New Federal President, old power logic: Germany needs a new beginning – and first organizes party peace

Germany needs renewal: Why Aigner's candidacy is not yet a new beginning

New president, same old power logic? What Aigner's nomination reveals about politics

Ilse Aigner's nomination for the office of Federal President is a historic step: Should she be elected on January 30, 2027, she would be the first woman to lead the country. However, a new person in the highest office does not automatically signify a political revolution. The candidacy is, first and foremost, an agreement within the existing party system – and raises the question of what criteria Germany uses to select its leaders.

This is not about questioning Aigner's suitability or independence in advance. Her professional experience and long political career warrant a nuanced perspective. Rather, the crucial question is what the parties associate with her nomination and what independent contribution they expect from a Federal President. The office can neither replace the government nor directly solve economic problems. However, it can shape debates, highlight long-term challenges, and measure political decisions by their implementation.

Especially given weak economic growth, high municipal investment needs, and growing demographic challenges, a symbolic change in personnel is not enough. Aigner's candidacy could represent more than just a new representative at the head of state – but that remains to be seen. Until then, this historic step is not yet proof of political renewal.

Ilse Aigner as Federal President: A new beginning or more of the same?

Ilse Aigner's nomination for the office of Federal President is no proof of Germany's political renewal. It is, first and foremost, a personnel decision that garnered a majority within the existing party system. On November 9, 2026, Friedrich Merz officially presented the CSU politician as his candidate; the new head of state is to be elected on January 30, 2027. Anyone who sees this as a historic breakthrough is confusing a change at the top of the state with a change in political decision-making standards.

The opposite assertion, however, would be too simplistic. Aigner's candidacy does not imply that she is personally unsuitable, nor does it mean that all those involved are acting solely out of party self-interest. A different criticism is more valid: a personnel agreement can stabilize the balance of power between the parties without convincingly explaining what additional contribution it is supposed to make to the country's capacity for renewal. This is precisely the political weakness of a decision presented as a major step, but whose promise of change has yet to be fulfilled.

A nomination is not a new beginning

The crucial difference lies between personnel change and institutional renewal. A different face at the head of state does not automatically alter the processes by which political leaders are selected, responsibility is distributed, and societal problems are addressed. Even a widely accepted candidate can therefore represent continuity without calling her personal integrity into question. Critical scrutiny must focus on the selection criteria, not on denigrating the individual.

If elected, Aigner would be the first woman to hold the office of Federal President and the first elected officeholder from the CSU. This would represent a significant shift in representation. However, this does not necessarily translate into greater economic dynamism or a greater willingness to reform. Gender, party affiliation, and regional origin, in themselves, say little about whether a head of state will ask uncomfortable questions and foster societal change.

As of November 10, 2026, the election is still open, even though the CDU/CSU and SPD together hold a sufficient majority in the Federal Convention based on the current balance of power. Frank-Walter Steinmeier's term of office ends on March 18, 2027. An objective assessment must therefore distinguish between the already discernible logic of the nomination and a record of her service that has not yet been established. Those who already deny Aigner any independence are judging just as prematurely as those who are already claiming her candidacy as a success for renewal.

The office cannot replace a government

The economic policy expectations placed on the Federal President must be aligned with her actual powers. The head of state possesses neither the Chancellor's power to issue policy guidelines, nor her own legislative reform program, nor the budgetary authority of the Bundestag. She cannot lower corporate taxes, order the digitalization of public administration, or independently accelerate infrastructure projects. Therefore, selecting a different person would not immediately solve Germany's growth problems.

The constitutional duties of the Federal President include, among other things, participating in the formation of the government, promulgating laws, and representing Germany both domestically and internationally. The review of legislation is not a political veto against measures that the head of state finds economically distasteful. Those who desire a female Federal President as a potential Chancellor are demanding a shift in the balance of power that is inconsistent with the parliamentary system of government.

Precisely for this reason, the particular significance of the office lies elsewhere. A Federal President can bring issues to the forefront, open up spaces for public discourse, and influence the quality of public debates. She can demand that political promises be measured by their implementation. She can insist that reforms be discussed not only as an imposition but also as a prerequisite for future security. Her economic impact would thus be indirect and difficult to isolate, but not insignificant. The appropriate aim is not to replace the government, but to provide public guidance without becoming the government's shield.

When majorities become more important than standards

The Basic Law explicitly does not provide for the direct election of the head of state. The Federal Convention consists of the members of the Bundestag and an equal number of members elected by the state parliaments according to the principles of proportional representation. Parties inevitably wield considerable influence in this process because they organize parliamentary majorities. This is inherent to representative democracy and not evidence of its abuse.

This process becomes problematic when the question of a suitable candidate almost entirely disappears behind the question of which party can agree under which conditions. Then there is a risk of a shift in the selection objective: the focus is no longer on the greatest possible societal benefit, but rather on minimizing internal and inter-party friction. A person can thus become particularly attractive precisely because they provoke as few conflicts as possible. Whether they also embody a convincing understanding of the office may remain under-examined.

This danger can be described as an incentive problem. For party leaders, a unified stance, reliable majorities, and the avoidance of coalition conflict are immediately apparent. The benefits of a convincing, independently acting government in the long term, on the other hand, are more difficult to quantify. This does not mean that parties deliberately act against the country. Rather, it means that partisan rationality and national expediency can diverge. A rigorous selection process would have to acknowledge this tension instead of treating the level of approval already achieved as sufficient proof of quality.

Merz and the limited creative power

Markus Söder publicly floated Aigner's candidacy for the position as early as April 2026; Merz only publicly committed to her candidacy in November. This time lag suggests a political weakness in the communication: While the Chancellor was ultimately able to present the result as his own decision, he had failed to shape the public debate with a clearly defined and positive profile of requirements for months. The impression of a belated confirmation was therefore more plausible than that of a confidently initiated impetus for renewal.

This impression, however, should not be equated with proven personal disinterest. Public reticence can be an expression of internal coordination, tactical caution, or an attempt to avoid prematurely damaging a candidate. Merz himself described the process following the nomination as conflict-free and orderly. It is impossible to reliably determine from the outside which motives prevailed internally. Criticism should therefore focus on what is publicly verifiable: the justification, the process, and the political impact.

The real shortcoming lies less in the fact that Merz didn't present a surprising candidate. Surprise is not a sign of quality. Rather, what needs explaining is why this particular candidacy should be especially suited to the demands of a challenging economic and social era. A mere description of personal suitability doesn't replace an understanding of the debates Germany needs to have and what unique contribution the head of state could make to them.

Merz now has to present a result as a convincing leadership decision, the outlines of which were publicly outlined long beforehand by others. This is neither proof of his political ineptitude nor convincing evidence of strategic planning. Leadership is demonstrated not only by uniting a majority, but also by making the rationale of a decision understandable beyond that majority.

Aigner's biography defies simple labels

A fair analysis must not reduce Aigner to the role of a long-serving party official. She trained as a radio and television technician, qualified as a state-certified electrical engineer, and worked from 1990 to 1994 on the development of electrical systems for helicopters. Subsequently, she assumed municipal, parliamentary, and ministerial positions; since 2018, she has served as President of the Bavarian State Parliament. This combination of professional experience and political expertise is relevant for assessing her suitability.

Such a career path can broaden one's perspective on vocational training, industrial value creation, and opportunities for social advancement. It offers, at the very least, the possibility of viewing economic contexts from perspectives other than purely academic or administrative ones. However, this does not automatically translate into modernization competence. Professional background provides access to experience, but it is no substitute for political judgment. Likewise, a long party career does not prove a lack of independence, even if it does raise legitimate questions about ingrained loyalties.

Aigner served as Federal Minister for Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection from 2008 to 2013 and subsequently as Bavarian Minister of Economic Affairs. She therefore has extensive firsthand experience of political decision-making processes. Her familiarity with institutions speaks in favor of her candidacy; her close ties to the existing political system argue against the idea of ​​her as a fresh start. Both statements could be true simultaneously. The crucial question is not whether she possesses experience, but whether she would use that experience to publicly challenge the limitations of the familiar system.

Equality is not a reform program

The fact that the office of Federal President has so far been held exclusively by men is part of the institutional history of the Federal Republic. A first woman at the head of state would therefore be more than a trivial personnel matter. Public office also represents social belonging and access to responsibility. Anyone who dismisses this step as mere symbolic politics underestimates the importance of political visibility.

Nevertheless, the justified appreciation of this progress should not lead to further questions appearing inappropriate. Representation and renewal are different dimensions of evaluation. A decision can represent progress in gender equality while simultaneously changing little regarding the opening up of political selection processes. It can cross a long-overdue boundary without altering the underlying routines.

The pointed description of a "business as usual" approach to gender equality only hits the mark if it refers to the process and the substantive justification. As a blanket condemnation of the candidate, it would be insufficient. The stronger criticism is this: A male-dominated political order does not comprehensively modernize simply by opening its highest representative office to a woman. It must simultaneously demonstrate that competence, social experience, and intellectual independence are becoming more important than internal balance. Otherwise, there is a risk that visible progress will be used as evidence of a far more extensive renewal that has not yet been demonstrated.

The economy demands reliable answers

The economic situation makes it understandable why a mere change in personnel fails to meet many expectations. According to data revised in the summer of 2026, the price-adjusted gross domestic product fell by 1.0 percent in 2023, stagnated in 2024, and grew by only 0.2 percent in 2025. This picture describes several years of weak growth, but not an uninterrupted economic collapse. The distinction is important because objective criticism depends on the accuracy of its diagnosis.

The economic situation improved in 2026. In the first quarter, economic output rose by 0.4 percent compared to the previous quarter, adjusted for price, seasonal, and calendar effects; in the second quarter by 0.3 percent; and in the third quarter by 0.2 percent. In the third quarter, real gross domestic product was 1.3 percent higher than the previous year. This development contradicts the claim of a complete standstill but does not yet prove a sustained higher growth trajectory. According to preliminary results, investments declined in the third quarter compared to the previous quarter.

The economic challenge, therefore, lies in distinguishing between short-term recovery and long-term performance. Increased consumption can cushion a weak period. However, sustained income growth also requires productive investment, functioning infrastructure, a skilled workforce, and competitive businesses. A Federal President cannot create these conditions on her own. But she could help ensure that the political debate doesn't interpret every minor economic improvement as confirmation of the current course. This sober distinction would be far more valuable than a vague promise of national optimism.

Germany has ideas, but friction losses

The claim that Germany is not innovative is not supported by the available data. In the Global Innovation Index 2026, Germany ranks eleventh out of 139 economies surveyed; it achieves eighth place in terms of recorded innovation results. Seven German locations are among the top 100 innovation clusters. These figures describe a high-performing innovation system, even if they do not demonstrate a leading position in all future technologies.

In 2024, a total of €137.1 billion was spent on research and development, of which €92.5 billion was spent by companies. These are considerable resources. However, expenditures primarily measure the resources used, not their economic return. More research does not automatically lead to rapidly growing companies, widespread adoption of digital applications, or increased productivity across all sectors. Likewise, a single ranking cannot definitively capture the overall quality of a country's economy.

The more precise criticism, therefore, is not that Germany fails to innovate, but rather that its existing strengths are insufficient to overcome all the challenges of renewal. Administrative burdens, competitive barriers, and skills shortages hamper economic dynamism and productivity growth. This results in a more demanding political task than simply invoking a general shift in mentality. It is about creating concrete conditions under which ideas can reach companies, companies can grow, and new processes can function effectively in everyday life.

The innovation index also has methodological limitations. It combines numerous different indicators, which do not all necessarily share the same reference year. Changes in data availability and the evaluation model complicate simple year-on-year comparisons. For Germany, the statistical confidence interval for the 2026 ranking lies between ninth and eleventh place. Therefore, a precise overall assessment of the speed of economic growth or decline cannot be derived from fluctuations in individual positions. A more meaningful indicator is the interplay of several findings: substantial research resources, strong industrial and scientific hubs, and simultaneously, unsatisfactory overall economic dynamism.

The middle class refutes the decline reflex

A closer look at medium-sized companies also reveals a more nuanced picture. Between 2022 and 2024, 41 percent introduced at least one innovation; this figure was two percentage points higher than in the previous survey. Innovation spending rose to €35.4 billion. These findings contradict a blanket portrayal of the German economy as fundamentally resistant to change.

At the same time, there are significant differences within the SME sector. The innovation rate was 73 percent for large SMEs, compared to 37 percent for small businesses. This doesn't mean that every large company is future-proof, nor that small businesses are backward. However, the figures do show that the capacity for innovation is unevenly distributed. Therefore, anyone discussing Germany's future should not only look at individual flagship companies, but also at the conditions under which many smaller companies can finance and implement change.

Politically, this leads to an important correction of the initial criticism. Not the entire country is resistant to new approaches. Businesses, employees, and research institutions are already working on them. The crucial question is whether public regulations, administration, and political priorities facilitate these efforts or unnecessarily hinder them. A convincing Federal President wouldn't need to invent new funding programs. She could, however, focus attention on those who are implementing innovation under everyday conditions. This would also provide a counterweight to a political public sphere in which internal party personnel issues are often more apparent than the practical prerequisites for economic renewal.

The investment backlog is the clearer signal

The implementation problem becomes particularly clear at the municipal level. The projected investment backlog perceived by municipalities reached a value of €231.2 billion in the 2026 Municipal Panel. Of this, €68.9 billion was allocated to schools and €53.7 billion to roads and transport infrastructure. This magnitude underscores why the debate about future viability cannot stop at technological excellence.

The figures must be understood methodologically. They are based on a survey of municipal finance departments and a representative projection, not on a comprehensive, individual technical inspection of every building and street. The identified backlog is therefore a structured assessment of the need and not a precisely fixed total price for its elimination. This limitation reduces the accuracy of the measurement, but not the political significance of a problem that has been growing for years.

Schools, transportation infrastructure, and efficient public administrations form the foundation of economic development. If their quality declines, costs can arise elsewhere: for businesses due to reduced accessibility, for families due to unreliable services, and for future generations due to postponed modernization. The precise extent of these consequences cannot be determined solely from the investment backlog. Nevertheless, the economic connection is clear: neglecting maintenance can provide short-term relief to budgets, while in the long run it restricts room for maneuver. A presidency that wants to credibly embody renewal must therefore not only recognize future technologies but also take seriously the unspectacular foundations of a functioning, everyday state.

Financial flexibility is no substitute for implementation

The financial situation of municipalities illustrates how closely resources and the ability to act are linked. A municipal deficit of €31.9 billion was projected for 2025; 44 percent of municipalities rated their financial situation as inadequate in the 2026 municipal panel survey. At the same time, planned investments for 2026 were 14 percent higher than those planned for 2025. This indicates intentions to change and contradicts the notion that nothing is fundamentally happening at any level.

However, a significant gap exists between planned and realized investments. Experience shows that only about two-thirds of the planned volume is actually spent; obstacles include staff shortages in construction departments and cumbersome permitting processes. A larger funding commitment does not automatically eliminate such bottlenecks. If planning capacities, technical standards, and responsibilities cannot keep pace, additional financial leeway can initially only be translated into limited real output.

This does not imply a disregard for additional resources. Underfunded tasks cannot be accomplished solely through better organization. Conversely, it would be equally simplistic to treat every performance weakness exclusively as a financial problem. A robust policy of renewal must combine both: funding appropriate to the tasks at hand and structures that can effectively utilize available resources. This provides a suitable guiding principle for a head of state. They could remind the public that political credibility does not depend on the size of announced sums, but on whether their benefits are actually evident in people's lives.

Delay comes at an economic price

The link between the presidential election and economic development is not directly causal. A protracted nomination process does not cause a municipal funding gap, nor does it explain a decline in private investment. Such an attribution would be factually untenable. What is relevant, rather, is the potential similarity of decision-making patterns: If actors primarily avoid risks within their own sphere of responsibility, the overall system can slow down, even if individual decisions appear understandable.

Economically, this can be understood as a coordination problem. One institution might demand additional safeguards, another might wait for further coordination, and a third might avoid assuming responsibility prematurely. Each step may be rational in itself. However, in aggregate, waiting times, duplication of effort, and uncertainty can increase. For companies, it can then become attractive to postpone an investment as long as key parameters remain unclear. The specific magnitude of such effects depends on the project in question and cannot be calculated from a single political personnel decision.

That is precisely why critics should not claim that Aigner's candidacy is causing economic stagnation. At most, it can serve as an opportunity to fundamentally question political selection criteria. Is leadership judged by its ability to avoid conflict, or by its ability to enable viable decisions in a timely manner? Is unity confused with efficiency? And is the benefit of waiting scrutinized as rigorously as the risk of acting? These questions connect political and economic renewal without constructing a false cause-and-effect relationship based on mere coincidence.

Demographic pressure won't wait

The aging of the working-age population is intensifying the time pressure. Based on the 2025 microcensus, around 13.3 million people in the workforce at that time will have exceeded the statutory retirement age of 67 by 2040; this corresponds to 30 percent of the working-age population in that base year. This does not necessarily mean that the actual number of workers will decrease by precisely this amount. Immigration, younger generations entering the workforce, labor force participation, and longer working lives will alter this trend. However, the magnitude of the figure illustrates how demanding the adjustment task will be.

When labor becomes scarcer, the importance of higher productivity and better utilization of existing skills increases. Technological modernization, further training, and reliable support services can make various contributions in this regard. Better employment incentives for women and older people, skills development, and facilitated immigration of skilled workers are important starting points. None of these tasks can be replaced by a representative turnover of personnel.

A head of state could, however, bring a stronger long-term perspective to the debate. The interests of today's workers, future pensioners, and younger generations cannot be permanently isolated from one another. If necessary adjustments are postponed, their costs do not automatically disappear. They can emerge later in a more concentrated form and under less favorable conditions. A federal president should therefore neither demand longer working hours across the board nor downplay the burdens on certain groups. Her role could be to demand an honest discussion about productivity, participation, and burden-sharing before financial or personnel constraints further limit the available options.

Trust requires tangible reliability

Political trust cannot be established through a single personnel decision. In an international survey published in 2026, 35 percent of respondents in Germany indicated a high or moderately high level of trust in the federal government for 2025; the average across participating OECD countries was 40 percent. Compared to 2023, this represented a decrease of one percentage point. This does not imply a dramatic deterioration in this short period, nor does it allow for any judgment regarding Aigner's candidacy. The data merely describe a general institutional context.

Trust is economically relevant because reliable expectations can facilitate cooperation. Companies need to assess whether announced regulations will hold up. Employees need to be able to trust that training and professional adjustments will provide fair opportunities. Citizens need comprehensible reasons for why certain burdens are necessary and how they are distributed. These connections are not a guarantee of higher investment or greater public support, but they do explain why political reliability is more than just a matter of public image.

A federal president can contribute to understanding, but cannot permanently compensate for the poor performance of other institutions through communication alone. Confidence becomes unbelievable when it merely masks problems. Conversely, an exclusively negative portrayal of the country can obscure its existing capabilities. A more convincing approach would be a combination of recognition and expectations: naming successes, specifying shortcomings, and measuring progress against verifiable improvements. This would give the office more substance than the expectation that a likeable personality can compensate for the consequences of unreliable politics through personal charisma.

Consensus must not mean self-reassurance

Broad support is a plausible goal for the office of Federal President. The head of state should not act as a permanent counterweight to democratically elected majorities, but rather embody the unity of the state and maintain political distance. A candidacy that garners support beyond one's own party can therefore be an advantage. It would be contradictory to demand social cohesion on the one hand and, on the other hand, treat any cross-party agreement with suspicion.

The crucial line lies between a viable consensus and mere complacency. Consensus is productive when it clarifies shared principles and enables action. It becomes problematic when it primarily prevents existing conflicts of interest from being addressed. A head of state does not need to endorse as many stakeholders as possible simultaneously. Rather, they should argue in such a way that even uncomfortable points can be understood as a contribution to the common good.

For Aigner, this presents an open question of how to prove himself. A calm, committed approach to governance could depoliticize debates and thereby facilitate change. However, the same restraint could also lead to difficult issues being obscured by general appeals. Which effect will prevail cannot be reliably determined before taking office. Criticism of a potential continuation of the status quo should therefore formulate a clear criterion: Is cohesion understood as a prerequisite for joint problem-solving, or as a justification for avoiding existing conflicts for as long as possible? There is a significant difference between these two forms of consensus regarding the capacity for political renewal.

Opening begins before the name

A better selection process wouldn't necessarily lead to a different candidate. It would first require a change in the order: first a comprehensible job profile, then the individual. This could include the ability to integrate, constitutional judgment, social experience, intellectual independence, and the capacity to explain long-term developments clearly. Such a standard would not privilege any particular professional group or dismiss long-term political experience across the board.

The Basic Law requires neither party membership nor prior government office for eligibility to be elected. Anyone who possesses German citizenship, is eligible to vote in Bundestag elections, and has reached the age of forty is eligible. The legally eligible group is thus broader than the usual political attention. However, this does not automatically mean that a non-partisan individual would be more independent or better suited. Economic interests, institutional ties, and personal loyalties also exist outside of political parties.

Therefore, public discussions about the understanding of the office, conducted differently than a government election campaign, would be beneficial. The candidate would not need to present detailed tax or pension plans. However, she could explain how she intends to handle power, distance, and societal opposition. Similarly, the supporting parties could more clearly justify which requirements their decision fulfills. This would not replace the Federal Assembly and would not require a constitutionally mandated direct election. It would simply require that a decision of national importance be explained in a way that goes beyond simply pointing to its mathematical justification.

A presidency with strong economic ties

One unique contribution the office could make is to translate economic renewal from abstract programmatic language into concrete, real-life contexts. Productivity doesn't just mean more output per hour worked. It also determines which incomes, public services, and social security systems a society can sustainably finance. A debate on this topic should therefore bring together economic performance and social participation, instead of treating them as irreconcilable opposing positions.

Aigner's professional background offers a potential entry point, without prejudging her future course. A presidency grounded in reality could raise the profile of vocational training, technical professions, and entrepreneurial responsibility. It could also include people who perceive structural change as a threat. Crucially, these perspectives should not simply be juxtaposed, but their inherent tensions should be taken seriously: increased efficiency and job security, climate protection and competitiveness, financial stability and necessary investments.

It would also be conceivable to visit not only successful showcase projects, but also places where innovation fails or stalls. Such encounters need not serve the purpose of publicly shaming individual officials. Their benefit would lie in making problems more understandable and demanding a concrete willingness to learn from various levels. Whether this results in a real impact depends on continuity and credibility. A single meeting to discuss the future does not create a new culture of debate. Consistent attention to implementation, responsibility, and societal consequences, on the other hand, could give the office a recognizable profile that extends beyond mere ceremonial representation.

Independence is revealed in contradiction

The most important test only begins after a potential election. All previous Federal Presidents suspended their existing party memberships during their term in office; the necessary distance from day-to-day politics is intended to enable independent orientation. However, a formal distancing alone does not answer the question of how independently someone actually acts. Political independence becomes apparent when a person applies standards even where this is uncomfortable for their former circle.

For a Federal President from the CSU, this would not mean demonstratively opposing the CDU/CSU alliance. It would mean demanding democratic fairness, the rule of law, and long-term responsibility, regardless of which party is currently benefiting. Likewise, distancing oneself from extremist positions should not lead to dismissing legitimate criticism of government services as an unwelcome disruption. An open democracy requires both clear boundaries against unconstitutional activities and ample space for substantive dissent.

This is the difference between a non-partisan head of state and a representative figure who appeals to all parties. The former can unite people because it sets reliable standards. The latter risks only complacency because it demands little of anyone. Aigner's candidacy leaves both possibilities open. A fair, critical perspective must therefore not claim that the outcome of her term is already predetermined. However, it should insist that personal popularity and broad support cannot replace the demonstration of independent judgment.

The actual test is still pending

The most substantiated criticism of the current selection process is not that Germany is incapable of innovation, nor that Aigner will inevitably harm the country. Both of these claims go beyond what can be proven. The criticism focuses on a political ambition that has so far fallen short of its own promise of renewal: A candidacy that garners a majority is treated as a significant step forward, even though the question of a changed culture of selection and accountability remains unanswered.

A surprising name wouldn't have automatically solved this problem. Even a prominent outsider could have become a projection screen without possessing the necessary capacity for integration. Germany therefore needs less the staging of a major "aha" moment than a political culture that provides comprehensible justifications for suitability, openly addresses long-term problems, and prioritizes results over the satisfaction of the party apparatuses involved. That would be a more sophisticated understanding of innovation in the political sphere.

Aigner could certainly fulfill this claim after an election. Precisely for that reason, it should be formulated now. The historic progress of a first female Federal President would be real, but not complete. The crucial question is whether the approach to responsibility will also change with the new person in office. If the established forces continue to operate with little friction, the candidacy would primarily be a modernization of the political landscape. If it emerges as an independent voice for efficiency, fair renewal, and the limits of political complacency, then more could come of it. Until then, a new beginning has not been proven, only the parties' ability to agree on a single candidate.