Don't you think it makes more sense to actually discuss the article linked here instead of having a general discussion about party politics and what media allegedly prefers who?
Especially since the article contains opinions that completely align with the commentator who criticised it so harshly.
they beg for return of the debt-brake-fetish party
As stated above: this article criticises the debt brake as "absurd".
I read your comment and I read the article.
Somehow I'm under the impression that you either read a different article or didn't read the article properly.
It even also criticises the debt brake just as you.
Ja, ich glaub das. Das Unionsvolk wurde fanatisch gegen die Grünen aufgepeitscht, als seien die der Teufel in Person, da gibt's nix mit Koalition. Lindner hat seine traurige Partei erfolgreich atomisiert. Da ist auch nix mit Machtoption. Und wer bleibt dann am Ende?
Hat mir zu viel "ich möchte nicht mit anderen Meinungen belastet werden"-Vibes.
Leute, deren Geschäftsmodell es ist, Leute zu ~~nerven und zu verarschen~~ manipulieren und zu steuern?
ftfy
Natürlich will er das. Mit Merz hat er ja auch nach der Wahl eine Zukunft, mit Lindner nicht. Und ob man jetzt schon anfängt mit de facto Großer Koalition oder erst nach der Wahl, macht für ihn gar keinen Unterschied.
Stellwerke der Gegenwart
Hahahahah...
Nein!
Was stoppt Putin die als nächstes anzugreifenn wenn Trump die NATO nicht ernst nimmt?
Wir.
Wenn nicht wir, dann niemand. Das ist die bittere Erkenntnis
Das passt. Leider
*Einfluss Die Wichtigkeit ist bereits kaum mehr messbar. Ein noch laufender toter Mann.
..which is a sentiment almost unanimously spread across Germany. I.e. also including those that align themselves with one of the partaking parties. No party politics (conservative spin?) here. Also, you omitted the part where it stated that such a coalition would in no case be fit to stand up against Trump, which is the point made to justify the opening "long overdue death". Would you disagree with this assessment?
Your cited passage:
Of course the Union had a blast sueing the coalition. But it wasn't who sued them that made it illegal but the constitution. In my world, it shouldn't matter who sues to determine if something is illegal or not.
Well, yes it does! The traffic light coalition wasn't willing/able to overcome the debt brake and exploded due to this issue. So now a new government is needed. I see no party politics here. Could well be a new government with Olaf and others willing to cancel the debt brake.
This is coming entirely from you and is not part of the article in the slightest. As stated several times already, it even makes clear claims against the debt brake.
Exactly. The one being so strongly agitated by this article is you and I really wonder what you read into it that it makes you so angry. This isn't a conservatives vs social democrats text in the slightest but instead makes some general yet interesting points about the state of affairs in Europe given the arising challenges in our future.
A future, mind you, where it is vital for us to stand together against pressures from the outside instead of being completely self-absorbed and losing ourselves in petty disputes. Which is why I find it so strange that you chose to be offended instead of trying to listen to the author.