Neccesary disclaimer here: I am showing this to give an idea of which mayors are the most vulnerable according to bookmakers, not to advocate gambling.

In fact, It really is not worth gambling on this because it comes down to political negotiations, which are very unpredictable.

The remaining votes to be counted and reported are primarily postal votes from abroad and the municipality of Venray. Sint Eustatius is also yet to report, but has very few voters.

D66 will at the very least come very close to a 27th seat which would be gained from SP. Whether it gets it depends on how many abroad votes there are, and the exact distribution of them.

You can find all the numbers here: constructiveinstitute.org/dit-valg-vor...

Overall the numbers are very interesting, but there are some limitations to them: Voters are being asked relatively early in the campaign, the sample sizes in each individual municipality is relatively small, and a lot of voters are undecided.

Note that this is without the Megafon polls. If you were to include them, the picture would look slightly different.

Here is a perhaps more accurate depiction, where the polling result for M, and blue bloc without M is also shown.

Note that 3 municipalities (Ballerup, Holstebro, Køge) are yet to release their data onto VALG. Hence why I only have data from 95, not 98 municipalities.

So for example, of the 9 lists using the letter Q, 5 are Independent Greens, but the remaining 4 are used by completely unrelated local lists.

For K, all but two of the lists are used by the Christian Democrats.

I will note though that the poll from Epinion is an outlier. Polls from other pollsters have it closer to 8 or 9%. Even so, the shift is real, as the party was polling at 4-5% at the beginning of the year.

This itself is huge in my view. The Social Democratic reaction (moving their biggest hardliner on migration to the ministry on it) is so far seen as reactive and out of tactical political reasons, rather than being seen as a genuine shift.

3. The increased polling numbers for the party, and the Social Democratic reaction to it, sort of becomes a positive feedback loop for the party. It gives it way way more coverage and seriousness than it had back when it was closer to the 2% threshold.

This is quite widely met with misunderstanding, even though the actual reason is that there is no time to do it in the remainder of this parliamentary term; the government was also critisized for not making preparatory steps before now.

The government then made a clear misstep by reducing the price on candy, chocolate and coffee from 2026 onwards, but without announcing a decrease on the VAT for food (which in Denmark is 25%).

2. The party was out campaigning about the increased prices on food before the government noticed it was a problem for many people.

There also was a scandal at Roskilde University, where a bunch of students from Bangladesh abused the rules to get a right to reside and work in the country, and the university itself encouraged it.

Overall, the party obviously does better, the bigger role immigration plays.

1. Immigration has increased in prominence again. From 2019 to very recently, it played a very minor role in Danish politics. Now it has increased. The party has campaigned on a message that Frederiksen is letting in too many Muslims, partly by cherry picking numbers.