Neither he nor Jonas Hinnfors, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Gothenburg, are particularly surprised by SD's figures. Several opinion polls had placed them in the vicinity of the preliminary election result of 17.5 percent, down 3 percentage points from the last election.
- We had a premonition that they would have a historically first setback in a parliamentary election. But if you look at it long-term, SD has stabilized at a fairly high figure, says Jonas Hinnfors.
The reasoning is that the historic rise was due to the party being able to attract voters who previously voted for other parties on the basis of substantive issues such as taxes or employment. Continued growth will be more difficult because it is not such an easy task to win over those who do not really think that the immigration policy should be as strict as SD wants.
- With, for example, 18 percent, you are a large important party and then other parties can start to worry about them, which we could see in 2014. Other parties change their policies in their direction and then they became decisive for government formation, says Jonas Hinnfors, who points out that SD's growth slowed down already in the last election.
Some SD representatives expressed frustration with the preliminary election, for example Riksdag member Josef Fransson. "Congratulations, all mentally disabled minor party voters! Cool!", he wrote on X and later clarified that he was addressing those who opted out of SD in favor of Alternativ för Sverige, Örebropartiet or other immigration-critical parties.
Party leader Jimmie Åkesson instead wanted to convey a positive message:
- I still feel that we are winners because many are no longer afraid to admit that they are Sweden Democrats. For me, who has been involved in this for a long time, it is very moving, said Åkesson at the party's election vigil.
Johan Martinsson, political scientist and head of opinion at Demoskop, speculates whether SD's results can partly be explained by the fact that some voters chose to vote in support of L, but also switched to M. Some may also have chosen the sofa cover.
- It needs to be investigated more. New data collection will be started now to investigate exactly why people voted the way they did. Then we might get a slightly better response to these movements, says Johan Martinsson.
Political scientist Per Oleskog Tryggvason, head of opinion at Indikator, is on the same track as Hinnfors, that SD's decline could be sensed earlier also in the last EU election.
- It is a historic election in that SD for the first time did not succeed in mobilizing voters in the same way as before. Now that they have sat in the position of power that they have done and do not have an opposition role, it looks like they can damage the party and that is very interesting, says Per Oleskog Tryggvason.
It is noteworthy that SD is losing widely - both in big cities but also in its traditional strongholds such as all Scania's constituencies.
In addition to the support votes for L, Oleskog Tryggvason has a preliminary interpretation that SD has sort of lost the role of being something that voters can express their dissatisfaction with - something similar to what Member of Parliament Fransson expressed on X.
- For those who previously wanted to vote against something, those who do not like the development, SD has existed as a magnet for dissatisfaction. It is difficult to maintain when you yourself have been in power for four years. In a few weeks we will know much more about this.
