So far, this election campaign has not been about real politics – also because the candidates stumble from one faux pas to the next. Political scientist Marc Debus on late decision-makers, defamation and the possible Americanization of the German election campaign.
The deadline is getting closer: In just over a month, Germany will elect a new Bundestag – and thus a new Chancellor. Seldom has the race for entry into the Chancellery been so close.
But political content has often had to take a back seat in the previous election campaign. Whether allegations of plagiarism, inaccuracies in the résumé or simply laughing at the wrong moment – this year it seems that the supposedly small things are being discussed in great detail.
This “negative campaigning” has so far mainly been observed in the election campaign of another major democracy: in the USA. The question arises: is the German election campaign becoming Americanized? That’s what the stern spoke to Professor Marc Debus from the University of Mannheim. In an interview, the political scientist also reveals to what extent the voting behavior of Germans has changed.
Professor Debus, do we vote for people or parties?
Debus: That is exactly one of the great challenges for electoral research. Who we choose does not only depend on the candidate, but on many other factors.
Of course, we also choose a party because of its top candidate – based on sympathy, supposed competence or political position. That was already the case in the 60s and 70s and is no different today.
Are the presidential candidates more important in the US?
Yes, if only because of the electoral system. There, the candidates can and must sometimes move far more from the party line than in Germany. The alignment of the two US parties is much more vague than in our multi-party system.
So you are not so much chained to your party?
Exactly, they are much more detached. The same goes for Congress. The voting behavior there is not so linked to factions. There are far more deviants there than in parliamentary democracies like ours.
Why is that?
Quite simply: In the US, the president’s retention of office does not depend on a majority for his party in Congress. The Chancellor, on the other hand, has to be elected to office by a majority in the Bundestag and needs the trust of the majority in Parliament in order to remain in office – this has a disciplinary effect.
Has our election campaign gotten rough?
Let’s put it this way: the more at stake, the tighter the election result, the harder the bandages that are used to fight. Studies also show that at least the tone in parliament has become rougher: there are more calls for order, more interruptions.
In the USA, “negative campaigning” – the targeted defamation of candidates – has long been part of the election campaign. German politicians are also repeatedly approached personally. Why is that?
This cannot yet be scientifically proven. But I see social media as a possible cause. Using the platforms, it is simply easier to target competitors. Personal encounter is no longer necessary. However, voters in Germany are not necessarily good when parties and candidates resort to unfair means.
Why did that increase?
This is not least due to the establishment of the AfD, which polarized the German party system. Other parties have moved closer to the AfD’s aggressive election campaign – after all, they want to remain visible, to stand up.
According to surveys, the Greens were at times the strongest force, but the mood is now much more balanced. Are voters in Germany more fickle than in the US?
We are actually relatively similar there. Indeed, this trend of variability runs through all modern democracies. Who we choose no longer depends only on belonging to a social group or on long-term party affiliation.
What does more flexible mean?
That we will commit much later – about two to four weeks before going to the ballot box. The proportion of these “late decision-makers” in federal elections is now over 40 percent. In the 1960s the value was still five percent. Accordingly, the variability in this choice is not surprising and can continue in the coming weeks.
At the beginning, Armin Laschet’s strategy was characterized by successfully ducking away. To paraphrase Merkel: It is better not to react than to act incorrectly. But surveys show: There has never been a less popular Union candidate.
For one thing, the candidate question was already controversial within the Union. Intra-party competition is never a good start – and it was openly carried out in the media. The fact that Markus Söder was already more popular with Union voters back then didn’t help either.
And then in the following months Laschet made mistakes – like laughing in the flood area. His election campaign is marked by mishaps to which he himself contributed.
So is the German election campaign really just about affording as few breakdowns as possible?
Sure – if you avoid faux pas, your poll numbers are less likely to drop. This can be seen in Mr Scholz, who has so far got through the election campaign without any serious scratches. The SPD is currently benefiting from this.
What other surprises can we expect?
SOMETHING can still happen in any case (laughs). From my point of view, the outcome is completely open. For the first time since 1949, no incumbent has run – that makes predictions even more difficult. Just a few weeks ago, my colleagues and I would never have thought that there could be a near tie between the Union, the SPD and the Greens. And: There are also the TV duels.
Now the TV duels could finally be more about content than about botched résumés or unhappy pictures.
Yes. Mainly because the candidates for the Chancellery each come from the moderate wings of their party – perhaps the TV duels help to emphasize the differences more clearly.
Before and during the US elections there was talk of a “division of the country” in which the political fronts are apparently irreconcilable. Are we experiencing a similar polarization in Germany?
In Germany the political climate is mild compared to the USA. There are still around 30 percent behind Trump – not to be compared with the number of AfD sympathizers. But Trump supporters and AfD voters cannot be compared properly – apart from the populist elements.
A look into the crystal ball: What will the election campaign of the future look like?
Digitization will play an even more important role. In the US election campaign, for example, social media profiles have long been scoured, matched data sought and potential followers found. These supporters are contacted personally and then make their own election campaign for the candidate in their environment. In Germany, too, parties will make greater use of people’s transparency on social media.
Do you sometimes wish for more US manner in the German election campaign?
The fact that the Christian Democrats had an internal selection process for candidates – and the SPD selected its chairman team in a similar way – has already made the election campaign somewhat Americanized.
But: I am more than satisfied with the way election campaigns are carried out in Germany. I prefer the whole thing to be more moderate than these violent, sometimes exaggerated personal attacks like in the USA.
David William is a talented author who has made a name for himself in the world of writing. He is a professional author who writes on a wide range of topics, from general interest to opinion news. David is currently working as a writer at 24 hours worlds where he brings his unique perspective and in-depth research to his articles, making them both informative and engaging.
