Triell of the Chancellor candidate: Laschet is looking for a dispute

Laschet against Scholz – and every now and then a Baerbock moment: In the TV Triell, differences in content between the candidates for chancellor become clear. But it should hardly be enough for a turnaround in the Union.

Unlike her two opponents, Annalena Baerbock can go into the triumph largely carefree. And that is what the green candidate for chancellor does too. Two weeks before the election, the content of this election campaign has finally arrived, its mistakes, blunders, inaccuracies in their own affairs are hardly an issue – but neither is the Chancellery for the Greens. Co-governing is now the goal and to present oneself as a force for departure and against “business as usual”.

This becomes particularly clear when both of your fellow opponents have been dogged again. And that happens more often this evening, which is mainly due to Armin Laschet’s aggressiveness. Right at the beginning. “Mr. Laschet, you deliberately gave the wrong impression here,” accuses SPD Chancellor candidate Olaf Scholz of the Union applicant with a view to the latest searches in the Ministry of Finance. Laschet had just accused him of making mistakes in investigating money laundering, and the Cum-Ex and Wirecard scandals are also quickly an issue.

For Scholz, these allegations are quite dangerous, and the SPD politician countered the attacks with corresponding vigor. At least now it becomes clear that he will not make it through the evening remotely. He accuses Laschet of “untruths”. “Schönrednerei” comes from Laschet in the direction of Scholz. Baerbock may not directly endorse Laschet’s allegations, but neither does Scholz jump aside. She calls for a more determined fight against money laundering.

The central dispute between Laschet and Scholz continues in the further course of the debate. Unlike the first triell, the Union candidate does not work on Baerbock, but above all on Scholz. Laschet is under pressure, he has to score if he wants to keep himself and the Union a chance at the Chancellery. His Union expects nothing less than a trend reversal from him. And that’s obviously what he has planned for the evening. Laschet doesn’t look aggressive, but it doesn’t look aggressive.

Differences in content in climate protection

The moderators’ inquiries also ensure that the level of disputes remains high and differences in content become clear. For example with climate protection. The debate has already been running for 45 minutes, the lessons from the corona pandemic have already been dealt with, the three should also position themselves on compulsory vaccination (Laschet and Scholz, on the other hand, Baerbock for certain professional groups), and digitalization is also briefly an issue.

Baerbock is rewinding the Greens’ climate program, a 50 billion investment program for infrastructure, including power grids, the expansion of the railways and wind power. The coal phase-out must be brought forward to 2030, because “we cannot go on like this for 17 years”.

Laschet is also calling for more speed, but not with the coal phase-out. But when planning and approving power grids. And besides, one should “let the company do it once”, the CDU boss turns against new rules and regulations. Rather, “a dynamic must arise that everyone wants something new to emerge”. Scholz, on the other hand, speaks of the “major industrial reconstruction” that is now necessary and repeats his plan to expand renewable energies more quickly.

When he got into trouble with Laschet, who blocked what when in the grand coalition is another Baerbock moment. The two may please leave their coming to terms with the past and blame. After all, this is about the future. How expensive climate protection will be for citizens – keyword: gasoline and electricity prices – has not been clarified, by the way, despite repeated inquiries from the moderators.

“What was the question again?”

But sometimes it goes through the topics very quickly on the ride: “What was the question again?” Asks Laschet – this is currently about the topic of rents and affordable housing. He turns against a rent cap, the subject of living must be thought of “holistically”. Scholz wants to build more apartments, 400,000 per year are in the SPD election program. In “my” election manifesto, as he emphasized a little later, it is about citizens’ insurance. When asked, Scholz called citizens’ insurance a “matter of the heart”. Is it a condition for the next coalition? Answer: “Everything that is in my election manifesto is a condition.”

He is unlikely to have any quarrel with the Greens in terms of public insurance. Laschet, on the other hand, makes it clear: “We were fundamentally different.” The German health system is “good” and he speaks out clearly against unified insurance.

Red-green shoulder to shoulder

A red-green alliance is also forming in the Triell when it comes to pensions and taxes. And so Laschet only remains to point out the “fundamental difference between me and the two competitors” when it comes to the question of tax increases. These are the wrong way. Scholz calls the Union’s proposals for tax cuts for people who earn very well, in view of the billions spent in the Corona crisis “unfinanced”. Baerbock wants to relieve people with low incomes and examine a wealth tax. The SPD demands the wealth tax, the Union rejects it.

And even if Scholz and Baerbock often show overlapping content, the coalition statements after the election do not reveal anything new. Laschet does not rule out the junior role in a Scholz government, nor does Scholz clearly determine whether he will rule out a coalition with the left. Laschet finds it “dishonest”. All democratic parties should talk to each other, says Baerbock. In doing so, she included the left.

Conclusion: more duel than triell

Conclusion: In the 95 minutes, the differences in content between Scholz, Laschet and Baerbock become clear. The argument is sometimes biting, especially Laschet tries to be sharp. Scholz is only briefly on the defensive at the beginning. Baerbock scores with clear programmatic content, such as climate protection. She receives fairness points for pointing out that Scholz’s speaking clock continues to run without him speaking.

However, if the closing words of the three were planned as the dramaturgical highlights of the triell, they do not meet expectations. Laschet is promoting himself as “Federal Chancellor of Confidence” and Scholz wants to “serve as Federal Chancellor”. Baerbock is the only one who can do without the word “Federal Chancellor”: She is promoting a “real departure”.