Unlike many other countries, in Sweden there are more significant paths to political leadership than the university degree. Most Swedish political parties offer leadership training programmes that include practical and ideological content and several have a design rooted in the popular education movement. This article explores how party political training for leaders happens in practice, using data from interviews, surveys, text files and ethnographic field notes. Using reflection and ideology as theoretical concepts, the study shows how reflection is used for different aims, and how it can shape participants ideologically. Ideology, in terms of describing what is good, is communicated from the top down in these courses in a general way. In terms of showing what is possible and desirable to either legitimise or challenge, these programmes leave that open to negotiation among the participants, which implies a confidence in their competence by virtue of being elected. Allowing different interpretations risks undermining the party's ideological core; however, since popular education methods are not negotiated, participants are required to reflect deliberately and listen to each others views on the issues under discussion. This can be understood as a safety line as it most likely leads to self-sanitation from the party's perspective.