Polling for anti-immigration DPP is relatively low, but many feel its ideas have been co-opted by Mette Frederiksen’s Social Democrats
The electorate indicates it thinks like this, the political parties scramble to do things like this? Isn’t that the point?
Not in the UK it isn’t – the electorate have been ignored by politicians for decades.
‘Should I have spent the first ten years as an MP campaigning for what a majority of my constituents wanted, re-migration and the last ten campaigning to leave the EU?’.
Roy Hattersley.
With very few exceptions they have been cunts…..
Of all the people on my Kill List, Hattersley was right up there in the leading pack.
By dedicating 2 hours daily to this online job, I brought in $16,453 last month. It’s incredibly simple to start and doesn’t require any specific skills, making it perfect for anyone. For a student like me, this has been the ultimate solution to balancing my studies and finances…
.
For More… Rb.gy/axcdam
…the electorate have been ignored by politicians for decades.
Yes; but the electorate have also allowed politicians to ignore them: if re-migration and Brexit were your priorities, why vote for Hattersley when his views on these issues were well known?
Two things: Party tribalism (Labour is the party of the working man etc., my dad voted Labour), and who else would you suggest the people could have voted for? The Tory party were the only party I have seen that promised in their manifesto to stop mass migration, in 1970, got elected, then didn’t.
Labour tribalism is often based on perceived self-interest: ‘I want re-migration/Brexit/capital punishment/etc, but my salary and/or benefits are safer under Labour…’. Though weaker, Tory tribalism is – or was – not dissimilar. So voters who are unwilling to abstain continue to elect MPs who don’t represent majority opinion. Thus the electorate gets the politicians it deserves…
That’s because they actively despise the British people – particularly the English.
.
Alternatively, DPP increased their vote share despite social dems slight shuffle right.
Obvs restrictions on diversity aren’t enough for some of the native Danes
Interesting result on Sunday in Germany. Elections were held in the state of Reheinland Palatinate . Pretty prosperous but a SPD stronghold since reunification, with all that industry west of Frankfurt.
CDU 30%
SPD 26%
AfD 20%
Greens 8%
Big win for the CDU, with only a small increase in their vote. SPD lost 10% and AfD gained 11%.
Also unusual in that there only four parties in the Landtag this session.
CDU and SPD coalition on the cards, which circles back to the question of cynically not giving the voters what they want.
Tired: Bjorn’s beers
Wired: Bjorn’s unfortunately flammable house at 3AM
From my perspective it’s a good result: the Greens came last.
Perhaps this speaks to Tim’s point. Germany is not short of green lunacy because the regular parties have “co-opted” sufficient of the policies to render the actual Greens redundant.
I was going to bring that up. There was a couple of interesting graphics on Tageschau on Monday night:
One showed the number of voters who had moved from SPD to the AfD, IIRC around 9,000. That’s some swing in both politics and numbers.
The other was the number of 16 to 18 YOs who supported the AfD which IIRC was around 25%. When I saw it I thought Labour are playing with fire giving votes to the under 18s.
That was easier to find than I thought and a lot more voters that I remembered as well.
ARD Mediathek is your friend.
Since stopping paying my licence fee. I have disconnected my satellites so only occasionally have a look at German TV.
Mayasa Mandia, a recent graduate living in the small Danish town of Kokkedal, will be voting for the left in Tuesday’s general election – but it won’t be for Mette Frederiksen’s Social Democrats.
The 23-year-old, a practising Muslim, says that under Frederiksen’s government far-right commentary has become normalised in the Danish mainstream. She has seen this, she says, at her own university, where there were discussions about banning prayers.
“There are more important issues to talk about than the skin tone of someone or whether or not they wear a scarf on their head and whether that scarf is reflective of our Danish values or not,” said Mandia.
Foreign Muslima has very strong opinions on what Danish people should care about. Many such cases!
When, on the campaign trail, Frederiksen said she did not want Denmark to receive any refugees from Iran, which is under attack from the US and Israel, Mandia felt the prime minister was courting those rightwing voters. The difference in her approach to those fleeing war from Ukraine, she said, was “hypocritical” – and telling.
“We should be open to give asylum to them the same way we open to give asylum to western people affected by war,” she said.
Muslim wants more Muslims in Denmark! That must be one of the things that are more important than skin tone or religion then?
.
“Frederiksen said she did not want Denmark to receive any refugees from Iran “
Yes, and rightly so…..
Anybody decent GTFO decades ago when the Mullahs actually took over.
But the people fleeing Iran will be the mad murdering dealth cultists. WT*F* would you be actively demanding they be let ubti the country?
Yeah. Why have we got in England Iranians who are pro-ayatollah? Surely they ought to want to be in Iran?
I mean, don’t get me wrong, I see no reason why we’re housing anti-ayatollah Iranians either. But that does at least have the patina of making some sort of sense.
There comes a time when you’re digging a hole when you realise you can’t get out. That’ss where MTK is now and he’s brought the rest of us down to join him…
The Danish election has resulted in a right mess. The Social Dems won, but still lost a dozen seats and Ms Frederickson has resigned.
The Danish Peoples Party gained 6.5% and now have 16 seats.
The Socialists have a narrow majority over any rightist coalition, but there is a big bloc of unaligned ‘Moderates’ who will decide the eventual result.
Ah, the wonders of PR.
Peter Hitchens, definitely not of this parish, made a point that if you ignore the electorate you will get what they want eventually and it will likely be worse. His argument being in terms of crime and punishment – if you get soft “punishments” then eventually vigilantism will arise. I think this is a similar position. The public want less migration, especially from non Judeo-Christian societies. Either the governments give that or the voters will elect people who will do that far more severely than they want…