What would hurt the FDP that much more than the CDU? They wouldn’t have gotten the full free market manifest past the CDU anyway.

It seems to me that there are three things the FDP really cares about.
1. Lower rates in exchange for less tax exemptions
2. Less regulations
3. hire ‘n’ fire

Of that #1 is possible with the Greens, #2 partially, maybe even a bit #3

And no, Fischer hasn’t explicitly ruled Jamaica out. He has made clear, though, that he thinks it a very unlikely outcome, and unlikely to be workable even if it does come about.

I think Georg is onto something here. (Hmmm… Jamaica under Wulff?) The difficulty with Jamaica will be less the Union than the FDP. Paradoxically, despite their poorer results the Greens have more leverage over the Union than do the FDP (since Guido essentially waived any leverage the FDP might have had). The Union would probably concede quite a lot to the Greens to be able to form a government. I’m not sure how much of that lot the FDP would wear.

There’s one additional factor, though, that could make for unexpected developments. Both FDP and the Greens want to be in government. But I have the impression that, if it came to that, the Greens would be much readier than the FDP to resign themselves with equanimity to opposition. For the FDP to do as well as they’ve done and then see a grand coalition — that’s got to hurt.

Alex, you’re dead wrong on this (and I think many people here confuse today’s yuppy-FDP with its Genscher’ian historical self). a) b) d) - as Oliver says. Plus, imagine how desperate the CDU is. c) As Raschke says, a “formula compromise” is possible, since the matter won’t be decided any time soon. And when exactly did Fischer rule Jamaica out after the election?

Westerwelle has just accused the SPD of sexual harrassment of the FDP and requested an end to that business, and Fischer has announced that he will become a backbencher in the event the Greens go into opposition. Previously he said he won’t serve as a minister under Merkel. An admittedly daring synthesis: ditch Merkel, and welcome Fischer back as foreign minister of Jamaica.

b)renewable energy - partially - compensated by coal subsidies and commuters’ subsidies

c)Turkish EU membership - it is a tough world

d)feminism - the FDP is on their side

e) opposition to the Iraq war - CDU wants to forget that embarrasment anyway

The sheer feel of it is still wrong. But not enough to reject it out of hand.

Why do you suppose that the president will further such three party ideas by giving negotiations any more time than he is required to? He strikes me as a man who likes it decisively. I guess he will set the procedure in motion as soon as constitutional.

Yes, come Rheinland-Pfalz in spring we will know. However, the SPD has to prevent that. The have to treat them like a grave danger now while still something may be done.

the German institutions are unable to deal with the current divisions

In a way they are and there’s no hiding that. From this result no good government will come. The public knows and is unhappy. There’s a choice between a bad government collapsing two years hence and a quick dissolution. Long lingering lesser pain or a sharp jab? It boils down to that. Proportional representation has this fundamental weakness.

I’m not sure the CDU has nothing to lose in the next round. Look what happened in the last two weeks.

The future is fundamentally uncertain. If they can get a grand coaltion, they’ll probably take it. But it does not look that way. What else is there to lose vs. a decent chance?
Additionally, the CDU’s loss would be the SPD’s gain. Red/Green is dead, no matter what. But the SPD is only three seats behind. There is a chance that Schröder could make the CDU/CSU eat its own words about chancellorship in a grand coalition if it comes to new elections. Schröder didn’t want to rule with the Greens, an Ampel would be worse. A grand coaltion on his terms is his dream. If this Jamaica thing collapses, as is likely. He has the power to force a new go at it.

the F.D.P. likely would though

Why? They demonstrated spine for the first time in decades.

I’m not sure they will not convince Merkel that stepping down would serve the country

They will dump her in a second and gladly if they have anything to gain. But the SPD does not object to Merkel. They want Schröder. And the reason they have given would damage the fundamental union between CDU and CSU. After that they need to demand the chancellorship, no matter what.

more predictability in reforms

How? Predictability by announcing cuts has backfired.

Whatever Guido Westerwelle said on election night is of secondary importance - SPD/FDP/Green is no more ruled out than CDU/FDP/Green (Fischer ruled it out) or SPD/CDU (both Schröder and Merkel have done so in practice by demanding the chancellorship, and Merkel has done so in as many words). But everyone talks as if Joschka’s rule-out wasn’t a rule-out although everyone else’s is. Bizarrely, people seem to assume that the Greens will behave like the FDP and the FDP will behave like the Greens.

Mrs T wrote: “(Meanwhile, as the same article points out, Union leaders are suddenly dicovering that they have an awful lot in common with the Greens….)”

Yes, but the article was rather vague as to how this was the case.

- Question: So both FDP and Greens say the other must “reinvent themselves” to share power. How would each have to budge, and what common ground would it be necessary to emphasize?

Oliver:

“How about one party leader having called the other a gloating dimwit?”

Indeed! From what I’ve seen, Westerwelle’s rejection of the SocDems does seem more strident than most of the other (myriad) rejections seen thus far.

I think the Google translation of the Spiegel article sums it best:

‘Schroeder showed with its “deplorable and embarrassing appearance” in the elephant round that he does not have the format for further chancellor shank.’

Tell it like it is, Guido!

Which leads me to another question:

- Is Schroeder’s personality a hindrance to forming a coalition with the FDP (and other parties), or is it more SDP’s current policy/ideology?

Where I come from, somebody that refers to themselves in the third person (i.e. “Gerhard Schroeder will be Germany’s next chancellor!” said Gerhard Schroeder - not an exact quote) would generally be seen as an arrogant jackass, the company of whom should be avoided at all costs. (Bob Dole excluded, for some reason; I think it’s all in the name.)

The irony would be rich, since in popular terms, it was always Schroeder’s slick image that was portrayed as SDP’s biggest asset.

- Finally, any opinions on which coalition (grand, traffic-light, Jamaica) would be the least gridlock-y?

>There is a permanent threat from the left now

I suppose it remains to be seen if they will be able to get so many votes in the west again. I don’t think it’s possible to say that the party system has changed yet. The PDS is still largely an east German phenomenon.

>Why do you think that anybody has an interest in >blinking at all? Schröder is smelling the blood >in the water and the CDU has nothing to lose in >the next round.

Aside from the fact that the parties will not be interested in demonstrating that the German institutions are unable to deal with the current divisions, and that would put the country through an awful lot, listen to all the bollocks being written about “Weimar” already (there, I said it, too), I’m not sure the CDU has nothing to lose in the next round. Look what happened in the last two weeks. I’m not sure they’re willing to risk another election. Not they would fair much worse (the F.D.P. likely would though). Given some time, I’m not sure they will not convince Merkel that stepping down would serve the country (and the state premiers’ interest) best.

I hear all the talk about Jamaica. Yet I have a hard time believing the CDU and the Greens could make this work. Still, I’d like this version from a civil rights point of view.

>So do people want a watered down reform? Or are >there several possible kinds of reform? That what >is called the Northern Model? Ore something else >entirely? Protectionism? I see just questions, no >answers.

While all this is largely a discussion about labels whose content no one really knows anything about, I think it has become apparent that voters are looking for more predictability in reforms. That would have been rather difficult with what would have happened under a Merkel/Westerwelle coalition. I see operational questions, but a fundamental answer.

It is anything but disencumbered. It is in mortal peril from the left. There is a permanent threat from the left now, as the SED is more and more a thing from the past.

I agree, I find Jamaica hard to see. Especially when Joschka Fischer is saying “Can you really see Angela Merkel and Edmund Stoiber [the leader of the CDU's Bavarian sister party, the CSU] sitting round the table in dreadlocks? This is more our style. It’s impossible. I don’t see that.”

I still give slight odds to the traffic light. I think it’s easier to see an SPD disencumbered of its left going in the direction of the FDP and EU Commission on economic reform than it is to see Merkel and Stoiber accepting ’social liberalism’ on the kind of questions that matter to the Greens.

I do think that the FDP and the greens have a big interest in avoiding new elections, and in avoiding a grand coalition. I don’t think either of these outcomes will improve their position.