Political Parties, Politics, And Public Policy

In recent discussion of Democrats and Republican parties, a controversial issue has been whether or not the U.S. should expand their options from more than a two party system. On the one hand, some argue that there should be more choices other than between the two Democrat Party and Republican Party. From this perspective, voters have more of a variety when they vote. On the other hand, some argue that the U.S. should remain as a two party system. In the words of Gary Johnson, one of this view’s main proponents, “The Republicans and Democrats have spent decades trading power back and forth between themselves, and in doing so, have managed to install a two-party duopoly that completely controls America’s political process.” According to this view, Democrats and Republicans are dictating other parties opportunities to get elected. In sum, then, the issue is whether there should be other options rather than a choice between the Democrat and the Republican Party. I agree with Gary Johnson’s view that the Democrat and Republican Parties are controlling America’s

Generally speaking, anyone who lives in the United States of America knows that there are two main political parties—the Republicans and the Democrats. Having two main parties has its advantages and, of course, its disadvantages. For example, in By the People James E. Monroe and Rogan Kersh (301) point out having this type of system creates “predictability and stability.” However, they also declare (301) it can “lead to a gridlock.” This is not a new concept either as there has been a divide since the beginning of both parties. The two parties more often than not disagree on various issues, while rarely agreeing on what is best for the country.

US parties are often described as organisationally weak because they are essentially ‘broad coalitions’. For example they contain moderates like McCain republican) and Obama democrat), while also having a more conservative wing. Therefore stronger party organisation would give parties a narrower appeal and potentially alienate large ‘voting blocs’ or proportions of the electorate. This is a reason why it is argued that having ‘organisationally weak’ parties is a necessity in the US political system. It has therefore been argued that symptoms of weak organisation e.g issue centred or candidate-centered election campaigns are deliberate as parties attempt to gain a maximum

The political system of America is very different from other developed and developing democracies. Most notable is the increased power bestowed on the upper house of the parliament, the extensive power held by the Supreme Court and the dominance demonstrated by only two major parties. In the United States, third parties have the least influence on the world’s most developed democracy’s political structure. In this democracy, people are under the US Constitution of the governmental system as well as state government and other units of local government. Local government entails counties, districts and municipalities. The evolution of the American political party system has come a long way; with Hamilton and Jefferson being regarded as the founder fathers of the modern party system. These were heads of the Federalist and Anti-Federalist groups in the 18th century of American politics. Ever since, the country has maintained a party system that has two main parties that are relatively stable. These are Democrats and Republicans and have remained in contest for election every time since the 1860 presidential elections. Initially, the Republican Party was the dominant party but the Democrats later gained dominance. However, the two parties became closely competitive and neither of them has been notably dominant since the 1970s (O'Connor & Sabato, n.d).

The dichotomy of major political parties in the United States initially developed from the division of Federalists and Democratic-Republicans during the Federalist Era. These alignments were distinguishable almost immediately after and even during the drafting of the Constitution. Though the names and stances of the two parties varied over time, they both rested on their foundations of their ideas of a government’s role and where power belonged. The most defining trait of each party was their support—or lack thereof—of a strong central government. Federalists, as the name implies, advocated for power to be firmly rooted in the federal government, whereas Democratic-Republicans urgently recommended the autonomy of each state.

The United States began as a weak, newborn nation that grew into a large, self-supporting country with a governing body unique to this time period. As the government grew and the nation prospered, the rise of leaders and political figures came about and with this, conflicting principles and ideology spawned, thus creating the first of the political parties; the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans. Although the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans ideology and stances on the power of the federal government, domestic economic policies and the group of constituents they represented differed vastly, members of both parties often compromised their own beliefs for the nation’s best interest as a whole.

There are copious Americans who believe that the political party system is shattering our nation. In my opinion, our nation would not be the nation we are today without political parties. Other than presenting candidates and electoral campaigns to the electorate, political parties perform innumerable tasks to better the United States of America. They serve as institutionalized mediators between our society and duly elected representatives who are responsible for determining and executing legislations. They seek public policy priorities and civic needs and concerns identified by their affiliates and supporters. Political parties educate the people on how the political, electoral system, and general political values work. By doing so, voters are well informed of each party’s stance on specific matters. They also inspire individuals to participate in political decisions and turning their outlooks into policy options for all. Unlike other countries, America is a democratic nation we want our people to freely voice their thoughts and support the party who shares their interest and perspectives. In addition, political parties help to annihilate any unexpected shifts in political trends that hold the ability to disrupt the balance of our government. As we all know our nation is a two -party system that assist in advocating stability in the government, because there will only ever be two

The most powerful groups in American politics are the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), the AARP (American Association of Retired Persons), the AMA (American Medical Association), the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the NRA (National Rifle Association). To begin, the NAACP holds great influence in the political spectrum where there vision is to ensure a society in which all individuals have equal rights without discrimination based on race. Here their purpose and objectives attract the attention of the general public where they hold support and generate major revenue. Now for the AARP, this association represents the views of the older American population where they affect the health care system. Evidently their

Political Parties were never intended to be an exercised idea in the American government. Our founding fathers had emphasized their hatred for the division of our ‘republic.’ “All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations, and

Third parties fail to achieve electoral victories and representation in modern American politics have been because of the structure of the types of the elections, the ballot rules, and the debate rules. Even if the third parties have equal standards, views, resources, etc., lacking in popularity and significance within the government may increase the chance of not being able to represent in politics. “In order to appreciate the reasons for the Electoral College, it is essential to understand its historical context and the problem that the Founding Fathers were trying to solve.” (Kimberling) In the nation, the political parties brought up concerns and questioning of how electing a president with no such political parties would be possible

Since the writing of the United States Constitution, the American government has been structured in a way that only truly allows for two parties. Of course there are numerous other smaller parties, however, the key is that these parties are smaller. The most successful way to become elected to a position in the American governmental structure is to have the backing of the Democratic or Republican Party. Over the two-hundred-year history of the United States the parties have changed names and fundamentally altered their core believes. Today, the distinction has become quite clear as the rise of polarization forces a clear, concise difference between the two parties. The Democrats must uphold the liberal ideals while the Republican Party carters to those of a conservative

It was found that national party divisions are typically ran by elites that worked together to unite divided parties to participate together in the hopes of the party winning the presidency. Having a diverse set of candidates does not imply that the party is divided although it could worsen existing disunions. Measuring national party division was crucial in the research; in the 1970s delegate votes at the national convection gave an approximate measure of divisiveness. One way that national party division can be measured is by the proportion of convention votes through the Democratic nominee without the corresponding proportion for the Republican nominee. This delegate-based measure is for the most part based on party activist, in which are picked by the presidential campaign by the partisan voters. On the other hand, another manner to measure is by aggregate primary vote that is comparing the proportion of the national primary won by the two nominees. Moreover, to measure the impact national party division has they used convection votes and aggregate primary vote to portray that the substantive conclusion does not rely on how the variable is measured (12). Although there is no precise or best way to put to use state level primary divisiveness it is clear that in presidential campaigns, a divisive state primary the electorate rather have a candidate than the eventual nominee. Thus, this type of divisiveness can be measured by the proportion of the vote for the candidate other than the final nominee. Another approach would rely on the competitiveness of the primary, which is measure by a vote margin of the two leading candidates in the

There is a commonly held belief among the political savvy that the ideologies of the major parties seemed to have flip throughout the mid 20th century, more specifically between 1932 and 1968. These shifts are attributed to mainly to the New Deal Democrats, as well as the demise of the solid south of the Democratic party. It is entirely correct that geographically, the parties have done a 180 degree flip since they were established as the prominent parties in the early 1800’s. However, John Gerring makes the argument in, “Party Ideologies 1828-1996”, that the ideologies of the two major parties have been consistent over that period of time. Furthermore, the perceived shifts in these ideologies are due to the changing political climate in

In political campaigns, the viewpoints of the individual candidates are often reflective of the positions of their political parties. In the upcoming presidential election, there are issues which have the power to divide the nation. One of the most divisive issues at present is the question of gay marriage and whether or not the federal government should weigh in on what has thus far been a states' rights issue. Both on the state and national levels, the perspective of the people in the various political jurisdictions will determine the way in which they vote. If a party agrees with the population's view on an issue, the people will be more likely to vote with that party. The two major parties, the Republicans and Democrats, have officially been against gay marriage although a few have differed from the party's position. Less is known where some of the "third" parties, such as the Green Party, Libertarian Party, and Constitution Party, stand on the issue.

Today, political parties are an authoritative and essential component of the United States political system. However, it is important to examine how the political parties began and evolved over hundreds of years, since they were first established. In 1794, the major political parties were the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans. The major difference between these two was that the Federalists favored a strong central government, while the Democratic-Republicans preferred a central government with limited power and more state control. At the time of the election, it seemed that the prominent, distinguished Federalist Party clearly had the upper hand, but in the end the