1925 German presidential election

none Weimar Republic presidential 1919 German presidential election 1919 1932 German presidential election 1932 29 March 1925 (first round)26 April 1925 (second round) 68.87% (first round)77.56% (second round) Bundesarchiv Bild 183-C06886, Paul v. Hindenburg.jpg 190 115 145 7 47 Paul von Hindenburg DCDCDC IndependentSupported by: Reichsblock DNVP DVP BVP NSDAP WP BB DHP 14,655,641 48.29% Bundesarchiv Bild 146-1968-101-25A, Wilhelm Marx.jpg 160 115 145 14 18 Wilhelm Marx 000000 CentreSupported by: Volksblock SPD Centre DDP 13,751,605 45.31% Bundesarchiv Bild 102-12940, Ernst Thälmann.jpg 410 115 145 68 95 Ernst Thälmann Communist Party of Germany 1,931,151 6.36% 400px First round: results by electoral constituency 400px First round: results by district and independent city 400px Second round: results by electoral constituency 400px Second round: results by district and independent city 3 President Friedrich EbertEbert died on 28 February 1925, and Walter Simons became acting president SPD(Acting president Walter SimonsIndependent) Paul von Hindenburg Independent politician A presidential election was held in Germany on 29 March 1925, with a runoff on 26 April.Nohlen Dieter Dieter Nohlen Elections in Europe: A data handbook Stöver Philip Nomos 2010 978-3-8329-5609-7 Baden-Baden 762 It was the first direct election to the office of president of Germany (de Reichspräsident), the head of state of the Weimar Republic, and followed the death in office of Friedrich Ebert. The first round of the election included seven candidates and resulted in no clear frontrunner. In the second round, the centrist parties united around Wilhelm Marx of the Catholic Centre Party, while the parties of the Right convinced former field marshal Paul von Hindenburg, who had not run in the first round, to enter the contest. He won with 48.3% of the vote. Background 1919 German presidential election Germany's first president, Friedrich Ebert of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), was elected indirectly by the Weimar National Assembly on 11 February 1919. The Weimar Constitution, which became effective six months later, required that the president be elected by the "whole German people". The first regular presidential election was to have taken place in 1920, but it was repeatedly postponed because of Germany's continuing political unrest. In late 1922, the Reichstag extended Ebert's term to 30 June 1925, a change which required amending Article 180 of the constitution.21. August 1919: Friedrich Ebert als erster Reichspräsident vereidigt 21 August 1919: Friedrich Ebert Sworn in as the First President of the Reich https://www.bundestag.de/dokumente/textarchiv/1919-08-21-vereidigung-friedrich-ebert-654306 14 February 2026 Deutscher Bundestag deReichsgesetzblatt 28 October 1922 Reich Law Gazette 28 October 1922 https://alex.onb.ac.at/cgi-content/alex?aid=dra&datum=1922&page=899&size=45 10 November 2024 ALEX Historische Rechts- und Gesetztexte Online de When Ebert died in office on 28 February 1925, Chancellor Hans Luther, an independent, took over the duties of the office under Article 51 of the Weimar Constitution. The Law on the Deputization of the Reich President of 10 March 1925 then made the president of the Reich Court, Walter Simons, acting president of Germany.Gesetz über die Stellvertretung des Reichspräsidenten vom 10. März 1925 Law on the Deputy Reich President of 10 March 1925 http://www.documentarchiv.de/wr/rp_stellv_ges.html 17 February 2026 documentArchiv de The election was scheduled for 29 March 1925. Electoral system The president was directly elected by universal adult suffrage for a term of seven years. The Weimar Republic used a modified two-round system for the election of the president. If no candidate received an absolute majority of votes in the first round, a second ballot would take place in which the candidate with a plurality of votes would be elected. There was no prohibition against a candidate who had not run in the first round being nominated for the second.Gesetz über die Wahl des Reichspräsidenten vom 4. Mai 1920 Law on the Election of the President of the Reich of 4 May 1920 http://www.documentarchiv.de/wr/1920/reichspraesidentenwahl_ges.html 16 February 2026 documentArchiv.de de First round Candidates Ebert died four months before his term was due to expire. Up to that point, there had been little discussion of a possible successor, and only a month was allotted to select candidates and hold the campaign.Kellerhoff Sven-Felix 7 April 2025 Als ein Monarchist im Schicksalsjahr 1925 die Republik retten sollte When in the Crucial Year 1925 a Monarchist Was Meant to Save the Republic https://www.welt.de/geschichte/article255754166/Hindenburg-Als-ein-Monarchist-im-Schicksalsjahr-1925-die-Republik-retten-sollte.html 17 February 2026 Die Welt de The centrist parties recognized the advantage of fielding a joint candidate but were unable to overcome their divisions. The parties to the Right, the German National People's Party (DNVP) and German People's Party (DVP), wanted chiefly to keep the presidency out of the hands of the Social Democrats and were willing to work with the German Democratic Party (DDP) and Centre Party to do so. Defense Minister Otto Gessler of the DDP was proposed as a compromise candidate, but Foreign Minister Gustav Stresemann of the DVP opposed him out of concern that choosing a defense minister would negatively affect Germany's foreign policy. In the end, only three right-of-center parties were able to unite around a common candidate. The seven first round candidates, in order of finish, were:Graper 1925 593–595Mommsen Hans Hans Mommsen The Rise and Fall of Weimar Democracy University of North Carolina Press 1996 978-0-807-82249-4 Chapel Hill 235 Forster Elborg Jones Larry Eugene German National People's Party, German People's Party, Economic Party: Karl Jarres, former vice-chancellor of Germany (38.8%) Social Democratic Party: Otto Braun, former minister-president of Prussia (29.0%) Centre Party: Wilhelm Marx, former chancellor of Germany (14.5%) Communist Party (KPD): Ernst Thälmann, member of the Reichstag (7.0%) German Democratic Party: Willy Hellpach, state president of Baden (5.8%) Bavarian People's Party (BVP): Heinrich Held, minister-president of Bavaria (3.8%) German Völkisch Freedom Party (DVFP): Erich Ludendorff, former general, member of the Reichstag (1.1%) The German-Hanoverian Party supported Heinrich Held. Most völkisch movement parties supported Jarres as a compromise candidate, although Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party (NSDAP) supported Ludendorff.Orlow 1969 61 Results The frontrunners in the highly fragmented election were the candidates of the Right (Jarres) and Left (Braun). While the total votes for the Centre Party (-5.6%) and DDP (-18.3%) dropped from the Reichstag election of December 1924, the parties of the far Left and far Right fell considerably more in percentage terms. The Communist Party's vote total dropped by 30.9%, and the far Right's showing was down 68.5%. It was a continuation of the trend towards de-radicalization that had become visible between the closely spaced Reichstag elections in May and December 1924 and can be attributed to the economic stabilization that was taking place at the time. Given the relatively low turnout for the first round of the presidential election (69% as compared to 79% in the December Reichstag election), it is likely that many who had voted for the Communist Party or the far right National Socialist Freedom Movement in 1924 stayed away from the polls on 29 March 1925.Winkler Heinrich August Heinrich August Winkler Weimar 1918–1933. Die Geschichte der ersten deutschen Demokratie C.H. Beck 1993 3-406-37646-0 Munich 279 de Weimar 1918–1933. The History of the First German Democracy Second round The formation of united blocs was even more important in the second round because the candidate with the most votes, even if not over 50%, won the election. The parties of the Weimar Coalition – SPD, DDP, and Centre – knew that unity was their only chance of defeating the candidate chosen by the Right. The SPD, which was aware that its endorsement carried significant weight only among its own party members, dropped its support of Otto Braun and made a political deal with the Centre Party to support Wilhelm Marx. Braun had resigned as minister-president of Prussia in January after a tied vote of no-confidence against his ministry. A series of indecisive votes in the Prussian Landtag that swung between Marx and Braun then followed. The SPD promised the Centre Party that it would back Marx in the presidential election in exchange for the Centre's support for Braun as minister-president of Prussia. The DDP then joined them in the de Volksblock to endorse Marx as candidate for president.Winkler 1993 279–280 thumb|260x260px|A large bust of Paul von Hindenburg driven through the street as part of campaigning. thumb|260x260px|A van with a pro-Thälmann posterboard on its side and supporters flying the Red flag The parties of the Right united around the 78-year-old World War I field marshal Paul von Hindenburg. In spite of the eventual consensus among the parties to support him, there were misgivings about his candidacy on a number of fronts. Stresemann and the DVP initially opposed him due to worries that the western powers would see him as a provocation. Large industrialists, who bore much of the cost of the campaign and generally were aligned with the DNVP, feared that Hindenburg, whose family owned a large estate east of the Elbe, would favor eastern agrarians. Wilhelm von Gayl of the DNVP expressed concern over whether Hindenburg would be willing to openly violate the constitution as some monarchists and anti-republicans hoped he would. In the end, he was endorsed by all of the parties of the Right, including the German Völkisch Freedom Party (DVFP), the Nazi Party and the Bavarian People's Party. The BVP, which represented heavily Catholic Bavaria, split from the Centre Party and Marx, who was Catholic, because it believed that the Protestant Hindenburg would be more certain to oppose the Social Democrats. Hindenburg, at his own insistence, obtained the approval of former emperor Wilhelm II before he agreed to run for president.Winkler 1993 280–281Mommsen 1996 236 The Communist Party alone put forward its own candidate, Ernst Thälmann, even though the Communist International (Comintern) had urged the KPD not to do so.Mommsen 1996 237 In an appeal to German workers, the KPD stated that "it is not the task of the proletariat to choose the most skilful representative of bourgeois interests, [or] to choose the lesser evil between the civil dictator Marx and the military dictator Hindenburg... Every class-conscious worker votes against Hindenburg and Marx for Thälmann."Winkler 1993 281 Marx was not considered to be an especially inspired campaigner, and Hindenburg, who had no experience as a politician, made few personal appearances. He addressed only one public meeting, held in Hanover, where he had retired, and gave one radio address. Hindenburg stated that he would uphold the constitution, and his campaign stressed his devotion to "social justice, religious equality [and] genuine peace at home and abroad"Dorpalen Andreas :de:Andreas Dorpalen 2 January 2026 Paul von Hindenburg https://www.britannica.com/biography/Paul-von-Hindenburg 21 February 2026 www.britannica.com and called for a "national community" (de Volksgemeinschaft) under his leadership.Pyta Wolfram The German Right in the Weimar Republic: Studies in the History of German Conservatism, Nationalism, and Antisemitism 2014 Berghahn Books 978-1-78533-201-2 Jones Larry Eugene 39–40 Hindenburg and the German Right The parties of the bourgeois Right campaigned for him as a man who stood above party politics and condemned Marx for being too close to the SPD. In the words of Fritz Schäffer of the BVP, Hindenburg's candidacy emerged out of the "misery of Germany's party politics".Mommsen 1996 236–237 Results The second round was held on 26 April, with a turnout of 77.6%. Hindenburg won on a plurality of the vote, with 48.3% to Marx's 45.3% and Thälmann's 6.4%. The KPD clearly played a spoiler role in the election – the 27 April headline in the SPD's party newspaper Vorwärts read "Hindenburg by the Grace of Thälmann!" – although Thälmann's votes did not all come from committed KPD members. Religion also was part of many voters' considerations. When compared to the SPD's results in the first round, Marx fared especially poorly in Saxony, where strong anti-clerical sentiment led many SPD voters to turn to Thälmann. In Protestant regions of Württemberg, many liberal and socialist voters turned to Hindenburg for the same reason. In East Prussia, Hindenburg as the victor of the Battle of Tannenberg, which was fought in East Prussia, drew many who had voted for one of the Weimar parties (SPD, DDP and Centre) in the first round. Across Germany as a whole, Hindenburg had more success at bringing first round non-voters to the polls than did Marx.Winkler 1993 281–282 Historian Hans Mommsen attributed Hindenburg's victory to discomfort with the SPD among the middle class and the mobilization of nationalism and anti-Marxist feelings by the Right in the second round:Mommsen 1996 237–238The election results made it clear that resentment against the Social Democrats had played a central role in the voting behavior of the bourgeois electorate and that in large segments of the German middle class this went hand in hand with the rejection of the parliamentary system. The decisive factor, however, was that of the 3.5 million voters who participated only in the second round of balloting, an estimated 3 million cast their votes for Hindenburg. The mobilization of anti-Marxist and nationalist sentiments thus afforded the political Right access to that dangerous arsenal of non-voters the republican parties could not hope to reach. Some also attributed Marx's loss to the candidature of Ernst Thälmann of the Communist Party of Germany, who did not drop out in the second round. However, historian Peter Fritzsche rejected this view, calling the claim "far-fetched" and arguing that "given the explicit enmity of this party toward the Weimar "capitalist state," it would have been completely unrealistic to expect the KPD to support the candidate of the Weimar system". Fritsche instead found that the BVP's endorsement of Hindenburg was crucial to Marx's defeat.Presidential Victory and Popular Festivity in Weimar Germany: Hindenburg's 1925 Election Peter Fritzsche Peter Fritzsche 1990 Central European History 23 2-3 10.1017/s000893890002135x 233 2142/2288 free Aftermath In spite of Hindenburg's open monarchism and pressure from some of the men in his inner circle, Hindenburg as president never overtly stepped outside of constitutional bounds during his term in office. After the Great Depression hit Germany in 1929, he allowed Chancellor Heinrich Brüning to govern by presidential decree rather than through the Reichstag, but under Article 48, his actions were within the letter if not necessarily the spirit of the constitution. The 1930 Reichstag election made the Nazi Party the second strongest in the parliament, but its rise was due primarily to the dire economic circumstances under which the nation was suffering. Hindenburg was re-elected president in 1932. He was supported in that election even by the Social Democrats as the only candidate who could defeat Adolf Hitler. Vote totals Karl Jarres German People's PartyGerman National People's PartyEconomic Party 10416658 Otto Braun Social Democratic Party 7802497 Wilhelm Marx Centre PartySupported by SPD, Centre, DDP in the second round 3887734 13751605 Ernst Thälmann Communist Party 1871815 1931151 Willy Hellpach German Democratic Party 1568398 Heinrich Held Bavarian People's PartySupported by DHP 1007450 Erich Ludendorff German Völkisch Freedom Party 285793 black Paul von Hindenburg IndependentSupported by DNVP, DVP, BVP, NSDAP, WP, BB, DHP 14655641 Other candidates 25761 13416 150654 216061 39226138 39414316 Gonschior Results by constituency Winners within each constituency are highlighted in the color representing the party. Constituency First roundhttps://wahlen-in-deutschland.de/wRPW1925WG1.htm Ergebnisse des 1. Wahlgangs am 29.3.1925 in den Wahlkreisen Valentin Schröder 27 July 2014 Wahlen in Deutschland Second roundhttps://wahlen-in-deutschland.de/wRPW1925WG2.htm Ergebnisse des 2. Wahlgangs am 26.4.1925 in den Wahlkreisen Valentin Schröder 27 July 2014 Wahlen in Deutschland JarresDNVP, DVP, WP BraunSPD MarxCentre ThälmannKPD HellpachDDP HeldBVP LudendorffDVFP HindenburgReichsblock MarxVolksblock ThälmannKPD Votes % Votes % Votes % Votes % Votes % Votes % Votes % Votes % Votes % Votes % 1 East Prussia 550,294 58.41 228,012 24.20 70,050 7.44 45,276 4.81 32,759 3.48 2,837 0.30 11,352 1.20 715,093 66.90 302,740 28.32 50,344 4.71 2 Berlin 329,003 30.13 398,510 36.50 56,638 5.19 180,734 16.55 121,390 11.12 1,357 0.12 4,010 0.37 384,361 32.47 654,487 55.29 144,879 12.24 3 Potsdam II 372,996 42.34 261,740 29.71 37,953 4.31 84,516 9.59 118,309 13.43 1,206 0.14 3,977 0.45 427,358 44.22 467,709 48.39 71,206 7.37 4 Potsdam I 394,333 45.93 287,263 33.46 26,188 3.05 84,196 9.81 58,933 6.86 1,784 0.21 5,266 0.61 464,550 49.20 403,596 42.75 75,722 8.02 5 Frankfurt (Oder) 439,818 56.47 227,546 29.22 51,340 6.59 23,319 2.99 27,740 3.56 1,785 0.23 6,499 0.83 532,597 61.47 307,914 35.54 25,513 2.94 6 Pomerania 530,287 63.92 213,942 25.79 10,862 1.31 33,483 4.04 26,929 3.25 2,268 0.27 10,879 1.31 656,822 71.08 224,486 24.29 42,276 4.58 7 Breslau 354,431 39.49 314,880 35.08 167,398 18.65 18,668 2.08 33,439 3.73 2,499 0.28 5,490 0.61 451,792 45.34 520,907 52.28 23,335 2.34 8 Liegnitz 240,523 42.26 204,339 35.90 48,365 8.50 11,667 2.05 59,333 10.42 1,602 0.28 2,904 0.51 321,295 50.47 298,431 46.88 16,629 2.61 9 Oppeln 145,053 30.58 46,391 9.78 220,914 46.57 45,552 9.60 8,980 1.89 2,064 0.44 4,640 0.98 224,914 39.84 293,213 51.94 46,041 8.16 10 Magdeburg 411,748 47.74 347,615 40.30 17,734 2.06 38,670 4.48 37,901 4.39 1,511 0.18 6,677 0.77 485,357 52.21 404,361 43.50 39,584 4.26 11 Merseburg 334,877 50.00 143,680 21.45 10,836 1.62 136,951 20.45 33,195 4.96 1,446 0.22 8,395 1.25 411,234 57.41 164,671 22.99 140,153 19.56 12 Thuringia 496,699 49.07 305,481 30.18 47,224 4.67 101,681 10.05 42,234 4.17 2,159 0.21 15,857 1.57 621,652 55.21 393,621 34.96 110,108 9.78 13 Schleswig-Holstein 373,731 53.18 231,841 32.99 10,398 1.48 37,035 5.27 41,915 5.96 1,715 0.24 5,404 0.77 478,509 59.78 283,379 35.40 38,177 4.77 14 Weser-Ems 227,045 38.02 172,108 28.82 127,345 21.32 19,144 3.21 41,452 6.94 4,737 0.79 4,863 0.81 335,057 46.95 355,227 49.78 23,030 3.23 15 East Hanover 221,367 50.85 142,595 32.76 7,302 1.68 14,289 3.28 14,560 3.34 30,873 7.09 3,526 0.81 336,885 64.05 172,725 32.84 16,026 3.05 16 South Hanover–Braunschweig 386,535 41.55 379,569 40.80 53,094 5.71 28,813 3.10 36,836 3.96 35,942 3.86 8,716 0.94 540,077 50.94 488,544 46.08 31,226 2.95 17 Westphalia North 268,355 27.97 228,155 23.78 379,875 39.60 48,625 5.07 22,613 2.36 3,852 0.40 6,892 0.72 389,507 35.44 660,770 60.13 48,267 4.39 18 Westphalia South 320,109 27.50 320,581 27.55 350,105 30.08 108,686 9.34 52,245 4.49 3,083 0.26 8,157 0.70 461,725 35.67 737,311 56.97 94,922 7.33 19 Hesse-Nassau 383,931 36.11 347,647 32.70 193,695 18.22 43,924 4.13 80,484 7.57 4,022 0.38 8,576 0.81 546,580 44.96 622,037 51.17 46,502 3.83 20 Cologne-Aachen 140,202 17.50 142,960 17.84 429,945 53.66 51,675 6.45 25,661 3.20 3,861 0.48 6,259 0.78 212,795 22.84 670,238 71.94 48,278 5.18 21 Koblenz-Trier 100,172 21.29 57,996 12.33 280,929 59.72 12,420 2.64 11,466 2.44 2,561 0.54 3,998 0.85 166,151 30.59 362,622 66.76 14,015 2.58 22 Düsseldorf East 296,687 34.06 160,616 18.44 227,266 26.09 151,676 17.41 24,782 2.85 1,872 0.21 7,273 0.84 410,664 41.07 441,654 44.16 147,527 14.75 23 Düsseldorf West 174,808 25.58 115,614 16.92 304,263 44.52 67,603 9.89 13,351 1.95 2,489 0.36 4,931 0.72 252,830 32.83 455,808 59.19 61,165 7.94 24 Upper Bavaria–Swabia 200,085 23.52 183,845 21.61 11,461 1.35 25,562 3.00 20,965 2.46 372,778 43.81 33,890 3.98 630,348 65.42 306,161 31.77 26,549 2.76 25 Lower Bavaria–Upper Palatinate 36,481 10.66 44,754 13.08 10,175 2.97 7,300 2.13 6,431 1.88 227,215 66.41 8,738 2.55 260,721 67.98 113,543 29.60 8,736 2.28 26 Franconia 355,635 36.69 278,354 28.72 13,835 1.43 23,318 2.41 36,512 3.77 227,950 23.52 32,399 3.34 673,243 58.69 447,529 39.01 25,769 2.25 27 Palatinate 90,074 29.26 87,512 28.43 39,771 12.92 23,575 7.66 19,777 6.43 43,099 14.00 3,674 1.19 166,873 45.29 179,232 48.64 22,188 6.02 28 Dresden–Bautzen 396,242 43.44 366,081 40.14 17,557 1.92 36,636 4.02 88,088 9.66 2,099 0.23 5,079 0.56 511,213 51.49 416,036 41.90 65,148 6.56 29 Leipzig 267,707 40.05 275,551 41.23 6,501 0.97 67,663 10.12 44,424 6.65 1,884 0.28 4,346 0.65 332,075 48.04 276,464 39.99 82,206 11.89 30 Chemnitz–Zwickau 360,616 44.29 292,761 35.96 7,380 0.91 99,864 12.26 36,733 4.51 2,301 0.28 14,228 1.75 490,277 53.63 284,600 31.13 138,647 15.16 31 Württemberg 348,640 34.72 206,518 20.57 241,525 24.05 56,521 5.63 137,059 13.65 3,971 0.40 9,023 0.90 544,104 45.73 588,027 49.42 57,056 4.80 32 Baden 241,357 27.62 198,494 22.71 295,183 33.78 39,152 4.48 88,091 10.08 3,744 0.43 6,508 0.74 375,272 35.63 635,787 60.36 41,578 3.95 33 Hesse-Darmstadt 188,108 33.26 210,545 37.22 98,491 17.41 20,951 3.70 42,351 7.49 1,689 0.30 3,271 0.58 274,384 41.33 366,321 55.18 22,998 3.46 34 Hamburg 214,200 36.86 214,888 36.98 12,368 2.13 67,566 11.63 65,415 11.26 1,504 0.26 4,603 0.79 294,156 45.63 281,312 43.64 68,718 10.66 35 Mecklenburg 224,509 52.07 164,113 38.06 3,768 0.87 15,104 3.50 16,045 3.72 1,691 0.39 5,493 1.27 275,170 59.55 170,142 36.82 16,633 3.60 Total 10,416,658 38.77 7,802,497 29.04 3,887,734 14.47 1,871,815 6.97 1,568,398 5.84 1,007,450 3.75 285,793 1.06 14,655,641 48.29 13,751,605 45.31 1,931,151 6.36 See also Presidential cabinets of the Weimar Republic Notes References Works cited Cary, Noel D. "The making of the reich president, 1925: German conservatism and the nomination of Paul von Hindenburg." Central European History 23.2-3 (1990): 179-204. online Graper Elmer 1925 The German Presidential Election https://www.jstor.org/stable/2939137 American Political Science Review American Political Science Association 19 3 592–600 10.2307/2939137 2939137 Orlow Dietrich https://archive.org/details/historyofnazipar0000orlo/mode/2up The History of the Nazi Party: 1919-1933 1969 University of Pittsburgh Press registration 822931834 Further reading Cary Noel D. The Making of the Reich President, 1925: German Conservatism and the Nomination of Paul von Hindenburg Central European History 23 2–3 179–204 1990 10.1017/S0008938900021348 145119910. Debus, Marc, and Martin Ejnar Hansen. "Dimensionality of the Weimar Republic from 1920 to 1932." Politische Vierteljahresschrift 51 (2010): 15-42. Eyck, Erich. A History of the Weimar Republic, Volume I: From the Collapse of the Empire to Hindenburg's Election (1962) pp.334ff online Falter, Jürgen W. "The Two Hindenburg Elections of 1925 and 1932: A Total Reversal of Voter Coalitions" Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung. Supplement, No. 25, (2013), pp. 217–232 online Fritzsche, Peter. "Presidential Victory and Popular Festivity in Weimar Germany: Hindenburg's 1925 Election." Central European History 23.2-3 (1990): 205-224. online Fulda, Bernhard. Press and politics in the Weimar Republic (Oxford University Press, 2009) online. Hansen, Martin Ejnar, and Marc Debus. "The behaviour of political parties and MPs in the parliaments of the Weimar Republic." Party Politics 18.5 (2012): 709-726. online Zeender, John K. "The German Catholics and the presidential election of 1925." Journal of Modern History 35.4 (1963): 366-381 online. Category:Presidential elections in Germany Germany President Category:Federal elections in the Weimar Republic Category:Paul von Hindenburg Germany Germany Category:Election and referendum articles with incomplete results