Das Wahlergebnis

In a satirical way, the typical television coverage after a (fictitious) state election is simulated — including projections, interviews, commentaries, and a so-called “heavyweight round”. When then, over the course of the broadcast, the voter turnout is estimated as just 3.86 percent of those eligible to vote, none of the involved believes it. But after this information turns out to be true, it is attempted to explain this scandalous, impertinent, and downright subversive behaviour of the electorate. In a satirical way, the typical television coverage after a (fictitious) state election is simulated — including projections, interviews, commentaries, and a so-called “heavyweight round”. When then, over the course of the broadcast, the voter turnout is estimated as just 3.86 percent of those eligible to vote, none of the involved believes it. But after this information turns out to be true, it is attempted to explain this scandalous, impertinent, and downright subversive behaviour of the electorate. In a satirical way, the typical television coverage after a (fictitious) state election is simulated — including projections, interviews, commentaries, and a so-called “heavyweight round”. When then, over the course of the broadcast, the voter turnout is estimated as just 3.86 percent of those eligible to vote, none of the involved believes it. But after this information turns out to be true, it is attempted to explain this scandalous, impertinent, and downright subversive behaviour of the electorate. In a satirical way, the typical television coverage after a (fictitious) state election is simulated — including projections, interviews, commentaries, and a so-called “heavyweight round”. When then, over the course of the broadcast, the voter turnout is estimated as just 3.86 percent of those eligible to vote, none of the involved believes it. But after this information turns out to be true, it is attempted to explain this scandalous, impertinent, and downright subversive behaviour of the electorate.