German Elections & Politics

[Sozialliberal]

I'd also like to point out that the SSW receives donations from the Danish government. In 2013, the party received 458,000 euros worth of donations from the Danish government, which made up more than 70% of the party's total revenue. I think it's totally unacceptable that a party receives donations from a foreign government. I don't care if they are from the Danish government, the Turkish government or any other government in the world.

Source: http://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/hohe-parteispenden-gaben-aus-kopenhagen-1.2427978

[Sozialliberal]

Is CDU-FDP-Green or SPD-FDP-Green at all possible?  If not then it is back to good old Grand Alliance.

Both are possible. The FDP top candidate said that he would prefer a Jamaica coalition (CDU + Greens + FDP).

[Sozialliberal]

The NDR host called it the "Küsten Koalition" (the Coastal Coalition, I presume). What does that exactly refer to? Is that just because Schleswig-Holstein has a lot of coast? Or does the parties in the government do better along the coast?

The name I heard was "Küsten-Ampel" (i.e. coastal streetlights) which refers to the "Ampel" coalition (red SPD, yellow FDP, green Greens), but with the SSW instead of the FDP.
And yes, I think it is just because Schleswig-Holstein has a lot of coast.

This coalition was originally termed as "Dänen-Ampel" ("Dane traffic light"). A traffic-light coalition usually consists of the SPD, the FDP and the Greens because the parties' traditional colours match the colours of a traffic light (red, yellow and green). In a "Dane traffic light", the SSW takes the place of the FDP. However, the term "Dänen-Ampel" was used as a pejorative by the CDU in the 2005 and 2012 state elections, which is why they were accused of running an anti-Danish campaign. So it's understandable that the parties of the "Dane traffic light" wanted to have a more positive-sounding name for their coalition. That's how the terms "Küsten-Ampel" (coastal traffic light) and "Küstenkoalition" (coastal coalition) came into being. These terms most likely refer to the fact that SH is the only German state that borders both the North Sea and the Baltic Sea.

[Sozialliberal]

How the top candidate of each party has commented on coalition options since the announcement of the first projection:

CDU: Prefers a Jamaica coalition (CDU + Greens + FDP), but has also said that he doesn't rule out a grand coalition (CDU + SPD).
SPD: Open towards participation in government in spite of loss of votes.
Greens: Has said that they can probably implement more of their policies in a traffic-light coalition (SPD + Greens + FDP), but open to a Jamaica coalition as well.
FDP: Has said that he can hardly imagine a coalition led by SPD top candidate Albig, spoke in favour of a Jamaica coalition before the election.

[Sozialliberal]

A disastrous result for the SPD in NRW, which is also Martin Schulz's home state.

If Linke falls below 5% a CDU-FDP majority might be viable

Since the FDP ruled out a traffic-light coalition and the Greens ruled out a Jamaica coalition, it's going to be either that or a grand coalition.

[Sozialliberal]

Justice Minister Maas (SPD) wants to crack down on online hate speech

The federal justice minister Heiko Maas (SPD) thinks that social media services (Twitter and Facebook in particular) don't do enough about hate speech. Therefore, he wants to legally oblige those companies to check posts for hate speech within a given time frame if they are reported by other users of the service. In the case of posts that are "obviously" illegal (Holocaust denial and incitement to ethnic hatred are cited as examples), the companies would have 24 hours to delete or block those posts. In more ambiguous cases, they would have 7 days to check whether those posts violate German law or not. If they were found to be illegal, they would have to be deleted or blocked, too. If the companies failed to do so, they would have to pay fines that could be as high as 50 million euros (roughly 56 million U.S. dollars).

Opponents of this planned law have drafted a "Declaration for Freedom of Expression" (English translation available), which has been signed by trade associations, digital rights groups, civil rights organizations and legal experts. CDU/CSU, while also in favour of taking a tough stance on online hate speech, have criticized Maas for trying to pass the law in a hurry shortly before the summer recess of the Bundestag begins. Some CDU/CSU politicians have also criticzed Maas's bill because it would "outsource" a state task to private companies.

Wow, another reason not to vote SPD.

[Sozialliberal]

If CDU/CSU-FDP don't have a majority but CDU/CSU still win the election by a comfortable margin, it has to be a grand coalition again... right? Or is Jamaica really a plausible option?

Let's assume that neither red-red-green nor black-yellow nor black-green had a majority of seats. In that scenario, the respective parties would start negotiating a Jamaica coalition first. My gut feeling tells me that the negotiations wouldn't be successful, though. I believe that a coalition with the CDU/CSU and the FDP at federal level is potentially dangerous for the Greens, even more so than a black-green coalition, because they could lose many voters to Die Linke (watermelon greens) and the SPD (economically moderate SJWs). They could even end up like the FDP in 2013.

I honestly think a minority government would be more likely than a Jamaica coalition, and I don't think the former is very likely at all

While I think that both are unlikely, I'd say that a Jamaica coalition would be more likely than a minority government. Germans don't like minority governments, especially not at federal level. We're too much of play-it-safe types for that.

[Sozialliberal]

If CDU/CSU-FDP don't have a majority but CDU/CSU still win the election by a comfortable margin, it has to be a grand coalition again... right? Or is Jamaica really a plausible option?

Let's assume that neither red-red-green nor black-yellow nor black-green had a majority of seats. In that scenario, the respective parties would start negotiating a Jamaica coalition first. My gut feeling tells me that the negotiations wouldn't be successful, though. I believe that a coalition with the CDU/CSU and the FDP at federal level is potentially dangerous for the Greens, even more so than a black-green coalition, because they could lose many voters to Die Linke (watermelon greens) and the SPD (economically moderate SJWs). They could even end up like the FDP in 2013.

I honestly think a minority government would be more likely than a Jamaica coalition, and I don't think the former is very likely at all

While I think that both are unlikely, I'd say that a Jamaica coalition would be more likely than a minority government. Germans don't like minority governments, especially not at federal level. We're too much of play-it-safe types for that.

What about a traffic light coalition? (SPD+Greens+FDP). Assuming the numbers add up of course, which I guess is not likely at all.

Right, I totally forgot about that one. A traffic-light coalition is a possibility, but even less likely than a Jamaica coalition in my opinion.

The FDP has made it clear that Martin Schulz would have to clearly position himself as a third-wayist to make a traffic-light coalition happen. Officially, the federal FDP chairman Lindner says something like: "The FDP has changed so much since 2013! We're so independent now, we can even form coalitions with the SPD, too!" But it's not hard to tell that Lindner doesn't really want a traffic-light coalition. While he criticizes both Schulz and Merkel, he's much more critical of Schulz. Whenever Schulz says something that contradicts the FDP's turbo-capitalist agenda, Lindner goes: "Bad Schulz! Stop that!"

That's Schulz's dilemma. He could say that he's aiming at a red-red-green coalition, positioning himself as an old-school social democrat; or he could say that he's aiming at a traffic-light coalition, positioning himself as a third-wayist. Schulz, however, has not publicly expressed any preference for either coalition. Schulz's fear of taking a side, and maybe putting off voters from the other side as a result, is why most voters are not sure what he really stands for. They don't know in what direction he wants to take the country.

[Sozialliberal]

Survey on foreign policy (June 2017)

I think this is quite an interesting survey.


Statements on international policy

Question: I'm now going to read out a few statements regarding international cooperation. Please tell me if you tend to agree or tend to disagree with this statement.

"The states of the European Union should cooperate more closely on defence matters."
93% tend to agree
5% tend to disagree

"When the United States withdraws from global politics, the European Union should jointly take more responsibility at a global level."
80% tend to agree
17% tend to disagree

"Germany should aim at less cooperation at EU level and should act more independently at an international level."
31% tend to agree
65% tend to disagree


Trustworthy partners of Germany

The trustworthiness rating of the United States has plummeted under Donald Trump's presidency. The share of people who said that the U.S. can be trusted went down from 59% in November 2016 to 21% in June 2017, which is the same rating that Russia got.

Question: I'm going to mention a few countries. Please tell me if the respective country can be trusted as a partner for Germany or not.

France:
94% said "can be trusted"
4% said "cannot be trusted"

United Kingdom:
60% said "can be trusted"
35% said "cannot be trusted"

China:
36% said "can be trusted"
53% said "cannot be trusted"

Russia:
21% said "can be trusted"
74% said "cannot be trusted"

United States:
21% said "can be trusted"
74% said "cannot be trusted"

Turkey:
3% said "can be trusted"
95% said "cannot be trusted"


Satisfaction with international top politicians

Question: And the next topic is your opinion on a few top politicians. What about ...? Would you say that you are very satisfied, satisfied, less satisfied or not satisfied at all with his/her political work?

Emmanuel Macron:
59% responded with "very satisfied" or "satisfied"
9% responded with "less satisfied" or "not satisfied at all"

Theresa May:
22% responded with "very satisfied" or "satisfied"
59% responded with "less satisfied" or "not satisfied at all"

Donald Trump:
5% responded with "very satisfied" or "satisfied"
92% responded with "less satisfied" or "not satisfied at all"


International commitment of Germany

Question: Currently, it is debated whether the Federal Republic of Germany should commit itself more strongly when international crises arise. Do you think a stronger commitment of Germany in the case of international crises is fundamentally right or fundamentally not right?

62% said it is "fundamentally right"
33% said it is "fundamentally not right"


U.S. withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement

Question: The United States has decided to withdraw from the international Paris climate protection agreement. The federal government, on the other hand, has decided to remain committed to the agreement. The goal of the agreement is to reduce global warming to less than two degrees in comparison with pre-industrial times. In your opinion, is it good or not good that the federal government remains committed to the agreement?

93% think it is "good" that the federal government remains committed to the climate protection agreement
6% think it is "not good" that the federal government remains committed to the climate protection agreement


German-Turkish relations: Chances of improvement

Question: Because of considerable differences of opinion between Turkey and Germany, the federal government has decided to withdraw the Federal Armed Forces from the military base in Incirlik, Turkey. In your opinion, what are the chances that the German-Turkish relations will improve again in the next years?

1% said that the chances are "very high"
10% said that the chances are "high"
57% said that the chances are "low"
30 % said that the chances are "very low"


Information on the survey

Survey method: telephone interviews (CATI)
Sample size: 1,000
Survey period: 6th to 7th June 2017
Margin of error: 1.4 to 3.1 percentage points
Polling agency: infratest dimap
Full report: https://www.infratest-dimap.de/fileadmin/user_upload/dt1706_bericht.pdf

[Sozialliberal]

Why is the FDP doing so much better in the polls? It surprises me that some say they could come ahead of Die Linke and AfD

My guess would be that the increase has come from CDU/CSU-FDP swing voters who would prefer a black-yellow coalition and who, after seeing the remarkable state election results in SH and NRW, are quite sure now that the FDP has a good chance of re-entering the Bundestag this year.


Die Linke: Manifesto for the 2017 Bundestag election

So I'd like to inform you on the key points of Die Linke's 2017 election manifesto.

Note: Most of the following information is simplified because I don't want to bore or confuse you with the gazillion exceptions for every rule that the German law has to offer.

Income tax:
* The first 12,600 euros of a person's yearly income would be tax-free.
* Starting from 70,000 euros, the tax rate would be 53%.
* Starting from 260,000 euros, the tax rate would be 60%.
* Starting from 1,000,000 euros, the tax rate would be 75%.
The status quo: The first 8,820 euros are tax-free. The highest tax rate is 45%, which has to be paid on a yearly income from 256,304 euros up.

* Introducing a 5% tax on a person's private property if it is worth 1,000,000 euros or more.

Labour market:
* Raising the gross minimum wage to 12 euros per hour.
* People who work via temporary employment agencies would have to be paid 10% more than permanent staff.
The status quo: The gross minimum wage is currently 8.84 euros per hour.

Retirement:
* Lowering the retirement age to 65 years.
* Introducing a minimum retirement pension of 1,050 euros per month.
* Raising the pension level to 53% (i.e. the ratio of the standard retirement pension to the average payment of the gainfully employed population in a given year).
The status quo: People who were born in 1967 or later can retire at 67 years of age. The pension level is at 48%. There is no minimum retirement pension, which means that people have to claim benefits if their pension is not high enough to get by.

Welfare:
* Complete abolishment of Hartz IV.
* Abolishing benefit cuts for unemployed people who reject a job offer, or miss an appointment without an excuse.
* Raising the minimum unemployment benefit to 1,050 euros per month.
The status quo: The standard Alg II rate is 409 euros per month. Alg II is a type of unemployment benefit for people who have been unemployed for longer than 12 months or who have paid into the state unemployment insurance for less than 12 months within the past 24 months.

Foreign policy:
* No combat missions of the Federal Armed Forces in foreign countries.
* Basically, the same crackpot policies they've always had.
See:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=180300.msg5153751#msg5153751
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=180300.msg4803748#msg4803748

* Oh, and they want to abolish all German secret services, too ...

[Sozialliberal]

I doubt Merkel will seek a grand coalition again. It looks like she might go for a Jamaica Coalition

I think she'll only need the Greens.

But doesn't she prefer FDP?

Only officially. Merkel has never been a conservative. She only became a member of the CDU because Kohl was at the helm during Reunification.
Her political views bear much more resemblance to the Greens than to the FDP.

Huh ok that makes sense, but wouldn't the more conservative elements of the CDU/CSU want her to go with the FDP?

Of course. But she will be lucky and happy if a black-yellow coalition doesn't get enough votes. Furthermore there has been a strong black-green movement for over twenty years call "pizza connection" making the case for a black-green coalition. It's named after a meeting of various CDU and Green politicians, including Hermann Gröhe, Armin Laschet, Peter Altmaier, Ronald Pofalla, Julia Klöckner, Kristina Köhler, and on part of the Greens Katrin Göring-Eckardt, Cem Özdemir, Volker Beck, in the Italian restaurant Sassella in Bonn in 1995.

Pofalla and Altmaier later become Merkel's Head of the Federal Chancellery and the former was also her party's Secretary General. I think that says a lot about Merkel.

Ok thanks

It will be interesting to see what happens after this election

I think black-yellow (CDU/CSU + FDP) is much more likely than black-green (CDU/CSU + Greens) now. The refugee crisis is not over yet and there's a state election in Bavaria next year. Forming a coalition with the Greens at federal level would be toxic for the CSU. Merkel, while probably preferring black-green to black-yellow secretly, is likely to go for black-yellow for tactical reasons. I think she knows that the CDU could lose too many votes to the AfD and the FDP in the next election if she prefers black-green to black-yellow.

[Sozialliberal]

So why exactly has Schulz and the SPD crashed?

Cause the SPD has been a 22-25% party for close to a decade now.

Why, exactly? is it just that they've only been able to have limited appeal, even though they seem to be the standard center-left party that most European nations have?

The introduction of Hartz IV and the rise of the Left Party, both of which happened around the same time. Also, Angel Merkel governing as a sort of social-democratish Christian Democrat.

The SPD has been suffering from increased competition.

Let's go back to the 1970s, when the SPD was at the height of its success. Bundestag election results above 40% were the norm for the SPD back then. That started to change when environmentalism became more important to many voters, and the Greens subsequently emerged. However, the most painful loss for the SPD happened in the 2000s when Die Linke became an established force in German politics. An important reason for that, as Old Europe has pointed out, were the Hartz reforms of the then red-green government. Those welfare cuts estranged many SPD core voters from the party. It lost its credibility as a party that helps the poor. Now the AfD is quite successful in elections. Only time will tell if they will become an established force like Die Linke or fade away like Die Republikaner in the 1990s. There are former SPD voters who indeed vote for this nationalist, isolationist party because they fear the increased competition from immigrants on the job market and also out of a sense of welfare chauvinism.

If you take the aggregate poll data you get this breakdown of seats:



Black-yellow are 12 seats short of a majority, a leftist coalition would need 55 additional seats. And remember when red-green was a thing? They're a remarkable 118 seats short of a governing majority.

Would this probably lead to a Jamaica coalition, with a majority of forty?

Let's assume this would be the actual election result. Likeliest scenario in my opinion:
Step 1: The negotiations for a Jamaica coalition would start. Personally, I think they'll probably fail. Firstly, I can't see the CSU and the Greens agreeing on immigration/asylum. Secondly, this coalition would be a nightmare for the left wing of the Greens.
Step 2: If the negotiations for a Jamaica coalition fail, there's the possibility that, out of a sense of "moral obligation", the (masochist) SPD would grudgingly agree to being Ms Merkel's junior partner for another four years.

I think it's very unlikely that a minority government is formed at federal level. Generally speaking, Germans are not risk takers. I think even a new election would be more likely if a majority government can't be formed.

[Sozialliberal]

The SPD really needs to revise its strategy after this election because it obviously isn't a winning strategy. The FDP, as much as I dislike its current incarnation, did that after they dropped out in 2013 and they're now back on track. They actually didn't change all that much: More focus on digital policy and education, being more hipsterish in communicating their message. It worked for them. However, the SPD can't simply copy that. They have to find their own way. Preferably, they'll do that while they're in opposition. Because when they're busy with governing, they have less time to reform their own party.

[Sozialliberal]

Schulz's future after this election

Martin Schulz was asked about his future after this election in the TV programme "Frag selbst" on 27th August 2017.

In case you don't win the chancellorship, will you enter the Bundestag or will you return to Brussels; or will you even switch to the private sector?

Martin Schulz: I stand as a candidate for the German Bundestag. Of course, I will accept my mandate in the Bundestag. And to make it clear, I'll remain the federal chairman of the SPD, too. I will lead my party beyond election day in any case.

No matter what the [Bundestag election] result will look like?

Martin Schulz: Well, I was elected [as SPD chairman] with 100% of the vote at the party conference in March. We'll have a regular party conference in December, and of course, I'll stand for election there again.

Isn't it a bit self-evident that a party that has been in coalitions with the government for the majority of this past decade, and is going into the election as one, isn't going to convincingly argue they're the vehicle for change? That consensus seemed to be best shown within the debates, where there was mockery on how often the two leaders agreed.

I welcome Schulz's support for a Red-Green government, and his focus within the campaign, but I think until the SPD are out of government they will not be able to land the punches and channel the public disquiet and are left languishing.

It is a shame it's going to AFD, but not in the least bit surprising.

Since red-green is very far away from a majority, I assume you meant red-red-green. Well, Schulz only said that he doesn't rule out this coalition under certain conditions. I wouldn't really call that support.

True, the recent grand coalitions are additional baggage for the SPD. But do you remember when the SPD's poll figures suddenly surged after Schulz entered the stage of German politics? So there were apparently many people who did see a "vehicle for change" in the SPD at that time.

[Sozialliberal]

So traffic light?

It currently looks like it's going to be either a traffic-light coalition (SPD + Greens + FDP) or a Jamaica coalition (CDU + Greens + FDP). However, the final results can still be a little different: For example, Red-Green (SPD + Greens) could still receive a narrow majority of seats or Die Linke could enter the state parliament, but that's rather unlikely.

[Sozialliberal]

According to the latest projection, the SPD and the Greens (the incumbent government) have a narrow majority now!

What about a Grand Coalition with the SPD supplier the premier?

I suppose that mathematically you could get a "Jamaica coalition" but given how the election is seen as a such a big rebuke to the CDU/FDP and Greens in the wake of a likely Jamaica coalition federally, i wonder if that combo would be seen as a bit of a "coalition of losers" 

A grand coalition is possible, but it would be the least popular option. It has already been said that a Jamaica coalition would be a "coalition of losers". However, the most important part about forming a government coalition is that the respective parties can work well with one another. The FDP top candidate Stefan Birkner has already ruled out a traffic-light coalition. He said: "We don't see a possibility to implement our policies in a traffic-light coalition. We Free Democrats won't take part in a traffic-light coalition." If the FDP formed a traffic-light coalition now, it would make Birkner look like a flip-flopper.

[Sozialliberal]

So what government will be formed? If the FDP absolutely refuses to join and "traffic light" coalition and the Greens absolutely refuse to join a "Jamaica" coalition and no one wants a "grand coalition" - what happens?

The SPD would prefer a traffic-light coalition to a grand coalition. The SPD state party's general secretary Detlef Tanke said they at least want to talk to the FDP to find out if they can find common ground for a coalition despite the FDP's scepticism. If that fails, it will probably be a grand coalition.

Another option that has been mentioned in the media is an SPD + Greens minority government. While a minority government has never been tried out at federal level in Germany, there were several at state level, e.g. North Rhine-Westphalia 2010–2012, Saxony-Anhalt 1994–2002 or Lower Saxony 1976–1977.

It looks like the Red-Green fell just shy of a majority.  Interestingly enough unlike recent German elections it looks like more people voted for parties on the left than right.  I also noticed using constituencies only SPD got a majority so has anyone in Germany ever raised the idea of switching to first past the post or Alternative vote (AV or known as ranked ballots) as both produce majorities and stabilities or is it most European countries so entrenched the idea whatever percentage of votes a party gets they should get that many seats and the idea of deviating from them just doesn't fly with voters even if less stability.

CDU/CSU actually wanted to introduce an FPTP voting system when they were in a grand-coalition government in the late 1960s. The FDP, which was the only opposition party in the Bundestag at the time, strongly objected to that idea because it would have lost most of its political influence. The SPD was initially supportive of FPTP, but they abandoned the plan when the FDP offered to be their coalition partner.

[Sozialliberal]

Lower Saxony: CDU woos Greens and wants Jamaica coalition

As the Lower Saxon SPD is trying to win over the sceptical FDP for a traffic-light coalition, the Lower Saxon CDU is attempting to persuade the sceptical Greens into a Jamaica coalition.

The CDU's rejection of the Green agriculture minister Meyer was considered one major obstacle to a Jamaica coalition in Lower Saxony. In the television debate with the incumbent state premier Weil (SPD), his challenger, the CDU top candidate Althusmann said:

"The Green agriculture minister Meyer would not be agriculture minister any more in a CDU-led government."

However, in a recent interview with the newspaper "Hannoversche Allgemeine", Althusmann no longer insisted on Meyer's dismissal and adopted a more conciliatory tone:

Hannoversche Allgemeine: "Do you still rule out Christian Meyer as agriculture minister?"

Bernd Althusmann: "I'd feel much more comfortable regarding Lower Saxony, a state characterized by agriculture, if there would be a change of course in this policy area. However, I will not make a recommendation in the current situation. It's not that Mr Meyer did everything wrong on matters of consumer protection or animal welfare. I believe there were verbal excesses on both sides that created deep rifts between the CDU and the Greens, but eventually, that doesn't mean we don't have common positions on consumer or nature protection. Ultimately, it's important to me that our farmers receive more recognition. The CDU is very open to a rationality-oriented agriculture. Regarding this, Mr Meyer, too, might reconsider if the strong polarization in the past years was necessary."

[Sozialliberal]

The most interesting deputy election will result from Albrecht Glaser's nomination. The AfD politician is said to be staunchly Islamophobic, which is likely to lead to his defeat. He used to be a CDU member from 1970 till 2012. From 1997 till 2010, he was the city treasurer of Frankfurt am Main.

Glaser will of course repeatedly lose and the AfD will of course cry havoc and lament how totally unfairly they* are treated by the other parties.

* (and only they, because prior to the foundation of the AfD injustice and unfairness didn't exist at all in Germany... the AfD was basically founded with the express purpose of introducing someone who's treated unfairly. That the Greens didn't have a vice president of their own for the first eleven years they sat in parliament didn't actually happen. That the PDS didn't have a vice president for the first eight years they sat in parliament didn't actually happen. That Left Party vice presidential candidate Lothar Bisky didn't manage to get elected in 2005 and that the Left Party's vice presidential post then remained vacant for half a year until Petra Pau was elected for the Left Party in his place didn't actually happen.)

To be fair AfD got 12.6%. That's higher than any result the Greens or Linke/PDS ever got. In fact it is the third best result for a third party ever, only behind FDP's 14.9% in 2009 and FDP's 12.9% in 1961.

I think that getting 12.6% of the vote, higher than any other party except the big 2 and the 3rd best result for a third party entitles them to get a vicepresident of their own, and one that the AfD itself likes.

Also, I heard that the initial speech was not given by the oldest parlamentarian (which would have been an AfD one) but by the one with most seniority?

That's terrible. The German Bundestag shouldn't change its rules to marginalize the AfD. It should be treated like any other party.

In this office, Glaser would not speak for the AfD, he would speak for the whole of the Bundestag.

There is substantial doubt whether Glaser's views are compatible with our constitution, namely the part about religious freedom.

On 18th April 2017, Glaser made a speech at an AfD party convention, in which he said:
"Islam itself is a construct that does not recognize or respect religious freedom. Where it is in charge, it nips religious freedom in the bud. If you treat a fundamental right like that, the fundamental right should be removed from you."

Islam is a controversial religion, and I agree that many of its proponents hold despicable views, but I still understand why someone like Glaser would be unsuitable for this office.

Nahles, the chairwoman of the SPD parliamentary group, said she had written a letter to Glaser before the constituiting session, in which she had urged Glaser to take a stand on his controversial remarks. However,  Glaser did not reply, according to Nahles.  

If the AfD are unable to put up a candidate that is trusted by the majority of Bundestag members, they'll have to go without this office. It's as simple as that.
-------------------------------
Personally, I think it makes more sense that the initial speech is delivered by the parlamentarian with the most political experience. It should have always been like that.

[Sozialliberal]

The negotiators have still a long way to go. Nobody knows if there will be a Jamaica coalition at this point. It's expected that there won't be a new government before Christmas. By saing that the SPD won't be available for the continuation of the grand coalition even if the "Jamaica" negotiations fail, Schulz put a lot of pressure on the "Jamaica" parties.

The newspaper "Die Zeit" nicely summarized all areas of disagreement between the negotiating parties:
http://www.zeit.de/politik/deutschland/2017-10/sondierungsgespraeche-cdu-csu-fdp-die-gruenen-jamaika-koalition

I translated (and partly shortened) the descriptions of the policy areas where the disagreement is strongest.

Immigration
The CDU and the CSU have agreed on a guide value of not more than 200,000 refugees and asylum seekers at most per year. It certainly will be important to them that this number and the words "limited" and "controlled" will be contained in the coalition agreement. Family reunifications are already included in the number. However, according to CDU/CSU, this restriction applies only to refugees who were granted asylum on an individual basis (e.g. because they're politically persecuted in their home countries) and not to those who fled from war. The Greens, on the other hand, want to provide unbureaucratic possibilities for the former mentioned group's family members to come with them or join them later. The FDP wants to introduce quotas based on humanitarian and economic criteria.

Collectivization of Debt in the Eurozone
The FDP platform says: "We oppose the European financial equalization by means of a eurozone budget and the collectivization of the banks' deposit protection." As an alternative, the FDP calls for an independent institution that supervises compliance with the rules of the monetary union, an insolvency regulation for eurozone states, and the right to leave the eurozone (which implies dropping the euro as currency) without losing EU membership. Lindner (the FDP chairman) said that Greece would have to leave the eurozone in case of debt relief.

CDU/CSU want to stabilize the eurozone and develop it further in co-operation with the French government. They proposed the creation of a European monetary fund (i.e. like the IMF, only on a European scale, in case the IMF refuses to provide financial aid for an insolvent eurozone state), but they also emphasize that all EU members have to follow the common rules. In addition, they rule out the collectivization of debt in the eurozone.

The Greens want to transform the European rescue mechanisms into a European monetary fund and put it under the control of the European Parliament. However, the FDP is sceptical about the creation of a European monetary fund. Generally speaking, the Greens and the CDU tend to be in favour of spending more money on Europe, while the FDP and the CSU tend to be in favour of spending less.

EU Finance Minister
Chancellor Merkel implied that she, similarly to the French president Macron, can imagine giving more powers to the EU. For example, an EU finance minister with an own budget. She also said that it must be clarified what exactly the responsibilities of such a minister would be. However, the FDP is strongly opposed to an EU reform that would give the EU more rights to intervene in the individual member states. The Greens are very much in favour of extending EU powers.

Coal-Fired Power Plants
The Greens want to shut down the dirtiest coal-fired power plants in Germany until 2020. CDU/CSU and the FDP, on the other hand, oppose a government ban on specific energy sources. They prefer a market solution instead. A carbon tax, which would make most coal-based electricity unprofitable, could be a compromise.

Military Expenditure
CDU/CSU declared their support for the NATO goal to gradually raise military spending to 2% of Germany's GDP until 2024. The Greens say that it would be more sensible to invest money in the ecological modernization and the digital future of the European continent instead of spending up to 30 billion euros on defence. The FDP's position is vague.

[Sozialliberal]

Any news on what government is to be formed in Lower Saxony?

Summary:
The SPD is for a traffic-light coalition (SPD + Greens + FDP), but the FDP said no.
The CDU would prefer a Jamaica coalition (CDU + Greens + FDP), but the Greens rejected it.
Neither of them have apparently the guts for a minority government.
So the only remaining option is a grand coalition (SPD + CDU), on which they're currently negotiating. Especially the SPD isn't happy with the prospect of a grand coalition, though.

[Sozialliberal]

Yeah, I agree. On hindsight, I think that SPD and CDU both made a huge mistake in the 2013 election. There, either red-red-green or CDU-Greens should have been the government coalition.

To be fair, the CDU shouldn't be blamed for the 2013 grand coalition. Merkel said that the CDU would have been ready for a black-green coalition already in 2013. The problem was that the Greens had quite a left-wing tax plan back then, and therefore, they thought they couldn't enter coalition talks with the CDU/CSU without having to drop too much of their platform. Also in 2013, The Greens, along with the SPD, ruled out a coalition with Die Linke, which I always thought was a stupid move (having a left-wing tax plan and ruling out a coalition with Die Linke at the same time). They didn't make the same mistakes again in this election.

How come no one ever discusses a "Grand Coalition PLUS" arrangement of CDU and SPD and Greens? (not sure what the nickname for that would be)

Why would the Greens do that in the current situation in Lower Saxony? A coalition makes sense only when each of the coalition parties can put some pressure on the other ones to get proposals through that are important to the respective party. The Greens don't have any leverage against the CDU and the SPD in coalition negotiations if the two latter parties have a majority of seats and can therefore govern without the Greens' support.

How come no one ever discusses a "Grand Coalition PLUS" arrangement of CDU and SPD and Greens? (not sure what the nickname for that would be)

Kenya?

CSU would be on their back heels against such move

Yes, it has been called Kenya coalition or even Afghanistan coalition in the media. German journalists have that flag fetish.

[Sozialliberal]

Jamaica coalition talks at federal level drag on
Actually, the first phase of the coalition talks, known as "exploratory talks", should have ended on Thursday. In the first phase, the parties talk with one another to find out if there is enough common ground for a coalition. In the second and final phase, they negotiate on concrete government measures that they plan to implement in the next four years. Kubicki, the number two in the FDP after Lindner, said that the exploratory talks will definitely end on 19th November at 6 p.m. However, the CSU chairman Seehofer contradicted him, saying this deadline can't be met because the parties still need to discuss many issues. The CDU is still mostly optimistic that an agreement between the negotiating parties can be reached, but the FDP, the Greens and the CSU are more sceptical. The SPD chairman Schulz said his party won't continue the grand coalition in any case, even if the Jamaica negotiations fail. No major politician has publicly considered a minority government until now. There has been some speculation about a new election, though nobody can tell if the results of a new election would make forming a government any easier.

Lower Saxony: SPD and CDU agree on coalition
In Lower Saxony, the SPD and the CDU informed the public on Thursday that they agreed on a grand coalition. The incumbent state premier Weil (SPD) will remain in office. He expressed his satisfaction with the coalition agreement, saying: "The coalition agreement shows the hand of the SPD in substantial parts."  and "A major change in policy will not happen. There won't be a setback in refugee or education policy." The coalition agreement was approved by a large majority of the delegates at an SPD state party conference on Saturday. The CDU state party will hold a conference on Monday, where the coalition agreement is expected to receive a large majority of the delegate vote, too. Bernd Althusmann, who was the CDU's top candidate in the election, will take office as economics minister.

I'd support a massive SPD-FDP-Left-Green coalition if it was feasible.

Yeah, that'll never happen.

Out of the parties represented in the Bundestag, the FDP is the most right-wing on economics and The Left is (surprise, surprise) the most left-wing. The FDP is for lower government spending, privatization, tax cuts for high earners, economic deregulation; while The Left is the exact opposite. So it's clearly not feasible.

I have referred to a CDU-FDP black/yellow government as the "Bumblebee coalition" but that doesnt seem to have caught on with anyone else :-(

A funny nickname I heard for the black-yellow coalition back in 2009 was "Tigerentenkoalition", named after a famous toy from a children's book:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janosch#Tigerente

[Sozialliberal]

The 6 p.m. deadline could not be met. The parties are still negotiating. The talks might go on late into the night. The negotiators now hope to make a decision today, but no one is sure if that's possible. An option that has been mentioned is interrupting the negotiations so that each party can reflect on the previous talks and resuming the Jamaica talks in two weeks. Everything is open so far.

[Sozialliberal]

I think the CDU should oust Merkel. It's obvious that her handling of the refugge/immigration crisis alienated many former CDU/CSU voters. If she were the CDU top candidate in a new election, the results would probably be not much different. Without Merkel, CDU/CSU would have a good chance to win back enough former voters from the AfD to form a black-yellow (CDU/CSU + FDP) majority government. From the CDU's perspective, I think Jens Spahn could be a succesful top candidate in a new election. Other people that have been named as potential Merkel successors are Carsten Linnemann (chairman of the pro-business sub-organization MIT, which is traditionally the most influential sub-organization within CDU/CSU) and Wolfgang Schäuble (if you want someone with a lot of political experience).

Seehofer's position in the CSU is very shaky. Potential successors are Markus Söder and Ilse Aigner.

Is Merkel's position really in danger? I don't see anyone who could replace her (my boy Jens SPAHN probably isn't experienced enough ) and I also don't see the SPD winning enough votes to form a coalition themselves.

If someone like Trump can be President of the United States, Spahn is almost overqualified to be Chancellor of Germany.

The FDP are such wussies. If it comes to snap elections I really hope they get kicked out off the Bundestag again. 👿

Like any other party, the FDP are free to decide if they want to enter government or not. This is not the National Front of the DDR.

Wuh oh. New elections?

Probably a CDU/SPD grand coalition or a CDU Minority.

That would be by far the most foolish thing the SPD could do right now. The continuation of the grand coalition would hurt our democracy. If that's what the voters wanted, all three parties involved wouldn't have lost votes massively. With a perpetual grand coalition and a growing right-wing populist party as the largest opposition force, Germany would turn into Austria politically.