Is Immigration Driving the Nordic Countries Apart?

The bigger Nordic countries – Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland – are generally seen as a highly unified group of states, where democratic decision-making works exceptionally well. At the same time, however, they have undergone major demographic changes as a result of humanitarian immigration, which will likely have a significant impact on their future.

Sweden, as a former great power, is the largest Nordic country, governed by the local EPP together with a smaller EPP party and a liberal RE party. The government is also supported in parliament by an ECR party outside the coalition, whose immigration policy goals have been included in the government program.

This unusual arrangement stems from the fact that Sweden’s immigration policy has been extremely liberal, which has made the country’s population more multicultural than in the other Nordic countries. At the same time, the related challenges have also been greater.

This is reflected in the support for Swedish parties. The largest party in the country is still the Social Democrats (S&D group in the European Parliament), with around 34% support, but a party belonging to the ECR group that is critical of multiculturalism has risen to compete with the EPP for second place, with about 20% support. The country’s other parties are small.

Denmark is currently governed by a three-party coalition consisting of the Social Democrats (S&D) and two RE parties.

Unlike in the other Nordic countries, Denmark’s S&D has long pursued a strict immigration policy, which has reduced immigration-related problems. This helped their support rise a few years ago to very high levels – even around 35% – but in recent years it has dropped to about 20%. Despite this, the party remains clearly the most popular in the country.

Denmark’s second most popular party has been the Greens (G/EFA), with support around 15%. They are followed slightly behind by the RE-affiliated Venstre party, and behind them an ECR party at about 10%, which is slightly higher than the Danish PfE group, whose support has risen significantly this year. In addition, a large number of smaller parties influence Danish politics, including the smallest RE party in government.

In Norway, the country is currently governed by a minority government of the local S&D party, but parliamentary elections are being held today and tomorrow, after which a new government will likely be formed.

Humanitarian immigration in Norway has been more limited, and thus the related problems have been smaller than in Sweden. Nevertheless, the local ECR group has in recent years competed for the position of the country’s largest party alongside the S&D and the EPP. Meanwhile, the far left (SV) has lost support.

In my home country of Finland, the government is formed by two EPP parties, an ECR party, and an RE party representing the interests of the Swedish-speaking population. The government has pursued a strict economic policy driven by the larger EPP party, while also following the relatively strict immigration policy demanded by the ECR party in its government program.

During the current parliamentary term, the support for Finland’s EPP parties and the language-based party has remained relatively stable (around 20%, 3%, and 4%, respectively). By contrast, the Finns Party’s support collapsed under government responsibility, falling from around 20% in the 2023 elections to about half of that, though in recent months it has started to rise again.

Among the opposition parties, support has grown for the S&D party, which has risen to 26%, making it clearly Finland’s most popular party at the moment. Another recent gainer has been the former agrarian party (around 15%), which for some reason belongs to the RE group in the European Parliament. Meanwhile, the Greens’ support has long been in decline (8%), while the far-left party belonging to the LEFT group has remained fairly stable in 10%.

As this brief overview of Nordic politics shows, there are significant political differences among these countries regarding immigration. It remains to be seen how these differences develop in the future – and especially whether Sweden’s long-standing open immigration policy will lead it to diverge from the other Nordic countries.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
No Low-Hanging Fruits Among Russian Neighbors
Nordic Police Announce: Spread of Gang Violence Cannot Be Stopped
Nordic Nations Unite Against the Growing Threat of Cross-Border Organized Crime

Reform UK’s Landslide: Wake-Up Call for Labour and Tories Alike

There was a revolution in Britain's local elections. I mean that Reform UK achieved a landslide victory, and the ruling Labour Party was reduced to a minor party.

The reason is not hard to guess. It is, naturally, Britain's difficulties with its immigrant-background population. And not just that, but also the inability of the police and the judicial system to maintain control of society.

However, it must be remembered that local elections do not decide national matters, let alone choose the prime minister and government. And the results we’ve just seen may have no effect at all on Keir Starmer’s government policy.

On the other hand, it would be wise for Starmer to take the result seriously and begin correcting the mistakes he has made. And in doing so—perhaps—save his and his party’s position as one of Britain's leading political forces.

Then again, the Conservatives also have reason to reflect, as their position as Britain’s second major party has now been called into question. And that’s why it will be interesting to see how the outcome of the local elections will affect their opposition strategy.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
UK Supreme Court Distinguishes Between the Rights of Women and Trans Women
Is the UK's Democracy Facing an Existential Crisis?
Why Were Violent Protests Acceptable for George Floyd but Not for the UK Child Murders?

What the U.S.–Ukraine Mineral Agreement Means

Today, we’ll be hearing politically charged speeches from the leaders of various Finnish parties on current issues—which, of course, is above all entertaining.

But the most significant May Day event was likely already reported early this morning.

I am, of course, referring to the fact that the United States and Ukraine have indeed signed a mineral agreement. According to the deal, the U.S. and Ukraine will establish a joint investment fund intended, among other things, to support Ukraine’s reconstruction and to facilitate investments related to Ukraine’s natural resources.

The agreement explicitly states that Russia initiated the war, enables U.S. military aid to the victim of the aggression, and recognizes Ukraine’s right to control the minerals within its territory. At the same time, it offers Americans the opportunity to invest in Ukrainian mineral assets through the newly created fund.

According to U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, “The United States is committed to helping end this cruel and senseless war. This agreement sends a clear message to Russia that the Trump administration is dedicated to a peace process centered on a free, sovereign, and prosperous Ukraine.”

Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal, for his part, described the agreement as “good, fair, and favorable.” And there’s no reason to doubt that he meant what he said.

It remains to be seen how this new agreement will influence American realpolitik regarding the war in Ukraine. In other words, will it lead to increased or decreased military and diplomatic engagement by the U.S. on Ukraine’s behalf?

On one hand, it could be argued that since Americans now have a deal concerning Ukraine’s natural resources, their interest in ensuring those resources remain under their partner’s control may grow. That could even lead to actions aimed at liberating at least the most mineral-rich areas currently occupied by Russia.

On the other hand, it’s equally possible that the U.S. and President Donald Trump will begin pressuring Ukraine to make peace at any cost, in order to begin exploiting the deal quickly. In the worst case, this might take the form of increased pressure on President Zelensky’s government to accept peace terms reflecting the current front lines—playing into Putin’s hands.

At this stage, the only thing that’s clear is that the war in Ukraine has entered a new phase, one that will most likely differ in nature from what we’ve seen so far. One can only hope that, at least from a European perspective, it doesn’t take a turn for the worse—that is, in favor of the Russians.

In that regard, it sounds particularly encouraging that Bessent also stated that “no entity that financed or equipped Russia’s war machine will benefit from Ukraine’s reconstruction project.”

It’s as if Trump’s Ukraine policy made a complete U-turn overnight—but let’s not count our chickens before they hatch. Instead, for now, let’s focus on May Day traditions."

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
May Day Reflections from a President—and a Student
Trump Speaks from Putin’s Pocket – A Perilous Shift in the Ukraine War
Should Finland Heed the Warnings of a Left-Wing Idealist?

Why Finnish Youth Are Abandoning the Green Party

As my esteemed readers know, Europe is undergoing a major shift as the once-fashionable value-liberal trend is coming to an end. The clearest sign of this development occurred across the Atlantic, where power shifted from the Democrats to Donald Trump’s Republicans.

In Finland, this change has been reflected in the declining support for the Green movement in recent years. Since its inception, the party has been particularly popular among the youth, which has made it difficult for its support to fully materialize in elections. Nevertheless, just six years ago, it managed to secure 11.5% of the vote in the parliamentary elections—about two percentage points less than what opinion polls had predicted.

Less than a month ago, polls indicated that the party's support was hovering just below 10%, marking a roughly 25% drop compared to six years ago. Even more intriguing, however, was the so-called "youth election," in which those not yet eligible to vote could choose their preferred party.

Contrary to everyone’s expectations, the Green party did not perform well; instead, its support remained at a modest 10.5%. In other words, the party is no longer more popular among young people than among the general population.

The phenomenon likely stems from Finnish youths’ concerns about their future. They see and experience firsthand that the Finnish education system no longer functions as it once did. Furthermore, the rapid accumulation of state and municipal debt—exacerbated by the previous red-green government—as well as the public sector’s increasing entanglement in identity politics, do nothing to advance Finland’s economy or secure a better future for young people.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Why Does the Political Green-Left Lie, and Why Does It Resonate with the People?
A Major Victory for the Freedom Party in Austria's Regional Elections
The Green Movement is Withering – And That’s Not a Bad Thing

The Role of Ukraine Aid in the Elections of Thuringia and Saxony, Germany

The state elections in Thuringia and Saxony of Germany ended in success for the Alternative for Germany (AfD) and the BSW party. The former party is considered conservative, right-wing, and nationalist. The latter, on the other hand, is a conservative, nationalist and socialist party.

Many media outlets have emphasized that the election victories of these parties were due to opposition to both immigration and Germany's support for Ukraine. Fortunately, there is also data on this matter.

According to this data, voting in Thuringia was primarily driven by the following reasons: 1. crime and internal security, 2. social security, and 3. immigration. In other words, the war in Ukraine had little impact on Thuringians' voting behavior.

Similarly, in Saxony, voting was mainly influenced by the following reasons: 1. social security, 2. crime and internal security, and 3. immigration. There have also been reports on voting reasons by party. For AfD voters, the three most important voting motives were the same, except that social security was replaced by economic development. Thus, support for Ukraine was not a significant criterion for party choice in general, nor for AfD voters.

However, it did have some relevance, at least in Saxony, where among BSW voters, it ranked as the second most important voting reason after social security, and ahead of crime and internal security. In other words, the desire to cut off Germany's aid to Ukraine was only important to voters of the party built on national socialism in Germany.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Afghans Had to Go

The Stabber Killed Three People in an Extremely Multicultural City
The Social Democrats of Germany Supporting Putin

Elections in the UK: A Shift Toward Hand-Waving Politics?

In Finland, people are accustomed to a proportional electoral system where the number of representatives a party receives corresponds reasonably well to the proportion of votes it gets. Therefore, in Finland's 200-seat parliament, there are as many as nine parties, the largest of which has 48 representatives. This forces parties to form multi-party coalitions, resulting in relatively stable politics over time.

It's different in Britain, where the single-member district system has practically led to a two-party system. Other parties have little chance of getting their candidates elected, but they significantly influence the support of the two major parties.

Thus, the 14 percent support received by Nigel Farage's Reform UK party in the recent parliamentary elections resulted in the Labour Party gaining almost fifty percent more representatives than in the previous term with only about a two percent increase in support. Meanwhile, Reform UK itself received only a few seats.

At the same time, the previously ruling Conservative Party practically collapsed, and Britain is facing a radical change in political direction. According to the Labour party's election program, this will have unpredictable consequences especially for the country's domestic politics.

This is because, at least from here in Finland, the party's program seems more like hand-waving, that is, irresponsible redistribution politics rather than a serious political plan. This is because Britain's public finances are heavily indebted: the national debt is over 100 percent of the gross domestic product.

Of course, time will tell whether my impression is accurate or if it's just a Nordic prejudice. However, I wouldn't bet that the Labour Party's term in office will bring long-term success to the island nation.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
A National Rally election victory does not mean that France will become like Finland under the Finns Party
The future of all Europe is at stake
The most effective Russian agent in the UK

Putin's useful idiots in Finland

The flow of asylum seekers from developing countries organized by the Russians to their western border has prompted the Finnish government to prepare an emergency law proposal, which would allow the entry of newcomers to Finland to be blocked. The primary purpose of this law is not about trampling on the rights of people fleeing distress and persecution but about resisting the aggression related to Russia's hybrid warfare.

This has been well understood within Finnish parties belonging to the political right and center. The leadership of the Social Democratic Party of Finland also supports the emergency law, but the left wing of the party, like the extreme left and the Greens, is ready to oppose the law, that conflicts with international human rights agreements.

Since it is an emergency law, it requires a five-sixths majority in parliament to come into effect. And it is precisely this that the representatives of the left wing of the Social Democrats intend to block.

In doing so, they act as useful idiots for President Vladimir Putin, who is waging war in Ukraine and threatening its other neighbors. They open a channel for him to negatively influence Finnish society through hybrid warfare.

This is a significant change in Finnish politics, as the Social Democrats have understood the country's security needs since the Winter War of 1939-1940. But now it seems that this long tradition is about to be broken.

It remains to be seen what impact this will have on the Social Democratic Party. Will a rift develop between the party's realpolitik majority and the Putinist left-wing minority, ultimately leading to the division of the entire party?

And if this happens, will a new party that has grown from the minority gain popular support? And if not, will the politicians belonging to it perhaps join the Left Alliance or the Greens to promote Putin's freedom of action in Finland?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Brianna Wu's advice and the reality of Finnish politics
Duck emphasizing the urgency of the new border law
Change of immigration policy and development cooperation

Finnish horror gallery and reality

 In Finland, there is an ongoing special operation by the left-wing to overthrow the right-wing government that was appointed a few weeks ago. As a result, one minister has resigned, and another has been targeted over online writings from fifteen years ago, which have been claimed to be written by her.

The minister in question, Riikka Purra of the Finns Party, has neither confirmed nor denied writing the mentioned texts. Instead, it has emerged that among the texts cited is at least one taken out of context, which gives a false impression in the way it has been presented. It does not involve violent fantasies towards children, as it has been suggested, but rather is a response to a proposal to ban the right to carry firearms for all men. The alleged pseudonymous author, now claimed to be the current minister, has opposed the idea with the expression that has been brought up.

It is also interesting to note that the minister in question, who is under public scrutiny, was the candidate who received the highest number of votes in the national parliamentary elections in the spring. And I don't believe there was a single person among those who voted for her who was unaware of her critical stance on immigration.

Therefore, the orchestrated campaign must be seen as an undemocratic attempt to bypass the election results and overthrow the government enjoying the support of the majority in the parliament, as well as the minister who has garnered exceptional popularity. This is happening in a country where even ministers with a history of participating in armed rebellion have been seen, and earlier this year, a person convicted of a crime also held a ministerial position.

As such, the ongoing discussion has followed the familiar pattern. The left-wing opposition promotes their own propaganda, and the press supports it. Prime Minister Petteri Orpo (National Coalition Party), on the other hand, briefly stated that the government parties are committed to an equal, equitable, and safe society where no one should live in fear.

Just before writing this blog post, President Sauli Niinistö stated, "It would be wise for the Finnish government to take a clear zero-tolerance stance against racism. Racism and potential issues related to immigration are two completely separate matters."

This is an interesting comment considering that the Finnish government has already outlined in its program that "Finland adheres to human rights and other international agreements, obligations of EU legislation, and the principles of the rule of law in its immigration policy. Finland participates in multilateral international cooperation."

Furthermore, it has pointed out - acknowledging the facts - that "the government recognizes the increasing youth and gang crime as a serious problem. The government is committed to implementing the necessary measures to actively combat and reduce youth and gang crime. Resolving the issue requires a multidisciplinary approach. The entire society, starting from families and parental support in upbringing, as well as efforts against marginalization and discrimination, up to integration and immigration policies, will be involved in the process of change."

In other words, the government program states that it adheres to human rights principles (which definitely do not include racism) but also acknowledges the internal security problems caused by Finnish immigration policy. The latter, along with the indifference of previous governments and the media towards it, is the actual reason why the Finns Party has become the second most popular party in Finland. Riikka Purra, who is currently targeted in the campaign, emerged as the vote queen in the last elections.

In practice, the Finnish government will continue to lead the country as long as the Members of Parliament belonging to the participating parties support it. However, the Swedish People's Party may pose a problem in this regard, as their representatives have previously betrayed their coalition partners. 

However, so far, they have only demanded Purra to disassociate herself from all forms of racism. That was despite the fact, that the minister already Tweeted that "At the same time, it is evident that both the Finns Party and this government operate in accordance with all laws, do not endorse any extremist movements, condemn all totalitarian ideologies, violent activities, and discrimination."

It remains to be seen whether Swedish People´s Party will betray again their coalition partners. If this happens, it will leave a long-lasting stigma between it and other right-wing parties.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Putin´s Russia got mad about the Finnish chairman of the Parliament
The program of the new Finland´s Government is ready, and ministers are being selected
Increase of violence by youngsters in Finnish towns

History of Finland VI: Age of freedom and utility

This is the sixth part of a blog series where I go through the significant stages of Finland's history. In the fifth post, I described how the country transitioned from the rule of the highest nobility to a pre-capitalist society governed by the clerical nobility, where the living conditions of ordinary people also began to gradually improve.

Professor Heikki Ylikangas considers the above-mentioned turning point as the most significant in Finnish history. Equally important, following closely after that, is the subject of this post - the mid-18th century.

At that time - amidst the political strife between the "Caps" and "Hats" factions vying for leadership positions - a number of extremely significant decrees were issued that allowed the division of farms into several parts. Prior to this, it was not possible because the state apparatus feared that the farms would become unable to pay taxes as a result.

Similarly, the establishment of tenant farms or rental farms was permitted for peasants: this right had previously only applied to noble and cavalry estates. And as the icing on the cake, the redistribution of land was decided, meaning that each farm's land was located in larger blocks rather than the narrow strips previously required for communal planting and harvesting. This enabled peasants to develop their own land independently of others.

However, initially the peasants were not at all eager to seize the opportunity. The reason was the common forests, which they did not want to divide among the founders of the new farms but rather keep as a resource for profitable tar production. The situation changed only when the crown announced that the state would no longer interfere in the division of land, even forests, and that it would be left to the responsibility of independent landowners after the land reform.

The fourth reform was population registration, which was needed for drafting soldiers into the army, as many families had previously cheated the authorities, for example by giving multiple sons the same name to avoid being drafted. Especially in the 1600s, this had practically meant a death sentence, not so much because of battles but due to diseases that heavily taxed military units.

However, dividing farms was only allowed if the applicant intended to get married. In other words, the ultimate motive behind the reforms was that the Swedish state wanted to increase its population because there was a chronic shortage of labor in the country - in ironworks, manufactories, and manors. Perhaps increasing the economic opportunities of peasants would help to increase the labor force?

As a result of this expanded private ownership, people became more interested in economic entrepreneurship and profit-seeking. In other words, in the mid-1700s, Sweden and thus Finland entered the age of utility.

Also the university system participated in promoting economic prosperity, as in 1747 the position of professor of poetry at the University of Turku was changed to a professorship in economics - the same fate befell the legal department at Uppsala. One of the inventors of economic liberalism, Antti Chydenius, graduated from the Turku Academy, presenting his theories a decade before Adam Smith wrote similar ideas that would be recorded in the world's economic history.

At the same time, the judicial system began to change and the pressure to lighten punishments increased. Municipal power began to be transferred back to parish meetings from the crown bureaucracy. Even the church began to view different revival movements more favorably.

Thus, the societal trend that began in the 1500s towards growing aristocratic power and an extremely unequal society had irreversibly turned towards raising the standard of living for the entire population and democracy. And through this, the economic foundation was gradually laid that would eventually allow for the creation of the modern Nordic welfare state, although this development was not direct or straightforward.

The original blog post in Finnish: Hyödyn aika

All the blog posts in this series:
History of Finland I: How did Finland become culturally part of the West?
History of Finland II: From a hinterland of the Union into a modern state
History of Finland III: The legal and economic weakening of the position of the people
History of Finland IV: The bleakest time in Finnish history
History of Finland V: The pursuit of economic profit saved the country
History of Finland VI: Age of freedom and utility
History of Finland VII: The dictator of the era of Enlightenment promoted capitalist economy
History of Finland VIII: Joining of Finland to Russia led to an increase in crime
History of Finland IX: Enlightended dictator initiated economic growth
History of Finland X: The birth of Finnish identity
History of Finland XI: Finnish democracy and gender equality for women
History of Finland XII: Bloody civil war
History of Finland XIII: The far-right's rebellion
History of Finland XIV: The end of the first Finnish Republic
History of Finland XV: Paasikivi-Kekkonen doctrine
History of Finland XVI: Through rise and fall to a new kind of future

The Guardian misleads its readers

The internationally acclaimed Prime Minister of Finland, Sanna Marin, has decided to step down as the leader of the Social Democratic Party of Finland. At the same time, she announced that she will not seek a position as a minister in the upcoming government or run for president.

I have previously expained that despite her international success, Prime Minister Marin has been an inadequate leader. While she is certainly able to present herself convincingly, in the last few years she has been unable to maintain Finland's economy in good condition. Additionally, she has displayed inappropriate behavior by attacking her coalition partners and encouraging voters from other left-wing parties to vote for her own party.

Therefore, it was incomprehensible that the Guardian got excited about writing about Finnish misogyny in Marin's case. If this were the case, could the top three candidates in the elections have been women, or not?

It remains to be seen what kind of government will come to Finland in the coming years. However, it is clear that the voters did not want a new left-wing government: after all, the environmental and left-wing parties only received a third of the votes. And the same amount of seats in the Parliament.

Therefore, it would be appropriate for Finland to have a government that represents the will of the people, with the two largest winners of the election, namely the National Coalition and the Finns Party. It should also be noted that the latter party is not associated with the right-wing ideologies of the parties in the 1930s as insinuated by the Guardian. Instead, it is a conservative and market-oriented popular movement.

Previous thoughts on the same topic: 
Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin is quickly losing her national credibility
Elections in Finland enlight journalistic views
A notable difference between Social Democrats in Sweden and Finland

Estonias voted for economic liberalism

In Finland, parliamentary elections will be held in less than a month. "Our little brother" Estonia, on the other hand, was quicker and held its own elections last weekend.

The results provided an interesting point of comparison for us Finns. The largest party for the upcoming term was in fact the current Prime Minister's Reform Party, which will now hold 37 seats in the 101-seat parliament.

The position of the second-largest party went to the EKRE party, which received 17 seats. And the third place was achieved by the local Center Party with 16 members of parliament, following a huge loss of 10 seats. 

Thus, the three largest parties hold a total of 70 seats, and will dominate the politics of our southern neighbor in the future together with a party called Estonia 200, which achieved 14 seats. In addition, members of parliament were elected from the Social Democrats (9 seats) and the Isamaa Party (8 seats).

Since Estonian parties may not be familiar to everyone, it should be noted briefly here that the Reform Party represents market liberal center-right, EKRE is a national conservative right-wing party, and the Center Party is a center-left social liberal populist party.

Estonia 200 is an economic and social liberal party, and the Social Democrats, as their name suggests, are a moderate left-wing party. Meanwhile, the Isamaa Party is a center-right party that led the country after Estonia's second independence.

As my respected reader may have already noticed, Estonian politics are completely different from Finnish or other Western European politics. The country's far-left did not receive a single seat in parliament, nor did the Environmental Party. 

Instead, economic liberalism in particular has a very strong position. And it is even possible that the next Government of Estonia will be composed of only Parties with liberal views on economics.

These differences compared to economically stagnant Western Europe are likely due to the fact that Estonians still remember their experiences of totalitarian rule, which ended only a few decades ago. Also, the economic liberal policies of the new era of independence have led to an explosive increase in their standard of living, resulting in the economic prosperity of the country's citizens surpassing that of e.g. Finns even during my lifetime - and there is not willingness to stagnate the positive development of the economy by unnecessary regulations.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Elections in Finland enlight journalistic views
Global warming - searching for the guiltiness
Reducing taxes, enhancing export and paying the governmental debt

Elections in Finland enlight journalistic views

Finns will vote for the members of their national parliament in early April. Accoprding to opinion polls, the Conservative party (21.6 % of those, who told their opinions) is the most popular one followed by Social democrats (19.3 %) and True Finns (18.4 %), the latter one being a more conservative but economically slightly less market oriented right wing party compared to Conservatives.

Today also another opinion poll was published. According to that, True Finns were by far the most popular one among those, who will vote for the first time. Their share of told opinions was a remarkable 35,9 %, whereas the secondmost popular Social democrates were favored by only 16,7 %. 

Interestingly though, the main newspaper in the country, Helsingin sanomat, had the latter opinion poll made. And that it published its figures in an unusual way for gallups measuring popularity of political parties - namely, including also those, who did not tell their opinions. 

In this way, the share of opinions to True Finns was lower than it would have been, if expressed in a normal way (as above) - "only" 28 %. As Helsingin sanomat is well known for its disgust for true Finns, this way of presenting the results was probably made by purpose. That is, by an intention to make their popularity among youngsters to look smaller. 

I am not saying that politics in Finland would be exceptionally dirty nor media would be highly corrupted. But definitely journalists are trying to support their favorites as much as they can (another example). And therefore those entitled to vote should be cautious, when following the media stream on politics.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The beautiful PM of Finland has driven herself into a trouble
Misuse of taxpayers´ money in Finland
An ignorant mediahouse failed again in historical facts