🇩🇪 German state & local elections

[urutzizu]

Inofficial Preliminary Count (should be the same that Public Broadcaster will show soon)

Red-Green fails to get majority, gets exactly 50% of Seats

GRÜNE 32,64% (58 Seats)
CDU 24,06% (42)
AfD 9,74 % (17)
SPD 11,02% (19)
FDP 10,46% (18)
LINKE 3,57% -
FW 3,01% -

Total 154 Seats

Turnout: 63,83 %


Total crap that ties are possible -.-. Other states have mechanism to ensure that it isn't the case. One of many Issues hopefully soon to be fixed in election law reform.

Seems like the lack of Overhang in Tübingen was what held back the Greens a bit and stopped Green-Red.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Moreover, as you pointed out, the Swabian Greenservaties have nothing in common with the Green Kreuzberg hipsters (aside from their anti-vaxx stance).

Since then do they have an anti-vaxx stance again? 

Which groups of those do you mean?

Both, but only rhetorically, because neither one actually has an anti-vaxx stance.

I've heard and read it several times that there is a correlation between Green strongholds and anti-vaxxer hotspots, SPIEGEL TV, the Zeit, several ARD news magazines, extra 3 and the heute show reported about that issue, and if such leftwing media formats realize that and thus basically attacking their own base reader-/viewership, it has to be true.

You're mixing up voters and the political parties they (used to?) vote for.

While it is true that at least a part of the Green electorate were made up of anti-vaxxers, I can tell from personal experience that the anti-vaxxer movement also become increasingly pissed at the party in recent years. So the question is to what extent they're still voting for the Greens and if they're still voting for the Greens to what extent are they're holding their noses over the vaccination issue while doing so?

Also see this Green legislative proposal from 2019 (one of the reasons why the anti-vaxxers are pissed at the party): https://dipbt.bundestag.de/doc/btd/19/099/1909960.pdf

[Astatine]

Inofficial Preliminary Count (should be the same that Public Broadcaster will show soon)

Red-Green fails to get majority, gets exactly 50% of Seats

GRÜNE 32,64% (58 Seats)
CDU 24,06% (42)
AfD 9,74 % (17)
SPD 11,02% (19)
FDP 10,46% (18)
LINKE 3,57% -
FW 3,01% -

Total 154 Seats

Turnout: 63,83 %


Total crap that ties are possible -.-. Other states have mechanism to ensure that it isn't the case. One of many Issues hopefully soon to be fixed in election law reform.

Seems like the lack of Overhang in Tübingen was what held back the Greens a bit and stopped Green-Red.

Where can be seen who made it into the Parliament? Did Eisenmann get a seat?

Damn, found it: https://www.statistik-bw.de/Wahlen/Landtag/Gewaehlte.jsp

Susanne Eisenmann is out!
Seems like her career is officially over then, there were already rumors before that Kretschmann didn't want her in his next cabinet.

[Logical]

What is the reason for FW's very strong performance in Wahlkreis Bitburg-Prüm? I think it almost single handedly carried them over the threshold.

[Astatine]

What is the reason for FW's very strong performance in Wahlkreis Bitburg-Prüm? I think it almost single handedly carried them over the threshold.

The FW top candidate is county director somewhere in that area, so it were his coattails dragging the party over the threshold.

[Pick Up the Phone]

Red-Green fails to get majority, gets exactly 50% of Seats

GRÜNE 32,64% (58 Seats)
CDU 24,06% (42)
AfD 9,74 % (17)
SPD 11,02% (19)
FDP 10,46% (18)
LINKE 3,57% -
FW 3,01% -

Total 154 Seats

Turnout: 63,83 %

I suppose that Kretschmann will be rather happy about this. A majority for Green-Red would have put a lot of intra-party pressure on him to ditch the CDU and simply chose the SPD as it is the Greens' 'natural coalition partner'. Now he can decide between two coalition options that would both give him very broad and solid majorities (and not just one seat).

CDU improved quite a bit in the end. LOL @ AfD for losing more than a third of their voters. I must admit: It is absolutely hilarious to see them crash and burn. The party is in complete disarray and I can already see them badly underperforming at the federal level as well.

Together, CDU and AfD have lost almost 8.5%. Times are truly changing in BW.

[Anzeigenhauptmeister]

You're mixing up voters and the political parties they (used to?) vote for.

While it is true that at least a part of the Green electorate were made up of anti-vaxxers, I can tell from personal experience that the anti-vaxxer movement also become increasingly pissed at the party in recent years. So the question is to what extent they're still voting for the Greens and if they're still voting for the Greens to what extent are they're holding their noses over the vaccination issue while doing so?

Also see this Green legislative proposal from 2019 (one of the reasons why the anti-vaxxers are pissed at the party): https://dipbt.bundestag.de/doc/btd/19/099/1909960.pdf

It's not only the anti-vaxx stance quite many Green voters have, it's also their penchant for homeopathy and globules that makes people facepalm. According to my present knowledge, the Greens still want to make legally obligatory for the statutory health insurances to pay for that hokum. Whenever top journalists like Fabian Köster or Hazel Brugger try to confront Green top politicians with that malarkey, they are immediately evading their questions.

[Pick Up the Phone]

Whenever top journalists like Fabian Köster

You know that Fabian Köster is a comedian and not an actual journalist, do you? I increasingly believe that most of your political knowledge comes from the heute show. Which would explain a lot of things.

[Middle-aged Europe]

It's not only the anti-vaxx stance quite many Green voters have, it's also their penchant for homeopathy and globules that makes people facepalm. According to my present knowledge, the Greens still want to make legally obligatory for the statutory health insurances to pay for that hokum.

Actually, they don't anymore, based on the Greens' new Manifesto of Principles (Grundsatzprogramm) which states on page 68:

"Leistungen, die medizinisch sinnvoll und gerechtfertigt sind und deren Wirksamkeit wissenschaftlich erwiesen ist, müssen von der Solidargemeinschaft übernommen  werden."

What I just wrote about the anti-vaxxers is equally true about homoeopaths, because these are also pissed about the Greens.

You need to read up on what the actual positions of the Greens are instead of continue claiming what you incorrectly believe to be true.

Also, maybe you should reconsider using satirical and comedy shows on TV as one of your primary sources for political information.

[Anzeigenhauptmeister]

Whenever top journalists like Fabian Köster

You know that Fabian Köster is a comedian and not an actual journalist, do you? I increasingly believe that most of your political knowledge comes from the heute show. Which would explain a lot of things.

Sarcasm doesn't work on the Internet, does it?
Are you still grumpy at the left-wing heute show because they dared to trash your favorite party without prior agreement from the Antifa leadership on Friday? Or did I hit a raw nerve of yours when coming up with the highly controversial issue of esoterism, which is prevalent within your party?
Nevermind, Greens try to evade those question about homeopathy, too, when they are asked by your beloved state TV reporters. But it's funnier when they are unexpectedly dropped in on by satirists because they don't want to perceived as killjoys by the audience.
The fact that many people indeed prefer left-wing (!!!) satire shows such as the heute show, extra 3 or Die Anstalt to your beloved fake journalists like Anja Reschke, Georg Restle or Tarik Tesfu, tells a lot about the competence and qualifications of your journalistic idols...

[Middle-aged Europe]

Whenever top journalists like Fabian Köster

You know that Fabian Köster is a comedian and not an actual journalist, do you? I increasingly believe that most of your political knowledge comes from the heute show. Which would explain a lot of things.

Sarcasm doesn't work on the Internet, does it?
Are you still grumpy at the left-wing heute show because they dared to trash your favorite party without prior agreement from the Antifa leadership on Friday? Or did I hit a raw nerve of yours when coming up with the highly controversial issue of esoterism, which is prevalent within your party?
Nevermind, Greens try to evade those question about homeopathy, too, when they are asked by your beloved state TV reporters. But it's funnier when they are unexpectedly dropped in on by satirists because they don't want to perceived as killjoys by the audience.

I find it hard to believe that said comedians and satirists have asked Green politicians these questions at some point after November of last year, because that was the time that the current stance on homeopathy was finally approved at a party convention.

If they did so however, I would perfectly understand that someone refuses to answer such questions, because it obviously constitutes an attempt at trolling for purposes of political satire.

Also, I can't recall Robert Habeck evading such question when asked so at an interview for ARD or ZDF sometime last summer, because back then he had answered it quite detailed.

[Pick Up the Phone]

Sarcasm doesn't work on the Internet, does it?

Don't be mad at me! It's just that it really doesn't work for people who claim that 'the Antifa is running Germany' and 'the FDP is the de facto successor of the NSDAP' while musing that 'it would be good to abolish the welfare state so we can get rid of Muslim immigrants.' But perhaps everything you write on this board is sarcasm. If yes: Kudos!

Are you still grumpy at the left-wing heute show

No, I don't even watch it. Not my kind of humor.

because they dared to trash your favorite party without prior agreement from the Antifa leadership on Friday?

Okay... you got me. The Antifa leadership was indeed angry. Really angry. They even decided to pay me extra money to write this post here trashing the pinnacle of German comedy.

Or did I hit a raw nerve of yours when coming up with the highly controversial issue of esoterism, which is prevalent within your party?

LOL. How about you take note of the facts other users have provided you with?

to your beloved fake journalists like Anja Reschke, Georg Restle or Tarik Tesfu, tells a lot about the competence and qualifications of your journalistic idols...

Be careful, everybody. Lügenpresse moaning and groaning.

[Anzeigenhauptmeister]

It's not only the anti-vaxx stance quite many Green voters have, it's also their penchant for homeopathy and globules that makes people facepalm. According to my present knowledge, the Greens still want to make legally obligatory for the statutory health insurances to pay for that hokum.

Actually, they don't anymore, based on the Greens' new Manifesto of Principles (Grundsatzprogramm) which states on page 68:

"Leistungen, die medizinisch sinnvoll und gerechtfertigt sind und deren Wirksamkeit wissenschaftlich erwiesen ist, müssen von der Solidargemeinschaft übernommen  werden."

The thing is, however, that this is no equivalence relation; they didn't explicitly opt out the possibility of including pseudo-medical services and preparations.

Also, maybe you should reconsider using satirical and comedy shows on TV as one of your primary sources for political information.

I never claimed that those are my "primary sources for political information".

[Middle-aged Europe]

It's not only the anti-vaxx stance quite many Green voters have, it's also their penchant for homeopathy and globules that makes people facepalm. According to my present knowledge, the Greens still want to make legally obligatory for the statutory health insurances to pay for that hokum.

Actually, they don't anymore, based on the Greens' new Manifesto of Principles (Grundsatzprogramm) which states on page 68:

"Leistungen, die medizinisch sinnvoll und gerechtfertigt sind und deren Wirksamkeit wissenschaftlich erwiesen ist, müssen von der Solidargemeinschaft übernommen  werden."

The thing is, however, that this is no equivalence relation; they didn't explicitly opt out the possibility of including pseudo-medical services and preparations.

Well, I happen to know the people who came up with that sentence and therefore I also know what the intention of that sentence was. And the intention was to distance the party form homeopathy.

Also, I don't suppose that other parties like CDU, SPD, or FDP explicitly rule out funding homeopathy in their platform either.

Also, maybe you should reconsider using satirical and comedy shows on TV as one of your primary sources for political information.

I never claimed that those are my "primary sources for political information".

While not making such a claim explicitly you cited the titles of two satirical TV shows and the names of two comedians as your source of information for the Greens' stance on homeopathy within the span of two of your posts. In the first of these posts you also cited a couple of actual newspapers and magazines in the same sentence. In the second one, you refrained from doing so. Therefore I find my conclusion justified that you're using them as one of your primary sources for political information.

Also, you "didn't explicitly opt out the possibility of including" political satire as one of your primary sources of information in your last post, you just said that you "never claimed" using them in that manner.

[Anzeigenhauptmeister]

Also, I can't recall Robert Habeck evading such question when asked so at an interview for ARD or ZDF sometime last summer, because back then he had answered it quite detailed.

I didn't watch the ZDF summer interview, but I remember that Habeck said on the ARD summer interview that he deems the discussion about the minor issue of homeopathy to be impertinent and blown up to a major issue. However, in his defense, he also advised against the usage of homeopathy in cases of life-threatening diseases.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Also, I can't recall Robert Habeck evading such question when asked so at an interview for ARD or ZDF sometime last summer, because back then he had answered it quite detailed.

I didn't watch the ZDF summer interview, but I remember that Habeck said on the ARD summer interview that he deems the discussion about the minor issue of homeopathy to be impertinent and blown up to a major issue. However, in his defense, he also advised against the usage of homeopathy in cases of life-threatening diseases.

Well, I totally agree with that bolded statement from Robert Habeck. There are indeed more important political issues to deal with than homeopathy... such as climate change, energy supply, the future of transportation, pensions, minimum wage, taxes, child poverty, etc. and since last year Corona. Can't see how saying this reflects negatively on him with regards to homeopathy.

[Astatine]

The unrecognized winners of the evening are the exit polls, which proved to be about as accurate as in 2016 in spite of the logistical difficulties.

The unrecognized losers are the parties dieBasis in BW and VOLT in RLP: They got 0.998 and 0.996 % respectively, failing to cross the 1 % threshold for public party funding.

[Amanda Huggenkiss]

I think it is not stated enough that these results are totally satisfactory for the SPD, which, after all these years, means something.

Their losses in RLP were marginal.

They lost two percent in BaWü, but these losses are nothing in comparison to the downward trend people often like to ascribe to the party. Funnily, despite the losses, they are in a better position than they were in 2016 because they might very well be included in a government this time around.

I seldom agree with Olaf Scholz but I think he was right last night when he stated that these elections have shown that a CDU-government is not inevitable. The center-left bloc has grown in both states; the CDU is the definitive loser.

[palandio]

The unrecognized winners of the evening are the exit polls, which proved to be about as accurate as in 2016 in spite of the logistical difficulties.
[...]

The exit polls were generally good. If we wanted to be nitpicking then the biggest systematic errors would be:

- AfD overestimated by 2.8 (FGW) and 1.8 (infratest) percentage points in BW. AfD overestimated by 2.2 (both FGW and infratest) percentage points in RP.

- CDU underestimated by 2.2 (FGW) and 1.7 (infratest) percentage points in RP. CDU underestimated by 1.1. (both FGW and infratest) percentage points in BW.

- Governor's party underestimated by 2.2 (FGW) and 1.2 (infratest) percentage points in RP. Governor's party underestimated by 1.1 (FGW) and 1.6 (infratest) percentage points in BW.

Overall infratest's exit polls were closer to the final result in RP, whereas in BW it depends on the metric that you use.

The reasons why there were (minor) systematic errors: Postal voting in Germany is correlated with socio-economic variables and typically favors CDU, FDP and Greens, whereas SPD (in the West), AfD and Linke are less favored. Pollsters account for this, but the exact degree to which postal votes are different from precinct votes varies from election to election.
- It seems that the AfD fared particularly badly in motivating AfD-leaning voters to vote by mail, even worse than usually. Many of them just stayed at home instead.
- The CDU upswing with postal voters seems to be at least partially the effect of a last minute swing against the CDU that couldn't affect already cast postal ballots. Pollsters knew that something like this could happen, but it's very difficult to build time-effects into your models.
- Particularly the SPD in Baden-Württemberg (edit: Rheinland-Pfalz) seems to have been better at turning out postal voters than usual. A part of the explanation could be that Malu Dreyer motivated voters far beyond the traditional not-so-postal-friendly SPD electorate.
- In general it seems that German elections are seeing an increasing part of the electorate that is generally establishment-friendly, non-populist, but not party-loyal and likes to vote for popular incumbents. I can't prove it, but it makes sense that these people on average are also more likely to vote by mail. A statistical cleavage could be developing between postal voters and in-person voters that is not mainly socio-economic, but also related to attitudes towards the generic centrism that is prevalent nowadays. COVID-19 is probably accelerating this development.

[Anzeigenhauptmeister]

First-vote majorities of the constituencies

Rhineland-Palatinate

2016	2021

Green candidate Katharina Binz managed to win a direct mandate in district No. 27 Mainz I with 29.6% of the first votes.

Baden-Wuerttemberg

2016	2021

Both AfD direct seats from 2016 went to the Greens this time.

[Tender Branson]

Only the rural Blackforest (Schwarzwald), Swabian Alps (Schwäbische Alb) and Odenwald (known for abuse and rapes of minors in schools) remain as CDU strongholds ...

[President Johnson]

I think it is not stated enough that these results are totally satisfactory for the SPD, which, after all these years, means something.

Their losses in RLP were marginal.

They lost two percent in BaWü, but these losses are nothing in comparison to the downward trend people often like to ascribe to the party. Funnily, despite the losses, they are in a better position than they were in 2016 because they might very well be included in a government this time around.

I seldom agree with Olaf Scholz but I think he was right last night when he stated that these elections have shown that a CDU-government is not inevitable. The center-left bloc has grown in both states; the CDU is the definitive loser.

Agreed, though the Union (unfortunately) still has a 75-80% chance to retain the chancellorship as of today, I guess. That being said, I think they absolutely need to go back into opposition after the Merkel years. It's time for something new, the Union is tired and lacks new ideas or much policy ideas in general. A traffic light coalition might actually set new impulses for digitalization, social safety and a smart environmental policy that's combined with sound economic policy. However, that not just depends on the election results in September, but also the FDP. The Dreyer SPD and Kretschmann Greens are more pragmatic and centrist than at the federal level, where the left wings of both parties have more influence. Bringing that together with the FDP could be tricky, although Scholz, Habeck and Lindner themselves could probably work together just fine.

[Astatine]

Not only the US lose their bellwether states and countries, but Germany too: The town of Haßloch in RLP was often described as the "average" German town, but this time, the results deviated more than usually from the statewide outcome:

SPD 40.2 (+3.0)
CDU 21.7 (-2.4)
AfD 14.9 (-3.9)
Greens 7.7 (+2.5)
FDP 4.7 (-0.6)
FW 3.8 (+0.1)

[Pick Up the Phone]

Categories such as 'left-wing' and 'right-wing' only lead to confusion when analyzing such a constellation. There are far more voters switching from CDU/CSU to the Greens than to the AfD (...)

Had written this in the other thread a week ago. And, indeed, what can I say...





*Nichtwähler = 'Non-voters'
*Andere = 'Others?

Sure, it is BW - but the trend is clear. Outside the three city-states (Berlin, Hamburg, Bremen), there is an increasing segment of the electorate that is not switching from SPD to Greens (or vice versa) but from CDU to Greens. And this segment will only grow in the future.

In other words: The Greens are not only the main competitor of the CDU but also attract their voters. A dangerous development for the Christian Democrats, especially in the long run.

[Astatine]

Categories such as 'left-wing' and 'right-wing' only lead to confusion when analyzing such a constellation. There are far more voters switching from CDU/CSU to the Greens than to the AfD (...)

Had written this in the other thread a week ago. And, indeed, what can I say...

*Nichtwähler = 'Non-voters'
*Andere = 'Others?

Sure, it is BW - but the trend is clear. Outside the three city-states (Berlin, Hamburg, Bremen), there is an increasing segment of the electorate that is not switching from SPD to Greens (or vice versa) but from CDU to Greens. And this segment will only grow in the future.

Same in RLP: