Search

Susanna Silfverskiöld referred to SVT's Elisabeth Marmorstein's reasoning about why Magdalena Andersson was, according to her, afraid of an additional election. Silfverskiöld wrote that it was what Andersson would have to offer the Swedish people and described it as rather unappetizing. https://t.co/EY0ht26SUA #svpol #politiker #val2024 (translated)

Ida Gabrielsson wrote that the Left Party, unlike most other parties on the red-green side, had not campaigned primarily with the message of saying no to the Sweden Democrats (SD). According to her, the party had not repeatedly talked about an SD government, presented proposals for twelve SD ministers whom she described as more or less uncouth, or warned that Jimmie Åkesson could become prime minister. She wrote that the Left Party also believed that SD was wrong, but that voters needed to know what policies they were voting for. Gabrielsson thought that the negative campaigns and the political representatives' approach to each other had made it confusing to distinguish between SD and the other Tidö parties. She emphasized that the rhetoric had come from, among others, Ebba Busch, Simona Mohamsson, and moderate ministers, and that the politics had been presented jointly. According to Gabrielsson, the Left Party had therefore primarily focused on the policies it wanted to change. A campaign solely against SD risked, she wrote, appearing to target a group of people and giving someone the opportunity to adopt a victim role. She also believed it was contradictory to claim to be able to collaborate with everyone except SD, or preferably with the Tidö parties without SD, while campaigning on a different policy. Gabrielsson wrote that the Left Party had campaigned on its own policies and with Magdalena Andersson as a candidate for prime minister, well anchored in the red-green side. Therefore, according to her, the Left Party should not have to settle for having achieved a no to SD. #politik #Val2024 #rödgröna (translated)

Ledarsidorna.se wrote that Sweden did not appreciate presidential election campaigns and claimed that Magdalena Andersson was now having to pay for having postponed responsibility for four years. According to the site, she had nothing to deliver and did not take the election seriously, which led to questioning how she could then take Sweden seriously. #svpol https://t.co/rvPIIu80DD #Sverige #politik #val2024 (translated)

The sender wrote that SVT News stated that the Democrats would win big in the USA. They claimed that previous predictions from SVT ahead of American elections, if followed by the same outcome, pointed to a record election for the Republicans. https://t.co/nanGr8h5RB #USA #val2024 #demokraterna #US (translated)

Jan Lindberg wrote that a majority of voters wanted to replace the current ones with an unstable red-green alternative that, according to him, could not reach a consensus on any issue. He described it as a complete lapse in judgment, as the country needed stability when the neighboring region was threatened. https://t.co/RGRroT1a3o #politik #Sverige #val2024 (translated)

The writer stated that it usually went badly for S when the party was allied with leftist parties. According to the writer, a snap election focused on antisemitism, unemployment, and shortcomings in welfare could lead to a broad and well-functioning government. #politik #val2024 #Sverige #SE (translated)

Dr. Tallinger wrote that the situation would have been less embarrassing if Magdalena Andersson had not acted as if she were the strongest leader ever. He also claimed that she seemed to view the government negotiations as so simple that she did not need to explain before the election how they would be resolved. https://t.co/5U8waG0PTU #politik #ledarskap #val2024 (translated)

Tommy Norvell questioned whether the women could govern the country for four years with a common budget. He used derogatory terms about them and criticized those who voted for them, referring to the fact that, in his opinion, they did not understand the consequences. https://t.co/DS5aub3TjZ #politik #val2024 #Sverige (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)

Aja Baja wrote that if she chose red, Sweden would be in flames, like France, while a choice of blue according to the writer would make it possible to restore Sweden together. The writer hoped that there would be common sense. https://t.co/3Dc9NaZI9L #Sverige #politik #val2024 (translated)

Jan Lindberg wrote that the Center Party's opposition to the Sweden Democrats had become so strong that the party would rather allow communists into a government. He predicted that this would lead to the C party being out of Parliament in the next election. #politik #val2024 #Centerpartiet (translated)

This would never have happened if Hultqvist had continued as defense minister. Magdalena Andersson's leadership does not include promotion based on competence. If that had been the case, Hultqvist, Ygeman, Strandhäll, etc. would not have become prominent. It makes a big difference what you vote for. #val2024 (translated)