The 30 percent limit: Why the Union hardly benefits from the traffic light weakness

At first glance, these are figures that the CDU can be satisfied with: the party has been stable at around 30 percent for months – and thus far ahead of all other parties. At second glance, however, a problem for the Union is hidden behind it. Because “stable” also means that it hardly ever gets over the 30 percent mark. And that despite increasing dissatisfaction with the traffic light.

At the weekend, the general secretary of the CDU in Schleswig-Holstein, Lukas Kilian, expressed relatively clear self-criticism in the Tagesspiegel: “The CDU obviously does not manage that the citizens see it as a constructive alternative to the traffic light coalition,” he said. Instead, another party benefits from the dissatisfaction in the country: the AfD.

CDU leader Friedrich Merz himself asked in his newsletter at the weekend why the Union in the opposition was not benefiting from the “diffuse malaise” in the country. His explanation: You will be held jointly responsible for the state of the country. “The mantra of the traffic light, that it finally has to clean up what has been left there for 16 years, catches on with many voters,” wrote Merz.

The problems also lie with the Union itself

This argument locates the reason for the CDU problem with the traffic light. But the reasons are likely – at least in part – to lie with the party itself.

Merz as a person

Friedrich Merz has fans – no question about it. His relatively clear language, his conservative image – the hard core of the CDU voters are well received. However, the question is: Can he also mobilize beyond that? Only 20 percent would vote for Merz in a direct chancellor election, according to an Insa poll for “Bild am Sonntag”. He is visibly behind the Chancellor, who is at 25 percent. And also behind the poll numbers of his own party. In the former Merkel wing of the party, they believe that Merz does not come across as likeable enough.

Shrill tones

The Union recognized early on that the planned heating law contained major social explosives. She was working on a campaign with the hashtag #fairheizen, with which she wanted to take a stand against the law. However, the shrill tones from the Union are particularly suitable for remembering – such as the accusation that the traffic lights set up an “energy Stasi” or wanted to engage in “heating espionage”.

Very few voters could probably answer which alternatives the CDU would offer to the heating law. The party is in favor of letting the market regulate itself. The resulting rising CO₂ prices would mean hardship for consumers.

program

The fact that the CDU also lost the last election because it was not clear what it stood for – that is the consensus inside and outside the party. Now she is working on a new policy. While there are still influential Christian Democrats who do not consider it necessary to define too much content, program director Carsten Linnemann wants to develop demands that are as specific as possible and stick in one’s mind.

He also announced that he wanted to conduct an “honest” campaign. What sounds honorable sometimes also leads to CDU politicians making headlines with rather unpopular demands. For example, CDU parliamentary group leader Jens Spahn recently called for the immediate abolition of pensions at 63. Other ideas – such as compulsory work for people on welfare – trickle out of the working groups of the program commission rather than being communicated aggressively.

migration

After Friedrich Merz spoke of “little pashas” in relation to the sons of migrants, there was great excitement within the party. The topic was also discussed controversially in the parliamentary group. In a vote on the traffic light’s so-called Opportunity Residence Act, there were 20 dissenters within the Union. Several discussions on the topic of migration followed. In the end, a paper was passed and the dispute was buried. They agreed on the catchphrase: “Humanity and order”.

The Union was then even able to score with a municipal summit with mayors from all over Germany on the problems with the influx of refugees. But it is still unclear where the Union wants to go on the subject. While NRW Prime Minister Hendrik Wüst is more liberal on the subject, Spahn and Saxony’s Prime Minister Michael Kretschmer brought a change in asylum law into play. This may also be a reason why the Union has not yet benefited from the migration problems.

culture clash

The Union thinks it is in a culture war – against gender and politically correct language. CSU boss Markus Söder railed against the “Woke madness”. Hendrik Wüst or Schleswig-Holstein’s Prime Minister Daniel Günther are deliberately not getting on board.

The political scientist Marcel Lewandowsky recently explained in an interview with the Tagesspiegel that the Kulturkampf rhetoric seems to be “an attempt to make the Union more attractive to right-wing voters.” He is skeptical that this can work. “You produce a threat scenario and blow the same horn as the AfD. That can backfire,” said Lewandowsky.

Whether the Kulturkampf rhetoric of the Union now benefits or harms cannot yet be answered conclusively. In any case, Friedrich Merz has decided not to leave the topic to the AfD. “With every gendered news program, a few hundred more votes go to the AfD,” wrote Merz in his newsletter.