American politics operate as a two-party system, and third party candidates do not play a major role in elections. Describe how and why third parties form, their key successes, and hurdles to still further success. American politics operate on a two-party system, meaning that two major political parties dominate voting in most elections and consequently dominate elected offices.
In modern United States elections, the two major parties are the Democratic and Republican parties. These parties are associated with liberal and conservative views respectively, and nearly all elected officials are affiliated with one of the two. Campaign endorsements, funding, and resources are allocated to candidates on the basis of nomination by one of these two parties. Although the American political structure has consistently been a two-party system, third parties occasionally influence elections, and third party candidates sometimes obtain elected positions.
Many third parties have gained some traction throughout American history — at one point, the Socialist Party held mayoral offices, and Theodore Roosevelt obtained a signifiant number of votes in his presidential bid as the Progressive Party candidate in None of them hold a substantial number of public offices. There are numerous logistical reasons third parties have not been more successful in the U. This system is in contrast to proportional representation systems, in which parties are allocated representation based on the proportion of the popular vote they receive.
With regards to ballot access, candidates for major elections, such as presidential elections, must meet state-determined criteria to be included on election ballots. Ballot access laws often mandate that candidates pay large fees or collect a large number of signatures to be listed, which often restricts the ability of third party candidates to be put on the ballot.
Lastly, since the onset of televised presidential debates in the s, with only a couple of exceptions, third party candidates have been barred from participation.
This policy limits their ability to publicize their views and gain a following among the electorate. While many electoral policies in the U. The two major parties have shifted names, platforms, and constituencies over time, but they have always served as gatekeepers to financial and human resources.
Moreover, throughout the past few decades, major party politicians have been able to neutralize third party threats by adopting or discrediting the views of third party candidates. Both major parties are at risk of losing voters if third party campaigns gain traction, so they have both tended to act in ways that promote the two party system. Ross Perot : Ross Perot is the last third party presidential candidate to gain a substantial number of votes in the general election.
Third party politicians tend to be more ideological than Republicans or Democrats because they do not have to play to the American middle. This means that two major political parties dominate in most elections and consequently dominate elected office.
Currently, the two major American parties are the Democratic and Republican parties, although the top two parties change over time. A third party is any party that supports a candidate for election other than the two major political parties; at the current moment, a third party would be any party other than the Democratic and Republican parties.
Though third parties represent a very small fraction of Americans participating in politics, they do influence elections by drawing votes away from either of the two main parties. It has spent a lot of money and effort with no officeholders to show for it. This disadvantage for small parties is also built into the Electoral College, where a candidate needs a majority of electoral votes to win the presidency — and no non-major-party candidate ever has.
They have no desire to increase their competition. The small number of true independents in American politics are much less likely to show interest in politics and to vote. So it would not be easy for a third party to get Americans to put aside their existing partisan allegiance. Prospective Trump Party supporters do agree on what they stand for: Donald Trump.
There are good reasons for Americans to want more major parties. But American politics would look very different if the country had a viable multi-party system, in which voters could choose from among, say, a Socialist Party, a White Supremacist Party and maybe even a Party for the Animals. With the exception of African-American and Jewish voters — the vast majority of whom usually vote for the Democratic presidential candidate — both parties draw significant levels of support from virtually every major socioeconomic group in society.
The parties also exhibit flexibility with respect to policy positions and do not generally enforce a strict adherence to an ideology or a set of policy goals. Rather, they have traditionally been concerned first and foremost with winning elections and controlling the elective branches of government. Given their broad socioeconomic bases of electoral support and the need to operate within a society that is largely middle-of-the-road ideologically, American parties have adopted essentially centrist policy positions.
As noted, they also demonstrate a high level of policy flexibility. This non-doctrinaire approach enables the Republicans and the Democrats to tolerate great diversity within their ranks, and has contributed to their ability to absorb third parties and protest movements when they have occurred. In general, Republicans are seen as the conservative party, with more of an emphasis on property rights and private accumulation of wealth, and the Democrats are seen as somewhat more to the left, favoring liberal social and economic policies.
In practice, when they achieve power, both parties tend to be pragmatic. In addition to being ideologically flexible, the two main American parties are characterized by a decentralized structure. The Democratic and Republican congressional caucuses composed of incumbent legislators are autonomous, and may pursue policies that are in opposition to the president, even if the president is from the same party. Party fundraising for elections is similarly separated, as the Republican and Democratic congressional and senatorial campaign committees operate independently from the national party committees that tend to be oriented to the presidential election.
In addition, except for asserting authority over procedures for selecting delegates to national nominating conventions, national party organizations rarely meddle in state party affairs. This organizational fragmentation reflects the consequences of the constitutional separation-of-powers system — the division of powers among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government, both at the federal and state level.
This is broadly true whether we are talking about members of Congress vis-a-vis a president of their own party, or a similar relationship between state legislators and a governor. The layered system of federal, state and local governments in the United States provides further impetus for decentralization of the parties by creating thousands of constituencies for officeholders at the federal, state, and local levels.
As previously noted, the use of primary elections to nominate candidates also weakens the party organizations by denying them the ability to control the selection of party nominees. Individual candidates, therefore, are encouraged to build their own personal campaign organizations and electoral followings, first to win the primaries and then the general elections.
In spite of the long and impressive evidence of organized partisanship within the American political system, one ingrained component of American civic culture has been increasing distrust of political parties. The adoption and growth of the primary system for nominating congressional and state candidates is testimony to a populist, or even anti-party, sentiment within the public.
Modern Americans are skeptical about the leaders of their party organizations exercising great power over their government. Public opinion polls consistently reveal that large proportions of the population believe that the parties sometimes do more to confuse the issues than clarify them — and that it would be better if there were no party labels on the ballot.
Parties thus must contend with the problem of a substantial number of voters attaching diminished importance to party identification. One indicator of this is the incidence of ticket-splitting.
Thus, in an age of divided government, presidents often find themselves attempting to govern without a majority in one or both houses of Congress. Divided party control of the executive and legislative branches of government has become a commonplace feature of both the national government and the governments in the 50 states. Some observers believe that voters even prefer the arrangement because it tends to stifle major government initiatives that might inconvenience voters.
Third- parties and independent candidates, despite the obstacles discussed previously, have been a periodic feature of American politics. Often they have brought societal problems that the major parties had failed to confront to the forefront of public discourse — and onto the governmental agenda.
0コメント