The election to the 21st German Bundestag will take place as an early election on February 23, 2025. The parties are currently fighting for the votes of citizens - in TV debates, street campaigns and on social media. You can also find projections of how the parties will perform in the media - families and friends are talking about who they should vote for and whether they should vote at all. Editor Isabell Meißner spoke to political scientist Prof. Michael Böcher about why voting is important, whether the Wahl-O-Mat is really a help and whether the much-vaunted tactical voting really makes sense.
Why is it important to vote?
In the representative democracy of the Federal Republic of Germany, parliament is the only constitutional body that is directly elected by the people. According to Article 20 of the Basic Law, all state power should emanate from the people. By voting, citizens can decide on the composition of the Bundestag and decide who represents their interests in Berlin. With their first vote, eligible voters decide which constituency candidates are elected to the Bundestag, which can be up to 299 deputies, and with their second vote, they decide the majority ratio of the parties represented in the Bundestag. As the German Bundestag passes important laws and also elects the Federal Chancellor, it is important to vote and thus have a say in the majority and the direction of politics over the next four years. An election therefore ensures that the political preferences of voters are represented in parliament and democratically legitimizes their political representatives. The regularity of elections also ensures control of power, as voters are thus indirectly able to vote governments out of office and strengthen the opposition parties. When deciding how to vote, however, it is also important to remember that equal, free and secret elections are a privilege. In many countries, there are no free and secret elections and the right to vote had to be fought for. It was also extended to larger sections of the population: for example, women in Germany have only been allowed to vote since 1918 with the beginning of the “Weimar Republic”.
Why isn't not voting a solution?
Not voting is not a solution because then you leave the decision on the composition of parliament to others and do not articulate your own political preferences. Your own vote falls completely by the wayside and you have no influence on the composition of parliament. Others then decide on the composition of parliament. In addition, an increasing number of non-voters ensures that extremist movements gain more influence and question the electoral system and the democratic legitimacy of MPs and the government and want to use them for their political goals. They can then mobilize the dissatisfied and use them for their goals. If voters want to express their dissatisfaction with politics and do not want to vote for an alternative among the competing parties, they can also cast an invalid ballot paper (e.g. not vote at all). In this case, their vote is not taken into account when determining the election result, but it is included when determining the voter turnout. Many invalid ballots can then be seen as an indicator of a certain dissatisfaction with the political offerings of the parties.
However, the political parties also have an influence on the number of non-voters - many citizens feel alienated from politics because they think that politics does not solve the problems they experience in their everyday lives. Added to this are the tiring election campaigns, which are also becoming increasingly polarizing. In my view, political parties must demonstrate that they are able to provide convincing political answers to the current problems of citizens. If the political output is right and can be clearly attributed to specific political decisions, voters will be happy to go to the polls.
Prof. Dr. Michael Böcher, Political scientist at the University of Magdeburg (Foto: Jana Dünnhaupt / University of Magdeburg)
How do you protect democracy by voting?
Democracy is protected, as explained above, because the act of voting directly legitimizes the members of parliament, indirectly the federal government and ultimately our political system as a whole. Not voting strengthens extremist movements that see democracy in the Federal Republic as a thorn in their side. However, this does not mean that there can be no debate in Germany about the extent to which democracy and our political system can tolerate reform. The aforementioned alienation between citizens and politics and the short-term nature of election cycles, which serve short-term interests rather than long-term requirements, have already led to a number of discussions: for example, an expansion of direct democratic elements or the establishment of “citizens' councils” as supplementary elements of representative democracy have long been discussed here. Examples such as climate protection or long-term infrastructure projects such as the general overhaul of Deutsche Bahn show that short-term political considerations or tight budgets often make forward-looking, long-term policy difficult because these decisions can lead to short-term losses of votes or necessary reforms are put off.
Ultimately, it is about the political science topic of “responsiveness”, i.e. the extent to which elected representatives really transform the goals and interests of citizens in a society that has become increasingly differentiated in recent years into corresponding political decisions.
Is the Wahl-O-Mat really helpful and reliable?
The Wahl-O-Mat is a project of the Federal Agency for Civic Education that has been around since 2002. In my opinion, it is a good way of finding out about the central program statements of the parties running in the election with regard to important political issues and comparing them with your own preferences. The Wahl-O-Mat is a useful tool, especially as voters rarely work through all election programs in their entirety. By evaluating 38 current central theses and then weighting them, you can determine which party you have the most political overlap with.
However, weaknesses are also discussed: the theses to be evaluated are very abbreviated and can only be evaluated using a three-level scale (“agree”, “neutral”, “disagree”). It is also not entirely clear whether the complex range of programs of the parties running in the election can be represented in 38 theses. In addition, certain topics can only be weighted twice; for example, if you have a topic that is the most important to you and overshadows other topics, it is difficult to mark this accordingly. In addition, the assessments of the parties' respective stances on the various issues are based on the official election manifestos - if parties such as extremist parties conceal their real intentions or parties do not even intend to implement certain program points, the Wahl-O-Mat cannot reflect this.
My recommendation is that the Wahl-O-Mat is a good tool for comparing your own preferences with those of the parties running in the election. But only the combination of Wahl-O-Mat, closely following the various media in which the parties appear, attending campaign events where you can also ask the candidates questions and, last but not least, discussions with friends and family, will lead to an informed voting decision.
What are the benefits of tactical voting?
Tactical voting means that you do not vote for the party you actually prefer, but for another party - for tactical reasons. This can be the case, for example, if you want to help another party to overcome the 5% hurdle at all costs so that certain coalitions can be formed. In the past, supporters of the CDU, for example, voted for the FDP to make their preferred coalition more likely. A current example is the state election in Brandenburg in 2024, in which many voters voted for the SPD to prevent the AfD from gaining a majority.
In addition, one tactic used to be to give the first vote to a candidate with a good chance of winning the direct mandate if you were actually affiliated with a smaller party that had no prospect of winning constituencies directly.However, this form of tactical voting is no longer possible today with the amended electoral law, as the abolition of overhang mandates to reduce the size of the Bundestag means that not all direct candidates elected with the first vote are guaranteed to enter the Bundestag. In addition, the increase in the number of parliamentary groups in the parliaments makes it more difficult to form coalitions: it is also more difficult to vote tactically because it is simply more difficult to assess which coalitions will ultimately emerge and to what extent a supposed tactical vote will influence them.
Thank you very much for the interview!