessutom fått med sig en sosse till. Fattar att det är enklare att medverka när man inte blir emotsagd, även om jag ju gärna hade haft sällskap när jag framträtt. Men tror ändå svenska folket undrar varför vi som själva påstått oss ha vunnit valet inte kan regera tillsammans. Eller åtminstone ta en fika. Magdalena Andersson säger att ”det finns en ny koalition i svensk politik” trots att V sagt att vi aldrig kommer rösta på Ulf, och trots att Lena Hallengren samma dag ber oss att skicka in att vi tillsammans bildat ”kartell” i riksdagens utskott (så som vi även gjorde under föregående mandatperiod). När ilskan och lusten att ge tillbaka lagt sig, kanske man bör fundera på hur det kunde bli såhär. Varför V agerade som vi gjorde och vad som kan ha föranlett det. Åtminstone om huvudprioriteringarna är att Sverige ska få en ny regering och inte bara lusten att ”småhämnas”. För den leder ingenstans. Magdalena Andersson kastar in handduken och skyller på V ihop med C och MP. Trots att alla vet att det finns ett parti som inte respekterar ett annat, trots att det just är med hjälp av även V-mandaten ”vi” vunnit valet. C som inte ens vill styra med V har nu mage att vara arga. Dålig teater som inte gynnar möjligheterna att få en regering på plats. Nu behövs ett ledarskap som samlar laget, då kan man inte gå ihop tre mot en, där V ska acceptera rollen som hackkyckling, och där mobbarna blir arga för att vi säger ifrån. För att det ska ske behöver den som säger nej börja säga ja. När ska S och MP uttala sin besvikelse över C och hur deras agerande inte ”bygger ömsesidig respekt” eftersom dom vägrar att acceptera ett annat parti vars mandat man efterfrågar? Kanske i kvällens Aktuellt? Man kan ju alltid hoppas! #SvenskPolitik #Regering #ÖmsesidigRespekt

Ärligt talat så har jag aldrig vetat vilka personerna är som S och M nominerat som talmän innan dom blivit valda. Det kanske bara är jag? Jag har tidigare skrivit om att Johanna Haraldssons namn aldrig har nämnts för V av S i diskussionerna om talmansposten. Hallengren sa i princip öppet i media att dom skulle ha nominerat någon annan om dom hade haft chans på posten som talman. V tog vårt beslut i talmansvalet om att rösta på Andreas Norlén av andra skäl som vi redovisat för i olika sammanhang. Men tycker det blir rätt märkligt diskussion nu efteråt om Johanna. Min bild av henne då vi har stött på varandra är att hon är en rak och redig person, och från partivänner som jobbat mer med henne har jag bara hört positiva saker. Hon har facklig erfarenhet såväl som politisk, det är väl ett bra CV? Så givetvis kommer uppdraget som vice talman gå galant, vilket verkar vara vad S egentligen avsåg att nominera just henne till. Och i ett annat läge hade jag hellre lagt min röst på Johanna till talmansposten än på många andra som nämnts i diskussionen. #politik #talmansposten #val