GOVT 2305 Political Parties

This week we come to terms with political parties, their design, evolution and impact on government.

Last week we discussed elections, how they are designed in the American governing system and the various purposes they serve.

We mentioned that elections are mentioned in the U.S. Constitution and play a role in establishing the relationship between each governing institution and the people.

We also mentioned that the Constitution says nothing about political parties. Nevertheless they have evolved into dominant features of government.

They exist because they are very good at winning elections. Independent candidates rarely win elections on the national and state levels.

Political parties are perhaps the dominant feature of the American political system.

Proponents of parties argue that they are responsible for the development of democracy in the United States. Parties have been instrumental in expanding suffrage.

Blog Tags Parties. Parties in Congress. Parties in the Texas Legislature. Partisanship. Party Activist. Party Base. Party Bosses. Parties Parties in Congress Parties in the Texas Legislature Partisanship Party Activist Party Base Party Bosses

Blog Tags Party Coalitions. Party Cohesion. Party Eras. Party Identification. Party Leaders. Party Line Voting. Party Machines. Party Polarization. Party Coalitions Party Cohesion Party Eras Party Identification Party Leaders Party Line Voting Party Machines Party Polarization

A Definition of “Political Party” A group of individuals organized around shared political principles with the intent of winning elections to governmental office and organizing governing institutions once in power.

Parties are similar to interest groups, but the key distinction between them is that a political party is organized to compete in and win elections.

The principle value of a political party is in organizing and mobilizing like minded individuals to impact policy

This involves, as we will see below, a great deal of internal compromise. Interest groups can hone in on one issue and not compromise. Parties always have to compromise on something.

Due to the winner take all system, parties are collections of factions that sometimes come into fierce competition with each other to define what the party stands for.

Currently there are two dominant broad based political parties in the United States and Texas The Democratic Party The Republican Party Texas Handbook Online: Democratic Party Texas Handbook Online: Republican Party The Democratic Party The Republican PartyDemocratic PartyRepublican Party

As we will see, its difficult often to determine exactly what the terms refer to. Due to their decentralized nature, parties can sometimes shift their positions on issues.

Parties are sometimes referred to in three different ways: Parties as Organizations Parties in Congress Parties in the Electorate

Parties as Organizations: Political parties have complex organizational structures across each level of government and among different actors.

Parties in Congress: Political parties are the dominant organizational element in the U.S. Congress and determine what these institutions in fact do.

Parties in the Electorate: Political parties provide information and voting cues to those that identify with them.

I’ll use this three part breakdown to organize this discussion

Parties as Organizations

While the U.S. has a two party system, many other parties exist, at least on paper. Click here for a list and description of many of them. Click here for a list and description of many of them

None are competitive on an ongoing basis, though on occasion a third party may earn enough popularity to influence a specific election. Here’s a list:

1848 – The Free Soil Party 1856 – Know Nothing Party 1860 – Constitutional Union and Southern Democrat 1892 – Populist 1912 – Progressive 1924 – Progressive 1948 – State’s Rights 1968 – American Independent 1980 – Independent (John Anderson) 1992 – Independent (Ross Perot) 1996 – Reform Party 2000 – Green Party

As we know from the previous lecture, the logic introduced into the electoral process due to the winner take all system makes third parties uncompetitive in the long term.

As we know from studying elections, the American electoral system’s winner take all rules tend to support the development of two large parties and discourages support for minor parties

Recall that incentives exist against voting for minor parties.

A vote for a preferred minor party candidate can take a vote away from a “good enough” major party candidate. People are often encouraged to not “throw their votes away” on a minor party or uncompetitive candidates.throw their votes away

Recent examples of third party candidates Ross Perot – Reform Party Ralph Nader – Green Party Ross Perot Reform Party Ralph Nader Green Party

Republicans believe Perot pulled votes from George HW Bush in 1992 and Democrats believed Nader did the same to Gore in Neither party or candidates did well the following election

Recall this general rule from the previous section: Winner Take All Elections = The Two Party System

And this: Proportional Representation = Multiparty Systems

An Example: Israel Knesset It’s website shows the list of people each party offers the electorate and also the breakdown between votes and seats in the legislature. Israel Knesset

People tend to cluster their votes around two top competitors, and have so practically since the first election in American history. A review of American elections, especially presidential results, demonstrates this point.

For proof, looks through the election results on the following website. Open up the elections on the left hand column and notice the top vote getters. It’s a great tour through American history.the following website

You will be able to see the two elections where each of the current two dominant parties first competed.

For the Democrats it was the election of 1828, when Andrew Jackson was elected due to the support of the recently enfranchised non-property owners. He was the first person elected President that was not from a state that was one of the original colonies.1828

For Republicans it was the election of 1856, when John Fremont ran against the expansion of slavery.1856

Since then these two political parties have dominated politics in the U.S.

In the intervening 150 years, each party has developed large sophisticated (if sometimes unpredictable and unmanageable) organizations that reach down to each precinct in the nation, and include county and state organizations as well.

This guarantees them placement on the ballot in almost all races (so long as they are partisan – some local races do not include party affiliation). Minor parties often have to collect large numbers of signatures to get on the ballot.

A word or two on precincts: These were briefly covered in the previous section. They are the lowest level of governing in the nation and serve only to provide a place for people to vote and for votes to be counted and sent up to the county for further counting.precincts

Precincts tend to be run by precinct judges and chairmen, which are generally elected by the local Democratic or Republican Party, depending on which party’s candidates’ won the precinct majority in the previous election.

A guiding principle of political organization is that a party organization ought to exist wherever elections are held.

Here’s the point: Over the previous 150 years, the two parties have effectively controlled the electoral process across the nation down to the precinct level. This gives them a large degree of power and control over the political process.

Some related readings on the importance of the precinct: - A Ten Minute Lesson. - Is the Precinct Committeeman the most powerful office in the nation? - The Precinct Project’s Blog. - Brazoria County Precinct Maps.A Ten Minute LessonIs the Precinct Committeeman the most powerful office in the nationThe Precinct Project’s BlogBrazoria County Precinct Maps

Each party is built up from the precinct level.

Counties in the state of Texas – the large ones – have Democratic and Republican organizations.

State and County Links: Brazoria County Democratic Party Brazoria County Republican Party Galveston County Democratic Party Galveston County Republican Party Harris County Democratic Party Harris County Republican Party Brazoria County Democratic Party Brazoria County Republican Party Galveston County Democratic Party Galveston County Republican Party Harris County Democratic Party Harris County Republican Party

Above the counties are the state party organizations Texas Democratic Party Texas Republican Party Texas Democratic Party Texas Republican Party

The following links take you to the national committees of each party.

The Democratic Party Official website of the Democratic National Committee. Wikipedia entry. Official website Wikipedia entry

The Republican Party Official website of the Republican National Committee. Wikipedia entry. Official website Wikipedia entry

In addition to these organizations are a variety of informal “clubs” that allow party identifiers the opportunity to influence party matters. Example: The Harris County Democratic Party lists several dozen Democratic clubs in the county.several dozen Democratic clubs

This decentralization can lead to confusion over just exactly what a party stands for. Differences exist between different groups that identify with each party. Regional differences exist as well.

Despite tension on certain issues, some consistency exists on the positions taken in each party. Here are brief descriptions of each.

The Democratic Party tends to be more liberal to moderate in its political positions. It supports egalitarian principles, minority rights, labor unions, the public sector, and is socially liberal.

The Republican Party tends to be more conservative to moderate. It seeks to minimize governmental involvement in the private sector, is pro-business, and supports socially conservative positions.

Up until the late 1970s, the Democratic Party dominated politics in Texas. The Republican Party has largely dominated since then. This occurred because conservatives shifted from the Democratic to the Republican Parties.

Party positions can vary depending on region and state. The Massachusetts Republican Party is generally more liberal than the Texas Democratic Party.

Internal disputes exist within each party due to the fact that each party is composed of a number of factions which do not necessary share the same opinions on all policy matters.

For example, as members of the Tea Party have become more influential in the Republican Party the positions the party has taken have become more conservative than normal.

To add to the confusion, there is a permanent party organization and a temporary party organization. Click here for a diagram of each in Texas. Click here for a diagram of each in Texas

A temporary party organization exists during election season which includes the delegates elected to vote in precinct, county, state and national conventions.

Each election year when voting is finished an convention is held where the vote was held. Delegates are elected from there to vote for their preferred candidates at the county convention, where delegates are then selected for the state convention.

State conventions are held every two years in Texas Texas Democratic Convention Texas Republican Convention.2010 Texas Democratic Convention2010 Texas Republican Convention

Every presidential year, delegates are then selected for the national conventions. Democratic National Convention Republican National Convention Democratic National Convention Republican National Convention

Historically, the national party was able to determine who their party nominee was going to be at these conventions, but the due to the primary election process, this decision has already been made by the voters in each of the primary elections held throughout the country.primary elections

Initially this minimized the impact that party leader had over who became the party’s nominee would be and sometimes an “extreme” and uncompetitive candidate would emerge from the process.

Examples: 1964: Barry Goldwater 1972: George McGovern 1964Barry Goldwater 1972George McGovern

The contest over the presidential nominees tends to pit the party establishment against party activists.

Sometimes party activists can succeed in getting one of their candidates nominated, often by directly appealing to primary voters in each state.

Examples: 1976: Jimmy Carter 1980: Ronald Reagan 1976Jimmy Carter 1980Ronald Reagan

One way the establishment can influence the outcomes of primary elections is by their timing. Front loading primaries (bunching them up front) can help the establishment candidate by making it less likely an outsider candidate catches fire and wins.Front loading primaries

Question:

Since each state has its own party apparatus, and is somewhat autonomous, do we have a two party system or a 100 party system given that each party has an organization in each state?

What does this mean for party leadership? Who is in charge of each party?

For the party that controls the White House it is the President. For the party that does not, this is not clear.

Who controls the Republican Party? The head of the RNC? John Boehner? Mitch McConnell? Rush Limbaugh? The Tea Party Caucus?

Who determines what parties stand for? Office holders? Candidates? Party Officials? Party Activists?

Each is autonomous to a large degree and can have their own unique influence on parties and the positions they take.

It is generally assumed that a party’s positions are articulated in their platforms. A party platform is “a political party's formal statement of its basic principles, objectives, and positions on major issues.” Click here for party platforms throughout American history.party platform Click here

But here’s a problem: A party’s platform is generally written by party activists. Candidates are under no obligation to run on them. Claim: “Party platforms are written by activists to be ignored by candidates.”

Activists may simply be motivated by issues, candidates need to win elections. What if an issue on the platform makes a candidate less competitive?

Party Coalitions

As we know, electoral rules discourage the competitiveness of minor parties. They also force voter to compromise.

The candidate of either party may not be the preferred candidate for an individual, but they compromise in order to get someone good enough.

As a result, the major parties are coalitions of likeminded factions. These can change from election to election.

Recent Party Data: Groups that voted for Obama or McCain. Election Trends by Group. Groups that voted for Obama or McCain Election Trends by Group

Member of factions have a tendency to support one party more than the other, but support is not absolute.

As we will see below when we discuss party eras, the rise of the Republican Party occurred at least party because on faction within the Democratic Party – white southerners – realigned to the Republican Party.

What follows is a reasonably accurate appraisal of the current coalitions within each party.

Democratic Factions Social Liberals Union Members Ethnic Minorities Jews and Catholics Environmentalists

From Politics1.com: “... prominent Democrats run the wide gamut from the near Euro-style democratic- socialist left (Barbara Lee, Dennis Kucinich and the Congressional Progressive Caucus) and traditional liberals (Barack Obama, Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi) to the Dem center-right (Harry Reid, Heath Shuler and the NDN) to the GOP-style conservative right (Ben Nelson and the Blue Dog Coalition) to the pragmatic Democratic Leadership Council's "centrist" moderate- to-liberal style (Mark Warner, Harold Ford Jr, Rahm Emanuel).”Politics1.comBarbara LeeDennis Kucinich Congressional Progressive CaucusBarack ObamaHoward DeanNancy PelosiHarry ReidHeath Shuler NDNBen NelsonBlue Dog Coalition Democratic Leadership CouncilMark WarnerHarold Ford JrRahm Emanuel

Republican Factions Social Conservative Business Owners and Managers Anglo Protestants and Evangelicals The Military

From Politics1.com: “Republicans can generally be classified into several different sub-sets: traditional conservatives (John Boehner, Mitt Romney, Eric Cantor, Tim Pawlenty, Paul Ryan, and the Club for Growth), the Religious Right (Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Mike Pence, and the Family Research Council), the rapidly dwindling old Nixon/Rockefeller "centrist" or "moderate" wing (Scott Brown, Olympia Snowe, and the Republican Main Street Partnership), libertarians (Ron Paul, Campaign for Liberty and the Republican Liberty Caucus), and a "paleo-conservative" wing that backs strict anti-immigration controls (Tom Tancredo and Pat Buchanan). The influential "Tea Party" movement -- split between several groups who each claim the name (Tea Party Patriots, Tea Party Express, Tea Party Nation, etc.) -- emerged in 2009 and seem to straddle somewhere between the libertarian and paleo-conservative wings of the GOP.”Politics1.comJohn BoehnerMitt RomneyEric CantorTim PawlentyPaul RyanClub for GrowthMike HuckabeeSarah PalinMike PenceFamily Research CouncilScott BrownOlympia SnoweRepublican Main Street PartnershipRon PaulCampaign for Liberty Republican Liberty CaucusTom TancredoPat BuchananTea Party PatriotsTea Party ExpressTea Party Nation

Democratic Factions have led the party to take positions that are moderate to liberal. Tendency towards egalitarianism Support for policies not universal among identifiers

Democratic positions pro-choice pro-same sex poverty programs environmental programs unilateralist pro-minimum wage pro-collective bargaining

But there are pro-life Democrats

An example of a current issue for Democrats: Health Care Reform - single payer - public option - limits on market place

Collective Bargaining

Republican Factions have led the party to take positions that are moderate to conservative. Tendency towards minimizing government – but not the military or Medicare. Support for policies not universal among identifiers

Pro-life traditionalism resistant to poverty programs suspicious of environmentalism unilateralist no government involvement in wage and worker issues

There are pro-same sex marriage and pro-choice Republicans

The strength of either political party depends on whether they can hold their coalition together and which can attract the support of independents

Parties in the Government

Parties dominate legislative institutions at the national and state level, and strongly influence executive and judicial institutions as well.

There are a handful of tasks that parties have that enable them to control – or seek to control – governing institutions.

Specific tasks: Recruit candidates Manage campaigns Raise funds Develop legislative agendas Steer these through legislatures Promote them to the public

Parties have grown to dominate Congress. All decisions made in Congress are first made in meetings of the membership of each party. The majority party is generally in a position to determine what happens in the institution.

The organization are called caucuses and each party has them in the house and in the Senate.

Here links to each: The House Democratic Caucus The House Republican Conference The Senate Democratic Caucus The Senate Republican Conference The House Democratic Caucus The House Republican Conference The Senate Democratic Caucus The Senate Republican Conference

The current power of parties in Congress was not predicted when the Constitution was written.

Parties were not mentioned in the Constitution and did not exist, as external forces, until at least the 1830s. As internal forces they developed almost immediately.

Some history: A party system had developed in Britain after the Glorious Revolution and had featured the landed Gentry (the Whigs) against the Court (the Tories). Both were aristocratic organizations, but this demonstrates the tension that existed between them.the Whigsthe Tories

Party divisions had also existed in colonial America Some were Pro-British, some were Pro-Independence.Pro-British

The fight over the ratification of the Constitution (as well as the whether to have a convention to begin with) was also a party dispute.

The supporters of the Constitution would become the Federalists and the opponents (the Anti- Federalists) would become the Democrat – Republicans.Federalists Democrat – Republicans

But concerns were expressed over the existence of parties. Recall the concerns expressed about factions in Federalist #10.

Washington counseled against them. In his Farewell Address he tried to persuade people from supporting and joining them.Farewell Address

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally. This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it. It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection.

His key point: Political parties add additional, unnecessary contention in society. They interfere with the proper workings of government. (discussion question: was he right?)

But parties proved to be an effective way to organize Congress and to enable groups within Congress to establish and pass a legislative agenda.

Political parties help solve collective action problems by taking what would otherwise normally be a disorganized group and providing structure to it.

Without a party organization, it is unlikely that a cohesive legislative agenda could not be developed and passed.

Parties can propose a legislative agenda and implement it, which gives voters something to vote for or against.

Proponents of parties argue that there is no democracy without political parties. Parties, not government, were responsible for the expansion of political participation.

Political parties that offer distinct platforms that they then commit to implement offer clarity to the voter. One has a better chance to determine what they are voting for and what they are voting against.

Some also argue that parties are necessary in order to overcome the limitations on government established by the checks and balances.

Recall that the checks and balances allow each institution the opportunity to negate the actions of the other two.

This is far less likely to occur if the individuals that control each institution are committed to the same set of principles. Party membership helps guarantee this.

While Washington and other may have opposed parties, they proved useful and soon became features of the American political system.

Ironically, parties actually developed in Washington’s Administration. Conflict erupted over the future direction of the country between two key members of his administration. Alexander Hamilton – The Federalists Thomas Jefferson – The Democrat Republicans

Alexander Hamilton, his Treasury Secretary, promoted the development of a commercial republic.

Thomas Jefferson, his Secretary of State, wanted to retain an agrarian society.an agrarian society

The simple question they asked, should America have a commercial or agrarian future, was presented to the public in the form of a set of policies presented by the Federalist Party and a set presented by the Democrat-Republicans?

Federalists Pay off debts National bank Internal improvements Tariffs Loose Reading of Constitution to allow for additional national power

Democrat-Republicans Rather than debts, they wanted to focus on the immediate economic needs of farmers. Tariffs hurt their competitiveness. They wanted economic decisions made at the state and local level.

The Federalists argued that the future of the country would be best served by having a dynamic economic system based in metropolitan areas.

The Democrat Republicans believed there was virtue on the farm. People were more likely to be self sufficient on the farm. Cities were nests of dependency.

But a curious thing happened on the way to a two party system. Oppositions parties were made illegal. This was driven by John Adam’s concerns about a rising organized opposition.

The Alien and Sedition Acts These were a deliberate attempt by the Federalists to outlaw the emerging opposition party.AlienSedition

What is Sedition? 1. incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government. 2. any action, esp. in speech or writing, promoting such discontent or rebellion.Sedition

Even while opposition parties and movement were emerging in Britain and the colonies, the idea that one could criticize those in power was not generally accepted.

Free Speech, especially among the general public, took a while to develop.

John Adams did not care for the number of people who criticized him. He argued that seditious attacks could weaken the government.

The Sedition Act The Sedition Act The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions opposed the acts.Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions

The Democrat – Republicans opposed the acts and defeated the Federalists in the 1800 election. The acts were allowed to expire. As a consequence. the principle of the loyal opposition emerged.1800 election

Since then American elections have generally pitted two major parties against each other. These parties have slowly, overtime, become the dominant institutions in Congress.

The Office of the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives details the history of party divisions in the institution. The following wikipedia page has a breakdown of the current party leadership in the U.S. House.history of party divisionsfollowing wikipedia page

Party Control of the House

Click here for the party historyClick here for the party history in the U.S. Senate (here’s more). The following wikipedia page has a breakdown of the current party leadership in the U.S. Senate.here’s morefollowing wikipedia page

The Democratic and Republican party caucuses in each chamber effectively control all other institutions in each chamber as well as the Congressional agenda and the bill making process.

House Democratic Caucus House Democratic Caucus (wikipedia) Senate Democratic Caucus (wikipedia) House Republican Conference (wikipedia) Senate Republican Conference (wikipedia)wikipedia Senate Democratic Caucuswikipedia House Republican Conference wikipedia Senate Republican Conference wikipedia

What is the proof that parties are the dominant institution in Congress?

One item used as proof is the “party unity score” which is a measure of the percentage of votes in the House and Senate where a majority of Democrats are opposed to a majority of Republicans. These have increased over recent decades to about 90%.HouseSenate

For more information on this measure: - Party Unity in Congressional Voting - Party Unity Scores (1857 – 2010) - CQ Vote Studies: The Parties Really Are UnifiedParty Unity in Congressional VotingParty Unity Scores (1857 – 2010)CQ Vote Studies: 2010The Parties Really Are Unified

Political party strength in U.S. states

Parties in the Electorate

As we know, parties are driving forces in elections. The question is how strong a force they are and what is the nature of their influence over the electorate considering that other factors exist that attempt to influence the public.

It is assumed that party identification – the degree to which an individual identifies with a political party - helps drive voter behavior.party identification

People who study political socialization argue that party identification is first established in childhood either by parents, or by events that child is exposed to and uses to identify with a particular party, generally because of who happens to be president at that time.

Party identification matters because people who identify with one of the major parties tend to vote for them and to also take “cues” from the party and party leaders.

The precise nature of this influence is a subject of debate. Voters are also influenced by candidate characteristics and by the nature of the times. This can cause people to not vote for a candidate of the party they normally support.

Example: Reagan Democrats (unionized auto workers) Reagan Democrats

When parties were first established, party identification tended to very strong, but this was reinforced by certain rules which allowed the party to control government at the local level. This was the apex of party power. Political parties were controlled by local machines and party bosses.machinesparty bosses

Examples: - Tammany Hall under William Tweed. - George Berham Parr, the Duke of Duval County. He was accused of delivering the votes needed to elect LBJ senator.Tammany HallWilliam TweedGeorge Berham ParrDuke of Duval County delivering the votes

Boss Tweed

Rules allowed bosses to control ballot boxes and access to the polls, votes were not anonymous and favors were given (and punishment administered) as a consequence of one’s vote.

Many of these rules were changed by progressive policies in the early 20 th Century.progressive policies

These were discussed in the previous section, but four major changes were imposed, all together these have been argued to have reduced the power of political parties and made the candidate and external groups more powerful.

Registration Requirements Civil Service Reforms The Anonymous Ballot Primary Elections

Registration Requirements Groups of voters could no longer be organized by the party and spend the day going from voting booth to voting booth. One is registered to vote in one location only.

Civil Service Reforms Jobs were no longer handed out at the sole discretion of the chief executive, who is inevitably a party official as well. Party members are rewarded with jobs. A non-political institution was then given that power.

The Anonymous Ballot The party could no longer monitor who in fact voted for them. One could vote against the party without suffering consequences. The ballot was put together by the county, not the party.

Primary Elections Party bosses could no longer hand pick candidates for the general election. This was now determined by the party identifiers.

An ongoing question is whether these changes damaged parties as institutions. Party identification does not matter as much as it once did. More people are calling themselves independents.

Since polling data has been collected beginning in the mid 20 th century, information has been collected on party identification. This helps determine both the degree to which people identify with either party or as independents and what trends there are such identification.

Here’s a description of the process used by the National Election Study to make the determination:process used by the National Election Study

“Party identification normally is measured by asking individuals whether they consider themselves to be a Democrat, Republican, or independent. Those indicating Democratic or Republican are then asked whether they are a strong or a weak Democrat or Republican, while those claiming to be an independent are asked whether they feel closer to one of the two political parties. This yields a sevenfold classification: strong Democrats, weak Democrats, independents closer to the Democrats, independents not closer to either party, independents closer to the Republicans, weak Republicans, and strong Republicans. “

The Likert ScaleThe Likert Scale: - Strong Democrat - Weak Democrat - Lean Democrat - Independent - Lean Republican - Weak Republican - Strong Republican

Here are graphs that show recent trends in party ID over the past 25 years:

Click here for related story

Note that most people call themselves independent. But what does this mean? Since there is rarely a purely independent candidate running, voters have to make choices between the Democratic and the Republican candidate.

Some suggest that very few “independents” are true swing voters, that is they mix their votes between Democrats and Candidates, most default automatically to one or the other parties – these are called “leaners.” Taking them into consideration, the balance between the parties changes considerably.

Click here for related story

Notice that identification shifts over time. Sometimes it changes as soon as someone is elected president.

Over the course of American history the strength of certain parties has come and gone. The term Party Eras, or Party Systems, describes periods of time when a particular relationship existed the parties.Party Systems

Some analysts claim the United States gone through six distinct party eras separated by a critical election where a significant change occurred. These changes happen in what are called “critical elections,” of “realigning elections.”realigning elections

For more on realignment, watch the following: The Concept of Realignment by Daniel J. Palazzolo The Concept of Realignment

There have been at least six elections where a significant change occurred in voting patterns: ?

Has there been a seventh? If so, when? 1980? 1994? 2004? 2008?

In between the each election, a relatively stable relationship existed between the two parties

To get an idea about how electoral patterns have changed over American history, watch the following two clips (they not narrated unfortunately). State-Level Popular Voting in Presidential Elections, Counties Won in Popular Voting, State-Level Popular Voting in Presidential Elections, Counties Won in Popular Voting,

The First Party Era The First Party Era

The Second Party Era The Second Party Era

The Third Party Era The Third Party Era

The Fourth Party Era The Fourth Party Era

The Fifth Party Era The Fifth Party Era

The Sixth Party Era ?