The Riksdag 2022–2026

What the parties wrote — and how they voted

Every substantive vote in the Swedish Riksdag 2022–2026, linked to what each party’s own election manifesto and party programme say about the question. For each vote and party, an AI agent reads that party’s documents — and no one else’s — takes a stance on what the counter-proposal demands, and quotes the passages that stance rests on word for word. Every quote links to its line in the document. Where a party’s own text points one way and its vote went the other, the site flags it. Bloc documents such as the Tidö agreement and budget motions are deliberately left out: each party is measured against its own plan alone.

Not a prediction: the AI is never asked how the party voted and never told the outcome. It reports what the party’s own text supports — the divergence from the real vote is the result. If the model remembered the outcomes, that would pull its readings toward the real votes and show fewer divergences, not more. The project is politically unaffiliated.

51%of votes carrying an explicit commitment in the plan went against that commitmentn = 3325

Evidence tiers

  • 3939 explicit commitment
  • 5953 derived from principle
  • 10396 plan does not address this
JournalistWhere do parties break from the plan?

Every vote where a party’s own manifesto or programme pointed one way and the party voted the other — sorted, searchable, with sources and embeddable graphics.

ResearcherMethods, data and reproducibility

Full methodology, contamination defence, open prompts, raw data and code.

CuriousSearch a topic you care about

Find the vote, see how your party voted — and what its own plan pointed to.

Evidence

Every claim can be followed in both directions

The quotes are not decoration — they are an index that reads both ways. 77,522 citations tie 4,715 lines of 23 party documents to 2,536 divisions.

From a vote to the document

Every AI decision has to quote the party’s own documents verbatim. The quote links to that exact line, highlighted where it stands.

Open a vote →From the document to the votes

Open a party document and every cited line carries a margin note: which divisions leaned on it, and whether the party then voted with its own plan or against it.

Open a party document →

By party

How often did parties vote against their own plan?

Share of the party’s explicit commitments — where the plan took a position on that very question — that it voted against anyway.

KDKristdemokraterna82%303 of 371LLiberalerna79%458 of 583MModeraterna64%245 of 384SDSverigedemokraterna46%224 of 486VVänsterpartiet37%145 of 391CCenterpartiet36%109 of 305MPMiljöpartiet28%135 of 481SSocialdemokraterna25%81 of 324

The same thing, but across every decision the agent could read a position from the plan for, including where the plan only touches the question in principle. More decisions per party, weaker evidence per row.

KDKristdemokraterna77%1943 of 2535LLiberalerna75%1890 of 2535MModeraterna53%1342 of 2535SDSverigedemokraterna52%1199 of 2311CCenterpartiet49%955 of 1949SSocialdemokraterna45%985 of 2203VVänsterpartiet40%822 of 2057MPMiljöpartiet39%729 of 1886

Explore

Navigate by time

22/10222/112622/121023/01623/023223/0311523/0414423/0515123/066623/09523/10423/113123/122124/012024/026324/036824/0416524/0512124/068624/09424/101824/112424/123725/012225/0210225/039025/0413525/0514425/067225/09225/102525/112725/122226/013426/027626/0320826/0414326/057226/06146

Each cell is a month: number of votes, coloured by how often parties’ votes followed their own plan (green = follows the plan). Click for that month’s cases.

All cases (2539) →