This project consists of five short essays concerning the following topics: 1. Describe and analyze the classical theoretical model of political parties and point out the differences between this model and the two principal American political parties. 2. Explain five lessons that can be learned from a study of the history of American political parties and cite at least two elections or periods of time that illustrate each of the five lessons. 3. Write a detailed essay in which you describe and analyze the reasons that we have a two-party system in the United States. 4. Describe the changes in American social, international, domestic, and political circumstances that caused major shifts in strength from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party between 1965 and 2004. 5. Write an essay in which you describe the demographic, economic and cultural (social-technological) changes that took place in the latter half of the Nineteenth Century and the first part of the Twentieth Century that contributed to the changes in party alignment and composition that became evident in the 1930s.
¶ … classical theoretical model of political parties and point out the differences between this model and the two principal American political parties.
The classical theoretical model of political parties in the United States parties holds that these parties exist primarily to control government and to gain power rather than to promote a given ideology. The classical model maintains that in order to prosper and retain viability, political parties must adjust to the changing demographic, economic, and social conditions in American society. To the extent that the two principal American political parties achieve these goals is likely the extent to which they will be able to remain responsive and sustain their constituencies over time as discussed further below, followed by a summary of the research in the conclusion.
Review and Discussion
The United States has historically used a two-party political system since organized political parties first began to take shape during the early 1800s (Heffern 10). The modest delay in forming political parties following the approval of the U.S. Constitution was the result of political parties not being mentioned. According to O'Neill (1996), "It is hard to imagine our government functioning without a strong two-party system. Yet the Continental Congress and the Articles of Confederation Congress existed without parties. The idea of political parties apparently never arose at the Constitutional Convention, either" (35). Since the 1860s, the Democratic and Republican parties have clearly dominated American politics and all presidents since 1852 have been Republicans or Democrats (Heffern 10). The responsiveness of these two parties to their constituency does not appear to depend on the emergence of a third-party that might diminish membership sufficiently to threaten their viability. For instance, according to Heffern, "The Electoral College, with its 'winner take all' award of electors, has contributed to locking in the two parties, as does the division of government into three branches" (Heffern 10).
Consistent with the classical theoretical model of political systems, controlling and government and adjusting to changes in the social and economic climate has been the business of the two major parties. As noted in the introduction, though, the primary business of the main political parties has not been the promotion of ideologies. This assertion is congruent with O'Neill's observation that, "Men and women are elected to the House without having previously held elective office. They can get elected because they raise the money and hire a media consultant and get on television. Some of them do not care about what party they belong to, and they feel as if they owe the party nothing when they take office" (O'Neill 36). The harsh realities of the political party system today mean that the labels "Democrats" and "Republicans" do not have the same meanings for constituents; rather, Americans are voting how they feel about things. In this regard, Lucier (2001) suggests that, "Labels such as 'Republican' and 'Democrat' are meaningless to describe fundamental instincts that are pre-political. Even the words 'conservative' and 'liberal' are too slippery to get a firm grasp on the problem" (48). More accurate labels for American voters today, Lucier argues, would be the "Party of Feelings" and the "Party of Rules," with American voters divided right down the middle. According to Lucier, "The Party of Feelings believes that government should guarantee the happiness of citizens, no matter how the citizens pursue it; the Party of Rules believes that happiness is the result of honest pursuit. Having lined up on the one side or the other, Americans seek out institutions that will support the one platform or the other" (Lucier 48). Other analysts argue that even these nomenclatures fail to capture the real shift in thought that has taken place in the United States in recent years. For example, according to Moore, "But the cold, bitter truth and the best kept political secret of our time is that Americans are more liberal than ever when it comes to both the lifestyles they lead and the positions they take on the great social and political issues of the day" (167).
You’re 83% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.