Presidential elections | Haavisto answered the election machine’s value questions differently now than last spring

Presidential candidate Pekka Haaviston (green) HS’s answers presidential election machine on questions of values ​​are now more right-wing than in the one published less than a year ago in the parliamentary election machine.

HS’s presidential election machine has 15 value questions. Except for two, they are the same as in the parliamentary election machine published in February 2023. Haavisto responded to five of them in different ways than last spring. In two questions, his answers were now more right-wing than in the spring.

The answers of several other candidates are also slightly different now than in the spring. Harry Harkimo (Liike Nyt) now answered the five questions in a different way, Lee Andersson (left) to three and Jussi Halla-aho (ps) to two.

Sari Essayahin the answers remained exactly the same. The other candidates in the election machine were not candidates in the last parliamentary election, so their answers cannot be compared.

Haavisto moved from left to right in the two claims of the election machine.

The first of them is “the state should intervene more strongly in the functioning of the market in order to make the economy fair for everyone”.

Now Haavisto somewhat disagrees with the claim. In the parliamentary elections, he still somewhat agreed with it.

Another argument is “state and municipal ownership in business operations should be reduced”. Haavisto is somewhat in agreement with this now, while in the parliamentary elections he somewhat disagreed.

In addition, Haavisto no longer takes a position in the election machine on whether the interest of the environment should be put before economic growth and job creation. Even in the parliamentary elections, he completely agreed with the statement.

Slightly Haavisto’s answers about multiculturalism and keeping the whole of Finland inhabited have changed less.

He more or less agrees that Finland becoming more multicultural and diverse than before is a good thing. In the parliamentary elections, he completely agreed.

The open answers are almost identical in both elections, but in the presidential election machine Haavisto has added:

“However, we have to learn from Sweden’s mistakes. One must not close one’s eyes to the problems of integration. Regardless of cultural background, we must require everyone to accept, for example, the rights of girls and women.”

Haavisto is also completely of the opinion that the whole of Finland should be kept inhabited, even if there are costs involved. Previously, he was somewhat of this opinion.

Election of the parliament was organized last April. How have Haavisto’s values ​​changed so much in such a short time?

“The values ​​haven’t changed, but this is actually a broader issue. In election machines, squinting doesn’t tell a person’s way of thinking. That’s why I’ve always invested in the text part”, Haavisto answers.

In some of the questions, Haavisto’s text answer has remained almost identical, even though the place of the tick has changed. He says he is aware that he changed his answers. He says that he thought about the fact that the text of the open answer would match the place of the tick very well.

“Another option would have been cut and paste parliamentary elections. However, I thought I would see such an effort.”

Is this a matter of you answering the voting machines tactically thinking about what the voters will choose?

“Not like that. There are certainly very tactless choices for the majority of voters. I have always tried to think about what is my own opinion.”

You said earlier this year in an interview with Ilta-Sanomie that you are not red at all. So which one represents your true thinking more, the parliamentary election answers or the presidential election answers?

“Yes, that part of the text fully represents my own thinking. It is somewhat specified there. I thought I could do it cut and Pastebut that would be a bit unintellectual.”

Did you want to appear more right-wing in the presidential elections than in the parliamentary elections?

“No, that’s not the point. I focused on those issues, which may now come to the fore more strongly in this discussion, and specifically in relation to the role of the president.”

Haavisto lists the reasons for each point.

First of all, he says that he was especially thinking about the international situation when he responded to the argument about the state’s intervention in the functioning of the market. He does not like the protectionist movement seen in Europe.

He justifies the question concerning the ownership of the state and municipalities with the current economic situation.

“It is not realistic for us to increase these holdings very much,” he says.

On the environmental question, Haavisto says that he left “a bit of a protest answer”. In his opinion, the economy and the environment should no longer be pitted against each other, because, for example, Finland has great opportunities in the green transition.

Haavisto justifies his answer to multiculturalism by including the Swedish perspective. However, he denies that his thinking has changed on the matter and says that he has featured Sweden before.

“I thought that this point of view can be seen more strongly in rye as well.”

In keeping the whole of Finland inhabited, the aspect of total security has now become even more emphasized to him, for example on the eastern border.

Also Liike Nytin’s Harry Harkimo answered the five value questions in a different way. His answers are now closer to the extremes than in the parliamentary elections.

In the parliamentary elections, he still somewhat agreed with the statements “if you have to choose, it is better to raise taxes than to cut public services and social benefits”, “the ownership of the state and municipalities in business operations should be reduced”, “Christian values ​​are a good basis for political decision-making” and “the whole of Finland will to keep inhabited, even if there are costs”.

Now Harkimo completely agrees with these claims. In addition, Harkimo says that he completely agrees that Finland’s urbanization is a good thing. In the parliamentary elections, he neither agreed nor disagreed.

The Left Alliance Li Andersson, on the other hand, has answered three points differently.

In the parliamentary elections, Andersson completely disagreed that Christian values ​​are a good basis for political decision-making.

Now Andersson neither agrees nor disagrees with the statement. He writes that it depends on how each defines Christian values.

In the parliamentary elections, Andersson neither agreed nor disagreed on whether the whole of Finland should be kept inhabited, even if there were costs. Now he pretty much agrees.

In addition, he more or less agreed in the parliamentary elections that Finland’s urbanization is a good thing. Now he neither agrees nor disagrees with the statement.

Basic Finns Jussi Halla-aho has changed his opinion that large income differences are acceptable so that differences in people’s talent and hard work can be rewarded. In the parliamentary elections, he somewhat agreed with this, now he completely agrees.

The position on the climate issue is also stronger now. In the parliamentary elections, he somewhat disagreed that Finland should reduce its own emissions, regardless of what other countries do. Now he completely disagrees.