1. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE1 Evaluation of parties and coalitions with regard to party manifestos Andranik Tangian Hans-Böckler Foundation D-40476 Düsseldorf University of Karlsruhe D-76128 andranik-tangian@boeckler.de

2. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE2 Agenda 1 Introduction 2 Model for elections 2005 3 Evaluation of parties 4 Evaluation of coalitions 5 Summary 6Extension of the model to elections 2009 7Mathematical annex

3. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE3 1.1Introduction: Bundestagswahl 2005 % Votes SPD (social democrats)34.2 CDU/CSU (conservators)35.2 Green (ecologists)8.1 FDP (neoliberals)9.8 Left-Party (left social democrats & communists) 8.7 19 minor parties4.0

4. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE4 1.2Introduction: Data (2005 on party manifestos) Opinions of parties and unionsWeighting SPDCDUGreenFDPLeft- Party UnionsExpertGoogle Relax the protection against dismissals NoYesNoYesNo 525300 Sector-dependent minimal wages YesNoYesNo Yes4367 Statutory minimal wage YesNoYesNoYes 332500 Combined wagesNoYesNo 354000

5. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE5 1.3Introduction: Methodology Data like for the Wahl-O-Mat representation of programs by Yes/No answers Task is different Wahl-O-Mat: fit single voters to parties Our model: fit parties to the electorate Method: indicators of popularity and universality Goal of the paper to evaluateve leading parties and coalitions

6. 2.1Model: Representativeness

7. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE7 2.2Model: Indicators Popularity: % of the electorate represented, averaged on 95 questions l spatial aspect of representativeness Universality: frequency of representing a majority l temporal aspect of representativeness

8. 3.1Evaluation of parties: Indices

9. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE9 3.4Evaluation of parties: Implications SPD is the most popular and universal party l in spite of shortage of votes High representativeness of trade unions l no interrogation of public opinion Weighting plays a negligible role l henceforth, only unweighted indicators are considered

10. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE10 4.1Evaluation of coalitions: Definitions Unanimity of a coalition is the weight of questions with unanimous opinions of coalition members Proportionality of impact to weight l on non-unanimous questions, the impact of coalition fractions (probability that the opinion is decisive) is proportional to their size l total uncertainty (equal chances of alternative opinions) l both factors are considered with weights p and (1 - p), 0 ≤ p ≤ 1

11. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE11 4.2Evaluation of coalitions: Definitions (continued) Popularity of coalition is its expected representativeness Universality of a coalition is ist expected rounded representativeness Accuracy of prediction of the indicators is the standard deviation of representativeness and of rounded representativeness

12. 4.3Evaluation of coalitions: Indices

13. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE13 4.4Evaluation of coalitions: Principal component analysis Principal components First axis Second axis Third axis Popularity0.0568-0.2327-0.9709 Universality0.2677-0.93330.2394 Unanimity0.96180.2735-0.0093 Std deviation of w.r.t. axes 24.94178.31663.3827

14. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE14 4.5Evaluation of coalitions: Implications Coalition SPD/CDU (now in power) has high popularity but low unanimity and mediocre universality Coalition SPD/Green/Left-Party (much discussed but not realized) has higher unanimity, lower popularity but much higher universality

15. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE15 4.6Evaluation of coalitions: Implications (continued) Coalition CDU/FDP (held before the elections) has a higher unanimity but low indices of popularity and universality Coalition SPD/Green/Left-Party (failed due to personal conicts between party leaders) might be the best alternative

16. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE16 5Summary The indices of popularity and universality are derived from votes and party manifestos for parties, their coalitions, and trade unions The SPD was the most representative party, although it was not the election winner A better alternative to the actual coalition CDU/SPD: SPD/ Green/Left-Party Simple computing algorithms

17. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE17 6.1Remake for elections 2009 (Matthias Hölzlein)

18. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE18 The SPD is the most popular party (65%) FDP the is most universal The CDU/CSU as the strongest party in parliament has only mediocre indicators Contradiction to the shares of votes received: Electors, seem to pay more attention to the traditional image of parties rather than to what they vote for 6.2Evaluation of the remake 2009

19. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE19 6.3Electorate profile for 32 Wal-o-mat questions Survey data on balance of opinions on each question: Opinion polls like of the Politbarometer by institutes Wahlen or Forsa 6 of 38 Wal-o-mat questions 2009 are not covered by the polls and are omitted A few questions from the retained ones are matched to survey questions Equal weighting of questions

20. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE20 6.4Model 2009 for directly estimated electorate profiles

21. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE21 Under the direct method, the three left/ socialist parties are most popular and universal. The Left-Party is the strongest. The two governing parties CDU/CSU and FDP have the lowest indicators Electors vote for the parties with whom they disagree on most of issues: Irrational behavior of the electorate? Left-Parties are considered populist rather than reliable for government work? 6.5Evaluation 2009 for directly estimated electorate profiles

22. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE22 7.1Mathematical annex Notation

23. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE23 7.2Mathematical annex Definitions (parties) Representativeness:

24. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE24 7.3Mathematical annex Theorem 1 (indices of parties) Analogy with force vectors in physics: The most popular (universal) candidate has the largest projection of his opinion vector b c on the µ-weighted social vector of balance of opinions, respectively, of majority opinion

25. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE25 7.4Mathematical annex Definitions (coalitions)

26. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE26 7.5Mathematical annex Theorem 2.1 (on coalitions) where

27. 23.07.2010Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE27 7.6Mathematical annex Theorem 2.2 (on coalitions) If the coalition opinions on non- unanimous questions are independent (= independent negotiations on every question) then