German Chancellor Friedrich Merz suffered a fresh electoral setback on Sunday as his Christian Democratic Union (CDU) lost ground in two state elections, but he rejected suggestions that his government would backtrack on its reform agenda.
Exit polls by public broadcaster ARD showed the CDU securing just 5% in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, its lowest-ever result in a German state since World War II.
In Berlin, the centre-right party was projected to finish second with 20%, trailing the Left party, which was estimated to win 24.5%, according to ARD's exit poll.
Merz described the CDU’s performance as a “disaster” but remained defiant, arguing that Germany’s economic and political challenges made difficult, and potentially unpopular, reforms more necessary rather than less. He pledged to continue his agenda with “backbone, steadfastness and patience.”
His authority had already been weakened by the CDU’s defeat to the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) in the September 6 election in the eastern state of Saxony-Anhalt. The result had shocked many Germans, triggering protests in several cities in Europe's biggest economy.
Since becoming Germany’s leader in May 2025, Merz has pledged to revive an economy that has seen little growth for years.
But he has struggled to improve the country’s gloomy national mood and has himself become increasingly unpopular.
Merz losing ground?
Meanwhile, the anti-immigration and Russia-friendly AfD made significant gains on Sunday as well.
The AfD’s strong performance in Saxony-Anhalt, where it has its strongest opportunity yet to lead a far-right state government since World War II, has further weakened Merz’s position nationally. In recent weeks, calls for his replacement as chancellor have even emerged from within his own party, although no prominent allies have publicly backed his departure, and many have cautioned against getting drawn into “personnel debates.”
Apparently bracing for a difficult period following the elections, Merz cancelled a planned trip to New York next week to attend the UN General Assembly. Despite the growing political pressure, he has repeatedly insisted that he intends to remain in office and complete his term as chancellor.
(With AP inputs)
Facts Only
* German Chancellor Friedrich Merz suffered an electoral setback.
* The CDU lost ground in two state elections.
* Exit polls showed the CDU secured 5% in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, its lowest result since World War II.
* In Berlin, the center-right party was projected to finish second with 20%, trailing the Left party, estimated at 24.5%.
* Merz described the CDU’s performance as a "disaster."
* Merz argued that necessary reforms were more crucial given Germany's economic and political challenges.
* Merz pledged to continue his reform agenda with "backbone, steadfastness and patience."
* The CDU previously lost to the AfD in the September 6 election in Saxony-Anhalt.
* Merz has pursued an economy revival since becoming leader in May 2025.
* The AfD made significant gains on Sunday.
* Calls for Merz's replacement have emerged from within his own party.
* Merz cancelled a planned trip to New York.
Executive Summary
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz faced an electoral setback as his Christian Democratic Union (CDU) lost ground in two state elections. Exit polls indicated the CDU secured only 5% in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, its lowest result in a German state since World War II. In Berlin, projections showed the center-right party finishing second with 20%, behind the Left party, estimated to win 24.5%. Despite this performance, Merz rejected suggestions that his government would reverse its reform agenda, pledging to continue it with "backbone, steadfastness and patience," arguing that reforms were necessary due to Germany's economic and political challenges.
The situation was further complicated by the CDU’s prior defeat to the Alternative for Germany (AfD) in September 2025, which had already weakened Merz's authority, and subsequent calls for his replacement from within his own party. Furthermore, the anti-immigration and Russia-friendly AfD made significant gains on Sunday, particularly in Saxony-Anhalt, where it saw its strongest opportunity yet to lead a far-right state government since World War II. Despite political pressure, Merz has maintained his intention to remain chancellor and cancelled planned trips to New York.
Full Take
The narrative presented reflects a tension between stated political resolve and measurable electoral reality, complicated by the rise of an alternative political force. The initial framing focuses on Merz’s defiance—his commitment to policy irrespective of immediate results—which serves as an anchor for his leadership but can also appear as rhetorical insulation against accountability. This resilience is juxtaposed against tangible losses, particularly in areas like Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, which establishes a concrete measure of shifting public sentiment regarding the incumbent party.
The emergence of the AfD's strong performance and internal party pressure shifts the focus from Merz's personal political endurance to a broader systemic dynamic. The pattern is one where established leadership must simultaneously manage internal dissent and external competitive threats while attempting to steer a national narrative through ongoing reform efforts. The implication is that steadfastness alone may be insufficient against forces demonstrating significant, real-world traction, especially when the opposition is capitalizing on perceived national anxieties.
What historical patterns are at play here? A pattern of political contestation often involves an incumbent resisting immediate shifts in public opinion while facing parallel movements gaining momentum through demographic or cultural grievances. The ambiguity lies in whether Merz's insistence on "backbone" functions as a genuine strategic posture or a form of delayed reaction to the erosion of his base. Does the focus on reform distract from addressing the underlying mood that made those reforms necessary in the first place? What are the second-order consequences if political agency is perceived as rigidly held rather than fluidly responsive to changing electoral realities?