Mr. Jones votes for a party. There are several party's in Germany, not only Democrats and Republicans. So Mr. Jones votes for one of them. A party gets members in the Bundestag, if they get more than 5% of the votes. If a party has less than 5% of the votes, are they not allowed to participate in the Bundestag.

You can not only vote on a party, but also on a person of a specific party. If a party will have 10 representatives, the first 10 on the vote list will participate in the Bundestag. But if you're the 11th on the list, you can still join your party in the Bundestag if you get enough, so called 'preference votes' on you as person.

So a party can send a limited number of members to the Bundestag, but Mr. Jones can influence which members. Members at the same party will usually vote the same in the Bundestag, but, like Democrats and Republicans, they can also vote else.

Note: the votes at party's who didn't get enough votes to participate in the Bundestag, will be divide. So if party A has 30% of the votes, they get some extra votes from the party's who didn't passed 5%. Party A will have 32% of the members in the Bundestag then.

(Not sure if this is the complete system, I'm from Holland)

From what I know, there are two votes made by a citizen.
The first vote goes to a specific candidate - this determines, by plurality, who gets to enter the Bundestag.
The second vote goes to a party - this determines, by proportion, how many seats each party gets in the Bundestag.

The problem comes when many winners from the first vote are from Party A, but in the second vote Party A only receives a small proportion of votes thus a small number of seats. Does it mean that some winning candidates from Party A will not be able to enter the Bundestag?

Please do not post cheating accusations in the forum.

You can't vote for party A and then vote for a person, who is from party B.

So it will never happen that there are more votes for persons, than votes for a party. Your vote for a party is the main vote, voting for a person is optional and has to be on a person from the party you already voted for.

I have good knowledge of the german voting system, but my english is not very good. I think the most aspekts refered from batbeetje are right. In one case you are not clear or wrong.
If a party have 10 representatives (10 seats) in the Bundestag, first the representatives who won their "Wahlkreis" (this is the part of the plurality system) get to the Bundestag. The rest will be filled from the vote list.
In reality it is a lil more confused bevause of the foederalism system. Each "Bundesland" counts seperate.

In summary this is a really small part of the plurality system. You have two votes, first the person (see above), second the party. Each person who win the "Wahlkreis" gets in the Bundestag, but the percent of seats a party gets is count from the second vote.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT0I-sdoSXU

This video explains mixed-member proportional representation, the system Germany uses. The main difference between the system this video explains and Germany is the 5% rule. However LP seems to be more confused about the MMP system over the minor rules like the 5% one so I thought I would share this video.

"You can't vote for party A and then vote for a person, who is from party B."
Yes you can, thats the whole point of MMP

@kees:
you can, you have 2 votes.
You are right, Lukas, the members of the Bundestag are growing in that case you described. Few years ago, the party got "Überhangmandate", they got more seats than their party gets per percent, but this was change, i think since the last election.

If you want to go back to the origin, the French invention is credited to Condorcet.
That aristocrat mastered the mathematics of this voting system.
All I know about the German Bundestag (from Deutsche Welle tv news) is that the Left party (Linke) will join with the Greens to become the "Opposition".
But first the SPD party membership votes on the new Grand Coalition & thus could (theoretically) force a new election.

So am I right that when there are overhang seats because the party got more candidates from the first votes than the proportion from the second votes, they have the Ausgleichmandate to balance the proportion?

In that case, the "ideal" or "benchmark" proportion is always the one that comes out from the second vote?

I'm pretty sure in cases where you get more individual votes then party votes, you'll be disproportionally represented so the individuals who are voted in a chosen before the party.

Yes, Lukas, especially since the last elections, wehere the party not only become the overhang seats. THe others become now also more candidats.

I understand now, many thanks to all of you!

The end result, after some 60+ ( sixty plus per centum) % of the total Social Democrats' membership voted, is the Grand Coalition, once more, with a likely Heir Apparent in the 1st ( first! ) female defence minister, promoted from within the previous Cabinet, and whom DW (Deutsche Welle) tv news anchors from Berlin say is the new "commander-in-chief" under the German system and-or Constitution. Is that right?

Yes, that's true. The former minister of Labour and Social Affairs and minister of Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth between 2005 and 2009 Ursula von der Leyen is now the first female defense minister in Germany, being the new head of the German troops. Flexibility is a fascinating part of politics, isn't it? :D

We really should have done a better job of imposing "federalism", "separation of powers" and "first past the post" voting on people after the war. I mean what's the point of Imperialism, any way? It couldn't have possibly turned out worse than the Italian system or the Fourth Republic.

American Military Government - in Sicily, they left the Camorra at Large and into city halls; in Germany they let Gehlen's guys come on board or do humint (as against the Bolshevik Peril).
MAYBE IT was Truman's fault in dismantling the OSS or maybe his order was effectuated too slowly and-or piecemeal.
THERE was a National Review.old-style conservative writer who suggested the solution to all things Middle European was to restore the Hapsburgs. Editor Wm. F. Buckley jr was appalled but also amused, so the guy was kept on.
The 5th Republic - deGaulle resurgent, and then came the Vietnam War and '68 and at the same moment the student-led demonstrations for reform. BUT, the marches with the Lead banner reading "PAIX au Vietnam heroique", & demos were not only in Paris, they were held in London too.

Not sure if someone mentioned this already, but the idea behind the system is to allow smaller parties get into the Bundestag too, although they would possibly never win the majority in a voting district. IMO that is the major flaw of the English voting system...only the big ones get in, so although a smaller party might actually represent ten percent or more of the total population, they can get just a few seats or none at all in the parliament.

Yea I think implementing the idea of a hybrid system is a good job so that you don't flood the Bundestag with multiple small parties while still letting some of them flourish.

Is a modern-day German cabinet post as "independent" as some parliamentary cabinet posts have been in the past few centuries? I am thinking of Britain's foreign ministry, especially FM Hague now, and also Grey in 1913/1914.
Could say, the Defence Minister in Germany right now today act on her own, say, if she got the Chancellor's okay - without the Cabinet meeting and/or concurring?

As far as I know the ministers can usually only suggest eg reforms to the parliament, which has to agree and then the ministry executes these plans. It is definitely not possible for the Chancellor to decide sending troops to battlefields like Hollande did several times last year...

@G.: What about diplomatic moves: not tactics, but a secret treaty, etc.?
The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (in PM Asquith's & FM Grey's day it was Foreign & Colonial) with a demarche. [ Retired USA Secretary of State Albright has a stronger, anglo-saxon word for Demarche ] or the expulsion of a diplomat in a tit for tat sort of thing. The Executive, like Chancellor, Pres. or PM may not be calling all the shots - or in a strong monarch system like Germany 19th century the new Kaiser dropped the pilot, Bismarck

I think it's rather the ministry (not the minister, mind you!) who decides diplomatic moves, but contracts have to be made in agreement with the parliament

The Entente Cordiale - E/F. Sort of an agreement, an "Understanding" a cordial understanding, like the so-called "Gentlemen's Agreement".

NOT a unilateral press statement undercutting a foreign power's minister