Politics is a craft.

Instead, there used to be the term “ox tour”, which came from the Social Democrats and described the arduous ascent from the local association to the highest political offices.

During the ox tour, politicians learn everything they need to know: forge alliances to secure majorities.

But above all, carefully consider the effect of your words.

Nowhere else does a wrong word have such consequences as in politics.

There is a simple reason for this: no other profession is based in the same way on the legitimation of the public.

Apparently harmless with a mischievous smile

Yesterday evening Ms. Maischberger showed us what that means in practice. With Olaf Scholz (SPD) and Markus Söder (CSU), she invited two top politicians who will play a central role in the federal election campaign. Even if one has become what the other wanted to be. Of course, every good journalist knows even before an interview which questions a politician can answer with “yes” or “no” and which can not be answered at all. With Ms. Maischberger, this is expressed in her facial expressions: Her mischievous smile signals the expectation that a guest will not answer the question.

So the Bavarian Prime Minister made the start.

Söder did not want to answer the harmless question about the Union's election campaign slogan, because that would be interpreted in the "editorial offices" as rushing ahead, he wanted to put Armin Laschet under pressure again.

"No", so his explanation, he does not want to do that "as a loyal and well-behaved common campaigner."

We don't know the Union's election campaign slogan, but we learned something about its communication problem.

Söder had been trying to outmaneuver his rival from Düsseldorf for more than a year.

After his lost battle for the candidacy for chancellor, every statement he makes is looked for for signs of disloyalty.

After all, nobody would think of Söder to be “good and loyal”.

"Spiderman" instead of "Highlander"

In the meantime, this even affects the selection of his film motifs on the coffee cups. When the “Welt” journalist Dagmar Rosenfeld pointed out the “Highlander” motif, Söder showed his mug with “Spiderman”. This really doesn't mean that there could be only one. But that showed the risks of operating as a top politician with such symbolism. It could even happen that Söder didn't think anything at all when choosing a film motif. But an interpretation is slipped on him against which he could no longer defend himself. How does he want to prove that he hadn't thought anything at all?

Scholz does not have to expect such pitfalls. Almost 20 years ago, as SPD general secretary, he had the label of the “Scholzomat” stuck on. This meant a boredom who fiddled with sentences from text modules. That changed when he first became Federal Minister of Labor and then Hamburg Mayor. The boredom suddenly stood for seriousness and seriousness. Turning weaknesses into such strengths is a central point for the image of a politician. The riots at the Hamburg G-20 summit, however, left their mark on this image change, which had been so successful up to then.