German elections

[Dill]

(09-25-2017, 08:18 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So you are ok with leadership being elected with 30% or less of the vote?

That being said ..... two parties isn't the problems.   It's the uniparty that is the problem.

The Bundeskanzler is elected indirectly, by all the Bundestag members who represent all the voters of Germany, not the voters themselves. (Thanks to our electoral college, our system doesn't allow direct voting either.) Some of the Kanzler's own party may vote against him (her now). So German parliamentary leadership is created by a coalition of parties and party members. Those voting for a smaller party like the FDP know their party will be in a coalition behind the larger SPD or CDU. It's not quite right to say leadership is elected with 30% or less of the vote.

You are aware Germany has a system of double voting, right? They vote directly for a district representative and then for a party at the state level.

Having more choices, choices which reflect their interests, the German voters are more willing to participate in their own government. Over 70% of those eligible voted in the election previous to this.

Barely 45% of US voters voted in the last election. So Trump was elected with less than 30% of the electorate--by an electoral college which favors low population states--after losing the popular vote.
  

[*jason*]

(09-25-2017, 08:18 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So you are ok with leadership being elected with 30% or less of the vote?

That being said ..... two parties isn't the problems. It's the uniparty that is the problem.

If it means that they have to form a coalition with other parties, and work together to succeed, then yeah... I'm ok with that.

[StLucieBengal]

(09-25-2017, 08:29 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Yes, the groups he mentioned have come out of the woodworks. 

And Why have they came out and gotten support..... oh yeah the epidemic of rape, violence, assault, and overall public nusance by these Muslim migrants.

[StLucieBengal]

(09-25-2017, 08:49 PM)Dill Wrote: The Bundeskanzler is elected indirectly, by all the Bundestag members who represent all the voters of Germany, not the voters themselves. (Thanks to our electoral college, our system doesn't allow direct voting either.) Some of the Kanzler's own party may vote against him (her now). So German parliamentary leadership is created by a coalition of parties and party members. Those voting for a smaller party like the FDP know their party will be in a coalition behind the larger SPD or CDU. It's not quite right to say leadership is elected with 30% or less of the vote.

You are aware Germany has a system of double voting, right? They vote directly for a district representative and then for a party at the state level.

Having more choices, choices which reflect their interests, the German voters are more willing to participate in their own government. Over 70% of those eligible voted in the election previous to this.

Barely 45% of US voters voted in the last election. So Trump was elected with less than 30% of the electorate--by an electoral college which favors low population states--after losing the popular vote.
  

Lol at your attempt to take away from the electoral college. We shouldnt have a direct democracy. And we certainly shouldn't favor high population center over the rest of the country.

And I am fully aware of what is going on in Europe and with these parties.

The problems with Germany arent because of AfD. They are actually just a group of citizens who saw their country going away at the hands of Merkel and other major parties.

[Dill]

(09-25-2017, 11:36 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Lol at your attempt to take away from the electoral college.    We shouldnt have a direct democracy.   And we certainly shouldn't favor high population center over the rest of the country.  

And I am fully aware of what is going on in Europe and with these parties.    

The problems with Germany arent because of AfD.  They are actually just a group of citizens who saw their country going away at the hands of Merkel and other major parties.

Well, to be clear, I was not attacking the electoral college. My point was that your assumption that the Bundeskanzler "only" represents 30% of the voters is incorrect. 

And it is rather inconsistent to complain, in one post, that the leader of Germany doesn't represent a majority of voters, while in another post affirming unequal representation in the US.

[BmorePat87]

(09-25-2017, 11:24 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: And Why have they came out and gotten support.....  oh yeah the epidemic of rape, violence, assault, and overall public nusance by these Muslim migrants.

I'll take your word for it over his. I'm sure you've read plenty of Breitbart and Daily Wire articles on this where as he just travels there a lot. 

[BmorePat87]

(09-25-2017, 11:36 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Lol at your attempt to take away from the electoral college.    We shouldnt have a direct democracy.   And we certainly shouldn't favor high population center over the rest of the country.  

And I am fully aware of what is going on in Europe and with these parties.    

The problems with Germany arent because of AfD.  They are actually just a group of citizens who saw their country going away at the hands of Merkel and other major parties.

A direct democracy is one in which all citizens vote on laws. A popular vote for our executive isn't "direct democracy".

Why not count all votes equally instead of trying to give low population areas or high population areas more favor?

[StLucieBengal]

(09-26-2017, 12:09 AM)Dill Wrote: Well, to be clear, I was not attacking the electoral college. My point was that your assumption that the Bundeskanzler "only" represents 30% of the voters is incorrect. 

And it is rather inconsistent to complain, in one post, that the leader of Germany doesn't represent a majority of voters, while in another post affirming unequal representation in the US.

I was not speaking about the Germany system specifically. I was speaking on multi party scenarios in general. And since it was brought up for the USA the German system is irrelevant.

[StLucieBengal]

(09-26-2017, 08:20 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I'll take your word for it over his. I'm sure you've read plenty of Breitbart and Daily Wire articles on this where as he just travels there a lot. 

It's cute that you try and bring up my travel when I have been there several times the past five years or so. You should really try some travel yourself. Then maybe you could actually have some legitimate participation in these threads. I am tired of being one of only a handful of people here who even have the slightest clue on what's going on in Europe.

Come on.... Pony up the cash, flights to Europe are reasonable.

[hollodero]

(09-25-2017, 05:07 PM)Dill Wrote: Verstehe kein auslandisch . . . hier wird Englisch gesprochen!

Halt die Klappe, Yankee.

(09-25-2017, 05:07 PM)Dill Wrote: Is it your view that with SPD out, a CDU-Green-FDP coalition will start eroding the social net? You say the results will be tough for low-come Germans, but who is voting for the AfD?  They seem to have gained from from former SPD and CDU voters.

(09-25-2017, 05:30 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I think one of my failings in trying to understand the German politics is not knowing enough of the history. Knowing that would help me out a bit more, it seems.

As for Schulz, as much as I was shouting "Keine Bremsen!", it was more for the party than Schulz himself. Schulz has some great qualities, but if the SPD needed someone more charismatic to really have a chance. Plus, I had some issues with him policy-wise.

Allow me to give kind of an abbreviated, summed up response to these points. First, my SPD remarks weren't so much a historic stance then a political one; there's often two viewpoints, what one person refuses as betrayal the other person praises as being pragmatic. SPD was "pragmatic", at least that's what they tried to communicate, and lifelong voters didn't take that too well. The social net was already eroding under Schröder/Fischer, a government left leaning people have put high hopes in, only to be disappointed. After that, SPD was junior partner in a big coalition, and there is never anything to gain in that role ever. Plus they had some awful leadership in recent years, names like Kurt Beck or Sigmar Gabriel and then some.

A first counter-reaction was the founding of "Die Linke" (meaning "the left"), formed by a former SPD populist named Lafontaine and some PDS members (PDS started as the SED successor, SED was East Germany's governing party). Many voters were lost there for the SPD, true left leaning folk who couldn't go Grüne because, as mentioned, they are only left by cover, but really make policies for the wealthy. - AfD also feeds from disappointed socialist voters, like in many countries in Europe. The right-wing populists use those people who are in alliance with true nationalists. Now there's plenty to say about AfD, the German right-wing populism branch; they are, as everywhere, a force that doesn't go for the constructive vote, but for the angry, destructive, anti-elite, anti-establishment vote. Who votes for them are a) Nazis and sympathetic people and b) disappointed SPD voters who want to light a fuse. Because AfD have given them a scapegoat, a reason for the aölleged downward spiral, and it's refugees (and elites and media lies and so on, but mainly muslims).

(09-25-2017, 11:24 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: And Why have they came out and gotten support.....  oh yeah the epidemic of rape, violence, assault, and overall public nusance by these Muslim migrants.

...as mentioned.
Mr. Lucie, I try to respect everyone's position and plan to keep doing so. That being said, your statement still is a lie, and I won't grow tired telling you so. There is no rape epidemic, violence epidemic etc., caused by refugees. It is just a right-wing lie, and how openly American outlets outright lie abuout Europe is astonishing. You parroting these points doesn't shed the best of lights. And of course some migrants cause trouble and there's also no need to hide that away; an anti-immigration line isn't per se out of the scope of legit democratic opinions. But "epidemics", this is classical right-wing agitation speech, solving nothing and enraging people, being only destructive and accomplishing nothing good.
Support for the AfD mainly stems from people scapegoating and believing lies, from xenophobes, reactionaries and naive, low-educated folk. And some AfD voters, I assume, are good people.

[StLucieBengal]

(09-26-2017, 10:32 AM)hollodero Wrote: Halt die Klappe, Yankee.



Allow me to give kind of an abbreviated, summed up response to these points. First, my SPD remarks weren't so much a historic stance then a political one; there's often two viewpoints, what one person refuses as betrayal the other person praises as being pragmatic. SPD was "pragmatic", at least that's what they tried to communicate, and lifelong voters didn't take that too well. The social net was already eroding under Schröder/Fischer, a government left leaning people have put high hopes in, only to be disappointed. After that, SPD was junior partner in a big coalition, and there is never anything to gain in that role ever. Plus they had some awful leadership in recent years, names like Kurt Beck or Sigmar Gabriel and then some.

A first counter-reaction was the founding of "Die Linke" (meaning "the left"), formed by a former SPD populist named Lafontaine and some PDS members (PDS started as the SED successor, SED was East Germany's governing party). Many voters were lost there for the SPD, true left leaning folk who couldn't go Grüne because, as mentioned, they are only left by cover, but really make policies for the wealthy. - AfD also feeds from disappointed socialist voters, like in many countries in Europe. The right-wing populists use those people who are in alliance with true nationalists. Now there's plenty to say about AfD, the German right-wing populism branch; they are, as everywhere, a force that doesn't go for the constructive vote, but for the angry, destructive, anti-elite, anti-establishment vote. Who votes for them are a) Nazis and sympathetic people and b) disappointed SPD voters who want to light a fuse. Because AfD have given them a scapegoat, a reason for the aölleged downward spiral, and it's refugees (and elites and media lies and so on, but mainly muslims).



...as mentioned.
Mr. Lucie, I try to respect everyone's position and plan to keep doing so. That being said, your statement still is a lie, and I won't grow tired telling you so. There is no rape epidemic, violence epidemic etc., caused by refugees. It is just a right-wing lie, and how openly American outlets outright lie abuout Europe is astonishing. You parroting these points doesn't shed the best of lights. And of course some migrants cause trouble and there's also no need to hide that away; an anti-immigration line isn't per se out of the scope of legit democratic opinions. But "epidemics", this is classical right-wing agitation speech, solving nothing and enraging people, being only destructive and accomplishing nothing good.
Support for the AfD mainly stems from people scapegoating and believing lies, from xenophobes, reactionaries and naive, low-educated folk. And some AfD voters, I assume, are good people.

Despite the rampant Under reporting of migrant crimes in Germany I willl just leave this here

That's data from BKA. Not right wing American outlets

Quote:According to Federal Criminal Police Office (Bundeskriminalamt, BKA) data (page 14), in 2013, migrants (Zuwanderer) committed 599 sex crimes, or an average of two a day. In 2014, migrants committed 949 sex crimes, or around three per day. In 2015, migrants committed 1,683 sex crimes, or around five per day. During the first three quarters of 2016, migrants committed 2,790 sex crimes, or around ten per day.

In fact, the actual number of migrant-related sex crimes in Germany is at least two or three times higher than the official number. For example, only 10% of the sex crimes committed in Germany appear in the official statistics, according to André Schulz, head of the Criminal Police Association (Bund Deutscher Kriminalbeamter, BDK).

In addition, the BKA data includes only crimes that have been solved (aufgeklärten Straftaten). According to police statistics, on average only around half of all crimes committed in Germany in any given year are solved (Aufklärungsquote).

Moreover, BKA crime statistics do not include data from North Rhine-Westphalia, the most populous state in Germany and the one with the largest number of migrants, or from Hamburg, the second-largest city in the country.

[BmorePat87]

(09-26-2017, 10:25 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: It's cute that you try and bring up my travel when I have been there several times the past five years or so. You should really try some travel yourself.   Then maybe you could actually have some legitimate participation in these threads.    I am tired of being one of only a handful of people here who even have the slightest clue on what's going on in Europe.    

Come on.... Pony up the cash, flights to Europe are reasonable.

I didn't mention your travel. I mentioned his. The resident Europeans here and the ones I know have a completely different view of Europe than you. Considering all of your sources on Europe come from far right American sources... there's really no reason to take your word on anything. When you're consistently wrong on education, science, LGBT issues, and the Constitution, I've come to just assume you make up everything you post. 

I'm also way too busy living in reality to travel abroad. You should really try visiting it yourself. Then maybe you could actually have some legitimate participation in these threads. 

[BmorePat87]

(09-26-2017, 10:32 AM)hollodero Wrote: ...as mentioned.
Mr. Lucie, I try to respect everyone's position and plan to keep doing so. That being said, your statement still is a lie, and I won't grow tired telling you so. There is no rape epidemic, violence epidemic etc., caused by refugees. It is just a right-wing lie, and how openly American outlets outright lie abuout Europe is astonishing. You parroting these points doesn't shed the best of lights. And of course some migrants cause trouble and there's also no need to hide that away; an anti-immigration line isn't per se out of the scope of legit democratic opinions. But "epidemics", this is classical right-wing agitation speech, solving nothing and enraging people, being only destructive and accomplishing nothing good.
Support for the AfD mainly stems from people scapegoating and believing lies, from xenophobes, reactionaries and naive, low-educated folk. And some AfD voters, I assume, are good people.

Wait so he doesn't know what he is talking about? Shocking. 

[hollodero]

(09-26-2017, 10:40 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Despite the rampant Under reporting of migrant crimes in Germany I willl just leave this here

That's data from BKA.  Not right wing American outlets

...and the data is interpreted by right-wing outlets. Dubious claims of a dark number being far higher (a classic: we have the numbers, but the truth is even way more grim, because we actually miss some more data, miss certain regions, the media underreports, police underreports etc. etc.), coupled with claims the official numbers are already high, and then there's some claims of cover-ups, as if police and media had a severe interest in protecting muslims because, whatever.

The actual numbers cited might be correct, but there is no context here. Muslims probably are responsible for about 4% of all sex crimes in Germany. Given they are about 5% (closer to 5.5%) of the overall German population, that number is not particularly high. Which doesn't mean that I do not want to have every single person thrown out of Europe who seeks asylum and commits crimes, because I do, and because we have some severe problems in that regard. But talking "rape/violence epidemic" is a lie and remains a lie. 

And this is the vicious part of all this: People who are convinced mass rapes are daily boring news in Germany, are swept under the rug, can never be persuaded that they got their data wrong. They know they are right, they read news that confirm them, either bi lieing or by misrepresenting data, and there's nothing one can do; except pointing out again and again that these are lies; and that Germany's wealth, security and prosperity depends on many things, but the number of refugees taken in temporarily isn't one of these things.

[StLucieBengal]

(09-26-2017, 11:05 AM)hollodero Wrote: ...and the data is interpreted by right-wing outlets. Dubious claims of a dark number being far higher (a classic: we have the numbers, but the truth is even way more grim, because we actually miss some more data, miss certain regions, the media underreports, police underreports etc. etc.), coupled with claims the official numbers are already high, and then there's some claims of cover-ups, as if police and media had a severe interest in protecting muslims because, whatever.

The actual numbers cited might be correct, but there is no context here. Muslims probably are responsible for about 4% of all sex crimes in Germany. Given they are about 5% (closer to 5.5%) of the overall German population, that number is not particularly high. Which doesn't mean that I do not want to have every single person thrown out of Europe who seeks asylum and commits crimes, because I do, and because we have some severe problems in that regard. But talking "rape/violence epidemic" is a lie and remains a lie. 

And this is the vicious part of all this: People who are convinced mass rapes are daily boring news in Germany, are swept under the rug, can never be persuaded that they got their data wrong. They know they are right, they read news that confirm them, either bi lieing or by misrepresenting data, and there's nothing one can do; except pointing out again and again that these are lies; and that Germany's wealth, security and prosperity depends on many things, but the number of refugees taken in temporarily isn't one of these things.

So when the data shows that I am right ..... then blame the people reading it? Hahaha.

[StLucieBengal]

(09-26-2017, 10:47 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I didn't mention your travel. I mentioned his. The resident Europeans here and the ones I know have a completely different view of Europe than you. Considering all of your sources on Europe come from far right American sources... there's really no reason to take your word on anything. When you're consistently wrong on education, science, LGBT issues, and the Constitution, I've come to just assume you make up everything you post. 

I'm also way too busy living in reality to travel abroad. You should really try visiting it yourself. Then maybe you could actually have some legitimate participation in these threads. 

My ideas and reasons are from actually experiencing life in Europe in several countries. It's hilarious that you speak about these topics while you admittedly hide in Maryland. Talk about echo chambers.....

You can't say life experience counts only for the people that agree with my world view. Just shows your own bias. And makes you look ridiculous. Take a trip and then come back with your own opinions instead of just following along.

[BmorePat87]

(09-26-2017, 10:00 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: My ideas and reasons are from actually experiencing life in Europe in several countries.    It's hilarious that you speak about these topics while you admittedly hide in Maryland.   Talk about echo chambers.....    

You clearly don't know much about Maryland if you think it's an echo chamber.

Then again, it's not really a surprise that once again you're being corrected about a place by someone who actually lives there. 

Quote:You can't say life experience counts only for the people that agree with my world view.    Just shows your own bias.  And makes you look ridiculous.   Take a trip and then come back with your own opinions instead of just following along.

Considering you made up all of this gibberish, I don't really have a response to this emotional outburst of yours. 

[Dill]

(09-26-2017, 09:56 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So when the data shows that I am right ..... then blame the people reading it?   Hahaha.

Who, besides you and right wing websites, grants that the data shows you are right?

No one disputes some crimes in Germany are committed by migrants. But whether that constitutes an "epidemic" cannot be determined without reference to total crimes committed and past rates.

While sex crimes have increased in Bavaria since 2016, they have gone down in Nord-Rhein Westphalia.
https://www.thelocal.de/20170920/how-a-rise-in-sex-crimes-in-bavaria-has-opened-a-debate-about-womens-rights

And part of the increase is due to an expanded definition of "sex crimes."

And it is rather selective to portray Germany as awash in "foreign" threats while ignoring right wing extremism. What does the BKA say about the increase in RED? Do migrants swarm German neighborhoods and burn peoples homes? 

When was the last time racial minorities in Germany lived in the kind of fear you appear to welcome?

[Dill]

(09-26-2017, 10:32 AM)hollodero Wrote: A first counter-reaction was the founding of "Die Linke" (meaning "the left"), formed by a former SPD populist named Lafontaine and some PDS members (PDS started as the SED successor, SED was East Germany's governing party). Many voters were lost there for the SPD, true left leaning folk who couldn't go Grüne because, as mentioned, they are only left by cover, but really make policies for the wealthy. - AfD also feeds from disappointed socialist voters, like in many countries in Europe. The right-wing populists use those people who are in alliance with true nationalists. Now there's plenty to say about AfD, the German right-wing populism branch; they are, as everywhere, a force that doesn't go for the constructive vote, but for the angry, destructive, anti-elite, anti-establishment vote. Who votes for them are a) Nazis and sympathetic people and b) disappointed SPD voters who want to light a fuse. Because AfD have given them a scapegoat, a reason for the aölleged downward spiral, and it's refugees (and elites and media lies and so on, but mainly muslims).

Thanks for the run down. I was living in Germany when the wall fell and a couple years after, so I remember Gysi et al. Lafontaine's star was rising back then. But I've only followed German politics occasionally since. Haven't been there since 2011, before the big migrant problem.

The angry destructive fuse lighter vote describes the rank and file, and it makes sense that their support is strong in the former DDR, but I am puzzled so much of the leadership seem to be "Akademiker" and legal professionals in somewhat elevated and respected positions like state prosecutors. Those are usually the kind of people who plan things and take a longer view of actions and their consequences. They want to legitimize and normalize the extreme right. The angry destructive fuse lighter vote in the US and Britain generally rejects that kind of leadership.

I think one other difference might be that in Germany, for a long time, there have been small right wing parties(National party, Republikaner), different ones in different regions, but too incompatible to merge. The AfD may be collecting that vote too, bringing them together in an uneasy umbrella.

Der Spiegel had a report on a small community outside Dresden with just under 14,000 inhabitants and only TEN asylum seekers, but a third of that community voted AfD.  The claim is that, curiously, the AfD has done well in places with few migrants.  In the US, conversely, Trump seems to have done well in places where racial diversity is higher and politically troubling.

[hollodero]

(09-26-2017, 09:56 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So when the data shows that I am right ..... then blame the people reading it?   Hahaha.

Oh please. Your data said nothing more than "there were x crimes committed by migrants".  These numbers don't show you're right, they just show that migrants commit crimes like every other grooup.
You took an "x crimes committed" number and "proved" that there is a crime epidemic. And this doesn't show you're right. And while your number of sex crimes committed by migrants might be accurate, it doesn't make you any less wrong. Because the relevant question is not "how many crimes were committed by migrants", it's "do migrants commit more crimes than local people". Which they do not; hence no "epidemic". That I even have to do this explaining... well, you knew better anyhow, but still. This is childish.