US Parties - Using Theories to Compare UK/US Political Parties

Party System/2 Party State:

• Culturally the UK has had a two party system due to devolution leading to the rise of nationalist parties e.g SNP. Currently, no such cultural traits exist in the USA.
  • Devolution has also led to structural changes too.
• Culturally, the USAs history is nothing like the UK which leads (in the USA) to a 2 party system between the Republicans and the Democrats.
• In the USA, there have been no structural changes in the electoral system. “two fairly equally balanced large parties dominate the party system and alternate power” – Caramani 2011.
• Half a century ago, the UK was a two party state (1955 election – 96% of votes went to Conservative or Labour). Again there have been no structural changes in the electoral system but there have been cultural changes in devolved matters.
  • By 2015 6/8 parties in the Commons were nationalist parties.
• 2 party system in the USA because of the structure of the country where the President has come from one of the two main parties and Congress has been the opposite party of the President e.g Trump as a Republican and House being in Democrat control in 2019.
  • Further seen in that candidates from the two main parties can gather huge amounts of money within 24 hours of announcing their intention to run e.g Sanders and Biden who got record amounts of money.
  • “The British style divide between government and opposition is therefore absent” – Watts 2000
• Structural Theory: Nature of the Presidency which is seen as the ultimate prize in American politics, this can only be won by those who enjoy broad, national support.
  • Unlike the UK where parties can enjoy support in certain regions of the UK.

Campaign Finance:

• Issues crop up as scandal takes place.
  • USA: Watergate (Nixon using funding to send buglers to the Democrat headquarters) and Chinagate. UK: MP Expenses & Cranbourne Money/Short Money (Viable to use this in other ways)
  • This leads to calls for state funding. This may be the answer but is not without its’ problems.
• Arguments of how parties get money, Labour claim the Conservatives are in the hands of “big businesses” and this is true most come from the city of London. Conservatives claim that Labour are in the hands of “big trade unions”

Should Parties Be State Funded:
Yes:	No:
Ends dependence on wealthy donors which than ends influence being brought e.g Ecclestone £1 million to Labour for F1.	Reinforces the advantages given by FPTP
Means political parties can perform better functions e.g educate	May disconnect voters
Fill gap left by declining membership	Would make parties “legacies” of the state
Means parties have equal resources	People don’t want to bankroll parties they do not support.
Could lead to greater influence	Reinforces party role in democracy.
Will be a dependable source of income for parties

Internal Unity/Factions:

• Factions arise because it is hard to unite members under one manifesto when an election is not taking place (A rational view) – party renewal
• Factions do keep members a part of a political party who would otherwise leave
• Democrat: Blue Dog – conservative wing, fiscal conservatism
• Republican: Tea Party Movement
• Labour: Momentum bringing the hard left back
• Conservative: ERG uniting some members over Brexit and the issue of Europe.
• Factions become important during elections which may lead to negative campaigns e.g 1992 Bush (ultimately forced to choose Gore as his VP) vs Clinton, 2016 Clinton vs Sanders wing.
  • UK: Conservative 1992 GE. Split over Europe. 2015 Labour (?) split over centrist or hard left position later resolved through Corbyn’s election as leader bringing the party to the hard left.
• Factions can champion the party greats e.g Thatcherites and Reganrites
• Cultural: SPD broke away from Labour and formed with the Liberals. 2019 with the Independent group (Change)
• Cultural: The two parties keep themselves a part because there is nowhere else to go (structural). Rational choice of one of the other between the Presidential nominees
• Structure is flexible due to the broad churches of the two main parties in the USA.
  • Individuals use rational choice to change or transform a party e.g people choosing Trump in 2016 Primaries changed the structure of the Republican Party in that it become “America First.”

Party Policy:

• Cultural reasons why parties adopt certain policy e.g Labour born out the trade union groups therefore more likely to have policy which the unions agree on or like.
• The Republicans are to the right of the Conservatives whilst the Democrats are to the right of Labour. There are some policy similarities.
• Republican/Conservatives: Dislike ‘big government’, low tax, strong on law and order, high spending on defence, equality of opportunity
• Democrat/Labour: Support minorities, secure workers’ rights, equality of outcome, money back into education, high tax for the rich.

US Parties - Comparing UK/US Parties & More on Third Parties

Campaign Finance & Party Funding:

• Both the USA and the UK face issues concerning campaign finance and party funding
• In either country, the problem has resurfaced when a scandal has erupted such as Watergate in the USA whilst in the UK, the parties exchange words on how they get their funding e.g Labour from the big trade unions and the Conservatives who are the in the hands of big businessmen/women.
• The UK and the USA followed a similar pattern following this. In the UK the 2000 Electoral Commission Act was created by the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act. Jones & Norton found out that in 2014, almost 85% of the Labour party’s funding still comes from trade unions and that 51% of the Conservatives’ funding was still coming from big businesses.
• Parties both in the USA and the UK tend to find ways to get around regulations.

State Funding:

• Both countries have looked around the idea of state funding. In the 1970s the US tried federal matching funds whilst the UK saw the introduction of Short money and Cranborne money. Neither country has done this significantly or have they adopted it in the long term.
• The issue of party funding can be seen as a structural approach. Where structures create relationships within institutions, and within political parties and the party establishment.
• It can also be seen in the rational choice sense. Major parties will be happy with the status quo whilst minor parties will be very happy with the changes.

Party Systems:

The USA:

• There are many types of party systems and it is hard to categorise them with every state or area in the USA and UK.
• Some states in the USA have a dominant party system where the Republicans or Democrats will win in every election. The same can be said for some constituencies in the UK where the same party will always win in every election and have done for many years.
• But it can be said both the USA and the UK have a two party system Caramani described it as “a two-party system is one in which two fairly equally balanced large parties dominate the party system and alternate in power”.
• The USA is a 2 party system as the Republicans and the Democrats are swapping power whilst they are very similar in terms of policy.

The UK:

• The UK is harder to categorise. Over half a century ago, there would be a 2 party system. Where the 2 major parties controlled over 96% of the house in 1955.
• Following the 2015 election, only 67% of the house was in the balance of the two major parties. There were now 11 parties in the House.
• The reason for this lies in cultural and structural changes. The rise of nationalist parties and issue parties means there are more parties.
• In terms of executive control, it is still a two-party system. Despite all of this, it is still in a state of flux.

Changing Cultures In The UK:

• Until recently, the USA and the UK both had the same electoral system and very similar party systems. Why do they have such different party systems despite having the same electoral system. The answer lies in the cultural changes across the country.
• Trouble in Northern Ireland boosted support for nationalist parties, then the devolution debate bought the SNP in Scotland whilst popular Eurosceptic groups were the founding base of UKIP.
• Meanwhile, in the USA, no such cultural change was happening as the party system works under a structure that allows one party to control the presidency while at the same time the other party controls Congress. The way the presidency can be won is specific, it can only be won by parties that enjoy broad, national support.

Internal Party Unity:

Party Factions:

• Due to the 2 party dominance in both UK and USA politics, parties often find themselves without party unity. Parties find it hard to have unity due to the rise of nationalist and local issues which need attention.
• Members of factions tend to stress certain strands of ideology, certain traditions or even certain policies over others.
• They all believe in the party order but they tend to believe in a different priority or even different methods to achieve them.
• These differences can bring a new product or an era such as New Labour or Thatcherism.
• Party factions can be constructive by providing new ideas or policies, or they can be destructive as they fight for intra-party control.
• Some may be formal membership groups whilst some may be ‘coalition’ groups of those who are like minded. They may exist at grassroots levels or at a professional level, or it even exists in both levels.

Aims Of Party Factions:

1. To accentuate certain policies e.g income equality, free trade.
2. To focus on a particular aspect of ideology e.g hard left
3. To reflect geographic, ethnic, economic groups within the party e.g One Nation Conservatives, Southern Democrats.
4. To widen voter appeal e.g Momentum
5. To extol the party ’greats’ of the previous era e.g Thatcherites.
6. To offer diversity within a party that stresses unity
7. To offer personal support and encouragement to those politicians and voters of a similar view
8. To challenge the party establishment e.g New Labour & Tea Party Movement.

Effect On Factions of Voting Intentions:

• If the factions are destructive and the party as a whole appears disunited, then it may become a negative issue in an election. This was seen in 1992 when the Republicans when Bush fell out with Buchanan who was more in tune with the social issues facing the country and the party.
• Likewise, there was a similar fight in the Democrat party between Clinton and Sanders. For Trump, he may also face a similar challenge between the pro right and the religious right.
• In the UK, there has been a similar challenge. Mainly within the Labour party. New Labour vs Momentum. When it became truly destructive, they formed the SPD which later became the Liberal Democrat Party.

Effect Of Factions On Party Membership And Principles:

• Factions can be useful to parties, they can keep members who would have otherwise left either for another major party, or a third party. This can be said of the Tea Party Movement in the USA which kept the Blue Dog Faction the part of the Republican party. Whilst in the UK, one nation conservatives, was kept in the Tory party.
• A party faction can also go from being a faction to a leadership. This was done in 2016, with Trump’s America First and the quick change from leadership to the faction of David Cameron’s Notting Hill, the metropolitan elite within the UK Conservative Party following his replacement as party leader and prime minister by Theresa May in 2016.
• Factions tend to keep ideological and philosophically, lightweight, factions can keep the issues at the forefront of the party.

Party Policies:

• When comparing policies, it is easier to suggest that the Democrats and the Labour party policies will be similar whilst the same can be said for the Republicans and the Conservatives but the two have stark differences.
• Unlike the Democrats, the Labour party in the UK has remained at the grassroots level with trade unions and have been a socialist party for much of its life. Despite trying to become a socialist party during the Obama years, the Democrat party is not and never has been a socialist party because the appeal of socialist in the USA has never been widespread.
• The Conservative party came out of the British government in the 19^th century as a party dominated by the landed aristocracy and the established church. Nothing of this resembles that in the history of the Republican party which was born out of the Civil War.

Policy Agreements:

• Despite all of this, there are policy areas where the left-right divide does provide a match between the Republicans and the Conservatives.
• They both: Dislike big government, favour low taxes when the economy permits, talk of being strong on law, high defence spending and they want equality of opportunity than equality of results.
• The Democrats and the Labour Party are largely in agreement over the following: Right of minorities e.g racial, want better works rights, ‘green’ environmental policy, equality of opportunity than equality of results, better government spending on health, welfare and education, want to tax the rich to fund services.

Policy Differences:

• Ideologically, the centre of gravity in American party politics is further to the right than it is in British party politics.
• Broadly speaking, the Republicans are sat well to the right of the Conservative party whilst the Democrats sit to the right of Labour – more Old Labour and Corbyn’s Labour.
• The UK Conservatives in some policy areas have more in common with the Democrats rather than the Republicans – such as the death penalty (oppose), support same-sex marriage.
• Whilst the Conservatives may not be as far to the left as the Democrats, they are not as right to the Republicans.

Policy:	UK Labour:	US Democrats:	UK Conservatives:		US Republicans:
Abortion:	Support			Support but with limits as a conscience issue		Oppose
Death Penalty:	Oppose					Support
Same-sex Marriage:	Support			Support [but with some limits]		Oppose
Renewable Energy:
National Healthcare:
Role Of Central Government In Education:

Third & Minor Parties:

• Support for 3^rd parties in the USA is minimal whilst in the UK support is substantial by winning up to 1/3^rd of votes in Parliamentary elections. And they win up to half in European Elections – down to a different voting system.
• UK third parties reflect the four constituents’ parts of the UK – England, UKIP; Scotland, SNP; Wales, Plaid Cymru; Northern Ireland, SNP & Sinn Fein.
• A 3^rd party was created in the UK to tackle the EU issue. The 2 main parties supported the EU so the creation of a party against started – in the USA no such issue is present.
• Minor parties in the USA face significant problems because of the central position that the Presidential election holds in the structure. On only 4 occasions did a third party manage to mount a serious challenge in the past quarter of a century – 1912, 48, 68 and 1992.
• The structure of major parties in the USA is more flexible and responsive than their UK counterparts. The use of direct primaries makes the major parties in the US more responsive to ordinary voters who do not need reasons to create third parties. Primary voters saw the way the Republicans changed by selecting Trump as the candidate.
• Elections in the USA are much more expensive and the organisation on a national scale is much more challenging than in the UK. This makes it difficult for 3^rd parties to do well and compete in national elections in the USA.

US Parties - An Introduction, Theories of Party Renewal and Decline & Third Parties

Specification Key Words On Parties:

• Ideology: A collectively held set of ideas and beliefs
• Factionalism: Refers to the arguments and disputes between two or more small groups from within a larger group. It is said that a substantial amount of “factionalism” occurs within the movement if this is the case.
• Party Decline: The idea that parties are losing control to the people
• Party Renewal: The theory that parties are increasing in importance, during elections and voting during Congress.
• Party Organisation: How a party involves itself within the political process i.e it can either be top-down or bottom up.
• Third Parties: A party that is the 3^rd most popular in a country e.g Libertarian Party.
• Independent Candidates: A candidate that runs for office without the backing of a political party

What Are The Differences Between The Republicans & The Democrats:

Republicans:	Democrats:
Rebuilding the economy and creating jobs	Raising wages, closing the wealth gap
Fair and simple taxes for growth	Lowering health care costs
A competitive America	Defending the borders
Freeing financial markets	Fixing the criminal justice system
Workplace freedom	Guaranteeing rights for minorities, LGBTQ community and all Americans
Responsible homeownership	Common-sense gun reforms
Reducing the federal debt	Investment in modern education

Summarise 4 Democrats Policy That Show They Are More Focused On Social & Moral Issues:

1. Crime: They understand the disproportionate effects of crime, violence and incarceration of communities of colour.
2. Abortion: Believe that every women should have access to quality reproductive healthcare services including safe and legal abortion. Want to start the right to roll back the clock on women’s health and reproductive rights.
3. Minimum Wage: Want to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour over time and index it to inflation.
4. Healthcare: The affordable care act has covered 20 million more Americans and ensured millions more will never be denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions. They support reducing the cost of prescription drugs, combating drugs and alcohol addiction and improving the treatment of those with mental health issues.

Summarise 4 Republican Policy That Show They Are More Focused On ‘Small Government’:

1. Minimum Wage: Think that the minimum wage should be handled at state and local level
2. Education: Federal government should not be a partner as the Constitution gives it no role in education, only parents are a child’s first and foremost educators.
3. Wall Street: Called banking regulations an excuse to establish unprecedented government control over the nation’s financial markets.
4. Environment: Support all forms of energy that are marketable in a free economy. Oppose any carbon tax.

How Have The Two Parties Become More Distinct And Polarised In More Recent Decades:

• The 1990s brought a seismic shift in American politics.
• Up until then, both parties included a wide ideological range from liberals to conservatives.
• With the break-up of the old Solid South, southern conservative Democrats began to cross to the Republican party. This made the Republican party more ideological conservative party and this made the Democrats as a more homogeneous liberal party.
• As the 21^st century commentators began to talk of a 50-50 nation of Red & Blue America, with blue being more Democrat and red being more Republican.

Red America:

• Characterised as white, overwhelming Protestant but often joined by practicing Catholics.
• In Red America, the majority of voters think that the federal government does too many things which would be better left to private businesses and individuals, and they tend to think that the federal income tax should be cut.
• They are pro-life, pro-guns and pro-traditional marriage and they oppose Obamacare.
• They get their news from Fox News and listen to Conservative radio stations featuring Mark Levin.
• They love W. Bush but hated the Clintons and Obama.

Blue America:

• It is claimed that it is a racially, a rainbow, a coalition of white, black, Asian and Hispanic Americans.
• Attending a place of worship on a regular basis is not a huge important in Blue America.
• They think the federal government should do more to solve problems and they think that the federal income should increase.
• They are pro-choice, favours gun control, pro- same sex marriage and are supportive of Obamacare.
• They get their news from CNN and watch Saturday Night Live.
• They hated W. Bush and Donald Trump whilst they loved the Clintons and Obama.

What Is The ‘Coalitions Of Supporters’:

• American political parties are best thought of as “coalitions of interest”, they can be narrowly drawn than they were three or four decades ago but they still need to be in the coalitions in order to get enough people to vote.

Gender:

• In 9/10 elections between 1964 and 2000, women were significantly more supportive of the Democrat candidate than the Republican.
• This is known as the Gender Gap: The gap between the support given to a candidate by women and the support given to the same candidate by men.
• The GG for Trump was 11 points – 52% men, 41% of women.
  Clinton: 13 points, 52% women, 41% men.
• Trump’s attitude towards women became a feature of the 2016 POTUS election. With rude remarks made during the Primaries and one month before Election Day when the an infamous video tape was leaked “When you’re a star, they let you do anything...” After this one would have expected for his support among women to drop but it only went down by 3%. But it was still the lowest for any Republican candidate among women since 1964
• Some argue that women tend to vote for Democrat more since they have more favoured policy such as the pro-choice and gun control.

Race:

• In 10 elections between 1980 and 2016, African-Americans never gave less than 83% of support to the Democrats. President Clinton had the most loyal supporters among this group.
• When Obama was the first AA candidate for a major party, the share of AA voting increased from 88% to 95%. Turnout also increased, as AA accounted for 13% of the electorate.
• Hispanics are a growing group, they form 12% of the population but their full political importance is not yet known.
• Bush’s Republican campaign spoke out to them as he himself can speak fluent Spanish and his brother is married to an Hispanic women. The vote increased to 31%
• Not many voted for Trump after his promise to build a wall.

Class & Education:

• 30 years ago, Reagan Democrats were the most popular: White, working class voters, mostly living in the northeast and Midwest, employed in blue collar jobs who had been traditional Democrats but who supported Republican Ronald Reagan in 1980 & 1984.
• Trump did well in the Rust Belt, winning 6 primaries and getting close in another.
  Most of his votes came from people who only had qualifications from high school. Trump’s message of bringing back jobs was what they had been longing for and these people flocked to vote for Trump.

Geographic Region:

• The Northeast has become the heartland of the Democrat party, it used to be the south but now it is the northeast. In 7 elections from 1984 to 2008, the NE gave the Democratic candidate his largest percentage of vote.
• However in 2016, Trump broke through the “blue wall” (an area that almost always voted Democrat) and gained votes in Iowa, Wisconsin and Michigan as well as Pennsylvania.
• The south has moved from being the Democrats best area to the Republicans.
• In 2000 the Republican won all of the south, and in 2008, Obama flipped 2 states back to Democrat control
• In 2016, Clinton won only one state in the South (Virginia)

Urban Vs Rural:

• The 2016 election revealed how America is more and more divided by community, urban areas heavily support the Democrats whilst white, small towns and rural areas swing significantly to the Republicans.
• Romney won small towns and rural areas by just 50-48%. Whilst Trump won these areas by 27% (61-34%.)
• Trump’s message of making ‘America great again’ resonated with voters especially, white, older, blue collar voters.
• As Obama just about dug America out of the economic crisis, many felt that he had not done enough “banks got bailed out, we got sold out”.
• In 2016 Trump appealed to these voters with his promises and many voted for him as they felt that they had been “left behind”

Religion:

• In a country with a strict separation between Church and state, it is surprising in the 21^st century that it remains an issue, but it links with social and moral issues that divides the parties.
• Protestants & White Evangelicals: The Bible Belt (Southern states from Texas to Virginia), tend to support the Republicans, giving them between 54-59% of the vote. Trump got 84% of this vote, the highest ever, but this could be down to apathy with Clinton. They put a high premium on the appointment on strict Supreme Court judges.
• Catholics: Traditionally, goes to the Democrats but this has decreased after the Democrats changed stance on abortion. Thus, they now tend to vote Republican. 45% of Catholics voted Democrat in 2016.
• Religious Attendance: There is a correlation between frequency of attendance at a religious service and party support. Of those who go to a religious service, 56% of them voted Republican whilst, those who do not tend to get around 30% of the vote to the Democrats.

Describe The Factionalised Nature Of The Parties And The Internal Divisions Within Them:

The Democrats:

• After the 2016 election, the Democrats were in poor shape.
• Obama did not leave the Democrats party in a stronger state than he found it
• White House: Obama’s Democrats lost the White House and the fact that their candidate won the popular vote by nearing 3 million votes offered little comfort as it is Electoral College votes which count.
• Congress: In 2009, the Democrats controlled 58 seats in Senate and 255 in HOR. 8 years later they had just 48 votes in the Senate and 194 in HOR. They were now the minority party.
• State Governorships: When Obama was first elected, the Democrats controlled 29 of 50 state governorships but 8 years later they held just 16 which, was a loss of 18.
• State Legislatures: In 2009, the Democrats controlled 61 of the 98 partisan state legislative houses. By 2017, they controlled just 31 – a loss of 30. They held 4082 seats (56%) of state legislative seats in 2009 but only held 315 (43%) by 2017 – a loss of nearly 1000.
• Sone of those on the left of the party will be arguing for a more left-of-centre, radical approach, stressing issues such as income equality. Whilst others want to appeal to the Trump vote – white working class.

The Republicans:

• After the election of Obama, the Tea Party movement grew out of dissatisfaction with Obama’s response to the banking collapse and the economic meltdown on Wall Street.
• They stood for a strict adherence to the Constitution, limited government and a reduction in the size of the federal government.
• They also opposed Obama’s healthcare reforms
• Some argue that the Tea Party movement gave birth to Donald Trump in 2016 – however, a winning team is still a party in conflict.
• How will the traditional and religious conservatives adapt to the Donald Trump version of Republican ideology?
• What do the internationalists think of ‘America First’?
• Internally, can the party change the way candidates are elected and what will they do if they lose the mid-terms?

List The Key Debates Surrounding Party Debate & Renewal:

Theories Of Party Decline:

• David Broder said that the US parties were in serious decline.
• Whilst what he said was taken out of context, he meant that party loyalty has been “eroded”
• Candidate Selection: Until the last 1960s, POTUS candidates were chosen by bosses on smoke-filled rooms whilst now the ordinary person chooses. Both parties are struggling to choose candidates. The Democrats struggled to anoint their preferred candidate because of strong opposition from Sanders whilst the Republican hierarchy lost complete control by a hostile takeover from Trump.
• Communication With Voters: Parties have lost their traditional function as the communicator between politicians and the voters. Whilst the party rally used to do this by answering questions, nowadays TV does this whilst voters ‘speak back’ via opinion polls.
• Emergence Of ‘Movements’: The emergence of the Tea Party and Occupy movements during the first 10 years of the 21^st century showed the extent to which many Americans are more prone to join a movement than a traditional party. Americans tend to want to influence rather than join. The way the Tea Party movement was able to get the preferred Congressmen over the wishes of the Republican party suggested that the decline of the political parties. Trump presented himself as a movement rather than a candidate.

Theories Of Party Renewal:

• Theories Of Party Decline Were Exaggerated: Whilst it’s true that parties have declined, some argue that they play a less significant role in politics. The death of the Republican party came after Watergate whilst the death of the Democrats was reported to be in the 1960s-80s when it took a leftward shift but was resurrected by the ‘New Democrats’ of Clinton and Gore.
• Nationalism Of Campaigns: Some say that party renewable can be solved towards the nationalising of electoral campaigns. This was true of the Republican party in the mid-term elections of ‘94 and ’02 when they campaigned for “Contact with America” where a Constitutional amendment would be applied for balanced budget and congressional term limits.
• Increased Partisanship In Congress: If parties were declining in importance, a decline in partisanship could be anticipated. After all, if parties no longer matter, why should their members continually disagree?

Evaluate The Weakness Of US Parties:

The 2 Party System:

• A party system in which two major parties regularly win the vast majorities of votes, capture nearly all the seats in the legislature and alternately control the executive.

Evidence Of A 2 Party System:

• Popular Vote: Between 1992 and 2016, the Democrats & Republicans accounted for more than 80% of the popular vote on every occasion. In 4 of these 7 elections, their combined vote exceeded 95%
• Seats In The Legislature: Following the 2016 elections, only two members of Senate where not elected as Democrats or Republicans. Sanders is the longest running independent, though he does represent the Democrats.
• Control Of The Executive: In the White House, every POTUS since 1853 has been either a Democrat or a Republican. This has been the case for a century and a half.
• State Government: In January 2017, 49 of the 50 state governors were either Democrats or Republicans, only exception being Bill Walker of Alaska, he ran unsuccessfully as a Republican in 2010 and Democrats in 2014.

Reasons For A 2 Party System:

• Electoral System: FPTP makes it hard for 3^rd parties. A winner takes all system means that a 3^rd party receive no reward at all. Having a 3^rd party would lower the percentage of vote needed by the major party candidates.
• Broad Party Ideologies: When the two major parties encompass such a wide ideological spectrum there is not much room left for any other parties to attract substantial support.
• Primary Elections: The phenomenon of primary elections helps to make the major parties more responsive to the electorate, minimising the need for protest voting. Protest votes often go to the third party.

Does The USA Have A 2 Party System:
Yes:	No:
All POTUS since 1953 have been either Democrat or Republican	The USA have a 50-party system with individual state parties being autonomous and ideologically varied.
Democrats & Republicans combined regularly win over 95% of the vote.	Some states are virtually one-party states
All 435 of the Representatives are either Democrats or Republican	Third parties have played a significant role in some elections
98/100 Senators are either Republican or Democrat	Many voters join ‘groups’ or ‘movements’ rather than a party (e.g the Tea Party movement)
Leadership in Congress is organised by the two major parties	Many Americans are self-described ‘independents’
State politics is equally dominated by the two major parties.

Describe The Significance Of 3^rd Parties & Independent Candidates:

• Despite the domination of parties by the Republicans and Democrats, 3^rd parties do exist.
• Best known national 3^rd parties are the Libertarian Party and the Green Party.

Impacts Of Third Parties:

• 3^rd parties are both unimportant and important. Their combines popular vote in 2012 was 2% and just 6% in 2018.
• In 1968, 1992 and 2000 the 3^rd party affected the outcome.
• In 2000, the 2.7% for the Green Party almost certainly cost Al Gore the presidency. Data suggested that the 22,000 votes given to him would have gone to Al Gore.
• In 5 sets of House elections between 2008 and 2016, the 3^rd party vote never exceeded 3.6% whilst the Senate had 4.5%.

Third Party Difficulties:

• Electoral System: FPTP along with a winner takes all bonus, makes it hard for a 3^rd party. Regional third parties can do well. In 1968 George Wallace won 45 EC votes with just 13% of the vote. In 1992, Ross Perot won no EC vote with 19% of the vote.
• Ballot Access Laws: 3^rd parties are disadvantaged by the states’ ballot access laws. Laws in each state regulate how 3^rd parties’ candidates can qualify to get their name on the ballot. Some such as Tennessee are straightforward requiring just 25 signatures. But some are more complicated requiring signatures from each county in each state.
• Lack Of Resources: People are understandably reluctant to give money to parties that they know are going to lose. Hence 3^rd parties cannot compete with the two parties in terms of expenditure on organisation, staff and media.
• Lack Of Media Coverage: 3^rd parties suffer from a lack of media coverage. News programmes do not advertise them because they are not newsworthy. The parties cannot afford to make an advert. And the candidates are usually barred from appearing in TV debates.
• Co-optation: If the 3^rd party does well in the pre-election, against all the odds as Ross Perot did in 1992. It brings a problem as they need to co-optation of its key policies by one of both major parties. It happened to Perot when Clinton and the Republicans adopted policy to deal with Perots flagship policy – the federal budget deficit.

Do Third Parties Play An Significant Role In US Politics:
Yes:	No:
Ross Perot won 19% of the vote in 1992 and contributed to President Bush’s defeat.	Two major parties dominate presidential elections
Green Party’s 2.7% in 2000 contributed to Al Gore’s defeat.	Two major parties control Congress
Third parties can lose elections but win influence by changing the policy of one or both of both the major parties.	Two major parties control state politics
Some states (Alaska) have quite vibrant third parties which can play a significant role in state and local races	Two major parties will often co-opt the policy of successful third parties, thereby curtailing their election success (e.g co-opting Perot’s call for balanced federal budget)