Socialists up, populists down in Danish elections

After four years in opposition, the Danish Social Democrats emerged from Wednesday's elections with the largest vote share and a path toward minority government. The populist People's Party, meanwhile, lost more than half its votes from the previous election. 

Liselotte Sabroe/Ritzau Scanpix/AP
Mette Frederiksen of The Danish Social Democrats waits for election results in Copenhagen June 5, 2019. The Social Democrats emerged as Denmark's biggest party in elections Wednesday.

The Social Democrats emerged as Denmark's biggest party in elections Wednesday, with preliminary results indicating gains for left-leaning parties and a big loss for populists.

If confirmed in final returns, the outcome pointed to the Social Democrats returning to power after four years as the country's leading opposition party.

The Social Democrats got about 25.9% of the votes after a campaign in which party leaders vowed a tough stance against immigration.

Mette Frederiksen, the party's leader, said late Wednesday that the Social Democrats will try to govern as a minority rather than form a governing coalition with smaller parties. It will seek support from the right on some issues, such as immigration, and from the left on other matters, such as social welfare, she said.

Although Ms. Frederiksen won't try to form a coalition, other left-leaning parties that increased their vote shares will likely support her effort to form a government to avoid the center-right from getting a chance. The Social Democrats and other left-of-center parties appear headed to having one more vote than a majority in the 179-seat parliament, the Folketing.

With nearly 100% of the votes counted, the Liberal Party of Prime Minister Lars Loekke Rasmussen showed a slight gain from four years ago. But the populist Danish People's Party, which often voted with the center-right Liberals, was hit with a big drop in support, meaning Mr. Loekke Rasmussen can no longer muster a majority in parliament.

The Danish People's Party's performance was a contrast to some other European countries, where far-right populists have been on the rise. The party was the second-largest party in the outgoing parliament, but its vote share plunged to about 9% Wednesday, compared to 21.1% in 2015.

Mr. Loekke Rasmussen conceded defeat and said he would resign Thursday.

"You have chosen that Denmark should have a new majority, that Denmark should take a new direction," Ms. Frederiksen told a jubilant crowd at parliament. "And you have chosen that Denmark should have a new government."

At age 41, Ms. Frederiksen could become Denmark's youngest-ever prime minister.

"The election campaign is now over. It's time to find solutions," she said.

Many Danish People's Party voters have drifted to the Social Democrats, mainly because of its readopting tough views on immigration. The party advocated restricting immigrants in the 1980s and 1990s but softened its position later while in a coalition with left-wing parties.

Its lawmakers voted for several laws introduced by Mr. Loekke Rasmussen's government to tighten immigration.

"This is really, really bad," People's Party leader Kristian Thulesen Dahl said of his loss at the polls, but he said the party would not change its politics.

The Hardliner Course party didn't cross the 2% threshold needed to enter Parliament. The New Right, another openly anti-Muslim group that also fielded candidates for the first time, will be in the legislature after getting 2.4% of the votes.

This story was reported by The Associated Press.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.