Comments by "Luredreier" (@Luredreier) on "Sweden's Political Crisis: How Andersson Only Lasted 7 Hour as Prime Minister - TLDR News" video.

@lucaskp16 That's not how kingdoms works. It's like saying someone is a President in the US before being sworn in. Yes, you're right that the King or Queen doesn't formally decide who becomes prime minister anymore, but they do instate the prime minister after an election, making their position formal in the same way a swearing in of a president in the US does.
21
@lobaxx Joy... The center party in Sweden sounds horrible... Ours here in Norway on the other hand is probably the most pragmatist party in our whole parliament. They'll work with anyone to get their politics through. They've even worked with the local Nazies back in the day, prior to the war. Our center party has worked with the left several times in the last few years, although their nationalistic, immigration-sceptic and anti-predator (and other anti-enviromentalist) policies doesn't go to well with left wing ideology. But like I said before, they're masters at working out ways to work with other political parties and adapting their values to match with theirs.
3
@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.
3
@lobaxx Hum, factions within that party could probably get more done by splitting off from the Swedish center party and merging with factions within other parties splitting off from theirs. Agrarianism, subsidies, protectionism, pragmatism, this is all things that works well enough with the left. As for the whole immigration thing. Our center is anti-immigration in general, but that doesn't mean that they're opposed to seasonal work immigration. It's more about nationalism and protecting our culture etc. Their immigration policy is fairly pragmatic, they don't want a full stop in immigration because Norway needs to replace people due to our birth rate. And farms etc does need workers. But they want limited immigration rates, and immigrants that benefits us if you get my meaning. And of course working with parties that wants more immigration they're of course willing to conceede accepting people on humanitarian grounds, as long as this is kept within "reasonable" levels. In essence, on paper they're a "left wing" party, palatable enough to left wing voters to be acceptable coalition partners for the real left wing parties. But they tend to be the party that holds back a lot of left wing values in the coalition negotiations in favour of their own interests. Hence why our socialist left party actually decided to pull out of the coalition negotiations after our latest election, since the center party just drove too hard a bargain and wasn't willing to give in enough on enviromental issues...
2
@PetterssonRobin Nah, this was the center party and the left that shared had responsibility. Since the left knew S couldn't rule without the center party and that the center party wouldn't accept any budget with their influence demanding such a change was endangering the coalition, and the center party refusing any budget influenced by the left caused the goverment to fall. It's not like the Greens hadn't made their position on the SP clear a long time ago... It would have been better if S, C and V sat down to negotiate some kind of compromise instead of just posing ultimatums against eachother like that. Or alternatively if C isn't willing to cooperate with V at all then they shouldn't support either directly or indirectly a goverment that's ruling with their help.
2