Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
German Presidential Election 2010  
User currently offlineLTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 50
Posted (4 years 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1519 times:

If any of you watched or followed this, in particular German members, you'll have to realise that for the ruling coalition of Union and FDP, this Bundesversammlung (assembly in charge of electing the President) has been flushed down the crapper, or as I like to say: "Es war ein kompletter Griff ins Klo". Why do I say this? Simple, because Mutti Angie and Super Guido were so certain that Wulff would get instantly elected and that they cleaned up enough, so the delegates that were sent would follow the party line, but in the end, it became a total disaster for the government. My guess is that those responsible abstained themselves from making a choice, and instead chose "Enthaltung". Gauck was much more constant in the number of electoral votes that he got, and the Linkspartei indirectly helped the FDP by choosing "Enthaltung" in the third and final round, after Luc Jochimsen dropped out of the race. Wulff did get elected, but it ended with a major slap in the face for Angie and her cronies.

What's your opinion of this? My opinion is that this is once again proof that we can't trust our politicians, and that the presidential election should become a popular election once again. We Germans are mature enough to make this choice on our own again. I mean, if we can't even trust our politicians with buying themselves a pack of cigarettes without this causing a clash in parliament, then we can only trust ourselves.

I do wonder if this may even cause Angie to invoke article 68 of the constitution (Vertrauensfrage/Motion of no confidence) to lose on purpose and thus force early elections. If that happens, I'll vote for the Piratenpartei, because neither of the big parties, and MUCH LESS the SED Linkspartei, deserve my two votes.

19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7943 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (4 years 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1512 times:

Quoting LTU932 (Thread starter):
because Mutti Angie and Super Guido

What's with those infantile slurs?

Quoting LTU932 (Thread starter):
were so certain that Wulff would get instantly elected

They were *hoping* Mr. Wulff would get elected in the first round but they couldn't be sure. The fact he got only 600 votes came as surprise, though.

Quoting LTU932 (Thread starter):
My guess is that those responsible abstained themselves from making a choice, and instead chose "Enthaltung".

No, they actually voted for Mr. Gauck, hence the low number of abstained delegates during the first two rounds.

Quoting LTU932 (Thread starter):
My opinion is that this is once again proof that we can't trust our politicians

Well, not really. As the election was a "slap in the face" of Mrs. Merkel, as you said, commited by members of her own coalition, the election has actually proven that at least some electors do have a spine and vote for the candidate they like best.

Quoting LTU932 (Thread starter):
We Germans are mature enough to make this choice on our own again.

"Again"?
Other than that, I like the idea, although a direct election would have some drawbacks as well. I could even imagine abolishing the post altogether.

Quoting LTU932 (Thread starter):
I mean, if we can't even trust our politicians
with buying themselves a pack of cigarettes without this causing a clash in parliament, then we can only trust ourselves.

Huh?

Quoting LTU932 (Thread starter):
I do wonder if this may even cause Angie to invoke article 68 of the constitution (Vertrauensfrage/Motion of no confidence) to lose on purpose and thus force early elections.

Won't happen, because the results would be devastating.

Quoting LTU932 (Thread starter):
I'll vote for the Piratenpartei

Better check their agenda twice before voting for them.



I support the right to arm bears
User currently onlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2042 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (4 years 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1496 times:

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 1):
"Again"?

Yes, again, assuming the OP is referring to Weimar, which, of course, is why the Germans currently do not elect their president in popular elections.

Personally, I am not really in favour of this either, as any electorate is likely to vote not for the best qualified candidate, but for the most charismatic one with the deepest pockets. It'd be a kind of DSDS for Bellevue with Dieter Bohlen as the Wahlleiter. Horrible thought.

Quoting LTU932 (Thread starter):
I do wonder if this may even cause Angie to invoke article 68 of the constitution (Vertrauensfrage/Motion of no confidence) to lose on purpose and thus force early elections. If that happens, I'll vote for the Piratenpartei, because neither of the big parties, and MUCH LESS the SED Linkspartei, deserve my two votes.
Quoting NoUFO (Reply 1):
Won't happen, because the results would be devastating.

I agree. What would A.M. have to gain? Early elections would weaken her rather than strengthen her. While the CDU would come out stronger compared to the FDP, it most likely wouldn't be enough for a new coalition, and leading a Grosse Koalition with the SPD, Merkel and her CDU would have less weight in government than they have now.

Chances are, however, that after today's desaster, a Red-Green coalition might return. Remember, hardly anybody wanted that nutjob Wulff in Bellevue.



I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offlineLTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 50
Reply 3, posted (4 years 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1478 times:

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 1):
No, they actually voted for Mr. Gauck, hence the low number of abstained delegates during the first two rounds.

But in the end, the abstentions were what lost the election for Gauck, even with the late absolute majority.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 1):
Won't happen, because the results would be devastating.

You think she's that bright to realise that? Her former mentor Helmut Kohl did it after replacing Helmut Schmidt, and the gamble paid off, although then Gerhard Schröder tried the same thing after the NRW-Elections in 2005 and caused a virtual tie, where it was Angie who became Kanzler. If she becomes desperate enough, she may at least consider this option.

Quoting TransIsland (Reply 2):
Yes, again, assuming the OP is referring to Weimar, which, of course, is why the Germans currently do not elect their president in popular elections.

Weimar was a long time ago, those lessons have been learned. And trying to think that a popular election would become something of a political DSDS is just prejudicial to most people. Not everyone watches Unterschichtenfernsehen and would be even capable of such a thing. And if people would indeed do this in the presidential elections, then I assure you it would happen in other elections as well, so what's the difference?


User currently onlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9154 posts, RR: 29
Reply 4, posted (4 years 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1465 times:

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 3):
But in the end, the abstentions were what lost the election for Gauck, even with the late absolute majority

No, even with all the communist votes, the end tally would have been 625:615 in favour of Mr Wulff.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 1):
Other than that, I like the idea, although a direct election would have some drawbacks as well. I could even imagine abolishing the post altogether.

It would have a lot of drawbacks. The German President is a figure head of state without executive powers. The executive powers are with the chancellor. A direct election would empower the President and form a kind of a co-government which would not be what the constitution calls for.

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 3):
Not everyone watches Unterschichtenfernsehen and would be even capable of such a thing. And if people would inde

The media reporting ahead of yesterday's election and the invitation of the "popular vote" , with many people interviewed on radio showed how little many understand about how our democracy works. Poeple talk, but they don't know what they are talking about.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7943 posts, RR: 12
Reply 5, posted (4 years 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1429 times:

Quoting TransIsland (Reply 2):
Yes, again, assuming the OP is referring to Weimar, which, of course, is why the Germans currently do not elect their president in popular elections.

Ah, ok, but the then President had a lot more power than he has now.

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 3):
But in the end, the abstentions were what lost the election for Gauck, even with the late absolute majority.

Uhm, how so since Mr. Wulff gained the *absolute* majority as you correctly said?

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 3):
You think she's that bright to realise that?

Yes, she is. She is intelligent and probably more intelligent then the two of us.



I support the right to arm bears
User currently onlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2042 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (4 years 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1384 times:

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 3):
And trying to think that a popular election would become something of a political DSDS is just prejudicial to most people.

Then I shall be prejudiced, because I do believe that the majority of the electorate are poorly informed.

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 3):
You think she's that bright to realise that? Her former mentor Helmut Kohl did it after replacing Helmut Schmidt, and the gamble paid off, although then Gerhard Schröder tried the same thing after the NRW-Elections in 2005 and caused a virtual tie, where it was Angie who became Kanzler. If she becomes desperate enough, she may at least consider this option.

Kohl did it, because he wanted the electorate's blessing for his parliamentary coup. Schroeder did it, because he needed a renewed mandate after losing state after state, and because, in 2005, he only had one more year to go. As we know, it didn't work. Merkel's CDU/FDP coalition, on the other hand, is still brand new. She knows the polls. She'd have nothing to gain but everything to lose if she gambled like that now.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 5):
Ah, ok, but the then President had a lot more power than he has now.

Yes, but part of the argument I currently hear in the discourse about the presidential election process is that a popularly elected president of Germany ought to have more power, too. Ironically, it was Kuenast who, on ARD yesterday, as one of the only A-list politicians spoke out against a popularly elected president, when usually her party stands for more involvement of the people in the governing process, e.g. referendums.



I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently onlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9154 posts, RR: 29
Reply 7, posted (4 years 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1381 times:

Quoting TransIsland (Reply 6):

Then I shall be prejudiced, because I do believe that the majority of the electorate are poorly informed.

No, it's just an arrogant statement.

Quoting TransIsland (Reply 6):
She'd have nothing to gain but everything to lose if she gambled like that now.

She's elected for 4 years,not by the polls which may change in 6 onths into the other direction again.

Quoting TransIsland (Reply 6):
Yes, but part of the argument I currently hear in the discourse about the presidential election process is that a popularly elected president of Germany ought to have more power,

There' can't be 2 CEOs in the same company. The constitution hjas given the executive power to the chancellor and all populistic gossip will not change that. Ask the people who want direct elections of the president who the top 5 by protocol are and 99% will not give the right answer. It is very rarely that I agree with Mrs Kuenast, but here she is right. Must be a field she understands.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently onlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2042 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (4 years 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1378 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 7):
No, it's just an arrogant statement.
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 7):
Ask the people who want direct elections of the president who the top 5 by protocol are and 99% will not give the right answer.

I don't get it... Are you calling me arrogant because I maintain that the majority are poorly informed, but then you say that they are, if I may paraphrase, poorly informed?

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 7):
She's elected for 4 years,not by the polls which may change in 6 onths into the other direction again.

While this goes along the lines of what I said, anyway, one could say that the Bundestag is elected for four years, and if CDU and FDP get a divorce, they could elect a different chancellor at a moment's notice.



I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offlineRara From Germany, joined Jan 2007, 2056 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (4 years 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1374 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 7):
She's elected for 4 years,not by the polls which may change in 6 onths into the other direction again.

Once pressure rises above a certain amount, governments seemingly can't withstand it anymore. Schröder was elected for four years and despite a stable majority quit after the third. If the current coalition doesn't improve its performance, with all the state elections we're headed for, its end will come sooner than later.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 7):
There' can't be 2 CEOs in the same company. The constitution hjas given the executive power to the chancellor and all populistic gossip will not change that.

  

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 7):
Ask the people who want direct elections of the president who the top 5 by protocol are and 99% will not give the right answer.

Is that really relevant though? Seems more like political trivia to me than actual salient information that an informed citizen would need.



Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
User currently onlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9154 posts, RR: 29
Reply 10, posted (4 years 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1331 times:

Quoting TransIsland (Reply 8):
I don't get it... Are you calling me arrogant because I maintain that the majority are poorly informed, but then you say that they are, if I may paraphrase, poorly informed?

sorry for quick reading but I focused on your term "electorate" and thought you meant the "Bundesversammlung". I see that you mean the general public that would be elgibile to vote the President into office. In that case I agree with you.



Quoting TransIsland (Reply 8):

While this goes along the lines of what I said, anyway, one could say that the Bundestag is elected for four years, and if CDU and FDP get a divorce, they could elect a different chancellor

she would have to form a new coalition in that case and the new coalition could elect her again. Not necessairly a change in person.

Quoting Rara (Reply 9):
Is that really relevant though?

It is frightening to see how little the general public knows how democracy works. The really frightening part is, a new deicator could take over and many would not even notice, they'd rather applaud that things get done finally.

.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineLTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 50
Reply 11, posted (4 years 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1324 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 10):
she would have to form a new coalition in that case and the new coalition could elect her again. Not necessairly a change in person.

Yes, but who would want to form a coalition with Angie? Sure, she could have a try again at a grand coalition with the SPD, but right now there are too many fundamental disagreements for that to happen at this time, though I admit that a grand coalition would be the least of two evils. Better that than continue the Klientelpolitik from the likes of Guido and the FDP, even though I still consider the SPD unelectable after one of their candidates (Andrea Yps) publically broke her electoral promise of NOT negotiating with the communists.


User currently onlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9154 posts, RR: 29
Reply 12, posted (4 years 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 1312 times:

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 11):
es, but who would want to form a coalition with Angie? Sure, she could have a try again at a grand coalition with the SPD, but right now there are too many fundamental disagreements for that to happen at this time, though I admit that a grand coalition would be the least of two evils

The grand coalition would be the same sh*it we had before. People have given Mrs. M a clear mandate for a liberal conservative coalition which is the only political formation that can bring Germany out of this misery too much "social" has ridden us intoi. And I include the Kohl government with Mr. Bluem into that.

We have, in the past 40 years, told people that 1+1 makes 3, the result is a debt burden of e 1,7 billion and that does not include the pensions for the public work force.

We have to get back to the basics of math and back to the understanding that money has to be eafrned before it is spent. Niether the Greenms nor the Social Democrats will be able to do that, they will just dig the hole deeper.

Mrs. M. is about to f*ck up the historical chance voters gave her last September. She better gets her act together PDQ.

BTW - the clowns of the SPD are glad that they are not in office. They'd dip below 10% in the polls within 3 months time. Or can anybody imagine Mrs Nahles or that other guy as chancellor?



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineLTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 50
Reply 13, posted (4 years 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1286 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 12):
People have given Mrs. M a clear mandate for a liberal conservative coalition which is the only political formation that can bring Germany out of this misery too much "social" has ridden us intoi. And I include the Kohl government with Mr. Bluem into that.

But let's face it: There's too much trouble inside the coalition, Angie can't keep Horst Seehofer and the CSU in check, the FDP is in a leadership and political agenda crisis thanks to Guido, the government is far too involve in making the current social inequalities worse than they already are, etc. For me, this coalition has failed, and it's only a matter of time until Frau Merkel realises that and either reforms her cabinet, or makes the Vertrauensfrage in hopes of re-election. Sure, as you said, the Vertrauensfrage is far too unlikely, but since Gerhard Schröder 2005, it's something you can't rule out anymore.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 12):
We have to get back to the basics of math and back to the understanding that money has to be eafrned before it is spent. Niether the Greenms nor the Social Democrats will be able to do that, they will just dig the hole deeper.

IMO CDU/CSU and FDP can't do it neither. Especially the Union, which has given in to the many policies the FDP has wanted. I mean, cut the Elterngeld for people who make lots of money instead of taking it away from Hartz IV-Recipients (except those who abuse of Hartz IV of course) and lower income parents, take away the VAT benefits for hotel stays (which was probably put in place on request from Mr Michael Mronz, Guido's boyfriend and a person from the hotel business) and raise taxes for rich people. Little people have to pay for the fuckups of the richer people. Hell, even many other rich people have pleaded through the press that taxes are raised, and that they're willing to pay for it. But in the end, the current government only does Klientelpolitik.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 12):
can anybody imagine Mrs Nahles or that other guy as chancellor?

Good point...


User currently onlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9154 posts, RR: 29
Reply 14, posted (4 years 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1241 times:

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 13):
for it. But in the end, the current government only does Klientelpolitik.

If That would be true, the middle class would be happy. Instead we are the cash cows to finance all the socialist goodies which are no longer bearable. The debt burden is the real problem why governments are i n trouble these days and the present coalition does not make its supporters happy at all. but it is the lesser evil.Who would want Mrs Nahles or Mr Gabriel as Chgancellor with the communists supporting them? We did not free East Germany to have these rats back in office and this time fore the whole country.

We have to demand that each and everyone in this country (and in all other western democracies) has to support himself before asking for suppirt from the general public. We have to understand that wealth, and that includes öpublic wealth must be earned new each and every day. Nobody who is able wo work has the right to be lazy and be supported by the general public.

The government, and that unfortunately includes all parties that claim to be in the "middle" of the poilitical spectrum, looks after the votes of the poeple who don't work. You know why? They are the majority.

I have a good income, way over average but I earn every cent of it myself without any help from anyone. I don't have tpo apologize to anyone for that. By government standards, I am considered "rich" which is rubbish. Rich, for me, is when you can live from your savings and investments without working and that needs a minimum capital of € 3 Million. Anything below that is not rich.

So much for "Klientelpolitik"



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently onlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2042 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (4 years 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1234 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 12):
People have given Mrs. M a clear mandate for a liberal conservative coalition

You know as well as I do that the voter does not give any mandate as far as coalitions are concerned. They elected a parliament, that's all. Out of that result, the CDU and FDP concluded they had a "clear mandate," but that is but one interpretation of the election result. If polls are worth anything, they showed that despite the SPD's poor performance, most voters would have preferred that coalition to continue.

Also, as we had determined before, most voters are poorly informed. Some of those Germans I know who complain the most about the FDP in fact voted for them. Why? Because of a general, gut feeling of unhappiness, but not because they knew what they stood for. In a way, the FDP's 14.6% is comparable to results of the NPD/DVU/REP of 5.x%, as most of them are protest votes.

Some years ago, another right-fringe dumbass (Ronald Barnabas Schill), managed to collect enough protest votes to form a coalition with the CDU in the state of Hamburg. We all saw, how long that lasted.



I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6525 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (4 years 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1209 times:

What is the point of electing a president that has no power at all, and what is the point of having a head of state that nobody in the world knows about ? And how can it be a big drawback if it takes 3 turns to elect him ?


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7943 posts, RR: 12
Reply 17, posted (4 years 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1195 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 16):
What is the point of electing a president that has no power at all

The President is the head of the state and represents the country without being tied to a certain political party. He/she appoints and dismisses members of the federal government, can raise his voice over controversal topics and thus bring back a derailed debate back on track. The President can also veto federal laws if only once. For historical reasons, the President has only little political power but isn't completely useless.  
Quoting Aesma (Reply 16):
what is the point of having a head of state that nobody in the world knows about

It's debateable if "nobody in the world" knows about the President's existence. I couldn't say who is South Africa's Minister for the Interior right out of the top of my head, but I doubt that is's useless to have one appointed.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 16):
And how can it be a big drawback if it takes 3 turns to elect him ?

It's a drawback for Mrs. Merkel who wanted to get a possible canditate for her own succession, basically the last one, out of her way. While she succeeded, her party let her feel that they are not that eagerly following her.



I support the right to arm bears
User currently onlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2042 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (4 years 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1170 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 16):
What is the point of electing a president that has no power at all, and what is the point of having a head of state that nobody in the world knows about ?

Same point as England and the Queen... if Germany's presidents hung in there for half a century or more, I'm sure people might remember his name. However, I will admit that I had to google the name of the French prime minister, Francois Fillon; I recommend immediate retirement for the man.
  



I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offlineLTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 50
Reply 19, posted (4 years 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1160 times:

Quoting TransIsland (Reply 15):
You know as well as I do that the voter does not give any mandate as far as coalitions are concerned. They elected a parliament, that's all. Out of that result, the CDU and FDP concluded they had a "clear mandate," but that is but one interpretation of the election result.

You're right. The numbers may suggest that Schwarz-Gelb ist the coalition of choice for the people, but an election does not mean that the people gave that coalition a clear mandate. If that was so, then a Grand Coalition would have the actual popular mandate because of the numbers.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
2012 Presidential Election - Nominate A Republican posted Sun Nov 16 2008 08:35:32 by 1337Delta764
Presidential Election Strategy #1 posted Wed Mar 5 2008 07:34:31 by RJdxer
CNN & The Presidential Election posted Fri Feb 1 2008 19:40:53 by JetBlueGuy2006
Biya Wins Cameroon Presidential Election posted Wed Jul 25 2007 21:28:27 by MaverickM11
The Official French Presidential Election Thread posted Thu May 3 2007 09:35:42 by UTA_flyinghigh
Eddie Murphy Not To Run For Presidential Election! posted Wed Jan 24 2007 20:27:59 by RootsAir
Official Venezuelan Presidential Election Thread posted Sun Dec 3 2006 04:36:35 by Luisde8cd
The Official Mexican Presidential Election Thread. posted Sat Jul 1 2006 04:54:26 by SFOMEX
US Presidential Election System posted Mon Oct 17 2005 20:48:28 by Jush
The Real US Presidential Election Winner! posted Sun Nov 21 2004 15:12:31 by GKirk