Neutral (!!!) facts about coming German elections for your information!

But you did? With what? With racist and Islam hating BS sources as evidence? I get a laugh!

 

Of course, that is exactly what people thought back in the sixties when today's boomers were the younger folks.

When the moon is in the Seventh House
And Jupiter aligns with Mars
Then peace will guide the planets
And love will steer the stars

This is the dawning of the Age of Aquarius
The Age of Aquarius
Aquarius! Aquarius!

Harmony and understanding
Sympathy and trust abounding
No more falsehoods or derisions
Golden living dreams of visions
Mystic crystal revelation
And the minds true liberation.


Lyrics found <a href="https://www.elyrics.net/read/0-9/5th-dimension-lyrics/age-of-aquarius-lyrics.html">here</a>



Younger folks are idealistic and swallow lots of nonsense. As they mature they are confronted with reality.

 

Those younger folk are also the future, and we have made some great strides since the 60s.

 

Well, which is it? Did boomers "make great strides," or are they the obstacle to progress?

I can also point out here that back in the sixties there was no alt-right and the alt-right is very much a millennial-based phenomenon. The right is the new counter-culture much like the left was in the sixties.

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/03/29/an-establishment-conservatives-guide-to-the-alt-right/

 

Take Over, PAH-Leeze.
No needed.
Expel from NATO
Let's agree on that.

Oh for a EuroLand that would stand on it's hind legs like a self defending place.
Better yet, a Germany, a France, etc. and not an E.U.

I remember when de Gaulle expelled NATO and American over flights from France.
Let's see more of that spirit.

 

It isn't an either-or proposition. The Boomers have been better on average than their predecessors, and now there is another wave of progressive change a-coming.

 

Politico is a racist Islam hating site. LOL You are so small and tiny its laughable. This is how small you are ----> <---- You are so small that its even smaller than one of the pixels on my monitor.

 

Perish the thought!

I don't know how much more "progressive change" this country can stand. We've already lost so many beautiful and prosperous cities -- Detroit, Baltimore, Newark -- and can hardly afford to lose too many more.

 

The country has been changing progressively ever since it was established. It's nothing to worry about. So far the results are great!

You want MAGA? Don't go retrograde the way Trump and his uneducated rural cult following would have us do.

 

The USA peaked July 20, 1969.

 

Thank you for proof that you are as unimportant here in this forum like the last car accident in Tokyo! Politico and a serious source ... I get a laugh man! More ridiculous you can't become as you still are!

 

Agreed that we shall take it by our own and no, better an EU of the core states without the trolls only!
If the US wants to have a base in Europe, then go to the UK but stay out of our own territory. and honestly ... more and more and with big thanks to this current idiot in White House Putin looks more like a good partner and friend as the the USA!

 

One large, notable difference between parliamentary elections on the whole and US-elections that many people either don't realize or overlook is that the nature of parliamentary elections themselves cause people to focus far more on issues than on specific personalities. This is an especially strong characteristic of German elections and also explains why constituent-shift among German national parties (Volksparteien) goes at a considerably slower rate than among the two major US parties.

Because people in Germany get two votes (Stimme 1, Stimme 2), they can vote for a person they like from their representative district if that possibility exists in their district (called a direct mandate) and then give a second vote to the party of their choice. Sometimes, even for the first vote, it's just for a party of their choice, in the absence of a direct mandate. And as the OP explained, based on that second vote and a number of party lists, based on percentage of the vote, certain people whose names no one even ever knew will be placed in the German Bundestag: they are the water-carriers for the agenda and issues of their respective parties.

When I talk with my German friends about their upcoming elections, they focus almost solely on issues: what concerns them, what they would like to see changed, etc. They rarely focus on a person him-or-herself. No one cares what Merkel's hairstyle looks like or if Schulze wears a suit too tight for this body. That stuff interests literally no one here. In Germany, because of the horrible history from 1932-1945, Germans go out of their way to avoid any kind of 'personality cult' and most are of the opinion that any number of people at the top of the party they prefer to have in power should be able to adequately discharge the duties of the Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor.

Also to note is that in spite of the fact that a party puts up the name of the person who is likely to be their candidate for Chancellor, once the national popular vote is cast, if that party is able to win a majority vote outright (it's happened a small number of times in German electoral history) or if the party that is obviously going to be the larger partner in a ruling coalition, that party is not 100% obligated to actually place that promised person in the chancellorship. They can literally change their mind, although to my knowledge, this has never happened and were it to happen, would probably lead to a huge electoral defeat the next time around.

Traditionally, the big brother party in the winning coalition places the Chancellor in power and the junior partner party (little brother) puts the Vice-Chancellor in power. The Vice-Chancellor is for all intents and purposes the German Secretary of State, just with a different title. The rest of the German cabinet is then split up between the ruling coalition parties. I've never seen a winning coalition put someone from the losing coalition into the cabinet, not yet, at least.

One last point that I don't think Mandelus made is that the Chancellor and the Vice Chancellor are STILL members of the German Bundestag (one of the two houses of Parliament) and represent their own district while at the same time they run the German Gov't. So, you often see Bundeskanzler Merkel sitting in the plenum of the German Bundestag actively debating. This is a HUGE difference to US-electoral politics, where there is a pretty strict separation between the Executive and Legislative branches, with the exception of the Vice-President presiding over the US-Senate in order to either break a tie or to call the roll call vote for the counting of electors following a presidential election.

@Derideo_Te @MMC

MMC - for some reason, I thought this information would really interest you. Have no idea why, just a hunch.

 

Good post!

But ... representing their own district will mean to get the majority of 1st votes in this district. I know that Merkel got the majority of votes in her district at last election, but all before her too? I can't say in moment, but I think it is not given and let us say this time Merkel will not get, then she will be for sure member too due to the 2nd vote system behind

 

True dat. But I think it is very likely that such national names usually win in their respective districts. Looking back at German electoral history, I've not yet found a case to the contrary. You?

 

According to the latest polls Merkel would receive 52% in a direct vote, her challenger Schulz only 21%.

 

Great explanation, Stat!

Parliamentary systems where you are essentially electing a platform of issues do have certain benefits over the US system that has a distinct bias towards rewarding incumbents irrespective of the issues. I believe that the UK parliamentary system does have more direct representation in that you are directly voting for your member of parliament so incumbency does have benefits.

I like the concept of everyone having 2 votes. It gives voters greater incentives and it also means that minor parties have a greater chance of having a share of the seats in the Bundestag. That is something that is sorely lacking here in America IMO.

 

Lol...Well, you already have a Russian stooge as your dear leader.

 

Ya, that Putin. He totally trick America into rejecting a globalist that hates America as much as he does. For some reason Putin didn't want the party of managed decline economic policy, that sells out American interest, and gets extra "flexible" with him, to win. Makes total sense.

Here, have another nothing burger...


Some leftist know the truth. It's all a show for drones to excuse Hillary's 1.2 billion dollar campaign loss. Hopefully all the same DNC types will be there running the 2018/2020 campaigns. Don't you?

 

Some information about Die Linke since I'm an active party member:

Die Linke is a fusion of the WASG, a party that split off from the SPD, and the PDS, a party that tried to reform the SED, and thus only partially the SED's successor. Sahra Wagenknecht does not really represent the far left wing, her positions are actually somewhat close to the reformists.

Right now a coalition between CDU/CSU, Greens and FDP seems the most likely.