(By Ray D.)
ARD: “Very, Very Large Debacle for the SPD, Worst Postwar Election Result Ever”
The European parliamentary election confirmed a clear trend in German politics: The SPD and Chancellor Schroeder are on their way out. Today, Sunday, June 13, the Socialists registered their worst election loss in postwar history, dropping at least 7 percentage points to a projected 22%. The conservative Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) took advantage of the Socialist's collapse to claim two times as many votes with a projected 45% result, giving them the largest number of seats from Germany's 99 designated seats in the European parliament.
SPD Personnel Changes Fail to Stop Party's Implosion: Chancellor Schroeder under Massive Pressure
Earlier this year, Chancellor Schroeder stepped aside as the SPD's party chairman to concentrate fully on his work as Chancellor. Franz Muentefering replaced Schroeder as party chairman in the hopes of turning things around. But the job has proven to be mission impossible. It was as if Muentefering had been asked to bail out the Titanic with a five gallon bucket. The question now is whether the captain, Schroeder, will go down with the ship, or jump overboard before it is too late. Schroeder is clearly running out of excuses and will soon have to face the music for his party's miserable performance. If the current trend continues, it is unlikely that the Chancellor will politically survive 2004.
How much longer can a party supported
by only 22% of the populace govern?
Today's election results in the German state of Thuringia were a further disaster for the SPD, with the party dropping over 4% from the last election to an abysmal 14% of the vote. The 14% result is the second worst loss in SPD history in German state elections. If the Greens are unable to pass the 5% hurdle to gain seats in the state parliament, the CDU will retain its absolute majority in Thuringia's state parliament for a further five years. At the moment, the Greens still appear to be under the 5% mark with the CDU still in command of the absolute majority. We will keep you updated should things change there...
Update: More on Sunday's results.
Die meisten Deutschen sind Jammerlappen, die bei Wahlen aus ihren Löchern gekrochen kommen und sich freuen können, dem Schröder eins ausgewischt zu haben. Und nächste Periode wird dann halt die CDU abgewatscht.
Posted by: | June 13, 2004 at 08:33 PM
Ein schöner Beitrag dazu, der die Misere etwas beleuchetet - http://www.statler-and-waldorf.de/
Die Seele der Sozialdemokratie
Deutschland geht es schlecht. Bei jedem malerischen Sonnenuntergang über dem Kanzleramt hat das Land zwischen 2000 und 3000 sozialversicherungspflichtige Arbeitsplätze weniger. Das reale Wirtschaftswachstum tendiert gegen Null. Die Verschuldung der öffentlichen Haushalte nimmt ein besorgniserregendes Ausmaß an. Die steigenden Zinslasten signalisieren uns, daß wir schon seit längerem unseren heutigen öffentlichen Konsum von den Steuerzahlern von morgen bezahlen lassen. Die öffentlichen Investitionen gehen zurück, mit der ganz konkreten Auswirkung, daß wir den zukünftigen Steuerzahlern sowohl einen Schuldenberg als auch eine marode öffentliche Infrastruktur hinterlassen. Ein schöner Generationenvertrag.
Also, um es kurz zu machen: Deutschland steigt ab. Man könnte etwas dagegen tun. Eine konservative Finanzpolitik, freie Märkte, eine Zerschlagung der Gewerkschaftsmacht -- all dies wären vernünftige Schritte, die uns ein neues "Wirtschaftswunder" bringen könnten. Eine solche Politik ist aber nicht zu erwarten. Denn Schröder und Müntefering sind derzeit weniger mit Sachfragen beschäftigt, als mit einem Versteckspiel. Gesucht wird: die Seele der Sozialdemokratie.
Nun, dieses Spiel können wir abkürzen. Lieber Gerd, lieber Franz, Statler und Waldorf helfen Euch gerne mit einem Kurzportrait der Seele der Sozialdemokratie, damit Ihr nicht länger suchen müßt.
Die Seele der Sozialdemokratie ist eine ziemlich üble Schlampe. Sie wirft sich aus purem Opportunismus jedem an den Hals, der ihr einen Wahlsieg verspricht. Aber das weiß der Gerd schon noch selbst, denn er wäre als konzeptloser Politikluftikus ja selbst nie zur Kanzlerkandidatur gekommen, wenn die Seele der Sozialdemokratie damals irgendeinen Wert auf politische Substanz gelegt hätte. Gut, früher war das vielleicht anders. Aber seit dem Abgang von Helmut Schmidt gibt sich die Seele der Sozialdemokratie willig jedem Volksschauspieler hin, der ihr ein warmes Essen verspricht. (Erinnert sich noch jemand an Björn Engholm? Na also.)
Was ist mit den politischen Inhalten? Naja, die Seele der Sozialdemokratie ist ziemlich störrisch. "Gerechtigkeit" ist ihr wichtig, und zwar Verteilungs"gerechtigkeit". Das bedeutet für die Seele der Sozialdemokratie, daß möglichst alle gleich viel haben sollen, aber jedenfalls niemand netto mehr haben soll als ein Oberstudienrat in Besoldungsgruppe A13.
Darüber hinaus ist Eigentum im Zweifelsfall Diebstahl. Der Seele der Sozialdemokratie ist jedes Mittel Recht, um diese "Gerechtigkeit" herzustellen, auch wenn als ökonomischer Kollateralschaden die gesamte Prosperität des Landes den Bach herunter geht. Egal, solange nur Gerechtigkeit herrscht. Als ich die Seele der Sozialdemokratie zum letzten Mal gesehen habe, hatte sie auch noch Poster von Kim Jong Il und Pol Pot in der Wohngemeinschaftsküche hängen. Deren Verteilungspolitik findet die Seele der Sozialdemokratie immer noch ziemlich in Ordnung.
Außenpolitisch hat es die Seele der Sozialdemokratie immer noch nicht verkraftet, daß die NATO-Nachrüstung dabei half, den Kommunismus in die Knie zu zwingen. Also, eigentlich ist sich die Seele der Sozialdemokratie hier nicht ganz sicher: Gefällt es ihr nur nicht, daß Pershing II-Raketen den Ostblock befreit haben, oder gefällt ihr die Befreiung des Ostblocks an und für sich nicht? Sie wankt da noch zwischen diesen Standpunkten. Immer noch. Denn eigentlich, meint die Seele der Sozialdemokratie, war es doch immer ganz schön, auch ein gelebtes Gegenmodell zum Schweinesystem, also zum Kapitalismus, zu haben.
Den Amerikanern kann die Seele der Sozialdemokratie jedenfalls nie verzeihen, daß sie den kalten Krieg gewonnen haben. Sie glaubt überhaupt immer noch, daß amerikanischer Imperialismus und jüdisches Kapital für alles Elend der Welt verantwortlich sind. Das mit dem jüdischen Kapital sagt sie aber nur unter Freunden. Jedenfalls ist die Seele der Sozialdemokratie immer bei den Unterdrückten. Früher sammelte sie Geld, um die Sozialisten in Nicaragua zu bewaffnen und heute drängt sie ihr tiefes Verständnis für ausgebeutete Völker dazu, Enthauptungen von Amerikanern für eine eigentlich ganz verständliche Reaktion zu halten.
Also, wenn ich das alles zusammenfassen soll, dann gibt es eigentlich nur ein Land, in dem die außen- und wirtschaftspolitischen Vorstellungen der Seele der Sozialdemokratie befriedigend erfüllt sind: Nordkorea. Lieber Gerd, lieber Franz, vielleicht solltet Ihr mal eine Dienstreise dorthin machen. Dann seht ihr, wie Ihr Deutschland gestalten müßt, damit endlich "Gerechtigkeit" herrscht und Deutschland außenpolitisch eine echte Friedensmacht ist. Also los, Schluß mit der Suche nach der Seele, und frisch ans Werk!
Posted by: Downer | June 13, 2004 at 08:58 PM
Schroeder's death-spiral seems very similar to what happened to the Tories under John Major after the 1992 election. Recovery looks a logn way away for the Tories 7 years after.
Posted by: Don | June 14, 2004 at 01:10 AM
@ Amihasser
Voranstehend ein weiteres trauriges Beispiel des „linken“ Demokratieverständnisses. Abweichler erden schlicht und ergreifend beleidigt und mit der Nazi-Keule bestraft. Diese Ideologie ist dem Erzfeind, dem Nationalsozialismus, über die Jahre im Ausmaß der Intoleranz gefährlich nahe gekommen. Nicht, dass dies noch Erstaunen hervorrufen würde.
Notiz von David: Amihasser-Kommentare werden stets gelöscht. Bitte daher nicht darauf Bezug nehmen.
Posted by: P.K. | June 14, 2004 at 01:21 AM
Nun, bei dem kleinen, wirklich dummen Amihasser handelt es sich um den Prototyp des deutschen Trillerpfeife blasenden, geistig aber etwas entkernten Pazifisten. Die wissen zwar wenig von der wissenschaftlichen Definition des Begriffs Nationalsozialismus, aber sie gebrauchen ihn inflationär. Nein, Kershaw sagt ihnen nichts, auch Popper haben sie nie gelesen, geschweige denn Marx, aber tröten können sie, und das aber echt lautstark, diese Antidemokraten.
Ich denke, bei unserem sabbernden Poster handelt es sich um denjenigen, der derartig auch im Forum der verschrobenen antisemitischn Jünger von ATTAC plaudert und brüllt. Siehe hier: http://www.attac.de/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1244&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=alexander+schmidt&start=15
Notiz von David: Alexander, ich habe - wie immer - den Kommentar von amihasser sofort gelöscht.
Auszug des TBeutrags von SOLDAT: "1. Halt dich raus wenn ich mit Leuten mit Grips rede.
2. Schweig still, mein kleingeistiger Naivling. Die USA sind die grösste Killertyrannei der Weltgeschichte.
Auch geistige Minimalisten wie du - kleiner Mann - werden das kapieren wenn sie erst mal den Sargnagel in deine Totenkiste geschlagen haben.
Aber keine Angst. Kannst ja dann dem GI der dich in Dachau zu Tode foltert sagen du seist einer von den guten Deutschen gewesen. Einer von den richtig rechtsradikalen, marktgläubigen. Fürchte nur der steckt dir dann erst mal den Besenstil in den Anus.
3. Sag mal du bist nicht zufällig alt genug um noch in der HJ gedient zu haben? Macht nämlich ziemlich stark den eindruck.
Naseweis."
Toll, oder?
AS
Posted by: Alexander Schmidt | June 14, 2004 at 01:50 AM
Could one of you please explain under what circumstances would Germany hold elections, or change chancellors?
Posted by: Daniel Rodriguez | June 14, 2004 at 08:36 AM
@Alex
Wenn ich bei denen im Forum lese, dass "jedes Kapitalistische Imperium muss sich irgendwann in einem großen Krieg entladen um wieder viel wachsen zu können. Und dann wenn die kapitalistische Ordnung zerschlagen ist, dann werden wir Sozialisten die Macht übernehmen und endlich eine ewige Friedensordnung errichten.
Dann bekomme ich schon fast Augenkrebs. Mir stehen die Freudentränen in den Augen. Arm, sehr sehr armselig. Pisa untertreibt, ganz klar...
http://www.attac.de/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1244
Posted by: Downer | June 14, 2004 at 10:20 AM
I would like to add to Daniel's comment: Can someone explain to me, in German or English, how Schroeder can still be chancellor with 22% of the vote? Do the Greens bring that many seats? Plus, is there a prediction when this gov't will collapse?
Posted by: Erik Eisel | June 14, 2004 at 04:11 PM
@ erik eisel
frankly, I don't know, when Schroeders gov't will collapse, hopefully soon. But Schroeder won't give up.
I guess, he is hoping for another desaster like the 2003 floodings in Germany and Bush declaring war on Iran, so he can betray again our allies, but this time German voters will not follow him again on his "German way".
Only the Bundestag can vote him out of office, or most likely we have to wait another two years til the end of his current term. Hopefully the next "Bundestag-Election" will finish him up.
Posted by: ralf | June 14, 2004 at 06:01 PM
@David,
die letzten 3 Links oben sehen mir ganz nach Linkfarmen aus, die nur dazu gedacht sind, Trojaner und Viren durch div. Sicherheitslücken im Internet Explorer in das Betriebssystems des ahnungslosen Besuchers einzuschleusen.
Posted by: ! An David ! | June 14, 2004 at 07:01 PM
Das SPD Ziel bei der nächster Wahl - 10 plus X.
Posted by: robert | June 14, 2004 at 07:40 PM
@Daniel
"Could one of you please explain under what circumstances would Germany hold elections, or change chancellors?"
There are elections in Germany all the time: local, state, federal and European elections as a matter of fact. We elect the Bundestag every four years, next time in 2006. The Bundestag elects the chancellor and may replace Schroeder at anytime if certain conditions are met. This has happened before when Helmut Kohl first became chancellor. The SPD's 22% was for a European election not for the Bundestag. The red-green administration did win the majority of the popular votes in 1998 and 2002 and I don't recall endless recounts and re-recounts.
Note from David: You're wrong, Jo. In 2002 the total popular vote was 47 996 480. SPD and Greens together had 22 599 023 votes - clearly less than "the majority of the popular votes".
In 1998 the total popular vote was 49 308 512. SPD and Greens combined had 23 482 893 votes - again less than "the majority of the popular votes". The German election system is complicated and unpredictable - due to "Ausgleichsmandate" and "Überhangmandate". In particular in 2002 it took some time to identify the number of parliamentary seats for each party.
Posted by: jo | June 14, 2004 at 07:47 PM
"I don't recall endless recounts and re-recounts."
Gump didn't try to steal germany's election.
Posted by: bigjosh | June 14, 2004 at 09:08 PM
Be careful, Deutschland.
China has a huge population because it has had too many elections.
Posted by: David | June 14, 2004 at 10:01 PM
@jo
If Germany had a similar long-running democracy, perhaps such a phenomenon would arise. Bush could have burnt down the Washington Capital and declared the Democrats guilty of this atrocity… “recounts and recounts…” I recall the integrity of the world’s oldest Constitution fully intact at the conclusion of this process: in fact, stronger…
Posted by: James | June 14, 2004 at 10:08 PM
Wow, looks like I stired up a hornet's nest.
Nunja, getroffene Hunde bellen bekanntlich.
Posted by: jo | June 14, 2004 at 11:01 PM
on david's note @joe
it's not so complicated. "ausgleichs-" and "überhang"mandate guarantee, that the number of representatives of either party reflects the number of "second" votes (zweitstimmen), even if a party would deserve more representatives due to the "first" votes for the direct candidates - err.. well - ok, it is complicated. but it's really a clever system, since it enables the voter to elect a representative for his/her area directly and nevertheless maintains the overall ratio of votes/representatives.
"majority" in the german system means majority after substracting splinter groups with less than the famous five percent. the five percent rule is a consequence of the election system of the weimarer republic, as far as I know, when the parliament was hopelessly dissociated.
another interesting aspect is the fact, that a party can submit representatives according to their portion of second votes, even if it has got less than 5% second votes, but was able to win at least three areas with first votes (direct candidates), like the pds did in 1998. so, a party which is considered to be important locally is not wiped out by the 5% rule.
in my opinion the system is okay, but i'd prefer a 3% hurdle instead of 5%.
Posted by: no comment | June 15, 2004 at 09:21 AM
@ Erik & Daniel,
>I would like to add to Daniel's comment: Can someone explain to me, in German or English, how Schroeder can still be chancellor with 22% of the vote? Do the Greens bring that many seats? Plus, is there a prediction when this gov't will collapse? <
It has something to do with the elctions this year and our law-making system:
a lot, if not most laws here have to pass not only the "bundestag" (parliament) but also the bundesrat (chamber of federal lands, something like the US-senate). Now, if the SPD or red green loose elections there (like in Thuringia) there will be the day, when the conservatives not only have a simple majority there, but a two-third one, which would allow them to stop ANY law. This could happen, of the SPD loose in dense populated Northrhine Westfalia, which has a lot of seats in the bundesrat. Elections there are somewhen in autumn (guess, in september).
In such a case - ANY governmental law could be stopped - Red-green governing wouldn't make any sense anymore, and a "big" coalition would become likely. Or new elections.
Best wishes from Germany
klaus
PS.: yeah, back again ! To Karl, Nico, and all others from the good ol' times: please not my new mailbox. ;-) And keep up the good work, david!
Posted by: klaus | June 15, 2004 at 11:16 AM
In september there are local elections in Northrhine Westfalia, which have at least no direct influence on the federal politics.
The state elections in Northrhine Westfalia are held in may next year. If the SPD (Schöder's party) loses these elections, which is very likely, then the oposition will get a 2/3-majority in the Bundesrat (comparable to the Senate in the USA). As already pointed out by Klaus, they then will be able to not only stop MANY federal laws, what they already can do today because of their 1/2-majority in the Bundesrat, but ALL federal laws. This could get very interesting... :)
Posted by: Robert | June 15, 2004 at 10:02 PM
Thank you for your replies. So if I have this correctly, outside of a no confidence vote, the earliest that new elections would be held in DE would be next year after the elections in Northrhine Westfalia. Is this correct?
Posted by: Daniel Rodriguez | June 16, 2004 at 01:31 AM
Well, new elections are possible even now. But there can only be new elections if Schröder and the SPD want so (because the majority of the Bundestag, the Chancellor and the President have to approve early elections). But this, of course, would be a very silly thing for them to do, because they would suffer heavy losses in the new elections. So I am sad to say that in my opinion the possibility of new elections, even if the SPD will lose Northrhine Westfalia, is very low.
What could happen is that the SPD becomes so desperate that they fire Schröder and elect a new Chancellor. This could happen if the results of the local elections in Northrhine Westfalia (in september) are as devestating for the SPD as recent elections have been (because Northrhine Westfalia is THE stronghold of the SPD and also because it would be an omen for the state elections in may 2005).
If the SPD loses Northrhine Westfalia (in may 2005) perhaps they will abandon their coalition partner, the Greens, and try to form a "great coalition" with the Christian Democrats (which then would have a 2/3-majority in the Bundesrat).
I think federal elections will be held in September 2006, as scheduled, and maybe Schröder will still be Chancellor then. But who knows?
Posted by: Robert | June 16, 2004 at 05:20 AM
@Nico, Robert & Daniel,
nico,
thank you - how are you keeping?
Robert,
oops, you are right, I really made a mistake here - state elections are indeed in May 2005 ;-)
Daniel,
>the earliest that new elections would be held in DE would be next year after the elections in Northrhine Westfalia. Is this correct?<
Yes. It would e the most likely possibility in case the SPD would loose this state. But as Robert already pointed out the SPD is so desperate at the moment, that noone knows what could happen after the local elections there in autumn.
----------
At present they simply don't know what to do: Schroeder is not Mr. Niceguy anymore. Franz Muentefering, the parties' leader never was (only in the belief of the party functionaires, which says a lot about their sense for reality).
The problem they have is that of all socialistc parties: they need a lot of bureaucracy to realize their agenda, they cut the service of the state, but not the state itself (have you ever heard of masses of bureaucrats fired because the public cannot feed them anymore? - or what about putting all these nonsense-laws about tax, dosenpfand etc. in the closet? Instead they make things even more complicated needing more bureaucracy costing more tax....)
If you talk to some politicians of this party you get the impression: they simply don't know anymore what to do. They're helpless. Caught in their little world and unable to rebuild temselves.
Having said all this it does NOT mean that conservatives are automatically much better. They are not. Why? The urgent needed discussions about the agenda and visions of Strauss and Hayek, which happened in the 70ties and 80ties in the UK and the US, are still missing here (ironically enough they are both of Germanic origin). One should think that the conservatives could push their ideas. They don't. Why? Simply because also the conservatives in the meanwhile have no principles but - like the SPD - only the will to gain power. Ideas? Ideals? Visions? None. In this sense both parties are prostitutes. There was a time when this was different. Well, ONE difference surely will be: a different aproach to the US - not the childish, hypocratic "patriotic" one of todays' socialists.
Best wishes
klaus
Posted by: klaus | June 16, 2004 at 10:38 PM
Hi Niko,
>You're correct about the CDU when it comes to the appalling lack of visions. Although I'd say that in terms of foreign relations the CDU/CSU might be the lesser evil.<
Yep! At least one positive aspect. I think the whole mess exists, because both political parties have a problem with one word: freedom.
Result on the left: more and more nonsense-bureaucra(z)y and regulations.
Result on the conservative side: so-called "structural conservatism", which hinders the country to develop.
Any idea how to get out of it? Well, what about a little revolt? I mean, the last one happened already 15 years ago.... ;-)
Best wishes
klaus
Posted by: klaus | June 17, 2004 at 06:03 PM