|
|
Post by Peter Wilkinson on Sept 2, 2024 14:58:10 GMT
The final seat count for Thuringia is as posted by andrea above (just 29 of the AfD seats were direct mandates in the end). In Saxony it seems to be: CDU 42 AfD 41 BSW 15 SPD 9 Green 6 Linke 6 FW 1 I had the FW down as a wildcard to get in, but definitely not due to a direct mandate! If I get this right, the Greens and every party above them got above the 5% threshold and were thus automatically entitled to a proportional share of seats. The CDU and AfD between them took the vast majority of constituency seats (but neither even coming close to exhausting their entitlement to list seats), neither the BSW nor the SPD won any constituency seats (so all their seats are list seats) but the Greens won two constituencies (and were also entitled to more list seats). If nobody else had won constituency seats, then the list seats would have been split between these five parties, giving the incumbent CDU/SPD/Green coalition a narrow majority, and no other party would have been entitled to any seats. However, Linke won two constituencies and FW won one. Linke's two constituencies were apparently enough to waive the threshold for them and entitle them to list seats, reducing the number available to the parties which had met the threshold. This by itself was enough to deprive the incumbent coalition of an ongoing majority and create a situation for interesting coalition negotiations. FW's one constituency, though, apparently has not given them any entitlement to list seats, but it still creates extra demand for the list seats because the party which would otherwise have won the constituency (most likely the CDU, I think) would have had this taken into account when the list seats were shared out. If I am interpreting the figures correctly, the CDU will therefore have been compensated for losing the constituency by gaining an extra list seat. But this had to come out of someone else's list entitlement, and (so far as I can judge) the unlucky party was the Greens. At any rate, under most circumstances, the Greens had enough more votes than Linke to be entitled to one more seat - as it is, it seems that Linke is now very narrowly entitled to 6 seats but the Greens a little way short of 7. Perhaps interestingly, while this has probably made the CDU's coalition options somewhat more difficult, FW's single seat doesn't look as if it will play any part in them - unless another party splits, arithmetically there seems to be no possible coalition option that would fail without FW but succeed with it. The real spanner in the works seems to be Linke - rather illustrated by the fact that an AfD/BSW/Linke coalition would have 62 seats out of 120. The CDU would almost undoubtedly prefer not to have to negotiate with any of those three parties, but the arithmetic leaves them with little choice - both BSW and Linke would seem to prefer to negotiate with the CDU rather than with AfD (if possibly mainly because of the reputational damage consequent on the latter course), and for the CDU to force a situation where the two parties changed their minds about associating with the AfD would probably be almost as damaging as the CDU doing so itself (particularly as the situation for the CDU in Thuringia in terms of negotiating partners looks similar but worse). So, the most likely next Saxon administration looks to be one between the CDU and BSW - and any one of the smaller parties other than FW (which, as already pointed out, is basically too small). |
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,798 
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Sept 2, 2024 15:55:50 GMT
I had the FW down as a wildcard to get in, but definitely not due to a direct mandate! If I get this right, the Greens and every party above them got above the 5% threshold and were thus automatically entitled to a proportional share of seats. The CDU and AfD between them took the vast majority of constituency seats (but neither even coming close to exhausting their entitlement to list seats), neither the BSW nor the SPD won any constituency seats (so all their seats are list seats) but the Greens won two constituencies (and were also entitled to more list seats). If nobody else had won constituency seats, then the list seats would have been split between these five parties, giving the incumbent CDU/SPD/Green coalition a narrow majority, and no other party would have been entitled to any seats. However, Linke won two constituencies and FW won one. Linke's two constituencies were apparently enough to waive the threshold for them and entitle them to list seats, reducing the number available to the parties which had met the threshold. This by itself was enough to deprive the incumbent coalition of an ongoing majority and create a situation for interesting coalition negotiations. FW's one constituency, though, apparently has not given them any entitlement to list seats, but it still creates extra demand for the list seats because the party which would otherwise have won the constituency (most likely the CDU, I think) would have had this taken into account when the list seats were shared out. If I am interpreting the figures correctly, the CDU will therefore have been compensated for losing the constituency by gaining an extra list seat. But this had to come out of someone else's list entitlement, and (so far as I can judge) the unlucky party was the Greens. At any rate, under most circumstances, the Greens had enough more votes than Linke to be entitled to one more seat - as it is, it seems that Linke is now very narrowly entitled to 6 seats but the Greens a little way short of 7. Perhaps interestingly, while this has probably made the CDU's coalition options somewhat more difficult, FW's single seat doesn't look as if it will play any part in them - unless another party splits, arithmetically there seems to be no possible coalition option that would fail without FW but succeed with it. The real spanner in the works seems to be Linke - rather illustrated by the fact that an AfD/BSW/Linke coalition would have 62 seats out of 120. The CDU would almost undoubtedly prefer not to have to negotiate with any of those three parties, but the arithmetic leaves them with little choice - both BSW and Linke would seem to prefer to negotiate with the CDU rather than with AfD (if possibly mainly because of the reputational damage consequent on the latter course), and for the CDU to force a situation where the two parties changed their minds about associating with the AfD would probably be almost as damaging as the CDU doing so itself (particularly as the situation for the CDU in Thuringia in terms of negotiating partners looks similar but worse). So, the most likely next Saxon administration looks to be one between the CDU and BSW - and any one of the smaller parties other than FW (which, as already pointed out, is basically too small). It will surely have to be CDU+BSW+SPD=41+15+10=66 of 120 because CDU's Kretschmer doesn't want TheGreens any longer and the latter's image has become worst of all:  |
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on Sept 2, 2024 16:26:00 GMT
Presumably the German insistence on 'stable' majority administrations is unshakeable? A minority administration made up of somewhat (!) more compatible partners would make more sense in many countries.
|
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Sept 2, 2024 16:55:22 GMT
Presumably the German insistence on 'stable' majority administrations is unshakeable? A minority administration made up of somewhat (!) more compatible partners would make more sense in many countries. Thuringia is already a minority coalition. But generally speaking, Germany tends not to like minority government, because everyone needs a mudguard... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2024 19:00:09 GMT
I notice that in Thuringia, where there appear to have been very few BSW constituency candidates, it's very clear that a large majority of BSW list voters voted CDU in the constituency vote (if you compare the two parties' first and second vote totals). Was this the expected alignment?
|
|
|
|
Post by sanders on Sept 2, 2024 19:47:51 GMT
After much soul searching, I have decided henceforth to comment only on threads where I know something about the subject matter (so mostly US threads). Thank you for your understanding at this time.
|
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,028
|
Post by nyx on Sept 2, 2024 20:00:38 GMT
I notice that in Thuringia, where there appear to have been very few BSW constituency candidates, it's very clear that a large majority of BSW list voters voted CDU in the constituency vote (if you compare the two parties' first and second vote totals). Was this the expected alignment? I certainly wouldn't have expected that. Pro-Russia conservatives perhaps. |
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,798
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Sept 2, 2024 20:51:55 GMT
I notice that in Thuringia, where there appear to have been very few BSW constituency candidates, it's very clear that a large majority of BSW list voters voted CDU in the constituency vote (if you compare the two parties' first and second vote totals). Was this the expected alignment? Recently in exactly Thuringia was a survey made on democracy/rightExtremism/... in 6 waves (summa summarum 200-700 interviewed per district). Very subjective, of course, but the outCome was for - AfD:  - BSW:  So the voters (albeit not the exLeft-leadership) are indeed quite centrist, what fits not badly to CDU. Nevertheless pollster FGW claims, that only 10% of BSW-voters derive from CDU:  |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Sept 2, 2024 22:22:45 GMT
I notice that in Thuringia, where there appear to have been very few BSW constituency candidates, it's very clear that a large majority of BSW list voters voted CDU in the constituency vote (if you compare the two parties' first and second vote totals). Was this the expected alignment? It's fascinating if accurate. It will be interesting to see if this is repeated in Brandenburg. It does not bode well for the SPD if so. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2024 22:37:25 GMT
I notice that in Thuringia, where there appear to have been very few BSW constituency candidates, it's very clear that a large majority of BSW list voters voted CDU in the constituency vote (if you compare the two parties' first and second vote totals). Was this the expected alignment? It's fascinating if accurate. It will be interesting to see if this is repeated in Brandenburg. It does not bode well for the SPD if so. For context, here are the numbers on the official website: | Party | 1st vote | 2nd vote | diff. (2nd-1st) | | AfD | 408,011 | 396,704 | -11,307 | | CDU | 397,927 | 285,141 | -112,786 | | BSW | 28,478 | 190,448 | 161,970 | | Linke | 180,207 | 157,641 | -22,566 | | SPD | 92,510 | 73,088 | -19,422 | | Other | 109,831 | 104,814 | -5,017 |
So "large majority" may be overstating it, but not by much. Probably also an indicator to the BSW to not deal with the AfD |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,135
|
Post by Foggy on Sept 3, 2024 0:59:55 GMT
In Thuriniga, SPD nearly held their sole direct mandate (Gotha II): 34.6% compared to 34.7% to the AfD. The margin in raw terms was 27 votes. The SPD finished fourth on the list vote there, so it was definitely a huge personal vote for the incumbent. I have no ear to the ground in the part of Saxony where the FW won a seat so didn't see that coming either, but statewide they only got 2.3% (the tiniest smidge above Freie Sachsen) so not really much of a dark horse to clear the threshold - sorry DW. In terms of comparing the two types of vote, I notice the Greens got just above 119,000 of both kinds in Saxony whereas all other main parties had considerable differences. Their total has been revised up to 7 seats. I did think the initial allocation on Sunday night was odd considering they were sufficiently well clear of Die Linke on second votes. That means 41+10+7 = 58 with 61 now needed for a majority (the 1 FW seat is obviously an overhang), so the present "Kenya coalition" has been voted out regardless of whether the current Minister-President prefers the BSW or not. The same new three-party combination in Thuringia, meanwhile, would have 23+15+6 = 44 (45 needed) so would technically be yet another minority government, which as others have pointed out is highly unusual in Germany. |
|
|
|
Post by mrpastelito on Sept 3, 2024 9:30:50 GMT
In Thuriniga, SPD nearly held their sole direct mandate (Gotha II): 34.6% compared to 34.7% to the AfD. The margin in raw terms was 27 votes. The SPD finished fourth on the list vote there, so it was definitely a huge personal vote for the incumbent. I have no ear to the ground in the part of Saxony where the FW won a seat so didn't see that coming either, but statewide they only got 2.3% (the tiniest smidge above Freie Sachsen) so not really much of a dark horse to clear the threshold - sorry DW. In terms of comparing the two types of vote, I notice the Greens got just above 119,000 of both kinds in Saxony whereas all other main parties had considerable differences. Their total has been revised up to 7 seats. I did think the initial allocation on Sunday night was odd considering they were sufficiently well clear of Die Linke on second votes. That means 41+10+7 = 58 with 61 now needed for a majority (the 1 FW seat is obviously an overhang), so the present "Kenya coalition" has been voted out regardless of whether the current Minister-President prefers the BSW or not. The same new three-party combination in Thuringia, meanwhile, would have 23+15+6 = 44 (45 needed) so would technically be yet another minority government, which as others have pointed out is highly unusual in Germany. Tactical voting I think. |
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,798
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Sept 3, 2024 12:29:53 GMT
Presumably the German insistence on 'stable' majority administrations is unshakeable? A minority administration made up of somewhat (!) more compatible partners would make more sense in many countries. Thuringia is already a minority coalition. But generally speaking, Germany tends not to like minority government, because everyone needs a mudguard... After 1945 many adHerents of liberal demoCracy in WestGermany&Austria tried to hide the fact of a negative Nat.Bolsh.-majority and thus they invented, that the WeimarRepublic had died because of its inStability (in Austria because of division). As usual, roughly exact opPosite was true: "We don't have enough parties!" complained Seipel, the leader of austrian ChristianSocials - with a more fractured ReichsTag a coalition with moderate elements of communists or nat.soc.s would have been possible. France or CSR worked due to their myriads of parties. |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Sept 3, 2024 18:58:40 GMT
In Thuriniga, SPD nearly held their sole direct mandate (Gotha II): 34.6% compared to 34.7% to the AfD. The margin in raw terms was 27 votes. The SPD finished fourth on the list vote there, so it was definitely a huge personal vote for the incumbent. I have no ear to the ground in the part of Saxony where the FW won a seat so didn't see that coming either, but statewide they only got 2.3% (the tiniest smidge above Freie Sachsen) so not really much of a dark horse to clear the threshold - sorry DW. Mayor of the main town in the seat (Grimma), where he was elected as an independent. Didn't hear this until after polls closed and his win looked likely, but apparently there were rumors that FW might get in on the strength of two star candidates - the other of which, a CDU defector incumbent, bombed and got 6% or sthgHuge differences seat-by-seat in their Dresden and Leipzig strongholds though. Funnily enough the Left topped the poll in the list vote in one Leipzig constituency and it was the one the Greens won (Lindenau/Leutzsch), not one of their own (city centre and Connewitz)Literal "can't make this up" territory - the software used by state election authorities didn't know the law had been changed and they're using Ste Lague now! Technically not, an overhang would expand the size of parliament. It's a secret third thing. (See also the two PDS MdBs of 02-05) |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Sept 3, 2024 19:04:16 GMT
It's fascinating if accurate. It will be interesting to see if this is repeated in Brandenburg. It does not bode well for the SPD if so. For context, here are the numbers on the official website: | Party | 1st vote | 2nd vote | diff. (2nd-1st) | | AfD | 408,011 | 396,704 | -11,307 | | CDU | 397,927 | 285,141 | -112,786 | | BSW | 28,478 | 190,448 | 161,970 | | Linke | 180,207 | 157,641 | -22,566 | | SPD | 92,510 | 73,088 | -19,422 | | Other | 109,831 | 104,814 | -5,017 |
So "large majority" may be overstating it, but not by much. Probably also an indicator to the BSW to not deal with the AfD Yeah, looks like a Stop AfD vote if anything With the ironic effect of getting Höcke into the Landtag (by denying the AfD an overhang) |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,135
|
Post by Foggy on Sept 3, 2024 20:17:18 GMT
That means 41+10+7 = 58 with 61 now needed for a majority (the 1 FW seat is obviously an overhang). Technically not, an overhang would expand the size of parliament. It's a secret third thing. (See also the two PDS MdBs of 02-05) Has it not expanded? I make it 119 seats in the 2019-24 legislature and 120 in the new one. Which means the Saxon Parliament hovers around the same size as the Kiwi one. The Landeswahlleiter not realising overnight that the divisor method had been changed in statute and having to correct themselves yesterday is absolutely wild though. |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Sept 3, 2024 20:26:15 GMT
Technically not, an overhang would expand the size of parliament. It's a secret third thing. (See also the two PDS MdBs of 02-05) Has it not expanded? I make it 119 seats in the 2019-24 legislature and 120 in the new one. Which means the Saxon Parliament hovers around the same size as the Kiwi one. The Landeswahlleiter not realising overnight that the divisor method had been changed in statute and having to correct themselves yesterday is absolutely wild though. Ah. 120 is the default size, the AfD didn't have quite enough candidates to fill all its seats last time (long story, there were legal issues involved) |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,135
|
Post by Foggy on Sept 3, 2024 20:50:59 GMT
Has it not expanded? I make it 119 seats in the 2019-24 legislature and 120 in the new one. Which means the Saxon Parliament hovers around the same size as the Kiwi one. The Landeswahlleiter not realising overnight that the divisor method had been changed in statute and having to correct themselves yesterday is absolutely wild though. Ah. 120 is the default size, the AfD didn't have quite enough candidates to fill all its seats last time (long story, there were legal issues involved) I see, thanks. Am sure I read something about that at the time but had forgotten (it's been a long five years) |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 30, 2024 6:16:48 GMT
There are strong rumours that Scholz is going to pull the plug on the coalition and try for early elections.
He went to an investment summit the other day and pointedly invited neither the economy minister (Green) or finance minister (FDP).
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,135
|
Post by Foggy on Oct 30, 2024 6:29:34 GMT
From what I recall of the 2005 "snap" elections (which took a few months to arrange) that isn't a straightforward decision for the Chancellor alone. Would Steinmeier and the Constitutional Court both swallow it this time?
|
|
