Thread: Danish Election 2015- How would you vote?

Originally Posted by Carjosse

That is how I though it worked, turns out it is much more convoluted.

Not really. It is pretty simple.

Each party can put up as many candidates in a district as they want. They can rank these candidates as they want.

The voters can vote either on the party or the candidate. The party votes are given out by the party to the candidates based on how they are ranked.

Remember we use the D'Hondt method for most votes (135 seats) and Sainte-Laguë method for the remaining seats. Both methods are similar.. just difference maths, but the principles are the same. Threshold is 2%.

It is a quite fair system when it comes down to things. But in the end you as a voter, have a voting paper (yes we still use pen and paper), with all the candidates in your area and in some areas this is almost a meter long paper You can put your X (has to be an X) on either a name or the party. Pretty easy if you ask me.

People also have to remember one thing about Danish politics. It aint as split on right and left as American or UK politics... Almost ALL major legislation is bi-partisan, meaning in the last Social Democrat government, the various budgets and stuff were passed not only with the Social Democrats and their supporters on the left, but also with Venstre and the right wing.. usually minus the Peoples Party. Compromise is the key factor of running Denmark.

Originally Posted by Carjosse

So Rutte and the cabinet minsters are not MPs, the government is entirely separate? Does the government still physically sit in parliament?

you are right, none of they are not mp's. They are often found in parliament but have no permanent seat in parliament.

Our congress/house of commons looks like this



In the benches number one, is the box for the cabinet ministers if they are needed for a debate or if they are there to present a plan or have been called up to answer questions

at number 2 is the chairwoman of the house of commons, she used to be an MP but he/she is elected by the MP's to be chairperson. The chairperson is no longer an MP and cannot vote.

at number three is the place where an MP can ask questions are present the opinion of his/her party

number four is the place where MP's/party commons leaders can ask their questions from the MP at position number three or debate things with the cabinet minister who is sitting/standing in the box with the number one

like this

at the positions 5 are the 150 members of parliament/house of commons. Normally that is only full during voting or contentious debates. A lot of discussions are done at commission meetings (which are open to public) where the cabinet minister is debating issues with the party representatives who specialize in that subject.

Where it says 6 is the place where the public can come and view the debates.

When the commons wants to debate for example, crime and justice related issues, all cabinet ministers or under secretaries of that department, will be sitting in box 1. But normally, if they do not have any business with parliament, the cabinet ministers are not in the commons. Their duty is leading the country, not sitting in parliament and acting like politicians.

I would've much rather preferred that it would've come down to the Faeroese separatists. An independent Faroe Islands would be a much better end to the election than the DPP being given a chance at prime minister.

With Helle Thorning-Schmidt stepping down as leader of the Social Democrats and Thulesen Dahl ruling out going into government at all, (probably so that they can keep their populist appeal) that leaves Rasmussen as the only viable candidate for PM, despite the fact that his party came in third in popular vote and in seats... what a mess.

I elect this danish:



But only because your damn system sounds complicated as hell.

Originally Posted by Hatuey

I elect this danish:



But only because your damn system sounds complicated as hell.

Actually it's pretty simple.
It's representative democracy, so you use give your mandate to a candidate to act on your behalf.
If you can't find someone you're willing to vote for personally, you vote for the party instead, and a candidate is chosen for you.
In a historical view, the rest is just an arbitrary set of rules to establish how votes translate into MP seats.

When elected, the MP gets legal immunity and is by bound by nothing but his/her own conscience.
This is because the mandate belongs to a direct representative of the people, and as such may not be pressured into anything. Even by the party. Or the voters for that matter.
Pretty basic stuff really.

Originally Posted by SocialDemocrat

I would've much rather preferred that it would've come down to the Faeroese separatists. An independent Faroe Islands would be a much better end to the election than the DPP being given a chance at prime minister.

With Helle Thorning-Schmidt stepping down as leader of the Social Democrats and Thulesen Dahl ruling out going into government at all, (probably so that they can keep their populist appeal) that leaves Rasmussen as the only viable candidate for PM, despite the fact that his party came in third in popular vote and in seats... what a mess.

It is not a mess, it is quite normal. Denmark has not had a majority government in decades as far as I remember.

Now before the election it was a given that Rasmussen was the leader of the opposition and the blue block. That Dahl happened to gain more seats (3 more) does not change that because lets be frank.. it is most likely a fluke. Chances are they will lose many of those gained seats next election as they usually do. The Peoples Party voters are not exactly the most loyal out there. Many of those votes are most likely protests votes against the Venstre leader himself, and I suspect that for the next election in 4 years, there might be a new leader of the party... at least I hope so.

Now Dahl does not want to be in government for a simple reason. The future elections. 2nd tier parties in Danish coalition governments tend to lose seats at the next election. The Socialist Peoples party went into coalition government after the 2011 election and lost a lot of votes due to it, despite leaving the coalition government over a year ago. Many voters returned to their roots in the Communist party or the new Alternative party (which frankly smells a lot like the Socialist Peoples party), which this election both became bigger than the Socialist Peoples party for the first time I believe. So if Dahl went into coalition with Rasmussen, then he would have to compromise a lot, which would piss off the base and make them flee to other parties.. most likely Venstre ironically.

No instead he could become the main backer of a Rasmussen lead minority government with only Venstre in government.. he has done it before. It will be weak, very weak, but its parliamentary basis will be the right wing blue block.

Other than that Rasmussen would have to negotiate with all parties on every piece of legislation, which is what most Danish governments have done for the last 30+ years. So it opens up a freedom for Rasmussen to say talk EU with everyone else but the communists and the Peoples Party but include them in say social legislation or financial legislation. It could easily be that next years budget could be Venstre, Conservatives, Social Democrats, Radical Liberals for example, totally excluding the Peoples party.. probably wont but it could.

So this is about as close to a true democracy you can get if you think about it. Parties negotiate across political divides on all issues to reach a compromise that can be accepted.

Originally Posted by Hatuey

I elect this danish:



But only because your damn system sounds complicated as hell.

Thats an Austrian struddel... not danish