Prompt: Should mainstream parties change the way they "play the game" in response to niche parties? In other words: do mainstream parties need to worry about the impact that these small, fringe, outsiders have on electoral politics? Personally, I believe that mainstream parties do need to worry about the small, fringe, outsiders and their impacts on electoral politics because there's little to no understanding of macro-level behavior. Although there is little to no understanding when it comes to this concept, niche parties can influence political parties through accountability through ownership, changing demographics, causing vote splitting, impacting political culture, etc. At most, as stated in class, there is only one political party decision-making …show more content…
In order to address these issues, niche parties gain a specific audience that is made up of those who feel oppressed/marginalized under mainstream politics and often feel ignored. This results in the need for mainstream parties to adapt their policies in order to address other issues that need resolving to help serve all of those issues that have been overlooked and to compete effectively. Apart from this, vote splitting also has a role in electoral politics as niche parties can impact the votes from mainstream parties and can lead to vote splitting. To avoid this, mainstream parties need to use strategic tactics and score alliances with each other to obtain a coalition, another reason why they must worry about the impact of these “small” outsiders on electoral politics. On the same note, this also impacts their demographics when niche parties have gained enough traction among specific demographic groups. This can happen when they have gained the audience of younger voters or ethnic minorities, this results in mainstream parties needing to adapt to the demographic shifts that have been impacted by the niche parties and need to ensure that their policies fall within the following
Every individual can stand for a race, gender, income, education, age, or a combination of countless categories. Another criticism of Pomper is the complication of “critical elections” and “temporary peculiarities.” Pomper defines a critical election as “not usually part of (these) stable periods, but serve as breaking points, ending one era and leading to the next” (Pomper 547). A “temporary peculiarity” marks surprising changes in party electorate, but does not mark the end of one era and the beginning of another. This makes elections hard to accurately classify until after the long-term effects have been realized.
There has been much speculation whether political parties have become too strong in American politics and if that is a good or bad thing. My belief is that political party power in the United States is just about right where I believe that there are some instances where political parties have been in situations where they have too much power and instances where it is moderate. First off, political parties are crucial to our democratic government because it is composed of a group of people that the constituents elect to represent their issues or achieve a common goal. Being part of a group that shares your common interests or goals is more powerful than tackling an issue by your self. It gives you more voice and power in government. Also, political
A variety of ideologies and parties nowadays is an inevitable and essential feature of the democracy. Every party by its nature tends to gain the official state legislature position, and essentially every party differs from other ones in its ideological core. The modern political system, parties, believes and attempts are different form those 50 years ago, and it is the normal sequent political world development. It is claimed that the modern party competition is not driven by ideology anymore. In this essay the definition of party systems, party competition, the changing shape of the modern parties will be discussed. Also, the question if the party competition is still driven by ideology will be answered in accordance with the relevant arguments.
Despite what’s against 3rd parties they still do manage to make some important contributions in our political system. One contribution is there ability to shift other party’s views along the political spectrum slightly.
Plurality voting and winner-take-all rules directly undermine any chance of a third party victory, leading to the perpetual existence of a two-party political system. With winner-take-all election rules making any third party victory far from possible, the two major parties can shift their identity early on in the election to align better with the concerns of the general public that may be expressed from third party support. Third parties do not pose much of a threat to the two major parties due to their inability to carry a state through electoral votes. Any large desire for policy change will likely provoke a major party critical realignment before it leads to any third party victory. The two major parties will likely, based off of historical patterns, bring forth a candidate whose campaign is unique to the nation-wide concerns, leading to a shift in overall voting
Both parties will tend to be broad-based and attempt to target as many groups as possible: this is because any smaller parties will not stand a chance in competing in most districts, hence causing parties to consolidate in order to be viable (ACE Project, 2012). This analysis by the ACE Project shows how larger parties may tend to squeeze out smaller ones, and cause smaller parties to be excluded relative to their actual level in government, hindering their ability to act on a national stage, providing a normative basis for their exclusion in Canadian
system produces conflicts between the Congress and the President and promotes very outdated beliefs that stem from the Constitution. A vast majority of the American population has the stern belief that the Constitution does not need to be changed in any way, shape, or form. This belief, however, is keeping the country from progressing along with other countries around the world. These single parties are holding control of multiple branches of government at once and monopolizing the power during their respective terms. The government “faces an incapacity to govern since each party works as a majority party” and believes there is no reason for innovation (Dulio & Thurber, 2000). The two parties are seemingly always clashing about one thing or the other, making it difficult for things to get accomplished, and proves the thesis correct that the two-party system is ineffective for a growing country.
...e a lot of parties are going to be running for office. However, for the fringe parties this creates a major advantage for them. With the load of political parties in the House of Commons, there would be a wider range of interests for people but there would be a lot of indecision and coalitions.
Cleavages existing in society are divisions such as religion, gender, race, and most importantly socioeconomic status. Political parties form around these divisions in society and in America’s society; money has proven to be the major factor. The major parties in American politics are Democrat and Republican, and the political preference of each member of these parties’ deals greatly with the amount of income they receive.
Voters of smaller parties will be split up between the districts and it becomes difficult for a candidate to be elected they favor, thus making it hard for a third party to become represented in government.
The Two Party System of UK It has often been said that the United Kingdom possesses a two party political system. However, any balanced argument on this issue must take into account both the differing perspectives from which this subject can be viewed and the time period which is being evaluated. The two party theory is not universally accepted and many people argue that the UK can best be described as a multi party, dominant party or even a two and a half or three party system, depending on how the subject is approached. The most commonly held view is that Britain is a two party system.
Despite being the constant underdog and loser in major elections third parties make some significant contribution to the political spectrum in the United States. Third Party Agendas are taken serious by the Democratic and Republican Parties and specific pieces of the Third Party Agendas are sometimes adopted by the two major parties. Third parties give discontented voters other alternatives. The Republican and Democratic Parties have been known to operate in similar styles and third parties give the voter the opportunity to express their discontent. The third parties in the United States are policy advocates and often are more specific about were they stand ideologically. Often the Republican and Democratic Parties try and take a moderate approach to political issues, and third parties are more conservative or liberal when it comes to political issues. Also, third parties tend to do exactly the opposite when their agenda concerns social issues. Then there is the ?spoiler factor? a Third Party Candidate can collect enough votes to change the outcome of a Presidential Election.
Before my many years' service in a restaurant, I attended a top science university. The year was 2023 and I was finishing the project that would win me my professorship. In the end, it resulted in my becoming a kitchen employee. My forty-second birthday had made a lonely visit the week before, and I was once again by myself in the flat. Like countless other mornings, I ordered a bagel from the toaster. '
In representative government, parties are often found. Perhaps the most prevalent danger in a party system is a party split, which paralyzes government just as much as a divergence of executive, legislative, and judicial powers in government.
It is not reasonable to expect that the entire population will agree on every matter, which is precisely why modern democracy is executed through representation by vote. In order for there to be a true democracy in place, there must be choices for the voters. These choices translate into a system of values and principles, which in turn translate to these organized entities that we call political parties. This paper highlights the functions that political parties serve in the House of Commons, and also argues that they diminish the democratic characteristics and responsibilities of the House of Commons. Political parties are the link between general society and the representative machinery of our government.