I can only speak for my own country. And here politics do not have the same attention as other entertainment and as such have not been degraded into the same circus like in the US.

(On Germany) Parties act upon their conscience and policy and not because they desperately need to win the next election. There are no hardened rivalries because the goal is driven by policies and not elections. [...] Politics in Germany [...] functions exactly as what it's supposed to. [...] Sure, no democracy is perfect but what we have here is pretty much as close as it gets.

No, democracy is a choice of options (in case of a parliament people that go into the parliament), of which you choose the one which you agree the most with. If a candidate is changing his/her opinion it is a moving target. What consequence has my vote if the candidate changes all the time? And if all candidates all always changing, my vote is irrelevant, as I cannot predict which outcome it produces.

vivster said:

Another example would be gun control. In the current climate it is simply impossible to enact a full gun ban for civil use(except sports). So you would have to introduce it gradually. But if you do it gradually you will not see any results, which will just give more fuel to gun activists. It's not just the ban on guns that makes other countries so safe. It's the way people think of guns. It's not a status symbol or a precious symbol of freedom. It's not presented as the only thing to protect yourself and your family. It's simply treated at what it is, a tool for killing, a last resort. In the US it's the former and unless you change how people think about guns you cannot even attempt to apply policy.

So you can only speak for your own country, but of course, you can also speak for the US.

The way you describe the political system in your country sounds like it's very different from the political system in my country. I was quite surprised to see that according to your profile, your and my country are actually identical.

Those lines made me laugh so hard that I'm wondering if that was satirical or if you're being serious.

If you're really being serious, you must be about the most indoctrinated (and maybe naive) person I've ever come along.

With the myth of the gun in the US it is special somewhat. Recently I watched the korean show Stranger/Forest of Secrets on Netflix. It is a crime-show featuring police and prosecutors. Only half-through as one role aquires a gun I realized I saw no gun the whole time. One time the policewomen draws a taser, but isn't shooting it. The gun ends also unused. And that's it in 16 episodes. Multiple murders, chasing of suspects, but no shooting. This made me realize how much we are used to seeing guns and shootings in such shows - if they come from the US.

Hmm.. so you believe something like a larger recession would benefit the country then?

That is a normal risk in democracy as it's still based on humans. I'd rather have a more flexible democracy than a leader that clings to campaign promises despite changing circumstances.

Voting is only every 4 years. It's impractical to hold the same opinions as you had 4 years ago despite things changing. That's just stubborn and stupid. If it's a justified change of heart it's absolutely fine and you are free to vote for someone else next election. Merkel lost a good portion of her voters but the majority is still fine even with changing positions when it's necessary and founded.

It's the difference of molding a nation out of war or out of peace.

I don't quite agree with your left-right scheme in comparison to AfD and CDU. For instance the FDP is disagreeing with surveillance (as this is restricting freedom), which could be seen as more left. But more consequently it is more liberal (in the sense of freedom). In other questions they also prefer more freedom, so for instance the root for less restrictions for companies, while the CDu prefers some more rules for social security. In this case you could see the FDP as right of the CDU, but again it is about more freedom.