You're doing exactly the same. The difference is I'm telling you how the system works and you're complaining that it works that way.
I think you should just accept the fact that SD simply doesn't have enough popular support and the party itself can't find a willing partner to cooperate with to gain influence through a coalition.
This is democracy - you don't always get what you want.
But you refuse to accept that and instead complains that the other parties should have a responsibility to push for SD's policies as well - which simply isn't true of course.
And it's obvious you're only doing that because you really want to see SD's policies get more influence.
That they have all the influence they are entitled to in a democratic system, because they and their supporters aren't more numerous then they are and that they aren't interested in cooperating with anyone else doesn't really bother you.
But unless you want to get rid of democracy all together you have to accept that this is often going to happen to the party and the policies you like the most - they won't be in power and the policies won't be in place.
You want to portray the system as undemocratic and flawed just because the political situation in Sweden isn't the one you would have wanted, but there's nothing wrong with the system at all - it's just that SD lacks the popular support to gain any influence.
And also, as I said, the fact that the SD-party's leadership are acting like idiots in our party politics - stating impossible demands to other parties and so on.
So no - I don't think we're getting much further in this discussion.
I'm talking about the system as it is and has been since we gained democracy, and you're only interested in how SD and it's policies could get more influence then they currently have by complaining about this system.
But there's nothing wrong with the system - you just don't like the outcome in this case.
That's all.
0
@Mickey
You're doing exactly the same. The difference is I'm telling you how the system works and you're complaining that it works that way.
I think you should just accept the fact that SD simply doesn't have enough popular support and the party itself can't find a willing partner to cooperate with to gain influence through a coalition.
This is democracy - you don't always get what you want.
But you refuse to accept that and instead complains that the other parties should have a responsibility to push for SD's policies as well - which simply isn't true of course.
And it's obvious you're only doing that because you really want to see SD's policies get more influence.
That they have all the influence they are entitled to in a democratic system, because they and their supporters aren't more numerous then they are and that they aren't interested in cooperating with anyone else doesn't really bother you.
But unless you want to get rid of democracy all together you have to accept that this is often going to happen to the party and the policies you like the most - they won't be in power and the policies won't be in place.
You want to portray the system as undemocratic and flawed just because the political situation in Sweden isn't the one you would have wanted, but there's nothing wrong with the system at all - it's just that SD lacks the popular support to gain any influence.
And also, as I said, the fact that the SD-party's leadership are acting like idiots in our party politics - stating impossible demands to other parties and so on.
So no - I don't think we're getting much further in this discussion.
I'm talking about the system as it is and has been since we gained democracy, and you're only interested in how SD and it's policies could get more influence then they currently have by complaining about this system.
But there's nothing wrong with the system - you just don't like the outcome in this case.
That's all.