On Sunday morning I heard Margit Silberstein talk about the importance for politicians to go through the box (i always just as important and entertaining ”good morning, world!” in P1), a little later in the evening I thanked God for Stefan Löfven is not broke through the unit into my living room: I have never ever seen such a stressed, forced and pressured Stefan Löfven before.
It pulled at him. Of impatience.
A yoga and meditationsinternat in a few weeks to chill out, I thought – and Anna Hedenmo in SVT:s ”Agenda”, must afterwards have asked themselves what she at all did there. She had a battery of questions, he said, possibly very briefly on the first, then it was solokörning.
He answered on something else. Possibly a very practical method, but not a brilliant political idea. I thought that one really could feel, hear and almost take on how the Socialists, in real-time, dropped another few thousand LO-members.
If we do not have a real call in our time (and we do), if we lack a dialogue between power and people, for example – so not Stefan Löfven right now man we can seek answers. He don't talk with anyone. It says ”januariavtalet in the forehead at him, and it is that agreement which must be defended.
He's different tactically, not significantly from your colleagues, if it's any consolation. As spectators, viewers, critics, it is almost unbelievable how politicians at this level collectively, and deliberately refuses to answer questions, they have developed this ability in the last few years, and despite the fact that they know that the electorate yearns for a politician who has straight, honest, sincere, answers to their questions.
the analysts get together to the equation? It makes me completely puzzled.
You must be a bastard to solve the riddles if you're going to get something out of these ”talks”. SVT and other political offices must also ask themselves what value it really has, purely journalistic, if it continues to look like in the Sunday's ”Agenda”
Anna Hedenmo really made a valiant effort to get Stefan Löfven to answer a single question, a single time, but it was like turning on a tape recorder with pre-recorded answers, the closest robotlikt and easy aggressively and in monaco he repeated all of their defense for januariöverenskommelsen – and, as I said, no matter what Anna Hedenmo had asked about.
" Stefan, went by taxi hit?
Completely according to the januariöverenskommelsen.
" Are you still a labour party?
According to the januariavtalet, yes.
what Löfven thought was the reason that lost so very many LO-members – above all, to The sweden democrats – and the answer to that question was, for example, to januariavtalet was very good, and it did all, and at least four times, he said that we have a different ”dynamics” in Swedish politics now, and had desired that he said dynamite, and that something broke and had to start over from the beginning.
this Weekend's best tv was Anna-Carin Stenholm Pihls both beautiful and dirty film on Josefin Nilsson's life, so revealing, and brutally, but without speculation and claptrap – and it also became a magical portrait of sister Marie Nilsson-Lind. So strong and so fragile and so brave. She also.
the Elephant in the room, the actor who among other things was convicted of assault, have been protected by their employer, their managers, and their employer, the board of directors for decades.
such A shame.
the A to.