
Hello everyone,
So seems like many of you really enjoyed the last post about the Wahl-O-Mat, and I actually really enjoyed making it, so I have decided to go “all in” and make this a little election weeks’ special series.
We’ll definitely do a part two of the Wahl-O-Mat, and I think I’ll also do a post on the main German parties.
But today, I’ll want to talk about
The German Election System
Sounds boring, but it’s actually quite fascinating. I really mean that. Particularly Americans might be surprised as to how complex you can make this stuff. Tactical voting and all that.
So that’s what we’ll talk about today, and because we’re also here to learn German, I’ll do part of this as a “bilingual” post. So I’ll do a paragraph in German, and then give you the English translation. Originally, I also wanted to read out the German sections, but I have a cough, and my voice is all but gone, so it’ll be just text.
But yeah, you don’t only learn about the German election system, you’ll also see all the relevant vocabulary in context.
So if you’re read to jump in, then let’s do it!
***
Zuerst mal der Prozess.
Wenn man in Deutschland gemeldet ist und wahlberechtig, bekommt man automatisch einen Brief. Damit und mit seinem Ausweis kann man zum Wahllokal gehen. Oder man kann Briefwahl beantragen, und kriegt seinen Wahlschein nach Hause.
Wir haben KEINE Wahl-Automaten, sondern alles ist mit Papier.
Und wir können direkt mit einer Überraschung anfangen.
Hier ist mein Stimmzettel von der aktuellen Wahl (ich habe schon gewählt):

Wie ihr sehen könnt, haben wir bei der Wahl zum Bundestag (das ist der Name für das Bundesparlament) ZWEI Stimmen!
Wow!! 2-für-1 Special Deal!
Die sogennante Erststimme und die sogenannte Zweitstimme.
Fangen wir mit der Erststimme an.
“die Erststimme” – explained
Einige von euch denken jetzt vielleicht, dass man mit der Erststimme den Kanzler oder die Kanzlerin wählt. Aber das ist nicht so. Das macht der Bundestag.
Some of you might be thinking that we’re electing the chancellor with the “first vote”. But that’s not the case. That is done by the Bundestag (parliament).
Um zu verstehen, was die Erststimme ist, müssen wir verstehen, was die sogenannten Wahlkreise sind.
Deutschland ist in 299 Wahlkreise eingeteilt. Das sind im Prinzip Regionen, die in etwa alle eine ähnliche Einwohnerzahl haben.
Diese Unterteilung hilft zum einen, die Wahl zu organisieren.
Viel wichtiger ist aber die Grundidee, dass jeder Wahlkreis, also jede “Region” Deutschlands im Bundesttag vertreten ist.
Und genau da kommt die Erststimme ins Spiel.
In jedem Wahlkreis gibt es sogenannte Direktkandidaten. Die großen Parteien haben in jedem Wahlkreis einen Direktkandidaten, aber es gibt auch kleine Regionalparteien, die vielleicht nur in ein paar Regionen Direktkandidaten haben. Und man kann auch Direktkandidat sein, OHNE in einer Partei zu sein. Das kommt selten vor, ist aber möglich.
Mit der Erststimme wählen die Leute dann die Direktkandidaten, und wer die meisten Stimmen in einem Wahlkreis hat, gewinnt, und kommt sicher ins Parlament. Oder wir sollten sagen, fast sicher.
Denn da hat sich 2023 was wichtiges geändert, aber dazu gleich mehr.
“die Zweitstimme” explained
Die Zweitstimme ist die Stimme für die Partei. Das Ergebnis sind die Prozente, die die Parteien bei der Wahl bekommen, und diese Prozente bestimmen, wie viele Sitze die Partei im Bundestag bekommt.
Welche Parteien in einem Wahlkreis auf dem Wahlzettel stehen, hängt vom Wahlkreis ab. Es gibt Regionalparteien, die nur in einem Bundesland auf dem Zettel sind. Wie zum Beispiel die CSU, die es nur in Bayern gibt, die da aber immer fast 50% kriegt.
Im Prinzip gibt es in Deutschland sehr viele Parteien, aber die meisten davon haben KEINEN Sitz im Bundestag, obwohl sie mehr als 0% bekommen.
Der Grund dafür ist die sogenannt 5%-Hürde. Parteien, die weniger als 5% bekommen “sind raus”. Ansonsten wäre im Parlament zuviel Chaos. Das ist eine Lehre aus der Weimarer Republik. Je mehr Parteien es gibt, desto schwerer ist es, eine Mehrheit zu bilden.
Aber es gibt eine sehr wichtige Ausnahme. Wenn eine Partei 3 Direktkandidaten gewinnt, also in drei Wahlkreisen, dann KOMMT sie in den Bundestag und bekommt Sitze entsprechend ihrer Prozent (oder mindestens 3).
Das kommt tatsächlich häufig vor. Die Partei Die Linke zum Beispiel ist oft unter 5%, gewinnt aber normalerweise drei Wahlkreise (zwei davon in Berlin).
Die Idee hinter diesem System ist, dass eine Partei, die in drei Regionen so wichtig und relevant ist, dass sie das Direktmandat gewinnt, auch im Bundestag vertreten sein sollte. (crazy sentence ;)
Der Bundestag hat theoretisch erstmal 598 Sitze. 299 für die Direktkandidaten, und 299 die von den sogenannten Listen der Parteien gefüllt werden.
Die Liste ist eine Liste von Leuten, die die Partei ins Parlament schicken will, und sie muss VOR der Wahl fertig sein, damit man auch weiß, wer da potentiell ins Parlament kommt.
Wenn eine Partei zum Beispiel eine Liste von 200 Leuten hat, und Anspruch auf 50 Listen-Sitzen, dann kommen die ersten 50 von der Liste in den Bundestag.
***
Cool, so now you know the basics and are ready for the complex schemes that happen to actually determine who is in the parliament.
And I’ll switch to English only for that because it’s quite complicated and I don’t feel like explaining it in two languages :)
Parliament Seat Count – Are the Germans Crazy?
Now, this whole scheme about the lists is actually done on state level. So in each state, the party will have a list, and each state has a predetermined share of seats to fill in parliament depending on how many people live in that state.
So far so good.
Now, I just said that the number of seats in Bundestag is 598 in theory. 299 for the direct candidates and 299 for the lists.
Well… currently, it has 736 seats.
Why is that?
I’ll simplify this a bit, but in essence what happens pretty much regularly is that a party wins MORE direct candidates in a state than it is entitled to seats from that state.
Let’s say the FUN-party wins 10% of the vote in the state Bavaria, which means 10 seats in parliament (these are made up numbers of course… a fun party wouldn’t even win 1% in Bavaria).
But it wins 15 direct candidates in Bavaria. These 15 people do get to go to parliament, which means the parliament is now bigger than it should be AND the party basically ends up with 5 more seats than it actually had percentage of the vote. These 5 seats are called Überhangmandate (overhang mandate). You don’t need to remember that, but you might hear it in election talk shows.
Now, people were of course aware of this and used it extensively to do tactical voting. So you vote for the direct candidate of the FUN-party for instance in your district, knowing they’ll definitely get in, and then you give your Zweitstimme to your SECOND favorite party, to boost their percentages. This is called Vote splitting and parties even low-key campaigned and schemed on this. Like… in a district, two “friend” parties would say “Okay, you’ll get all my first votes and I’ll get all your second votes – win win.” giving the combined block a bigger share of the seats.
This was how it was done till 2009, when the Bundesverfassungsgericht (supreme court) ruled that the percentages have to be “followed”.
So then, they introduced the so-called Ausgleichsmandate (balancing mandates).
In our case, since the FUN-Party got more seats than it should, the other parties proportionally ALSO get more seats, basically, until those 15 seats that the FUN-Party won equate 10% of the seats that they’re entitled to based on the Zweitstimme.
So the other parties get to send some extra people.
And since this is done state by state, you also have to equalize across states. Like… if the number of seats Bavaria gets was 50, but is now 55, the number of seats of the other states has to be increased as well.
It’s quite complicated math, honestly :).
And this happens so much, that the Bundestag is now 736 seats instead of 598.
This costs tax payer money and it really doesn’t add anything functionally, so the did a reform AGAIN in 2023 and limited the number of max seats to 670.
So we’ll still do this “fill her up” stuff, but at some point it just stops. And that means that not all direct candidates might end up in parliament. So maybe only 12 of the 15 direct candidates that the FUN-party won, will actually be present. And that’s decided based on which direct winner had the worst results. Those “get to stay home”.
This goes against the original idea that EVERY Wahlkreis is represented with at least one person. Some Wahlkreise might end up not being represented and I am pretty sure that, after this election, lawsuits will follow and the system might have to be changed yet again, depending on what the federal court says.
You can still vote tactically though, as you can check how the direct candidates are polling in your Wahlkreis and if there’s a tight race between one that you’re okay with and one that you REALLY hate while your favorite has zero chance, you’ll vote for the one you’re okay with, even though you’d never actually vote for that party.
This is relevant in two districts of Berlin where the direct candidates of Die Linke and AfD are in a super tight race, so here, a couple hundred people can actually cause a solid difference in the Bundestag.
Like I said, this is the first election we’re having with this new seat cap, so no one really knows yet, how the system will end up influencing the result. There’s a consensus that it’s negative for CDU/CSU, as they usually win a LOT of direct candidates with not as much percentage to back it up, but we’ll see.
I don’t know what my opinion is on this, to be honest.
I like all the core ideas of having two votes and having all districts represented and all states balanced, but at the same time, I don’t think we need over 700 people in parliament. It’s expensive for no gain.
I’d love to hear what you think about this and if you could even follow :).
If not, don’t worry. Most Germans don’t really know in detail how this stuff works, either. It just seems so boring, but at the same time, I personally love vote splitting and tactical voting. Makes the whole thing way more interesting and a single candidate in a single district running a banger campaign can really make a difference.
Anyway, that’s it for today.
Let me know all your questions and thoughts in the comments, and also, let me know, if you have similar “complexities” in your country. Maybe it’s widespread and I’m not even aware of it.
Anyway, I hope you enjoyed this and I’ll be back in a few days with more :)
** Vocab **
- der Bundestag – the German paliament
- der Wahlkreis – the election district
- der Direktkandidat, die Direktkandidatin – the direct candidate in a district (winner gets to go to parliament)
- das Überhangmandat – seat beyond your percentage, that you got because you won many direct candidates
- das Ausgleichsmandat – extra seat you get because someone else has more direct seats than they should based on percentages
- die 5%-Hürde – the 5% hurdle

So do I understand correctly that with this system used this time that some Wahlkreisen won’t get representation? And would it be strictly for winners that belong to a party receiving less than 5%? Or could a Wahlkreis have a winner in a party receiving 5% of the vote and still not get their winner in? Maybe I’m missing something.
This is strictly for Bundestag of course. What about regional or local government? How many governments are there (or how many different elections)? One of the reasons the US might be slower in counting is that frequently all elections (federal, state, local, school boards, laws out to popular vote, etc.) appear in the same election. They aren’t counting two votes. Frequently they are counting 50 or more.
Yes, it did happen as expected and some direct candidates, particularly from CDU/CSU didn’t get to go to parliament even though they won their Wahlkreis.
Now they’re whining that someone from the Greens who only got 3% direct in her district still goes to parliament. The thing that they know VERY well is that she got in via the list, on which she is VERY high up.
So if one of their candidates doesn’t make it in is that they did NOT have a high enough list place, which is the result of party politics. Basically, the party said “We don’t like you enough to give you a save list spot, but you are popular in your district, so just run, win the direct mandate and then it’s up to luck”
Very important:
Direct candidates do NOT run on local issues. They are not really elected to represent the interests of their district.
The obvious solution to this would be just to reduce the number of districts and shrink the parliament that way, but the CDU/CSU is heavily against that too.
So they don’t like it the way it is now, they don’t want to reduce number of districts. They basically want a bloated parliament that costs the tax payer tens of millions per year EXTRA, just so many of their party folk get a comfy parliament seat with all the pay, influence and benifits it brings.
How many elections do we have:
– Europe
– Germany
– State (Berlin in my case)
– community (Bezirksverordnetenversammlung in Berlin’s case)
None of the dates align.
For instance, Hamburg had their state election (Hamburg is a city-state) just two weeks after the federal election.
I think the most distinct votes that I have ever cast at once was 3. One for the state, one for the Bezirksverordnetenversammlung and one for some state-level non-binding referendum.
Counting 50 votes is indeed crazy!!
This was very good, the german/english split was really useful and i understood a good chunk of the German paragraphs before reading the English ones (i wish wish wish netflix would allow for double subtitles so i could read things in both eng & deutsch)
What news sites/ resources/youtube channels/ social media users do you use to keep up with german (political) news?
At the moment, it was mostly Twitter. If not that, I am checking newspapers online but just the headlines. And for international I usually check the guardian. Oh and I listen to Info-Radio (NOT related to Info Wars) every now and then and watch ARD news.
I found that I somehow ingest a lot of information through osmosis. So I roughly know what’s going on, because I get for instance some headlines presented when logging in to my emails.
For double subtitles, maybe LingoPie is interesting for you. They have some shows with double subs and more interactive features.
LingoPie 7 Day trial
Without your explanation of the weird proportional representation adjustments, I would have had no idea what Merz was talking about here. thanks!
— tagesschau.de:
Merz machte aber deutlich, dass er auch das unter der Ampelkoalition geänderte Wahlrecht wieder ändern wolle, weil es “einseitig gegen die Union” gerichtet sei. 15 Wahlkreisgewinner der CDU und drei der CSU schafften wegen des neuen Wahlrechts den Einzug in den Bundestag nicht. “Ein solches Wahlrecht beschädigt unsere Demokratie”, sagte Merz.
—
Mimimimi-Merz!
I knew CDU was gonna whine about it. EVERYONE knew.
Just to make sure though… the proportion of percentage of vote IS represented as it should be. They’re whining because not all of their direct candidates get to go to Berlin, which everyone knew BEFORE. He’s acting like his party has less seats in percentage than it should, which is NOT the case.
Saying that this “damages Democracy” is ridiculous.
They’re demanding the parliament be bloated again, costing the tax payer 30 million Euro or so per year. I’m going to say it… I hate CDU so much.
Always have, always will. The density of opportunist, nepotistic liars in this party is very high.
Großartig Informationen, Emanuel. Vielen Dank.
Have you done an article about the dative, nominative and accusative cases? I am learning about them in school and want to know a little more about the cases.
Thank you, Mingwah
Yes, I have.
You can find part one here:
https://yourdailygerman.com/german-cases-nominative-genitive/
Thank you :D
GREAT article! Clear, and lots of practice translating. Germany deserves praise for making huge effort to represent the population “fairly“. Isn’t it difficult?
Canadian government are formed from a single first – past – the – post method. It is a lot simpler to understand, we get to elect a local candidate we can argue with and encourage. And we usually end up with government that can achieve a majority fairly easily, and make efficient decisions without murky coalition groups.
maybe members of minority groups [greens, Communists, or whatever) just need to get used to living without representation?
Hallo! Thank you for the membership sponsorship!!! I am going into my last year of high school as a german student, and it will really help me so much. I am beyond grateful!! Danke schön :)
Thank you for the sponsorship!!!!
So far this is the most effective platform for me to learn German. I really love unforgettable intriguing explanation which makes learning process so much fun.
Plus one more important thing. Thank you so much for German learning community who sponsored my learning process. I’m still a student and found there’s a chance for support in members page. I asked if I can get support and Emanuel kindly explained and led me to get support. I really can not thank you enough for kindness that I didn’t expect. I would still love to show gratitude to support this great platform somehow.
The voting papers have a circle next to each name. I presume voters need to make a mark in just one circle for each vote. Is the system fussy about the mark? Are ticks and crosses equally acceptable? I am from Australia where we use Preferential Voting (our name for ranked choice), so we have to write numbers. Ticks and Crosses are not valid votes for us.
Yes, you mark on circle on the left and one on the right. We do not have ranked choice.
I cross mine, but I think a circle is also okay. As far as I know, everything is counted by hand, so you don’t have to cater to some stupid machine.
I can imagine that writing a number would lead to some discussion when counting and they’d look up the rules.
Marking two circles in the same column makes it invalid.
Thanks once again. I very much appreciate your explanations. It is a complicated system with good reasons for it. I hope a fair way will be found to get the Bundestag close to its original size.
Sorry to comment here, but when there is no correct entry in the dictionary, there is also no place to comment :) I was looking for “zig” which I know is Umgangssprache but I thought you might have it.
I think it translates to ‘a ton of’ or ‘a zillion’, etc. I just wanted to know if it gets declined and if it has its own article. Ich habe (eine) zig(e) Fotos gemacht. Ich habe er mit (einen) zig(en) Fotos gesehen. USW. Thanks! PS – I thought I commented on this article (elections). I loved it.
Hi Bissell – so the problem, as you know already, is that you search for zig and you get some results – but not for the actual word you are looking for.
In these cases i’ve been putting a bunch of random letters in the search box e.g. dfsdgcfbsdgsdgsdf and then you get the dialog box where you can suggest Emanuel adds a missing word…
Perhaps there is a different workaround or Emanuel wants to suggest something but thats how i’ve been dealing with this …
It can sometimes help to put the word in quotes. Or if you have a short phrase (like “parat haben” instead of “parat”), that can also help to either narrow down the results or bring up the sad unicorn. It seems like when the sad unicorn shows up, there’s a chance the word will end up in the dictionary at some point.
Sometimes I’m hesitant to use the form to ask for a word to be added, just because I go through spurts where I search a lot, and don’t want to blow up the inbox or whatever place those forms land.
Yes, they land in my inbox :).
I track all missed searches and every now and then, I look through some of them, and add some. I think I add an average of 60 per month.
I tend to add those that I think are interesting and not self explanatory, or those where I know why people are looking for them.
But sometimes, people look for really clear compound nouns, and I usually don’t add those.
If a term gets searched for repeatedly and I happen to notice, I usually add it.
What is dfsdgcfbsdgsdgsdf in Dativ form? :) Thanks
dfsdgcfbsdgsdgsdfn. z.B “Wegen dem dfsdgcfbsdgsdgsdfn sind wir in Gefahr geraten”
*Dfsdgcfbsdgsdgsdfn … you used it as a noun here, so…
Ohhhhh so that’s why these weird searches come from XD.
Sorry, I think I might have distracted from your question. “Zig” doesn’t get declined or have an article. I guess it’s kind of like “tausend”, which can (!) be the same way.
Danke sehr
I just searched for it again as I thought Emanuel might have added it but I guess he’s been busy… : )
Bissell –
I don’t know if you know about DWDS but its become my go-to after yourdailygerman https://www.dwds.de/wb/zig?o=zig if you scroll down you can see the examples and none of them are declined.
I’m glad you asked the question here as I didn’t know about this either…
Oh, I actually just forgot the original comment after reading through the replies :). Apologies!
So yeah… it’s not declined and it doesn’t have an article. It works like “many” in terms of grammar pretty much.
that’s a really interesting, if complicated, way of voting. Great read!
btw, you forgot to translate the paragraph starting with “Aber es gibt eine sehr wichtige Ausnahme.”. Not a big deal and I was able to read it fine. I really like jumping back and forth between the translations to make sure I’m tracking correctly.
Oh, whoops, thanks for the heads-up. I added the section now :)
It is so embarrassing to be a USA citizen now-a-days, hard to think about political systems, but I enjoyed the lesson.
Hello,
I bet your excitment about this subject is making you write fast, leading to more typos than usual – I’ll call them die Überhangtypos ;)
“balot” (ballot – several instances)
“you can be direct candidate” (you can be a direct candidate)
“second vite” (second vote)
“sol called” (so-called)
“used to extensively” (used it extensively)
“law suits” (lawsuits)
“not as much percetage” (nor as much percentage)
“how this stuff work” (how this stuff works)
Very interesting stuff, I didn’t know any of this and find these posts really helpful if I’m ever to understand the German news :)))
Bis bald!
Yeah, the Erststimme Zweitstimme stuff will be REALLY big talk this time around.
I just checked and the direct mandate district poll map of Germany looks pretty much black (CDU/CSU) and blue (AfD). I can smell the lawsuits from a mile away already of people winning their election district and still not getting in if they’re not also on the list (which can happen if they have rivalries inside the party going on and didn’t manage to get on a list).
I enjoyed this post. I’m not quite sure I understand it all, but I like that changes have been made and will be made to keep up with the times. I also like there there are many parties instead of just two in the USA.
And also the English translation didn’t work for me either. Android user using chrome.
Oh, good thing you told me.
Turns out, it wasn’t an Apple problem, but a reformatting problem after I corrected some typos.
It should work now!
And in the US people think ranked choice voting is hard to understand… but it deals with a lot of the principles of concern in the German system. What’s interesting to me is is how fluid the German system is. “If this version doesn’t work quite right, we’ll just tweak it for the next election.”
PS the English Translation buttons don’t work on iOS Safari.
Fixed!
Nice explanation! Really helpful.
Not sure I should venture an opinion on any of it, but regarding the number of seats – OK, maybe over 700 MPs is too much for Germany, but I’m not sure. The U.S. House of Representatives has only 435 voting members for a national population of around 340 million (compared to Germany’s 83 million). So each member of the Bundestag represents about 124,000 or so people (based on 670 seats), whereas a U.S. Representative represents over 780,000 people on average. It’s worth wondering whether having smaller chunks of population represented might have some positive effects, making elected representatives more accountable to their people, and making the coalitions (which is what the two main parties in the US really are) less monolithic and polarized. But maybe not! idk
I think 700 is definitely too much, but most of the work of parliament is in committees, and I think there’s a certain strength in numbers to be had there. More people, more ideas, so to speak.
The person from a region is not primarily there to represent the interests of the region. If they want to do that, they should run on state level and then go to Bundesrat.
Often, people running for direct mandate don’t even come from the region or live there, they just pick the district because they have a good shot and want to make sure to get in.
Björn Höcke for instance, from the AFD is running in a district 200 km from the one where he lives, because there he has better odds to earn the direct seat.
So don’t think of these direct candidates as anything remotely resembling senators or even members of Congress. Germany is federal, but the US is WAY more federal in that sense.
I’m finding all of this extremely interesting and something I’ve been searching for for awhile. I’ve been fascinated by German politics for years but I’ve found it difficult to find resources which explain how these political systems work while providing good detail without getting lost in the weeds. Are there any histories, websites, or blogs that provide a good overview of the system as it exists and how it has developed over time which you might recommend?
I understood all of the German parts, but the English bit at the end makes no sense to me. Why not just assign the 299 Zweitestimme seats to the states and then proportion them out by vote? The only problem then is that smaller states probably don’t get 20 seats and so you would need more than 5% to get one. But this 5% number seems like it should be less important than each Wahlkreis having a representative. Just make the direct and indirect votes truly separate.
Next can you explain the Bundestag vs the Bundesrat?
So I have to amend my explanation a bit.
The proportioning by state is done by the PARTIES and it’s party internal policy. You can run for parliament if you have a list in only one state (like the CSU) and then ALL your representatives will come from that state, but in the number of the total percentage of federal vote.
So I got that part about the state quota wrong. That’s up to the parties to do however they please, but if you have a big party, there will be internal politics about which state gets to send the most and so on.
As for making the two votes completely independent – this is probably unconstitutional, since (I think) we’ve agreed to have a percentage based parliament.
If you make the two votes truly independent, you kind of just intensify the results you already have. Voting both votes for the same party kind of gives you TWO voices.
That’s a completely different system, than what we have.
We have one vote that determines the percentage, and then a kind “preference vote” for who gets to get a seat from the percetages. And then a whole bunch of complicated calculations :).
I saw your comment above about the direct votes not being local votes and now it makes more sense.
In the US, representation tends to be very local. When I lived in the US, our senator lived down the street in his childhood home. He’d hand out candy on Halloween. During COVID I’d see him walking around the neighborhood on his phone, since he couldn’t go to his office.
House Reps tend to be even more local. When big name national politicians buy a house somewhere just to be able to run for an easy district, it is generally viewed unfavorably.
It’s a mixture in Germany, so some people do live in their district and are well connected, but it’s not a big deal if you just “run” somewhere and then run in a different district next time.
Most people don’t really care.
And it would be super weird if a member of Bundestag in Germany were to start talking about their community and what they need. That’s not what the parliament is for, their purpose is to make federal policy, not cater to individual areas.
Ooh this is super interesting with the lack of residency requirements and not really being there to “represent” a certain district and more so to make national policy
I think it’s more of an informal thing actually.
Alice Weidel, the phony hard right lying populist, lives in Switzerland with her family, works in Berlin, but her election district is in the South at Bodensee. And she is registered there officially as “Erstwohnsitz” (primary residence)
She was asked how many people are in the district and how often she spends time there and she got bitchy and stopped the interview. Because she is in fact NEVER there. But she can’t say that, because then she would have to un-register.
You’re not required to live in your electoral district by law, but you can only run in a “random” district if the party allows it and helps you get the signatures or something.
Sehr interessant, danke