Page 20

prise either at its strength or weakness.
This fourth party, non-Christian, is re-
presented bya viously named parties in
the Ame'rica~n Zone. It- i's the leia st tell-
organized of the four major parties and
fared poorly 'in the January elections.
Question 1:
"Did any party receive more
expected?'
The Answers:
No, or c an't say
Yes
cSU
CDU
other Right parties
SPD
KPD
Question 2:
"Did any party receive less
expected?'
The Answers:
No, or can't say
Yes
KPD
SPD
CSU
CDU
other Right parties
votes than you
72 /o
i o/a
8
2      28-0/6
1100%/
voters -than, YOU'
63 °/o
21 3-
13
1
1      370o/
100/a
Fig. 2    Division of Votes
An analysis was made of the answers
to these questions given by followers of
the several parties. The strong showing
of the Christian parties surprised their
own followers almost as much as it did
the adherents of the leftist parties. The
weakness shown by the SPD      was a
greater surprise to its own'followers than
to the adherents of the Christian parties.
The followers of the SPD.were -as sur-
prised at the weakness of their own party
as at the weakness of the KPD.
ESTIMATE OF NEW ELECTEES
The interviewees were asked: "Do you
believe that the candidates who were
elected will do a good, satisfactory or
bad job?"
Respondents. agreed that in general the
newly elected candidates 'would do a
good (540/%) job or satisfactory (160/o)
job. Only two people out of every hundred
expected them to do a bad job. The rest
(280/6) were unable to anticipate the qua-
lity of work which would be done. Thus,
despite the fact that the elections for the
most part were along party lines, the
public- voiced confidence that all the
electees would do good or satisfactory
work. Reflecting the often-stressed non-
political nature of the recent local elec-
tions.
2O2
.