The EU election 2024 became a huge setback for SD, which for the first time went back in a choice. Therefore, it is extra interesting that the party now – even for the first time – publishes at least parts of the party’s election analysis.
A election analysis that states that the party’s strategy at the end of the electoral movement was based on an incorrect assessment.
Called the media for “Klägg”
So let’s back the band to the election movement itself, when TV4’s Cold Facts published the review of the Swedish Democrats’ anonymous accounts online. SD chose to go to a counter -attack, and made it the attack into part of its election campaign.
Jimmie Åkesson called the media “Klägg” and called TV4’s disclosure for an impact campaign. During the rest of the party’s election campaign, this was lifted at each election meeting, against a fund of a big screen depicting Kalla Fact’s digging reporter.
The culmination was reached the day before the election when Mass-SMS was sent out with the call not to let TV4’s impact operation win the election. In order to insure maximum attention to the text message, it was also sent to a large number of political reporters, including TV4’s, which of course everyone reported on it.
Did not give any effect whatsoever
The strategy behind this was spelled mobilization. Because in an election such as the EU election, it is above all the sofa and indifference that is the main enemy of the Swedish Democrats, reads the usual analysis. Wake people’s anger and you get them to the polls.
This is what the election analysis has come up with does not work. Instead, it brutally states that the attempts to increase the level of conflict against TV4 “did not give any effect whatsoever”. It may even have had a negative effect because it may have lowered confidence in individual representatives, the analysis notes.
But the criticism goes deeper than that, albeit wrapped. Under a cautious heading that more “opinion analysis” is needed, it is stated that the party’s campaign work is historically based on “fingertip feeling”.
But that this feeling seems to have failed in the EU election movement because the message became more “angry and hard” than playful, which may have contributed to the party losing among older voters, voters that are important for the party because they have higher turnout than younger voters.
Conclusion: Become more like other parties and think before.
“A suitable aftermath after an unusually unusual electoral movement”
It is a two -sided summary of the election analysis that SD has published. It is understandable that the party does not want to share the whole – the slightly fresh communication is part of the party’s identity and this also includes a quick -footed leadership that does not pull to change tracks when reality requires it.
But it works better in a small party than in a large one and one of the election analysis conclusions seems to be that electoral movements need to be organized and led better. That it was unclear in the EU election movement who had decided on messages and content in campaigns.
But more than that, TV4’s viewers do not know this time. We were not allowed to do our own interview with Martin Kinnunen who did the election analysis but were referred to the press manager. If nothing else, it is a suitable aftermath after an unusually unusual electoral movement.