Nearly 70% of Immigrants in Finland Support Left-Wing Parties
Among those originating from the Middle East and Africa, support is even higher: 85% support left-wing parties
Support for left-wing parties among immigrants in Finland is nearly 70%. The results are based on poll data we obtained from Taloustutkimus. Taloustutkimus is one of the major and well-established polling companies in Finland, conducting for example monthly polls on party support among the general population.
In the poll concerning immigrants, the target group consisted of foreign-language speakers aged 18 and over residing in Finland, i.e., those whose registered mother tongue in the Finnish Population Information System is other than Finnish, Swedish, or Sami. Thus, the target group includes both immigrants and (a large share of) their children born in Finland, i.e., the so-called second generation immigrants.
The poll asked the following question: “Which party would you vote for if the parliamentary elections were held now?” The poll was conducted entirely independently of Suomen Perusta, as its fieldwork took place in May–July 2025, and we only inquired in September about the possibility of accessing such a poll. We therefore acquired poll results that had already been collected. See below for further details on the study methodology.
In the study, party support was surveyed among 1,232 foreign-language speakers aged 18 and over. Of these, 555 responded to the question, giving a response rate of 45% (by comparison, the typical response rate in party polls covering the entire population is around 70%).
Of all respondents, nearly 70% (more precisely, 67.4%) reported supporting one of the three major left-wing parties in Finland. These three are the Social Democrats (European Parliament affiliation: S&D), the Left Alliance (EP affiliation: The Left), and the Greens (EP affiliation: Greens/EFA).
In the figure above, the shares of support are also shown by immigrants’ region of origin. Support for left-wing parties is highest among those originating from the Middle East and Africa, of whom as many as 85% support one of the three major left-wing parties.
The Social Democratic Party gains the most from immigration, with support close to 50%
In Figure 2 below, the levels of support for different parties among immigrants are presented. By far the highest support is for the Social Democratic Party (SDP), supported by nearly half (49.2%) of all immigrants. The next highest levels of support are for the National Coalition Party (Kok, 12.3%) and the Left Alliance (Vas, 11.6%).
The only major party opposing large-scale immigration from developing countries to Finland is the Finns Party (PS). Its support among immigrants is a mere 3.3%.
According to Taloustutkimus, the survey conducted among immigrants is not a “formal party support estimate” of the type they produce monthly for the entire population, since “the responses have not been adjusted with correction factors based on voting statistics.”
Nevertheless, we compare Taloustutkimus’ recent results for the entire population (presented in Figure 3 below) with the results of the survey concerning immigrants — in order to obtain at least indicative findings on how immigration influences party support figures.
Party Preferences of Immigrants vs. the Total Finnish Population
Here are the party support figures for both immigrants and the entire population, together with the difference between them (in percentage points):
SDP (S&D): 49,2% (immigrants) vs. 24.7% (entire population), difference: +24.5 percentage points.
Kok/NCP (EPP): 12,3% (immigrants) vs. 19.1% (entire population), difference: -6.8 percentage points.
Vas/Left (Left): 11,6% (immigrants) vs. 10.1% (entire population), difference: +1.5 percentage points.
SFP/SPP (RE): 7,8% (immigrants) vs. 3.9% (entire population), difference: +3.9 percentage points.
Vihr/Green (Greens/EFA): 6.6% (immigrants) vs. 8.6% (entire population), difference: -2.0 percentage points.
Kesk/Cen (RE): 5.0% (immigrants) vs. 15.1% (entire population), difference: -10.1 percentage points.
PS/Finns (ECR): 3.3% (immigrants) vs. 12.3% (entire population), difference: -9.0 percentage points.
KD/CD (EPP): 2.3% (immigrants) vs. 3.5% (entire population), difference: -1.2 percentage points.
Biggest Winners and Losers
By far the largest beneficiary of immigration is the Social Democratic Party (SDP), as its support among immigrants is nearly 25 percentage points higher than in the Finnish population as a whole. It is also noteworthy that the SDP alone accounts for virtually all of the additional support for left-wing parties brought by immigrants. Support for the Left Alliance and the Greens is roughly the same among immigrants as in the total population (when taking the poll’s margin of error into account).
The biggest losers from immigration are the center-right parties: the Centre Party (-10.1 percentage points), the Finns Party (-9.0 percentage points), and the National Coalition Party (-6.8 percentage points).
These results are particularly interesting in light of the fact that both the National Coalition Party (NCP) and the Centre Party support large-scale immigration (from developing countries), as long as it is labeled “labour-based,” regardless of the actual nature of the migration. In light of these results, it would hardly be in the interest of the NCP or the Centre Party to support the current model of mass immigration to Finland. The reason they nevertheless do so is that their backers include influential employer interest groups, which gain cheap labour and new consumers from this type of immigration. Supporting such immigration, however, represents rather short-sighted interest maximization for both the Centre Party and the NCP.
The Left gains new voters at the expense of traditional working-class supporters
In their 2021 article1, Professors Hillman and Long analyze from an economic perspective why left-wing parties in Western countries support large-scale immigration of the unskilled from lower-income countries, even though this runs counter to the interests of their traditional working-class voter base.
According to Hillman and Long, it is highly predictable that unskilled immigrants support left-wing parties:
“The support of unskilled immigrants for political parties of the left or ‘progressive’ political parties is predictable because of budgetary and welfare policies that benefit lower-income populations of which unskilled or unemployed immigrants tend to be part.4 There is also evidence that immigrants, after they acquire wealth, continue to support the left (Saggar 2000)”. (p. 5-6).
Hillman and Long argue that immigrants’ support for an open immigration policy is also explained by family reunification:
”Immigrants also support open immigration policies when the custom of marrying within extended families requires bringing marriage partners from prior home countries. See Charsley (2012)”. (p. 6).
Although there are differences in immigrants’ voting behaviour2, the studies cited3 by Hillman and Long indicate that, in general, immigrants tend to support the left more than the right in several Western countries.
The conclusion of Hillman and Long’s article is that left-wing parties in Western countries count on gaining new voters from immigration — even though this runs counter to the interests of their traditional working-class supporters. For this reason, these left-wing parties support mass immigration from lower-income countries:
“In particular, political parties that, according to economic theory, should adopt policies beneficial for lower-income voter-constituencies, have not protected workers from labor-market competition or from a fiscal burden of financing welfare dependent immigrants. We explain the contradiction by accounting for immigrants as future voters”. (abstract).
How the poll was conducted
The poll was carried out by Taloustutkimus, one of the major and well-established polling organizations in Finland. Below is a direct quotation, translated into English, of the description we received from Taloustutkimus concerning this poll.
Study methodology
Taloustutkimus conducted for the first time an Omnibus survey round among foreign-language speakers. This population group is not sufficiently covered by traditional research methods.
The survey was a pilot study, designed also to provide experience for future rounds.
Target group:
Individuals over 18 years of age residing in Finland and belonging to linguistic minorities. The sample was drawn from the Finnish Population Information System on the basis of language data.Number of respondents: 1,232
Research method:
A letter was sent to the target group based on language data from the Population Information System, combined with a so-called push-to-web approach. The letter directed respondents to the survey website via a QR code or web address.Data collection period: 2 May – 24 July 2025
Definition of Western/developed countries:
Refers to the EU, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, North America, Japan, and Taiwan.
Voting intention question
The questionnaire included a question on voting intentions: “Which party would you vote for if the parliamentary elections were held now?”
A total of 555 respondents (45% of all respondents) stated their party preference. Within the respondent group, 16% did not have the right to vote in parliamentary elections, 9% indicated that they would not vote, and 30% were unable to say which party they would support.
The margin of error for the main results (all respondents) is at most ± 4.5 percentage points. It should be noted that in some respondent subgroups the number of cases is small. For subgroups with fewer than 30 respondents, the results should be regarded as indicative only.
This is not a formal party support estimate, as the responses have not been adjusted with correction factors based on voting statistics.
Hillman, Arye L. and Long, Ngo Van: Immigrants as Future Voters. CESifo Working Papers ISSN 2364-1428 (electronic version).
See, for example, the UKICE (2024) report Minorities Report: The Attitudes of Britain’s Ethnic Minority Population. According to the report, highly educated people with an immigrant background in Britain tend to favour the Conservatives, whereas those with lower levels of education favour the Labour Party. This does not, of course, contradict the general observation made by Longman and Hill that immigrants with lower levels of education typically support left-wing parties.
It should also be noted that, for instance, immigrants who have themselves experienced communism typically do not support left-wing parties, as Hillman and Long point out.
“In Germany, the leftist Social Democratic Party has been the ‘party of and for immigrants’ (Schmidtke 2016). For evidence on voting by immigrants in Belgium, see Amjahad and Sandri (2012) and on the Netherlands, Groenendijk et al. (2011). On France, see https://www.lefigaro.fr/elections/presidentielles/2017/04/13/35003-20170413ARTFIG00255-jeromefourquet-la-gauche-a-fait-l-erreur-de-croire-que-l-electorat-musulman-lui-serait-acquis.php (accessed 09/01/2021). In the United Kingdom, the Labor Party (or new ‘Labor’) favored low-skilled immigration and immigrants have tended to vote for Labor (Sobolewska 2005; Dancygier and Saunders 2006). The same pattern has been present in Australia (McAllister and Makkai 1991; Zingher and Thomas 2012) and in Canada (Bilodeau and Kanji 2011). Evidence on voting by immigrants voting for parties of the Left also comes from local and municipal elections (see Seidle 2015 on Sweden, the Netherlands, and Belgium)”. (p. 5).