These numbers are from 2013 they were much higher in 2015.

Compared to the OECD average of 830, 5700 is extreme. To get some perspective 11700 per million were born in Sweden in 2016.

Anyhow I don't want to derail this thread any further.

Its totally arbitrary to say its extreme, 5700 is objectively a small proportion, it might be a larger proportion than other countries, but it is still a tiny % of over all population.

You have been made afraid of a bogyman that does not really exist and wont have any real negative impact on you, to divert attention away from things that do exist and will actually have negative impacts on you.

A classic far right tactic is being used here: imply something is abnormal by selective use of data. There are an infinite number of ways to do that. You can say it was the highest absolute amount. You can say it was the highest amount in a given time-frame (which can be drawn around inevitable random spikes). You can say it was the highest amount in the G20 or localized geographical area. Etc etc.

It will always be the highest absolute something.

Are you f***ing serious?

Marn is a Swedish Democrat. They are an explicitly fascist party. They were wearing nazi uniforms until the mid-90's, and the subsequent inevitable rebranding. I don't have to argue or convince anybody that a group that dressed up in nazi uniforms is racist.

Jesus, what next? "You can't call Hitler an anti-semite just because he murdered millions of Jews?".

Even though SD has questionable roots, they are something completely different today than the early 90's.

Wikipedia,

Anyhow GBV is just trying to provoke a reaction and doesn't seem to be interested at all in the facts of the matter, I won't be responding to him anymore. I would advice looking up the facts yourself if he makes any more sweeping claims.

The numbers are not by any means tiny compared to the overall population growth, comparing to total population is not very meaningful. Asylum immigration also goes hand to hand with immigration of family members of those granted permanent residency.

In 2015: 134 240 people immigrated and 114 870 were born

In 2016, 163 005 people immigrated and 117 425 were born

http://www.scb.se/en/finding-statist...on-statistics/

Again with the use of selective argument.

Let's look at their more recent history, also on that wikipedia page:

The Sweden Democrats have, among all Swedish parliamentary parties, had the largest share of elected municipal representatives resign since the 2010 elections (27.8%).[116] Many of these resignations were brought on by racist statements or actions by these representatives.[116]

In November 2012, party spokesperson Erik Almqvist resigned after he had been caught on tape making racist and sexist statements.[117] Another video later surfaced, showing how Almqvist, in addition to party spokesperson Kent Ekeroth and party official Christian Westling were arming themselves with aluminium pipes before they sought out a confrontation with Soran Ismail, a Swedish comedian of Kurdish descent.[118]

In November 2012, parliamentarian Lars Isovaara resigned after accusing two people of foreign origin of stealing his bag (which Isovaara had left at a restaurant) and then proceeding to verbally abuse a security guard of a foreign background.[119] Isovaara's replacement in parliament, Markus Wiechel, was found in April 2013 to have referred to a group of black people as "monkeys".[120]

In March 2013, 12 individuals were thrown out of the party for their involvement in neo-Nazi or other extremist movements.[121]

In November 2013, parliamentarian and then vice party leader Jonas Åkerlund gained attention for having called immigrants "parasites" during a broadcast on SD's own radio station in 2002, after the recording was publicly rediscovered. In his defence, Åkerlund stated that he only said it to provoke people.[122]

In September 2014, a few weeks before the general election, the party chairman of the local Stockholm branch, Christoffer Dulny resigned from his position. He had been posting mocking comments about immigrants, calling them "shameless liers" on alternative media sites.[123] He also resigned from his newly won position in the parliament on the same day he was elected, 29 September 2014.[124]

In October 2016, a video of the parliamentarian and economic policy spokesperson Oscar Sjöstedt making antisemitic jokes was released. Whilst at a party, believed to have taken place in 2011, he laughingly told a story about former co-workers with Nazi sympathies mocking Jews and comparing them to sheep.[125]

During the same month, the parliamentarian and second vice party leader Carina Herrstedt was confronted with having sent an allegedly racist, antisemitic, homophobic and antiziganist email to her then spouse in 2011. The email, which had been leaked from the party's internal servers, for instance contained phrases that named black football players from the team Landskrona BoIS as ******s whilst also picturing Romani people as thieves.[126]

In December 2016, the parliamentarian Anna Hagwall was thrown out of the party after using arguments associated with antisemitism to argue for a bill that she introduced in parliament intended to reduce concentration of media ownership in Sweden


In short, the party is a fascist party that mostly keeps its racist mouth shut in public. As soon as they get a few drinks inside them all the racist **** comes out.

And no, they aren't nazis any more. Most of the far right has moved on from Jews and now concentrates on hating muslims/arabs.

Yes there have been and are racists within the party, but they get rid of them after most incidents. I wish there was a better alternative, but I just can't support the status quo.

Quote:

12 individuals were thrown out of the party for their involvement in neo-Nazi or other extremist movements.[121]

They were allegedly in contact with the German NPD(an actual far right party), if their involvement went deeper than that is unclear. Anyhow they are no longer in the party.

How did Marn manage to derail yet another thread with his rants about Muslim immigration in Sweden?

Bringing this away from Swedish racists and back to French racists, Betfair has these odds:

Macron 36%
Fillon 32%
Le Pen 29%

On a scale of 1 to Trump, how scared should I be of this Fillon guy?

1 + (Trump / 10)

He's leader of the main centre right party.

He was Sarkozy's Prime Minster and I can't remember anything about him. In the current political climate, this can only be a relatively good thing.

The risk remains that he moves his party further to the right to capture Le Pen's votes, but it's hard to say from here (UK) because most commentators are talking about Macron and Le Pen.

The political situation of Le Pen / FN in France seem similar enough to Austria's Hofer / FPÖ to be an interesting comparison imo. If Austria is any indication at all then Le Pen is probably way overrated in those odds.

Austria's first round results:
Hofer (far-right FPÖ): 35%
Van der Bellen (Greens): 21%
Griss (Ind., center/right): 19%
Hundsdorfer (Social Democrats): 11%
Khol (Conservatives): 11%

Total center-left, VdB + Hundsdorfer: 32%
Total center-right, Rest: 68%

Hofer won the first round in a landslide and Van der Bellen was arguably the most vulnerable serious candidate for the second round, as a left-wing Green in a country with a comfortable center-right majority.

Hofer failed to win the second round twice, both times as a 70-80% betting favorite, achieving 49.7% (annulled) and 46.2% (final).

I guess the lesson is that these far-right parties have a fairly hard ceiling and a significant number of conservative voters will rather vote for a Green candidate than far-right. Both Fillon and Macron seem considerably more centrist and should have no problems with unifying the non-FN vote, as has happened in the past. (Looking up that past election, that seems like an epic ceiling: In the 2002 election Le Pens father got 16.9% in the first round of a 16-way race and finished with 17.8% in the 2-way second ffs.)

I've a very hard time seeing how Le Pen wins this 29% of the time, she seems to be drawing to some major scandal or unfortunately timed terrorist attack. Plus she has that EU funding scandal going for herself. Kind of mad I don't have access to Betfair/Predictit here, betting against Le Penn (and Petry) looks like easy money.

Here's Fillon's 15 key claims - in French I'm afraid.

It's basically austerity-light stuff, lots of government cuts and light de-regulation of the private sector that will magically produce jobs. With the requisite spend more on security and defence, obviously.

The mild Trump-like stuff comes at the end when he says he's going to introduce immigration quotas and not pay any regular benefits to immigrants until they've been in France for a few years - though that's an almost mainstream right position in the UK too.

The one that scares me personally is that he'll limit adoption and things like IVF to heterosexual couples, and ban surrogate pregnancies. France seems much more conservative on stuff like this than I, as a British person, am used to, so I'm possibly a poor judge, but it's something I've seen discussed on the news here - that Fillon is an unusually socially conservative person, even by French standards, and, once he's in place will let that side of things come out more.

Interesting analysis. I've been mulling over betting against Le Pen since seeing those odds. I bet on Trump and on Brexit, so it would make an interesting and welcome change for me.

There is a comprehensive list of polls on wikipedia: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_...A7aise_de_2017

It's true that Le Pen has a low ceiling but the scariest polls have her doing 27% in the first round and 45% in the second, which is too high for me to start relaxing 2 months before the election. And no one polled her vs anyone from the left wing in the second round.

My shook-meter puts her below 29% but not by much.

And a best 42% vs Macron. It's not reassuring.

These polls neglect to some extent that the other candidates are still campaigning against each other though. Pretty much every candidate from the first round is expected to support the non-FN candidate eventually, no?

Yeah but that's what happened in the US, the Republican establishment and the Bernie supporters all coalesced around opposition to Trump but that simply allowed him to define the agenda and gave credibility to his claims to be anti-establishment. Brexit was similar.

Yes, everyone campaigning against her can really go both ways, or not move the needle at all since it wont be new information to the voters. It looks like you're looking for reasons to believe that she cant win imo. I did that a lot for Trump and I'll just stay cautiously pessimistic this time.

Maybe I'm too optimistic about France, but the comparison doesn't seem accurate. The GOP establishment never really opposed Trump after the primaries. Trump won the primaries with roughly 50% of GOP support (comparable to 27% Le Pen support overall) and most voters simply fell in line after that and voted for their usual "team" even if they were not thrilled about the candidate.

I'd argue that in an US with 4 parties (Bernie, Clinton, GOPe, Trump), Trump never wins a run-off against Clinton if GOPe fully endorses her over Trump.

You may well be right and I hope you are.

One factor that might tip this election: some utterly clueless Jews have openly supported Marine Le Pen in previous elections due to her anti-arab stance, despite the party and her Father's long history of anti-semitism.

With what is going on in the US right now they must surely be reconsidering.

Newest polls seem to show this. Macron is polling at about 25%, Fillon stuck at 20%. Think the endorsement by Bayrou might be quite important, from what I hear Bayrou was and still is a popular guy who got 19% in the first round in 2007 as a centrist. And the Fillon scandal won't go away and actually seems to get worse.

And Macron still leads Le Pen by wide margins in all 2nd round polls while Fillon's lead vs Le Pen is shrinking...still a lot can change, but many reasons to be optimistic for Macron I think...

And generally I just think that against Macron, Le Pen won't profit from the anti-establishment/anti-elite sentiment like Trump did. I'm neither French nor American, but my take is that the anti-elitism is quite different in these 2 countries.

In the US, the intellectual elite is disliked by wide parts of the population, but the business elite is more popular. So an anti-intellectual business guy like Trump was a good fit for many people. In France, Intellectuals are quite highly regarded while the business elite is often demonized.

Yes, Macron was a investment banker for a short time and made some money, but he also studied philosophy and seems much more the intellectual type than the business man. And despite being part of the elite, politically he's an outsider because he's not running for one of the two traditional major parties. Add that together and he's a much stronger candidate against rightwing populism than Clinton was.

macronmania


https://twitter.com/AlbertoNardelli/...91524484825088