Sweden's Political Crisis: How Andersson Only Lasted 7 Hour as Prime Minister - TLDR News 

I hear Summoning Salt is already writing a world record history on this subject.

For somebody to beat it would actually be millions to one.

LOL, this is exactly what it sounds like

Next one will be a pm that resigns after 5 minutes.

I mean it's going to be hard to win against Louis XiX when it comes to shortest time in power. The guy's reign lasted less than 20 min, since he resigned right after accessing the throne, the 20 min were literally the time it took to complete the formalities.

Spain: First Time?

Israel: hold my dreidel

Italy: pathetic

Canada: first time?

Ireland in the 80’s.

Next prime minister: "Thanks for 7 minutes"

Swedish prime ministers in 2030: “Thanks for seven plank times”

Well It has just been Black Friday, so everything is at a much lower price or time.

Do you mean the Sweden Democrats (SD) or the Social Democrats (S)?

They should blame the center party for this crisis, refusing to work with another coalition member and then siding with the opposition to pass a new budget

@@user-vb2ur5us6i I will give you a hint: which party does Madam Andersson belongs to?

@@ryankahler2034 nah, they have been cristal clear during the negotiations that the commies should have no influence on the budget, if they were to support it. Since the socialists did in fact negotiate with the commies anyway, the center party was right not to vote for it. The real culprit here is unfortunately the green party, that left the government with no prior warning. They were the ones that could have prevented this. You can't blame the centrists for voting for their own budget proposal.

@@user-vb2ur5us6i Pretty sure OP means the social democrats (S) in this context, and not the Sweden democrats (SD)

On another note I'm always impressed when this channel covers swedish politics. It makes you trustworthy for other countries' politics.

She was never the prime minister tho, to formally become the prime minister the king has to validate her.

@@OHOE1 Are you sure you're not thinking of the UK?

​@@pelledanasten1615 If you want to be picky, the new prime minister is validated by the speaker during a meeting (konselj) "in the presence" of the head of state. So the head of state may not actually DO anything, but he or she has to BE PRESENT... Which is very important... somehow... (Regeringsformen 6 kap. 6$ " När riksdagen har godkänt ett förslag om ny statsminister, ska han eller hon så snart det kan ske anmäla de övriga statsråden för riksdagen. Därefter äger regeringsskifte rum vid en särskild konselj inför statschefen eller, om statschefen har förhinder, inför talmannen. Talmannen ska alltid kallas till konseljen. Talmannen utfärdar förordnande för statsministern på riksdagens vägnar.")

@@KrappiTheClown Hum, not how we do it here in Norway. And if I'm reading that correct the speaker of the parliament can take on the role of the king if and *only* if the king is unable to attend a council approving the ministers.

as a non-Romanian i want to know whats happening there too, please report on Romania!

got to love his swedish

Incoming report from Roumania: The situation is pretty fuckin teribble (as always).

My Romanian mate told me loosely about it, so I second a proper video on it!

@@wargamerproducions In a nutshell: Two long time enemies and a party, whom everyone hates (even the people, they represent) decided, to form a government together, after the country had none for a month. The funny part is, that Romania changing her government and having none for a couple of weeks, in every year, is not only totally normal, but expected. Since the 1989 revolution, the country changed her Prime Minister 26 times. In the last 9 years, we've had 14 different Prime Ministers.

*summoning salt music blares *

Is it normal in swedish politics to run with an opposition budget? Because to me it sounds ludicrous.

@@louisr6560 No, but it's happened at least once before in recent memory. And yeah, they're generally quite unhappy about it. This time Andersson knew what was coming, so she reluctantly accepts.

@@louisr6560 no, that is partly why the Green party left the government. It is shameful for the ruling party. It is not only the fact that it is "only" the opposition's budget, it is also that the budget contain right wing reforms that would have to be carried out by a left wing government. Therefore it is shameful.

@@xway2 no, Andersson hoped her budget would pass. The center party didn't let it and that made the Green party leave. When the Green party left Andersson thought her government would be too weak to rule, hence her resignation.

@@daniel931016 Always interesting to see how inter-party politics works. Is this particular scenario a uniquely Swedish phenomenon, or do other Scandinavian nations have similar stonewalls?

Unfortunately I also do not have an aptitude for politics and government workings etc. But I still love watching videos about these things, even if I struggle to keep up.

That’s why he said “ex communist” and not “communist”

It is noteworthy though, that the last party leader of V not too long ago actually came out as a communist during his leadership of that party. Even if they are not officially communists, many members still hold those ideas

@@PetterssonRobin i still don't understand why European and westerns r so afraid/ agitated by communism.

They don't say the ex-nazi party about the Sweden Democrats, even though it was created by nazis in 1988.

@@tinahalder8416 probably because it’s evil and some euros in the east had first hand experience

He actually said yesterday he would try to form a government if asked by the speaker, but that was mostly a way of putting pressure on the Centre Party.

The world doesn't care.

@@v1das007 I think that’s quite a bit of a generalization of a planet. Conversely it wouldn’t be particularly unique in Scandinavia. So you’re not completely off the mark.

@@erikthomsen4768 That was my point. Policy is much more important than the gender of your new PM. I don't get this strange excitement about her being a woman, as if something unheard of has happened.

She wears that little badge proudly on her Steam profile.

French system is pathetic. It resembles one man dictatorship rather. Which creates high probability of corruption, resentment, distress and massive protests like yellow vests.

Remember over here in France corrupt people stick to power even if they get scandal.

Indeed! Foreign events always look extra exciting.

Agreed. Legally it was little more than a clerical oversight, practically it was something to watch while nomming popcorn, politically it was(is) a bid for approval in time for next years' election. Amusing, for sure, but ultimately of little consequence.

You have to understand one thing, the simplistic mind of the English voter cannot grasp more complex electoral and parliamentary setups...

@@oldskoolmusicnostalgia whew. Chaunism much?

thats wrong because the SD have the political power now and their influence is growing because the government doesn’t listen to the people soon enough they will be the second biggest party in the riksdag

Seconded Ö is like the i in bird or the ea in heard.

It's important to understand why the Centre doesn't want them to have influence on the budget.

@@DaDunge Yeah, sure. No redscare involved… I mean, the party shifted from its previous stances in 1964 with the election of Eurocommunist C H Hermansson and collaborated openly with the socialdemocrats since the 1953 congress where anti-oportunism was purged in the party. So I rather feel it’s a bit too tilted towards scaremongering. That’s like pretending the Spanish PCE is a radical communist cell… Ehem. Sure. But sure, if we ought to call everybody by their previous positions we should consider the Moderate Party the party that voted against universal male suffrage and female suffrage. Sounds a bit fishy doesn’t it?

@@ricardogaliano9333 That was a hundred years ago.

@@DaDunge Yep. Precisely. Studying the subtleties of the evolution of one or other political structures requires commitment with a nuanced analysis of their orientations, discourse, factions, history, etc. So using certain shortcomings once can be understandable but up to three times out of context and with no further explanation just doesn’t reflect the kind of rigor one expects. It’s not dooming but just pesky.

@@ricardogaliano9333 In more reacnt decades they had a leader who was openly a commie while he was the leader so it's still revelant

This is not a shitshow this is working as designed, Sweden is made to be able to be ruled with a minority government.

Good for central and Eastern Europeans, good for Danes, Belgians and Italians. Good for news outlets in Sweden, they get some extra sales. And good as a reminder for the Swedes. This has been the most exciting happening since the formation of this minority government, three years ago.

except Russia, Poland and Hungary which governments are made by single party

@@ermin2248 polish government is not made up of a single party its made up of a coalition the Law and Justice Party(the largest party), United Poland, and Jaroslaw Gowin Agreement and they have only a 2 voter majority so if any of the coalition partners leaves the government collapses, also Hungary's government is a coalition but techincally Fidesz still has a majority and KDNP is puppet partner, Russia on the other hand though...

@@walrus1074 you're right but those parties in coalition are basicly PIS's puppets

Its not archaic spellings. Å Ä Ö is more modern than all other letters. And if you know something about French for example you know they have more "letters" (they aint counted as letters but in practicality are) with dots. Many nations have them. Many nations even have Ä and Ö etc. So stop being silly.

@@littlesaints91 what kind of weird trolling attempt is this?

@@olofiswatching you trolled by calling Å Å and Ö archaic. But you have 0 knowledge about linguistics.

@@littlesaints91 Her name means “leaf” and the modern spelling is “Löv” and also how it is pronounced. It’s the “f” that is archaic. Maybe you shouldn’t speak so confidently about things you don’t understand.

Nope. The budget is a law, and laws are made by parliament. A minor "update" will be made in about half-a-year.

We did not get One. She was only voted to be the next.

Well she didn’t have a choice did she? Hopefully she doesn’t succeed on her second attempt.

@@georgewilliams7233 Wow. You must be really late on this one because she already is PM again.

@@Cloud_Seeker Still not Sweden’s Pm until skiftelskonseljen

@@georgewilliams7233 She might not have formally accepted the position by the king, but she is for all intent and purposes the PM.

I don't pronounce Lööf as Löv, I pronounce it as Lööf because that's what her name is

Actually Swedes say it with the diphtong

The Moderates doesn't have that stance anymore. Also, no one should be compromising with them.

@@scorpioninpink why

I mean, not compromising with a far right party doesn't sound so bad in my opinion.

This crisis had nothing to do with the Sweden Democrats. This whole issue was because C wants to vote through a prime minister but also vote through the oppositions budget. Stop your crocodile tears, you SD apologists.

The Weimar Republic wants your number about working together with far right groups. Worked out well for them to work with Hitler. No democracy can allow that ever again.

Hear!, hear!

Their actions say otherwise. The reason they wouldn't vote for the governments budget was because of the increased pensions that (v) managed to get (s) to agree to after much resistance. To wit, an increase of 1000kr a month.

Nice.... True that...

Because the left literally had "Left party the communists" as their name while SD has never had any official Nazi policies. SD had a decent amount of individual nazis yes, but the party as a whole has never driven nazi policies.

@@halamadrid5238 That is not true. When the party was founded they were explicitly a Nazi party and had lots of official Nazi policies. Just because they never had the word "Nazi" in their name it doesn't mean they weren't Nazis.

@@klaseniusproductions7591 they were not a nazi party lmfao. Please give me sources that say exactly what nazi ideas they had on a PARTY level.

Get your facts straight, all the founders of SD weren't neo-nazis. One of the founders even fought in the Waffen SS as a Panzergrenadier. These guys were old school. None of this wish washy neo stuff.

Apart from that their leaders have said they are communists. You can paint a pig in whatever color you want, but nothing change that it is a pig. They are communists. They are not ex communists. They are communists. They are the new modern version of communist.

If anything they're biased towards the right, because they kept mentioning how the left party used to be communists. While that is true, it's a bit weird that they didn't then also mention how the Sweden Democrats used to be nazis

@@klaseniusproductions7591 both sides are hereby based and redpilled

He is quoting Greens.

@@klaseniusproductions7591 More just amazed that people are still using the terms "left" or "Right" as if they were sitting in the French parliament. I will be surprised if any Swedish party's platform was supporting increasing the power of the Bourbons on the throne of France.

They say polarization is due to unhappy populace while moderation a happy one. It seems the entire world is trending toward unhappiness because more people are voting to their political extreme. Not only that but moderates are usually chastised by both.

Yeah, sadly political shit flinging has become very popular these last few years. The Right blame the Left for everything bad they can think of the the Left does the same with the right. Compromises are seen as weakness, cooperation seen as sin. Meanwhile nothing gets done, not even obvious things like help the elderly, which all sides know needs to be handled.

Actually this debacle has cost the Left in the polls while the Social democrats have increased. SD is on the same ~20% they have had since 2015 and the moderates are dipping slightly. truth be told not much is going to change.

@@DaDunge That's not entirely correct. The left party is still predicted to gain about 2 percentage points from 8% to 10%. The Sweden democrats were at 13-14% in 2015 and 17,5% in 2018. Even though the growth for both parties is slowing down, they're both still expected to grow by several percentage points. Which could be quite significant.

The Sweden Democrats will gain anywhere from 3% to 6% from the last election somewhere around 20-23% very impressive for a party that was polling at 3% 10 years ago

very very few countries have had female leaders

It is kinda odd, but I think its just a coincidence. For example, the swedish democrats, who have basically been the biggest party since forever, had their first female leader 2007. Its just that they didnt get to form government then. On top of that, pretty much all parties have had a female leader at one point and currently 6/8 of the parties in parliament have a female leader.

Yeah, it's been kinda embarrassing really. All parties have had female leaders except Sweden Democrats. It was expected to happen when Mona Sahlin became leader for the Social Democrats back in 2007, but even though she lasted four years, they were out of power when she became their party leader, and her coalition also lost the 2010 election.

It's because the assumed heir to the social democrats after the long leadership of Göran Person was a woman called Anna Lindh who was stabbed to death in a mall in Stockholm during the Swedish Euro referendum. The social democrats haven't had a stable leader since.

It has a simple explanation. The Social Democrats have had two intended female candidates before. Mona Sahlin and Anna Lindh. But Sahlin was caught stealing tax money, and Lindh was sadly murdered. Andersson is the third attempt.

I highly doubt that the government raises rents. Or is that much property owned by the government in Sweden? I suspect we have the same issue in Sweden as in most European cities: slews of regulations discouraging building, international financial speculators buying up property and leaving it empty to declare losses and loads of migrants flooding the low income housing market with sudden demand.

@@Valnotersc Sweden has rent controls which limits the maximum amount of rent a landlord can set for an apartment depending on area, size, etc. If rent controls are removed, landlords can ask for whatever price they want which, considering the current housing situation in Sweden, wouldn't be very good for most people.

Yep. I'm not a leftist, I've never voted V, and I absolutely respect them more for what they did. They took a stand and didn't back down - they'd already made so many concessions, and at some point C and S needed to give V something back. They chose not to do that, and V did exactly what they said they'd do. Perfectly reasonable. I used to be way closer to C politically but their behavior these last couple of years has been extremely disappointing. For a long time I was closer to L than any other, but they've completely destroyed themselves. Just burned it down and salted the earth. S have been clinging to power at any cost since the election, and they've sacrificed a lot of their own integrity for it. But yeah. The leftists are the only ones who've acted in a way I can actually respect. They compromised as much as they could, but they were always clear on what their critical issues were. C could've prevented the whole mess by backing down in time - instead they waited until after the vote of no confidence, until it was too late, to retract their rent control proposal. They're so fixated on never working with V that they're sabotaging themselves.

@@Valnotersc the rent control situation is that our current system is supposed to prevent extremely inflated rent. It's far from perfect, but C wanted to cut that even further. There's no way that won't lead to skyrocketing rent, at least in major cities - and rents here (I live in Stockholm) are already climbing like crazy with no end in sight and far, far more demand than there is supply. Building new apartments is great and all, we absolutely have a need, but what use are they if people can't afford them?

@@FaerieDust Couldn't have said it better myself. Also used to be closer to L, but not anymore for the aforementioned reasons lol. They're only liberal when they feel like it, and that's usually only when it comes to objectively destructive legislation like nuking rent controls.

There is no way for that to happen right now.

@@vonnikon I mean next year when it is election

@@kristianmattsson1770 maybe. But there are three big problems which speak against that: L will likely not reach the 4% threshold, which will kill the chances for a right majority. C will not work with SD. And SD might actually get more votes than M, in which case Jimmie would be prime minister.

@@kristianmattsson1770 we might be heading towards a time where S and M will be forced to work together.

Yes but it produces good results. At least it did before the far right started messing stuff up and breaking unwritten rules.

The system itself is in fact not very complicated, but the situation is. The system is just a proportional parliamentary system. The people elect parliament (representation is based on the proportions of votes), and parliament elects the prime minister. With the small quirk that it is enough for a PM to be tolerated by the majority of parliament, rather than having majority support (to make it easier to form governments). The system has worked very well for a long time. But ever since the Sweden Democrats arrived on the scene, the prospects for forming 'natural' coalitions have been crushed. Neither side holds a majority on their own, and as such, they are constantly forced to deal 'over the aisle', leading to very complicated negotiations with many conditions of support. The Center Party is for instance neoliberal, whereas the Left party is socialist, but they both support the Social Democrats as they don't want the Sweden Democrats (nationalists) to have influence. It is very hard for the Social Democrats to please both. Different political cleavages are no longer aligned the way they used, and the parties struggle to readjust.

Very few Swedes would see advantages in the Westminster-type democracy.

@@jmolofsson it used to be a democracy, now its a criminal empire, protected by law.

@@nadeemchaudhry6585 Lol how pathetic this comment is, this government is doing just fine, and has quite a lot of support.

Nothing. I don't think you can change the budget as the show as to go on. They are just going to have to live with the oppositions budget until the next budget comes along, which is an outright shame for the government. To have to achieve their goals on the money the opposition assigns.

Well at least Denmark fought the Germans, the Swedes just sold weapons and steal to them, making a profit on the war by being a German allied. Also the 6 hours isn't really true as the fighting did go on longer, and the recistences fought the entire time. And with the K/D ratio we had it was a okay fight, given the difference in weapons tech and being landlocked to Germany.

@@-JustHuman- I know what happened in Danmark my Grandfather was a station master and my uncle worked in the slaughter house so he knew when the trains would be leaving and packed the explosives in the carcasses then ensured they were loaded into different trucks to maximise damage when the train was well into Germany. My mother has told me of the bodies of young German sailors shot by the SS near the end of the war for mutiny floating in the sound.

For us Europeans this system is completely normal and from our perspective USA has weird and chaotic system

Really we can’t laugh the US is a joke

@@ermin2248 It's only a perspective. The US system runs seamless from one government to another without difficulty. We don't suffer the trauma of transition that other countries have repeatedly experienced in their histories.

@@alexanderishere6205 The joke is on you.

@@jamesmartello1 well not really.

What are you even saying?

@@leiftorbjorn5621 hes calling out identity politics

The budget gets decided not by the government, but by the parliament. That's why there can be more budget proposals. Of course, a stable government should also rely on its supporting parties also supporting the own budget and getting a majority in the parliament...

Which could lead to some craziness, if there is lot of competing budgets. 4 about equally competing budgets and the win threshold would be 25% of the parliament. That is always the risk of plurality win condition. With lot of candidates it goes crazy town, when some extreme proposal nobody else wants manages to pass through based on their hard code but limited support, when all the main blocks bicker with each others proposals and can't agree on common proposal. Since the voting method allows theoretical win situation without having to come to common compromise. It becomes a small numbers game of fractured proposals (or candidates in case of office elections). None of the say 4 other blocks would ever support the 5th extreme one, but hey they managed to coble together a hard core of 20%. All the others are used to various in coalitions governing, since in multiparty democracy it has splintered to small numbers game around 20%. Where then the real governing and decision making happens via the coalition negotiations. Voters then know they are mostly voting on "how much leverage can our team get in the negotiating and what coalitions are possible. The more seats our team has the less partners they need." However this budget vote style then completely ignores this situation in worst case, if everybody decides to put in their own proposal on not being able to agree on a budget. Then the 20% supported budget, that 80% of parliament absolutely despises gets through "accidentally". Where say the 4 others proposals are actual much closer to each other and are really bickering over technicalities and specifics, but hey the most extreme one nobody else is even close to gets through. Since the others all listed their own proposals of minute differences as separate proposals to the vote. There is a reason laws aren't usually decided on plurality, but majority win factor. With all the amendments voted in as separate votes, again with majority win limit. "this change of one clause of this new law text: yes, no?" Since plurality is risky system. Be it then even say negative majority limit, still majority limit. Since laws as do budgets impact the whole country.... thus they should have legitimacy of majority support in country, demonstrated indirectly via majority win factor in parliament. Otherwise.... laws risk starting to face legitimacy crisis and that is a bad bad road. "This law was not supported by majority, so why should I follow it anyway?"

@@kosinusify I'm not very well versed in the nature of the Swedish executive branch, but it would be more efficient and suitable that the national budget should be only presented by the one body expected to execute it. It must, of course, be subject to the approval of the legislative (where all the support for any executive lies), but in general terms it's never a good idea, even in parliamentarist countries, to have this kind of fragmentation regarding the executive. For all intended purposes, it's more of a covert extra no confidence vote. I understand where it might enhance democratic participation, but to my view it disturbs more than it helps.

@@jorge6207 parliament has had the power of taxation since the mid-1500s One of the explanations for people's trust in the state authorities You don't change old traditions without very good reasons.