Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
rollover

Germany's Elections

Recommended Posts

the weird thing about germanys potential coalition is that its likely there will be the largest party and the 2nd largest party running things together.

if thats the case wheres the opposition?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the weird thing about germanys potential coalition is that its likely there will be the largest party and the 2nd largest party running things together.

if thats the case wheres the opposition?

That's a particularly Westminster/Washington way of looking at elections.

Grand coalition involves the two largest parties working together in the national interest, advancing parts of their own agenda and seeking to persuade the electorate they had the better half. They keep eyes on each other, as do all the smaller parties on both sides.

The idea that politics has to be done in such a right/wrong government/opposition me/you divisive sense is one of the reasons the UK is so broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a particularly Westminster/Washington way of looking at elections.

Grand coalition involves the two largest parties working together in the national interest, advancing parts of their own agenda and seeking to persuade the electorate they had the better half. They keep eyes on each other, as do all the smaller parties on both sides.

The idea that politics has to be done in such a right/wrong government/opposition me/you divisive sense is one of the reasons the UK is so broken.

Why is it broken , if anything history shows the absolute opposite. Whenever there is a coalition it inevitably leads to less accountability , more excuses , less electoral 'punishment' and ultimately it becomes replaced by totalitarianism.

The us/uk /Australian/Canadian model now also effectively taken up by the French also has proven to be way more resilient .

It may lead to inefficiency , waste , etc etc but the thought that one side can be allowed to implement the things they stated they would and the ability of the electorate to turf them out and replace them with an alternative allows for everyone to feel their day will come to make someone else sit in twats corner .

We are dangerously close to consensus politics here in the uk as no party can feasibly rule without centtrising their agenda around cheap credit , high taxes , high spending and deficits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it broken , if anything history shows the absolute opposite. Whenever there is a coalition it inevitably leads to less accountability , more excuses , less electoral 'punishment' and ultimately it becomes replaced by totalitarianism.

The us/uk /Australian/Canadian model now also effectively taken up by the French also has proven to be way more resilient .

It may lead to inefficiency , waste , etc etc but the thought that one side can be allowed to implement the things they stated they would and the ability of the electorate to turf them out and replace them with an alternative allows for everyone to feel their day will come to make someone else sit in twats corner .

We are dangerously close to consensus politics here in the uk as no party can feasibly rule without centtrising their agenda around cheap credit , high taxes , high spending and deficits.

Less accountability? More excuses? Than a system where the winner of around 1/3 of the vote gets untrammeled power for five years? One of the funniest features of the AV 'debate' was Cameron bleating loudly about how PR meant leaders couldn't be thrown out - on the day that Finnish Prime Minister Mari Kiviniemi lost a PR election, and got turfed out along with her coalition.

Consensus politics is grown up, and if the UK ever gets anywhere near it, it'll be a welcome change from the feces-throwing it currently involves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Less accountability? More excuses? Than a system where the winner of around 1/3 of the vote gets untrammeled power for five years? One of the funniest features of the AV 'debate' was Cameron bleating loudly about how PR meant leaders couldn't be thrown out - on the day that Finnish Prime Minister Mari Kiviniemi lost a PR election, and got turfed out along with her coalition.

Consensus politics is grown up, and if the UK ever gets anywhere near it, it'll be a welcome change from the feces-throwing it currently involves.

the government needs an opposition.

its about having a check on power, scrutinising everything they do, debating it, testing all the arguments and bad points of a policy to see if it holds weight. even if sometimes they agree with a policy.

now unless there is a free vote in parliament on every policy and there are no whips involved, the majority of members of the party will vote for whatever the leadership says is official policy.

i personally think whips shouldn't be allowed , but the reality is that it exists.

parliament becomes a simple rubber stamp process for both leaders. which group is accountable for government policy?

the difference between 2 parties opposing each other in parliament and 2 parties opposing each other behind the scenes in a coalition government is that its out in the open for you to see.

Edited by mfp123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it broken , if anything history shows the absolute opposite. Whenever there is a coalition it inevitably leads to less accountability , more excuses , less electoral 'punishment' and ultimately it becomes replaced by totalitarianism.

The us/uk /Australian/Canadian model now also effectively taken up by the French also has proven to be way more resilient .

It may lead to inefficiency , waste , etc etc but the thought that one side can be allowed to implement the things they stated they would and the ability of the electorate to turf them out and replace them with an alternative allows for everyone to feel their day will come to make someone else sit in twats corner .

We are dangerously close to consensus politics here in the uk as no party can feasibly rule without centtrising their agenda around cheap credit , high taxes , high spending and deficits.

I was thinking about that this morning. How in a more media driven information aware age the party most likely to get re-elected is the one that pandas to the electrorate the best. Therefore the agendas of all parties will ultimately converge. Any party which proposes radical change away from the mainstream is undertaking a massive risk. The easiest thing to do is let other people float risky policies and then simply steal the ones that appear popular.

Since turkeys don't vote for Christmas it seems likely that reality and the outside world will impose more constraints on what politicians can do rather than the electorate, who will continue to vote themselves freebies until the country collapses, while the politicians focus on high media impact, low consequence events.

How sad is it that "democracy" has turned out like this. Pretty inevitable really though if you think about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The us/uk /Australian/Canadian model now also effectively taken up by the French also has proven to be way more resilient .

Apart from the UK and Canada those countries have little in common. The Australians have compulsory preferential voting and have just had a coalition government. The French have a directly elected president and at various times have had prime ministers from the opposite party to the president.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A super result for Angela Merkel. But, in a reference to coalition building, she said it was "too early to say exactly what we'll do".

Her Christian Democrats took about 42% of the vote (39,4 % in 2009). But Mrs Merkel's preferred coalition is at risk, as her Free Democrat partners appear not have secured the 5% needed to enter parliament. She may, therefore, be forced to seek a grand coalition with the Social Democrats - estimated to have won 26% (27,9 % in 2009).

There was some speculation on German television that the Christian Democrats (CDU) might even win enough seats for an absolute majority - the first in half a century - if both the FDP and AfD fail to make it into parliament.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I must admit not really knowing much about the FDP. I had hoped they were a Ron Paulesque libertarian party type, however have heard they are in fact filthy neo-cons more similar to mainstream US republicans, but without the religious oogawooga stuff. I was aware they are EUphiles, so that alone should have alerted me to their nefarious intentions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I must admit not really knowing much about the FDP. I had hoped they were a Ron Paulesque libertarian party type, however have heard they are in fact filthy neo-cons more similar to mainstream US republicans, but without the religious oogawooga stuff. I was aware they are EUphiles, so that alone should have alerted me to their nefarious intentions.

The FDP have held the balance of power in Germany for much of the post war period so you can't expect too much boat rocking. Falling below the threshold to get into parliament will be a wake up call for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the elections have given Merkel enough control it doesn't seem to augur very well for the PIIGS. Soon more bail-ins to be the order of the day?

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apart from the UK and Canada those countries have little in common. The Australians have compulsory preferential voting and have just had a coalition government. The French have a directly elected president and at various times have had prime ministers from the opposite party to the president.

Not true if you look at substance over form. All of these countries have some nominal form of power sharing or split legislatures however they all share one common theme which is that the vast bulk of executive power is held by one branch and this usually emanates from one party.

Of course there are occasionally cohabitations but there is usually one party in administration and there is usually one or more major oppositions posing as an alternative .

It leavesost people in no doubt who to blame or reward

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   210 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.