Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T18:04:42.065Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A Political-Economy Forecast for the 2013 German Elections: Who to Rule with Angela Merkel?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2013

Bruno Jérôme
Affiliation:
University of Paris II, IRGEI-LARGEPA Paris II
Véronique Jérôme-Speziari
Affiliation:
University of Paris Sud XI- LARGEPA Paris II
Michael S. Lewis-Beck
Affiliation:
University of Iowa

Extract

Our political economy model has correctly forecasted the 1998 and 2005 elections. However, in 2002 we predicted a tight race to the benefit of the Christian Democrats(CDU)/Christian Socialists(CSU)-Free Democratic Party (FDP) opposition, so underestimating the narrow defeat of the FDP by the Green Party. In the German political system, proportional representation makes single-party domination almost impossible. On the contrary, the big parties, Social Democratic Party (SPD) or CDU/CSU, are pushed to build a majority coalition. In this competition, the FDP has been the “pivotal party” in German political life, at least until 2002. Since then, the Greens have challenged the FDP, with the Ecologists allowing the SPD to form a red-green coalition in 1998 and in 2002. Similarly, in 2005 the FDP was not associated with the grand coalition driven by Angela Merkel.

Type
Spotlight
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Powell, G., and Whitten, G.. 1993. “A Cross National Analysis of Economic Voting, Taking Account of the Political Context.” American Journal of Political Science 37: 391414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zellner, A. 1962. “An Efficient Method of Estimating Seemingly Unrelated Regression Equations and Tests for Aggregation Bias.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 57: 348–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar