Lecture #15, American Government, Political Parties 2

1. WEEK #8LECTURE #15
POLITICAL PARTIES PART 2
AMERICAN GOVERNMENT
PROFESSOR ANAND SHASTRI
FALL 2015

2. OUTLINE OF POLITICAL PARTIES #2
PART 2A) PARTY ERAS & THE JOURNEY OF U.S. POLITICS
PART 2B) 3RD PARTIES & INDEPENDENT CANDIDATES
PART 2C) PARTISAN POLARIZATION: ELECTED OFFICIALS
PART 2D) PARTISAN POLARIZATION OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

3. PART 2A) PARTY ERAS &
THE JOURNEY OF U.S.
POLITICS

4. KEY TERMS
• PARTISAN REALIGNMENT
• CRITICAL ELECTION
• PARTY PLATFORM
• PARTY COALITION

5. DOMINANCE AND 1ST PARTY SYSTEM
PARTY DOMINANCE: 1) ONE PARTY WINS THE OVERWHELMING
MAJORITY OF NATIONAL (ESPECIALLY PRESIDENTIAL)
ELECTIONS, 2) PARTY IS ASSOCIATED W/ A SET OF BELIEFS,
IDEOLOGY, VIEW ON SALIENT ISSUES, OR COUNTRY DIRECTION
JEFFERSONIAN-REPUBLICANS: HELD THE PRESIDENCY
THROUGH 6 SUCCESSIVE TERMS- 2 EACH FOR THOMAS
JEFFERSON, JAMES MADISON, & JAMES MONROE. VERY FEW
VOTERS PARTICIPATED, LIMIT NATL GOVERNMENT

6. 2ND AND 3RD PARTY SYSTEMS:
JACKSONIAN DEMOCRATS: WHICH BEGAN IN 1828, AND LAST
UNTIL THE CIVIL WAR. MASS PARTICIPATION, SHIFTED AWAY
FROM EASTERN BANKERS. YET JACKSON, AN ECONOMIC
POPULIST, WAS IN AN ANTI-GOVERNMENT WAY
RECONSTRUCTION REPUBLICANS: 1860-1896, REPUBLICAN
PRESIDENTS WERE OFTEN ELECTED BY NARROW MARGINS,
BOTH SENATE & HOUSE WEREN’T REPUBLICAN-DOMINATED.
DEMS “SOLID-SOUTH”. GOP WEST & NORTH, JIM CROW

7. 4TH & 5TH PARTY SYSTEMS: CLEAREST CASES
MCKINLEY REPUBLICANS “AMERICA’S PARTY” 1896-1932:
BUSINESS DOMINATED THE AGENDA. 7 REPUBLICANS; SOLE
DEM WAS WILSON. ALL REPUBS WERE PRO-BUSINESS, & ON
THE SIDE OF INDUSTRIAL FUTURE, BUT THEN ECON DOWN
NEW DEAL DEMOCRATIC COALITION 1932-1968: GREAT
DEPRESSION DROVE MANY NORTHERN GROUPS INTO THE DEM
PARTY & COMBINED W/ EXISTING DOMINANCE IN THE WHITE
SOUTH. BUILT ON ECONOMIC LIBERALISM, YET ALLOWED
SOUTHERN WAY. EISENHOWER SOLE REPUBLICAN

8. DEALIGNMENT OR 6TH PARTY SYSTEM: PROF SHASTRI SAYS
LATTER!
DEALIGNMENT: TREND AMONG VOTERS TO BE INDEPENDENTS
CASE FOR 6TH PARTY SYSTEM “NEW RIGHT” COALITION:
• NO CLEAR CRITICAL ELECTION, BUT RATHER SPLIT
• ECON POLICY, NATL SECURITY, RACE, “CULTURE WARS” SHIFT
RIGHT, VOTERS WHO SHIFTED
AND MAYBE A 7TH? “NEW LEFT” REALIGNMENT?

9. PART 2B) 3RD PARTIES &
INDEPENDENT
CANDIDATES

10. 3RD PARTIES AND THEIR CANDIDATES #1
USUALLY ARISE BECAUSE 2 MAIN PARTIES’ VIEWS ARE EITHER
1) TOO CLOSE TO MIDDLE
2) BOTH SAME SIDE, SO NO ADVOCATE FOR AN OPPOSING VIEW
3) NOT ADDRESSING A MAJOR ISSUE
GENERALLY RESULTS ARE AS 1) SPOILERS OR 2)
FORESHADOWERS OF REALIGNMENTS
RECENT ONES 1) OR 2) OR BOTH?

11. 3RD PARTIES AND THEIR CANDIDATES #2
RECENT IMPORTANT 3RD PARTY CANDIDATES: 4 TOTAL NADER
2000, PEROT 1992/1996, ANDERSON 1980, WALLACE 1968
WHY EACH ONE HAS NO LONG-TERM ELECTORAL IMPACT
1) NEGLIGIBLE CHANCE OF WINNING
2) INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF THE TWO-PARTY SYSTEM
3) MEDIA COVERAGE AND $$
SHASTRI’S 4) DEMOGRAPHIC & IDEOLOGICAL HOMOGENEITY

12. PART 2C) PARTISAN
POLARIZATION: ELECTED
OFFICIALS

13. PARTISAN POLARIZATION IN U.S. GOV’T
EVIDENCE: 1) TWO MAIN PARTIES IDEOLOGICALLY FURTHER
AWAY FROM EACH OTHER THAN ANYTIME IN 100 YEARS
2) MORE PARTY-LINE VOTING (ALL GOVT. LEVELS)
3) ALL SORTS OF VOTES
CAUSES:
1) IDEOLOGICAL HOMOGENEITY, 2) INSTITUTIONAL REFORMS,
3) REDISTRICTING, 4) SELF-SEGREGATION AMONGST VOTERS

14. POLARIZATION: EXTREMES MORE EXTREME, OR LOSS
OF MODERATES?
• COMMENTATORS & SCHOLARS NOTE HOW THE DEMOCRATIC
PARTY HAS MOVED TO THE LEFT, & THE REPUBLICANS HAVE
MOVED TO THE RIGHT (USUALLY OPPOSITE PARTY SAYS
OTHER SIDE HAS NO CENTRISTS)
• T. KENNEDY=WARREN, DURBIN=SIMON, LOTT=WICKERS MS
L-R 0-10 0= MOST LIBERAL 10= MOST CONSERVATIVE
0_______________________5(3R)_______ X_7_______ 9 (3R)____10
0_______________________5______________________X9(3R)_____10

15. PARTISAN POLARIZATION: NORMATIVE
NEGATIVES
• MAKES COMPROMISE VERY DIFFICULT, GRIDLOCK LIKELY
• POISONS PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS
• DISCOURAGES MODERATION, WHICH PUSHES MORE EXTREME
POSITIVES
• MAKES VOTERS HAVE REAL CHOICES
• TENDS TO INCREASE TURNOUT
• PARTIES INTERNAL COALITIONS MORE UNITED (CIVIL RIGHTS)

16. PART 2D) PARTISAN
POLARIZATION OF THE
AMERICAN PEOPLE

17. FLAWS IN FIORINA’S “PMP”
#1: ABSURD BAR OF IDEOLOGICAL PURITY: HE STATES ONLY 33%
ARE TRULY LEFT OR RIGHT, BUT CLASSIFIES IT AS 10/10
CONSERVATIVE OR LIBERAL
#2 USING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AS MAJOR RED-BLUE IS A
PROBLEM: IT IS SOMETHING THAT MANY WHITE DEMS ARE
RIGHT ON, SO PARTY CLEAVAGE IS LESS

18. FIORINA “PMP” RED STATE VS. BLUE STATE IS OVERBLOWN
#3 SUGGESTING SIMILARITIES IN AMERICAN VALUES PROBLEM
“BLUE WALL” LAST 6 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS, 18 STATES
(ROUGHLY 240 EV’S) HAVE BACKED THE DEM CANDIDATE
13 STATES HAVE BACKED THE REPUB CANDIDATE IN SAME 6; 22
STATES HAVE BACKED REPUBS IN LAST 4 ELECTIONS (180 EV’S)
DESPITE ECON, CANDIDATE APPEAL, ELECTORATE COMPOSITION

19. FIORINA’S MEASUREMENT ERROR & CONTRADICTION ON
MODERATION
#4 MEASUREMENT ERROR OF ISSUES CANCELLING
5 CONSERVATIVE AND 5 LIBERAL POSITIONS, RECORDED
AS MODERATE, MOST LIKELY LIBERTARIAN OR POPULISTS
ONLY 3 CHOICES GIVEN ON DIFFERENT SURVEY
#5 CONTRADICTION
EVEN USING HIS OWN, PLURALITY NOT MAJORITY

20. FIORINA DEMOGRAPHY PROBLEMS
• RELIGIOSITY GAP WIDENING
• LOCATION GAP WIDENING
• IDEOLOGICAL GAP BETWEEN PARTIES VOTERS WIDENING
• ALTHOUGH PARTY RANKS NOT GROWING %-AGE-WISE,
INDEPENDENT VOTER IS A MYTH