German Coalition Chaos: Who's Going to Be Germany's New Leader? - TLDR News 

The only real disturbance is that Germany was possibly the last European state to have the so called "popular parties", parties that are so big and so voted they were always either involved in government or lead the opposition. With the Union tumbling below 30%, that old system is becoming a thing of the past.

It's a healthy democracy. We are talking not just fighting against each other.

@@amm287 that remains to be seen... I wish I were the fly on the wall to listen to FDP and Greens discussing... Only, I'm afraid I would fall asleep and miss it when they start quarrelling.

Its called clickbait, is stupid and gets rewarded with downvotes if your viewers have any sense.

It's been so for every German election since like 2005 at least. And those guys are like "chaos", etc

Yes, but I think he meant a matter of internal politics, not the matter of lawmaking and so on, but a matter of tradeoffs internally regarding the positions and the coalition goals

Had one party taken more than 50% of the lead, the matter would have been solved through voting instead of politicking, I think that's the distinction they're trying to make. Hard to say though, it's an ambivalent phrase they used.

The Civil Service probably disagrees with you

@@jonasstolberg2802 >50% is virtually impossible in Germany

Sometimes it's a matter of systems, where the path to the end goal has been made clear by precedent, vs times when it takes genuine politicking to come to an agreement.

Well the one thing we know is that whatever the coalition they decide behind closed doors now wasn't voted for by any of the public. Some may say that's a non democratic trait.

@@danielwebb8402 Some people may be wrong

last time Germany tried to make a three way coalition it ended in chaos...

Agreed. I live in New Zealand, which has an electoral system modelled on the German system. Voters can elect people they actually want ...and those people then need to work together. Whereas the Brits elect one-party governments over 60% of people didn't vote for. No thanks. Germany is much better off.

@@danielwebb8402 Not having coalitions would be undemocratic as ideologies represented by more parties would be at a disadvantage because each individual party would gain less votes

I'm not sure if you can even get it, do they have enough drivers to ship it?

What‘s the color of power cuts, gas shortages and empty petrol stations?

@@tobiwan001 Tory blue

For the little ones

Omg tno man

I prefer the European system. The parties just pre-negotiate their legislative aims, instead the American style gridlock: endless intense negotiations over every new bills. Take time to layout agendas and governs efficiently.

I prefer a federal MMP system, so long negotiations are not an issue. Germany tends to get governed better when government is not trying to do anything, so i expect no negative impacts. But as for a shutdown, Germany avoids debt like the plague so I suspect there is no need for it.

@@peterfmodel Germany made a lot of dept, but there can't be a US style shutdown, cause there is no hard dept ceiling (there are still rules that you shouldn't take to much dept, but this is already considered in the budget and every law that's made that costs money)

@El Dimos Karam no. Maddam is right. An US Style debt limit and shutdown is not possible. There is no hard ceiling. Or can you Name the number?

Well the government shutdown is a function of congressional choices. It could be fixed at any point by passing a law saying that spending more than you take in through taxes implies permission to raise the debt ceiling, But then Congress wouldn’t be able to express the utter _shock_ that the president would be so reckless as to try to implement the budget congress passed what I’m getting at is that this is a political issue, not an issue with the system itself.

Yep, I thought the same. I mean, it is pretty obvious that we move in the direction of a traffic light coalition. Plus, a coalition with three parties is nothing. There are countries, which have regualary coalitions with four or more.

@@swanpride I’m hoping for 🇯🇲 but I’m definitely predicting the grand coalition here. If the FDP and Greens remain with the big party they align with them the only possibility is grand

@@mrttripz3236 Literally noone wants that, both the SPD and CDU have campaigned for months promising not to repeat that. Also, the SPD would hold the majority and thus provide the chancellor. The CDU would never accept that, they'd rather go into opposition so that they don't lose all credibility and chance of comeback in the future

@@mrttripz3236 Even less people want that option.

@@rm0986 hence nobody will work with them.

Oh no, the Danish take over!

@@kosinusify Oh shit. Fogot they're D*nes

At least we would a honest government, because Dänen lügen nicht.

I call for Germany to join with Denmark

@@jdu7729 you forgot the Danish spy scandal, they definitely lie sometimes

Almost like it’s not chaos at all, given it’s been a standard part of German elections for decades.

This is not a mess, this is common that going on for over 70+ years and thats what called a Democracy, Parties are negotiating, understanding and uniting each other, unlike The America, they are power grabbers and selfish, both Dems and Gop even tho America is the "Beacon* of democracy : )

American politics are just fine. You think the grass is greener on other side.

American "democracy" is a farce Almost like only having 2 parties is antithetical to actual democracy

This system is tried and tested, I'm a big fan of the German voting system

It’s not chaos to the Brits either - the title is just naked sensationalism.

Meanwhile, in the UK and US a party can hold complete power with a minority of support and this isn't chaotic at all.

so true 🙄

@@oldvlognewtricks like Tory Telegraph

@@krombopulos_michael Well, if you had grand coalition in current setup, the minority would hold the government as well.

@@night6724 Sir, what the hell?

@@night6724 Uh corruption is when you pay politicians to do something in your favour? But these are normal negotiations to form a goverment by merging party programs? You know to realise the promises given to the people?

@@night6724 Idk I don't know much about how US congress works

@@night6724 But... What you desribed... That's... That's a parliementary system isnt it?

@@night6724 Just one clarification: the minimum of representatives a US state has is 1 not 2 (states like Alaska and Vermont, for example, only have one). Other than that, in parliamentary systems, it's Parliament (and usually only the lower house in case of bicameral legislatures) that decides who the head of government is. In the US, the head of government (who is also head of state) is elected separately by an electoral college), that combined with the fact that his term lasts 4 years and Congress last 2 means that it is commom for the legislature to be controlled by the opposition, something that usually only happens in parliamentary democracies during caretaker governments. An example to clarify: if in 2018, the US had a parliamentary system and Trump was the prime minister, he would have to resign after the midterms of that year, since the opposition (Democratic Party) took control of the lower house (House of Reps). Another difference is the dismissal process. In the US the president can only be removed by a simple majority in the lower house and a 2/3 majority in the upper house (Senate), and that can only happen for a few specfic reasons. In parliamentary democracies, however, all it takes is a majority in the lower house to dismiss the head of government and it doesn't need a specific motive. Another example: in an alternative world in which Trump was the US prime minister, he would already be forced to resign when the House of Reps voted against him, since his ability to remain as head of government depends on having the support of the lower house (upper houses, or Senates, are usually not that important in Parliamentary systems and are mostly indirectly elected). You can say those are different ways of having a democratic system of government, each with its pros and cons. That being said, outside the US, presidential systems have a pretty bad track record and coming from a country that also uses the presidential system (Brazil), I would prefer that my country had a system similar to Germany's.

I tend to agree, FDP will keep the SDP from doing anything crazy so a SDP led government will be generally positive. This will allow the CDP to renew itself, which it really needs to do right now.

To be fair, Markus Söder is also leading a bit of a political vendetta against Laschet because he's still miffed about not becoming the Union candidate, so anything he says should probably be taken with a grain of salt.

@@darthplagueis13 My guess is, that he's already betting on becoming the candidate for the next elections

A duopoly between parties that are more similar than they like to admit.

@@chain_of_nothing totally agree. America is ruled by a right wing party and opposed by a far right wing party.

@@TheKobiDror Calling the democrats a right wing party is simply stupid and calling the republicans a far right party is even dumber

@@pancytryna9378 Republicans being called far right???Maybe,Democrats being called right wing,they are right,the most notable left politician in US is Bernie Sanders and he isn't really that much.

@al rode The right/left scale makes little sense when a party has right wing economy and left wing world views, really

*laughs in Weimar Republic*

Dutch politics fragmented? * laughs in Belgian *

How about Germany and the low countries all unite so we can all laugh at the resulting fragmentation in *central european*.

@@ubrot7995 I mean we all (except the british, of course) can look at the EU parliament an laugh in European :D

That's what the 5% threshold is for

Bias from a bipartisan country.

It's certainly way more fragmented than german parliaments have been in the past (e.g. I don't think Germany's ever had three parties in the governing coalition on the national level (or four if you count the CDU and CSU as seperate). Even with a PR system Germany was never really like the Netherlands in how small and spread out the fractions are in the parliament (after WW2 anyway).

Anything that tries to achieve a greater level of democracy causes headache to the British brain... They'd rather go dying with FPTP than stay alive with a "complex" voting system.

Same here in Ireland. We have a coalition at the moment between the two biggest parties and also the greens. Normal politics, not chaos, and far better than the brash Anglo-American two party system.

The Federation of Germany has not a normal Government. It is a occupied and extrem corrupt Regime.

*ceases

Can you explain what's so wrong in the video? I've seen other comments, but it's literally him explaining what can happen, what's so biased about it?

@@AceGigalo It isn't possible to give a complete overview of the democratic system of any country in a 10 min. video. So you have to reduce complexity up to a level when you have to be very careful with the conclusions you draw. Are the conclusions based on factual observations or basically an evalution based of your personal bias and experiences. And if so have you clearly drawn the line between reporting and commenting. Example: One issue in this video deals with "Laschets weakness." A lot of conclusions are drawn from this. Sadly an important question for the evaluation is left out. Why did the CDU choose a "weak" candidate as front runner for their campaign in first place? Depending on how you answer this question the whole coalition discussions need to be re-evaluated.

@@fuerchtenichts not everyone is having all day to watch one fucking video... most people want quick summary. stop trying to be a know-it-all; this is a news outlet, not a fucking documentary.

@@user-ph2is5vw9k seems at least you found a way to waste your time by reading every "fucking" comment, lucky you. :)

First thing I noticed, too. The only mistake I could notice was pronouncing “Lindner” as “Linder” at 5:55.

Indeed - the chancelor is not elected by the people but by the parliament. This is why the candidates refusing to concede their claim on it means something entirely different from ignoring that one got voted out. The worst Laschet could do by insisting on a futile claim is attracting even more ridicule - unless of course as mentioned above the SPD won't be part of the government in which case his insistance which earned him so much ridicule would also allow him to become chancelor, a chancelor ridiculed before even taking office.

@@Schmidtelpunkt Well, Laschet is so ridiculed already he has nothing to lose...

It's worth noting that Trump didn't concide during the time that there were several legal challenges and recounts takeing place. At that time there was no offical "government in waiting". Once congress ratified the election results and declared a winner as is the procedure, Trump did infact concede his loss as after that point there was infact an offical government in waiting. He left office at the appointed hour.

@@Ameriguy99 If you wish to interpret Trump‘s leaving the White House on January 20 as his conceding de facto the election, your point is not without merit, but you will never get Trump (and most certainly any of his followers) to agree with that interpretation. They still all (including Trump) say that the election was stolen, insist that Trump never conceded defeat (because he wasn‘t defeated), and speak repeatedly of „reinstating“ Trump as the rightful president. If the insurrection Trump incited on January 6 had developed into a more general event, I find it difficult to believe that Trump would have walked out of the White House.

I would love some Jamaican style climate in Germany if that weather would spill over to the Netherlands. 🍹🏖

I agree with everything you said, just one minor correction: The "Sonntagsfrage" isn't a poll held every sunday. It's a poll held basically every day, with the question being quite literally: "If tomorrow were an election sunday, who would you vote for?". The reason being that in germany important elections like for the Bundestag or the Landtage (and others) are usually held on a sunday to make sure that as many people as possible are free to go voting, without having to take a day off, opposed to, let's say the US, where the presidential elections are held on a tuesday.

And Laschet is out.

He was heavily scrutinized by the media and public for this, turning this sentence into sort of a meme. Many people didnt take into account that the last time the FDP entered a coalition with the CDU in 2009 as a junior partner, they threw them under the bus as a coalition partner and they lost credibility , leading to them not being voted into the Bundestag the next election for the first time in the republics history. No doubt that Lindner was vary of repeating that mistake.

You wish politicians in your country were neo liberals making politics for rich people? :D

@@Micha-qv5uf Don't talk bulshit. Every developed country needs Liberalism to grow

@@Micha-qv5uf better than communists who want equal poverty.

@@pablobomgiorno8273 I see. So Germany was economically so successful because FDP was in the government for so many years. Now everything makes sense...

Not on the federal level, but in some States, there have been a few successful attempts (and a few fails, but yeah...)

Minority government is possible with Left support but then basically Afd would hold the trigger in the no confidence vote.

Minority governments like in Canada are a scam anyway, with the government highly unrepresentative of the vote. Coalition forming might not be easy, but I'd take it over minority government any day!

in the last 72years we had 31 minority goverments in Germany 4 of those on a national level, they always came to be not because they were necessary but because one coalition partner resigned from goverment (so nobody actually wanted them) and therefor these goverments got fully replaced quite quickly. And all the others have never been in power longer than a year at maximum. So it is not entirely right to say that they are not a thing (well they defenitly are not on a national level), but on a more local level they seem to be good to help us make up our minds and vote again. of couse they may work for other nations and maybe quite well at that. But yeah they are a thing in germany, a thing that never worked and never got realy anything done, at least historically.

Man your elections were way back lmao

‘German Parliament is extremely fragmented’ Meanwhile India with 36 parties

@@josephthomas9717 maybe you guys could also need a law that only allows parties with at least 5% of the votes or sth.

@@botten4187 Most of these parties have 1 to 5 seats while the largest party has 300+ seats so its not necessary.

@@botten4187 no MP would vote such a law as they would be the first affected by it

Me too!

I'm not that enthusiastic about any government that involves the FDP. On the other hand the great coalition puts me off even more.

@@JorlinJollyfingers The left doesn't really have a choice. The FDP is a necessary part of any coalition they have to form in order to get a left-wing Chancellor. That's just politics, baby!

@@soccerguy325 “left” wing

The parliament is more clustered than it has ever been.

"Predicting a coalition is difficult" No. Ampel has been discussed way before the vote as the most likely. In fact, FDP and Grüne figures have supposedly had talks before election day on negotiating together first before talking to the big tent parties which as you say they are doing now.

Try convincing Americans about that. Any glimmer of a functioning government is "socialism"

@@tomrogue13 "shut it you communist, don't disturb my believes that USA is the best country ever in the Universe"

Lol, Keep dreaming.

Actually it is very fragmented by german standards. So i think he was totally right mentioning that. Even though this fragmentation wasn't surprising when you looked at the previous federal election or state elections.

@@lenab5266 what is really new, by German standards, is that there is no party that got more than 30%. This means that the usual two-party coalition won't be possible (unless they go again for the Große Koalition) and that a three-party coalition is needed with two junior parties that are junior in name only as they will be able to dictate the direction the government takes. The 5% limit to enter the parliament makes sure situations are clear from the start.

We really censoring the word silly now?

@@WhatAreFingers one can never be too cautious with YT algorhythms...

For a while Germany had a one party system, so let’s not get too uppity…

0:40 TL;DR is just using Wikipedia's seat chart from the election article.

The FDP is seen and sees herself in the center. Therefore the seat chart is quite correct.

@@johndotto2773 Thank you. Well, I guess the placement is somewhat arbitrary anyway. The FDP is more economically right-leaning, but socially left-leaning.

In state parliaments the FDP sits on the left of the CDU/CSU. I think after the last election there was an argument over who has to sit next to the AFD so that's why things are what they are in the bundestag.

Would be interesting if Den Haan entered the government. If wants her fraction to have a seat in parliament she cannot become a undersecretary herself so she has to find someone else.

wait 9? I know of the proposition for a 6 partied coalition. VVD, D66, DCA, Groen-Links, PvdA and CU. That in it self would be already something else. Edit: never mind I just read it now on the NOS site.

@@eyeli160 as far as I know we don't have undersecretaries. we have ministers and secretaries. as the political head of a department the rest in a department exist out of civil servants

@@sirBrouwer The vertaling voor staatssectretaris in undersecretary. Een minister is gelijk aan een secretaris (e.g. Secretary of Defence)

@@eyeli160 that is more a UK unique thing if you look at Australia they refer to there cabinet members as ministers and deputy ministers. For example: minister for finance

No need for arrogance friend. All they meant was that it isn't very simple.

@@pkddadoes4016 , it's not arrogance just experience.

@@pkddadoes4016 I would call arrogance to call a working democratic system chaos

Calm down, I'm sure they mean well.

Lol, but the SSW only have one seat in the german Bundestag? In what way would they be able to influence the outcome of the government coalition?

They still wouldn't have a majority

Not that their one seat is needed...

@@shittymcrvids3119 Yes they would.

I mean sure, but seeing as their votes would be entirely irrelevant in such a case, that doesn't really matter.

Not an expert but surely there's a compromise to be made. SPD can give Lindner the Finance ministry and promise no new taxes or significant increases in spending, but also no tax or net spending cuts, and no changes to stuff like minimum wage. Environmental ambitions can be met through carbon pricing as opposed to "green investment". All three parties agree on digitalisation, sociocultural issues, and are pro-NATO. Yes it wouldn't be as left-progressives as Greens or SPD would want, but then again right-wing parties won a majority in the Bundestag. Compromises have to be made and tbh none of the above seems unreasonable to me.

As a green voter, I'd see Jamaika as a betrayal that could only be topped by a coalition with the afd.

@@anna-flora999 How is this q betrayal ? If you care about environmentalism , it shoulsnt matter if the Greens go with the SPD or with the CSU/CDU If you care about left wing economics more than environmentalism , why arent you just voting for the SPD or Die Linke ?

@@mariolis because the cdu/CSU torpedoed green energy while protecting coal for the last decade. Going with them would essentially kill the greens environmental promises As for the second question, because I voted for the greens because they're also a left leaning party. The linke has stances I disagree with, and the spd, after the shitshow they did with the cdu, first needs to regain my trust. I'll definitely vote spd next time if the greens go into Jamaika because that would be a betrayal.

@@anna-flora999 Oh , I get your point of view even if i disagree with it If I were German , I would be voting for the FDP , and in my own country , which is Greece I voted for ND (the center-right party, we dont really have a libertarian party like the FDP) & Kyriakos Mitsotakis (who is now our Prime Minister) . So , yeah, Im kind of opposed to any and all left-wing economic policy, while Im okay with emvironmental policies only when thy dont limit the free market.

It is likely, but on the other hand söder has atepted and failed to move the CSU closer to the greens. If he has a government with them the policies they have to make might move his party.

@@claasmachens3858 The thing that could make a jamaika coalition possible would be the flexibility of the greens. of all parties they are the most likely to compromise to get into gouvernment. at least in my opinion. So unless the FDP wants to further prove their point on being an independent party not bound to the CDU/CSU and manages to compromise with the greens to than form a trafficlight, the thing keeping jamaika a possibility is not Laschets weakness but rather the greens flexibility to work with whoever (exept the AFD). I also sort of think that a red-red-green coalition is a far flung possibility. all they would need is to be tollerated by the FDP or just parts of it. However that is very unlikely. My best bet would be on a Great Coalition in may next year or new elections next september.

I would want at least 8 years for this trafic coalition (rot, gelb, grün). And then Söder with more humble CDU would be very welcome. But this usus with 16 years of the one chancellor should be broken. It's just too long.

I can't see a reelection happening and a new grand coalition would evaporate both parties' support. Jamaica may very well happen but the traffic light is vastly more likely. i personally believe habeck (very much unlike baerbock) would prefer allying with the union but he's also pragmatic and intelligent enough to know what his party wants and not risk losing his voter's support

@@amm287 That's the reason why so many governments have term limits. Everyone is always on board for "four more years" if it is a good leader, but look how much it has damaged the CDU to have essentially concentrated most of their power and popularity in one person for so long.

it's been like 3 days lol

@@shittymcrvids3119 it was a joke, hopefully we get a decent traffic light set up 😅

That's the usual way in most countries. even in weimar Germany the NSDAP was to the far right and the communist the far left.

That’s just how they are sorted in their parliaments.

I think FDP should be to the right of CDU then

@@lorddashdonalddappington2653 Actually it's not. If it were then the FDP would be between the Greens and CDU (as they are in the state parliaments) but they're not because the CDU doesn't want to sit next to the AFD.

That is literally where the left right thing comes from.

404. Far right parties not found.

@@256shadesofgrey whatever you want to call afd dude.. but that raises a question, why isn't there a far right party? if I was far righter I'd totally make one, its so easy, you just have to spout populist sentences and pick a minority to oppress. its a good grift

Yes, we really are.

@@halguy5745 By that definition the Left and the Greens are both "far right", since they both want to oppress a minority. The left wants to kill "the 1%" according to speakers at their conferences, and the Greens want to expropriate landlords (don't tell me that this kind of violation of property rights is not "oppression"). And since the Greens are definitely not being opposed by anyone except for the only opposition party in Germany (instead everyone copies their agenda), your original statement is false.

@@256shadesofgrey when did I ever say that oppressing a minority is the only defining feature that classifies a party as far right? you jumped through 10 logical hoops there dude. I love it when people simplify whole politics to a single axis with no nuance at all and yeah, these millionaires and soules landlords are such oppressed minorities, they can barely afford their 3 villas and 6 yachts. we should send them care packages or something

🍿*joining* 🍿

Writing and analysis, so far as non-British issues are concerned. The authors are totally out of their depth whenever they tackle issues outside of their Anglo-centric sphere, particularly the guy with the British accent. It's even worse if the topic covers matters that are outside both Europe and the Anglosphere.

Too Local, Does no Research

The Union wouldn't allow that. The Greens clearly have their preference and Laschet would have to make heavy concessions. That's a no no.

I assume that's why they are talking to each other first.

The problem is that both Laschet and how whole party have fallen out of favor completely with the majority voter bases of the Greens and the FDP. Which both attract primarily first time voters and people between ages 18-40. The Greens are also heavily turned off by the general demeanor of the Union, especially when it comes to things like the end of Coal Electrification, Climate and Budget. The CDU has lost so much because in the last 4 years, a myriad of corruption scandals, beyond questionable spendings, nepotism cases and outright tax money wasteage have surfaced. Combined with a general refusal to accept science and reality, especially during the Covid19 Pandemic, sheer utter incompetence and the pushing of a BUNCH of laws with questionable legal basis (e.g. The pushing of Upload filters and Article 17, Staatstrojaner Spyware and many more), the CDU has lost a large majority of its voter base as well as the public favor. Not only that, but the Union is already formerly moving on from the election internally, getting ready for an opposition spot this legislative period. Voices inside the party caling for the complete removal of Laschet from his position as chairmain of the party are getting louder and louder. IMO, A Jamaica coalition is all but unlikely at best. We don't even know if Laschet's political career is going to survive the coming weeks.

@@donaldmcronald2331 Yeah laschet doesnt make concessions. Not even small ones. He hasn't even admitted defeat yet or god forbid congratulated Scholz. Even though the rest of his party is calling for him to do so. Even Markus Söder, Chairman of the CSU has congratulated Scholz on his clear victory... This is an all too familiar level of Trump-esk demeanor of delusion.

"The Union" is a electoral pact between CDU & CSU and the CSU basicly conceded yesterday and Laschet by now has basicly no suport in the CDU. Maybe Greens and FDP will do that, but only if they have watched to much House of cards lately.

I also just saw a poll that showed that Green voters would prefer allying with the SPD by a margin of 80-20, while the FDP prefer the Union by only 55-45. The Greens would have to get a hell of a lot from Laschet to make it acceptable for their voters.

also don't forget that it is not just the CDU who needs to back him but also Söders CSU.

A little unfair to lump Johnson and Trump together. Johnson & the Conservatives clearly won the 2019 Election (beating Labour by more than 10%). Yes, he didn't get a majority of votes, but no UK government since 1935 has managed that (though Labour did come close in 1945, 51 and 66). Trump, meanwhile lost both the popular vote (by about 5%) and the Electoral College (by about 13%), yet still tried to claim he won.

@@johnpotts8308 When no UK government since 1935 ever achieved a majority than its an even more profound argument against the FPTP election system.

@@johnpotts8308 you are absolutely right, Johnson won his majority in 2019 and actually so did Trump in 2016. What I am talking about is the popular vote that is not considered. As a result Trump was governing despite having had over 2,000,000 votes less compared to Clinton. Now Johnson is able to govern with a comfortable seat majority over all parties, despite having won only 43.6% of the popular vote. If you combine the votes from Labour, SNP and LibDems then they have together 47.6% (32.1 Labour, 3.9 SNP and 11.6 LibDem) of the popular vote. This means that the three parties together have 4% more of the popular vote nonetheless Tories have 50.6% of the seats in parliament while the other parties have 49.4%. This is also the point I was making, Johnson is governing despite the fact that he does not have the popular vote. Here the calculation: According to the popular vote (and a minimum hurdle to make it into the parliament and 626 seats to distribute) parties should have the following number of seats: Tories 299 (instead of 317); Labour 220 (instead of 262); SNP 27 (instead of 35) and LibDem 80 (instead of 12) and who knows maybe the Green party could have made it into the Commons if the election system would be fair. So Tories would still be the largest party but a coalition would be required, allowing for more stable governance. But how can this be? That is the perversion of the first pass the pole system. The popular vote should also somehow be taken into consideration and the first pass the pole system doesn’t take changing demographics sufficiently into account. A mixed system should be more reasonable. Meaning a first vote for a candidate and a second vote for a party. Interesting enough I learned that the British and Americans have introduced such a system after WWII in Germany in order to create a stable government system. Only both countries missed the opportunity to reform their own voting system in the process. Another point is that gerrymandering should not be allowed! There are school districts and they should be the base for i.e. maximum voting distance and the number of polling stations should be established by a maximum number of constituents per ballot location. That will ensure that voters don’t need to cue for hours at a time and that they don’t have to travel unacceptable distances in order to make use of their constitutional right to cast their votes. (I am aware that the UK does not have a explicit constitution like the US, but the UK law implies this right and comes close to the fact).

@@philippschwartzerdt3431 Actually, on any sort of vaguely democratic system, Johnson would have still been PM after the 2019 Election (decisively beating Labour in votes) but Trump would never have been President as he had significantly fewer votes than Hillary Clinton (62.9m to 65.8m). And yes, Tories (and the SNP) are over represented in the current Parliament, but the party that wins the largest share of votes has at least got the most seats at every election since 1951. Nor does the UK system consistently favour the Tories - Blair achieved a 66 Seat majority in 2005 on just 35.2% (to the Tories 32.4%). And there was a Referendum to change the voting system in the UK in 2011 which was heavily defeated. While I agree the current system in the UK is bad, it's the one people voted for and is considerably more representative than the US one.

It's not quite the same. Most European nations have a nation election, the US doesn't have any national elections. Each state conducts its own independent election and the Presidential candidate to win the majority in each state gets the electoral college votes of that state. Trump, despite loosing the national popular vote, did in fact win the popular vote in 30 out of 50 states. He won 2,626 of the 3,142 counties in the US vs Hillarys 487. Yes its important to note that counties are not equal. LA county for example has a higher population than 23 entire states. But our system is designed to ensure that those states arnt railroaded by their more populous neighbors.

...you mean CDU/CSU + SPD?

Stances?

What are their stances?

@@bestrafung2754 The typical mainstream NPC positions. Orange man bad etc.

@@256shadesofgrey *typical sane human position

@@abhinavjha3082 I see your programming works perfectly.

Its probably meant to represent the imagery of the possible coalitions. So the arrangement on the right vaguely resembles the jamaican flag, while on the left is is obviously a traffic light.

I play Olaf Scholz in attack mode

Even people who traditionally vote for the Union didn't give him their vote this time. His career is soon to end.

or in Britain o_O

Well, that isn't very diffifult... You just have to implement proportional representation and get rid of racist voter supression.

@@donaldmcronald2331 Just. With this mess in the US and UK I just don't see the way out. The republicans and the Tory don't let any change... Our CDU wouldn't let be any change too if they could. Not to have two party system is really a win for the democracy, doesn't matter how messy it might look to the outsiders.

@@amm287 to be fair, this isn't even a chaos at all. This is just democracy at it's core. Just because one party doesn't rule above everything and everyone doesn't make a system chaotic. It's all just fine for now. 3 option, 2 preferable. I don't really see the chaos here tbh

@@Chrissy717 Like I've said to the outsiders. I really love our "mess", all the ages and many preferences are covered in these coalitions.

They do, don't they? But sounding like the Sun, just about sensational title, is a usual thing with TLDR. But at least they are delivering facts unlike the Sun.

@@amm287 sadly just half of it are facts, other points are plane out wrong and there are also elements that show that they haven't even done a proper google search other wise they would know that Red-Red-Green is not just irrelevant but straight up impossible, they have 5 seats less than needed, therefor traficlight, Jamaica an great coalition are the only options. Also as I can tell you from a german point of view (leaving idiolegie to the side) the talks actually seem to go better already than for most coalitions in history. :)

@@tonyeraser2029 You are right with you.

Probably CDU can only have any chance if they start to talk with Afd Other wise it will be fdp CDU vs SPD greens and maybe Linke as a offset Allie No chance for cdu

@@ShayNoMore1 As much as i personally dislike the cdu, i can safely say that not even they will consider the afd as a partner.. Luckily the afd is hated by every single one of the parties in the bundestag. And sadly the linke isn't powerful enough to have a say in politics...they, too will stay in the opposition. As much as id like a coalition between left, greens and spd, that won't happen...

@@ChaosLukas9000 my favorite coalition is SPD and FDP I don't want greens in power

@@ShayNoMore1 may i ask why?

@@ChaosLukas9000 yes go ahead Im kidding 😅 i will answer Well CDU is broken and had no competition at all so they got lazy and started not worrying much about the elections SPD worked hard and they chose a pretty modern candidate and without radical ideas. Then u have FDP, the best party by far, which will be the one to put the main party on track For me the elections winners from now on would be spd-fdp or cdu/csu-fdp

I absolutely agree. They need find the connection to their base learning about what the voters want not just what their politicians want. They should get more younger having also more of the successful women. And they should find the good reasons why we should vote for them. What can they really do for Germany in all the details please. Not just the Geschwaffel of Laschet.

The Greens will never forgive Laschet for having cleared the Hambach Forest from protesters (of which one died) as Minister President of North Rhine-Westphalia and for still wanting to flatten three villages for his friends from RWE (the big electricity company), in order to digg even more Lignite from the soil.

@@hape3862 what happens until a new government happen?

@@ShayNoMore1 the old guard stays in office. So Merkel is still chancler and can react to a crisis but isn't able to pass reforms

On top of that they seem to have learned their lesson in 2017 so they will be more carefull and reasonable, actually it is going great

I would be afraid in France, with currently almost 40% polling for a right/far right candidate. Imagine AFD in Germany getting 30% or so of the vote.

@@versuch8239 The ridiculous political system of France is the reason why alt right is so high, it's a protest vote.

Only if by some twist of fate the AfD gets involved; all the other parties have pretty similar attitudes towards the Union

@@10Tabris01 Well recently I saw Lucas Bender's video about German political parites and I learned that AfD is consider to be an outsider - no one wants to cooperate with them even CDU

@@silesiaball9505 That is correct. The last time someone got elected with their votes (in Thuringia) he became the Prime Minister with the shortest tenure in German history

@@10Tabris01 That says more about how "democratic" the CDU and the FDP are than anything about the AfD. When Merkel calls for the candidate whom her own party voted for to step down, and the FDP complies, even though not a single voter of either party could possibly have wanted the far-left to rule, it's nothing short of betrayal of their voters. That's probably also the reason why the AfD got the most votes in Thuringia this election. They are the only party involved that tried to actually represent the will of their voters.

@@256shadesofgrey Or you just need to acept that other people have other opinions

Super normal, the election was last week. Finding a coalition can take months (in rare cases), we're chill. Honestly, I never understood why people in the US refuse to vote for anything other than the two party system. I get that's kind of how your system is built (if you vote for a small party, your vote could just as well be worthless), but why isn't someone trying to do anything about it? In Germany, we had almost 50 parties to vote for this year, with all kinds of different concepts. In some states, people could vote for the HIP HOP PARTY! :D

In america 99% vote for 2 same parties

The question is, how can they agree on anything when they're so different on the fundamentals?

That‘s what they are going to do

I think that's what they are doing right now

@@GTA5Player1 You compromise. Clearly there are some issues where they won't be able to, but there will be some things they are willing to trade ground on in exchange for other things they really want. Look at your own political beliefs. You opinion on every issue is not always something you're prepared to die on a hill for. Some policy areas are more important to you than others. Trading away those less important things to get the things that are important to you is much better than getting nothing at all.

They already did so just yesterday.

Actually green and FDP are not that opposite, the bigger issue may be to get SPD and FDP into a coalition. 12 € minimal wage (SPD core item) voted for by FDP? Probably hard to sell to their voters.

@@MrX-nv8kp They do at least both agree that climate change is real, but disagree how to get there. Greens and SPD want more spending for climate change, more national projects, FDP want less. FDP wants more carbon and credit trading, Greens think that’s inadequate to get the job done. Besides with the Greens relying on young, urban left wing voters, it might be hard for them to sell their own voters on a lower minimum wage. Maybe together they’ll say “okay, we’ll drop the wealth tax, but we’re keeping the minimum wage increase”, or semi privatise these new infrastructure projects to appease the FDP?

Weimar Republic n2 bouncing back after a hundred years:

It is realy a bit to early to call it anything yet

Weimar Republic n2 bouncing back after a hundred years:

@@user-jv3mm6vt6e Ridiculous - the problem in the Weimar Republic was never that there wasn't a single majority party but the lack of democratic consensus. Remember, the parliament contained Nazis, ultra-conservative nationalists and monarchists and radical communists. Nothing like today.

@@mina_en_suiza well the fact that you have so hard of a time to even get a glimpse of the similarities between these two is telling of many things in and of itself. The left is the left, whatever color it has, red, green, brown or blue, it's going to moan and groan itself into authoritarianism and kill the individual. A pesky system glitch or symbolic bumble process of a catfight over federal election isn't the issue here, the sides of that issue are. Hope Germany doesn't fall into oblivion but this sh*t seems to wild to curb anytime soon.