political party classification essay

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

Publications

• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

Political Typology

Beyond red vs. blue: the political typology.

Pew Research Center’s political typology provides a roadmap to today’s fractured political landscape. It organizes the public into nine distinct groups, based on an analysis of their attitudes and values. Even in a polarized era, the 2021 survey reveals deep divisions in both partisan coalitions.

Political Typology Quiz

Take our quiz to find out which one of our nine political typology groups is your best match.

How the political typology groups compare

Pew Research Center’s political typology sorts Americans into cohesive, like-minded groups based on their values, beliefs, and views about politics and the political system. Use this tool to compare the groups on some key topics and their demographics.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

From ‘traditional’ to ‘open-minded,’ how Americans describe themselves

Roughly six-in-ten Republicans (58%) describe themselves as traditional, but just 19% of Democrats say the same.

Americans at the ends of the ideological spectrum are the most active in national politics

Americans who hold less consistently liberal or conservative views tend to be less engaged in national politics.

How we identified your typology group

Identifying which group is the best fit for you involves comparing your answers to those from the typology groups defined using our national survey of 10,221 Americans (including 8,710 registered voters). See here for a methodological description of how we created the typology groups. For the 20 questions on the quiz used in defining the typology […]

Liberals make up the largest share of Democratic voters, but their growth has slowed in recent years

About half of Democratic and Democratic-leaning registered voters describe their own political views as liberal.

Understanding Pew Research Center’s political typology

Our typology provides a look at internal divisions within both the Republican and Democratic coalitions. Read more about the typology study in a Q&A.

Q&A: Pew Research Center’s president on key issues in U.S. polling

Read a Q&A with Michael Dimock, president of Pew Research Center, on recent developments in public opinion polling and what lies ahead.

Conservatives are among the most politically active Americans

By several measures, conservative Republicans – and conservatives more generally – are more politically active than most other segments of the population.

REFINE YOUR SELECTION

Research teams.

901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction
• Cadre parties
• Mass-based parties
• The struggle for power
• Participation in power
• Power and representation

Multiparty systems

• The American two-party system
• The British two-party system
• The communist model
• The fascist model
• The single party in less-developed countries
• Future of political parties

Party systems

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• History Learning Site - Political Parties
• Social Sci LibreTexts - Political Party
• Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University - Political Parties
• political party - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
• political party - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

Party systems may be broken down into three broad categories: two-party, multiparty, and single-party. Such a classification is based not merely on the number of parties operating within a particular country but on a variety of distinctive features that the three systems exhibit. Two-party and multiparty systems represent means of organizing political conflict within pluralistic societies and are thus part of the apparatus of democracy . Single parties usually operate in situations in which genuine political conflict is not tolerated . This broad statement is, however, subject to qualification, for, although single parties do not usually permit the expression of points of view that are fundamentally opposed to the party line or ideology , there may well be intense conflict within these limits over policy within the party itself. And even within a two-party or a multiparty system, debate may become so stymied and a particular coalition of interests so entrenched that the democratic process is seriously compromised.

Recent News

The distinction between two-party and multiparty systems is not as easily made as it might appear. In any two-party system there are invariably small parties in addition to the two major parties, and there is always the possibility that a third, small party prevents one of the two main parties from gaining a majority of seats in the legislature. This is the case with regard to the Liberal Party in Great Britain, for example. Other countries do not fall clearly into either category; thus, Austria and Germany only approximate the two-party system. It is not simply a question of the number of parties that determines the nature of the two-party system; many other elements are of importance, the extent of party discipline in particular.

In Anglo-Saxon countries there is a tendency to consider the two-party system as normal and the multiparty system as the exceptional case. But, in fact, the two-party system that operates in Great Britain, the United States , and New Zealand is much rarer than the multiparty system, which is found in almost all of western Europe.

In western Europe, three major categories of parties have developed since the beginning of the 19th century: conservative , liberal, and socialist. Each reflects the interests of a particular social class and expounds a particular political ideology . After World War I other categories of parties developed that were partly the result of divisions or transformations of older parties. Communist parties began as splinter groups of socialist parties, and Christian Democratic parties attempted to weld together moderate socialists and conservatives and some liberals. Other distinctive types of parties emerged in some countries. In Scandinavia, liberal rural parties developed in the 19th century, reflecting a long tradition of separate representation of the rural population. In many countries ethnic minorities formed the basis of nationalist parties, which then either joined existing parties or divided them.

The appearance of socialism in the 19th century upset the earlier lines of battle between conservatives and liberals and tended to throw the latter two groups into a common defense of capitalism . Logically, this situation should have led to the fusion of conservatives and liberals into one bourgeois party that would have presented a united stand against socialism. This is, in fact, what happened in Great Britain after World War I.

One of the most important factors determining the number of parties operating within a particular country is the electoral system . Proportional representation tends to favour the development of multiparty systems because it ensures representation in the legislature for even small parties. The majority, single-ballot system (also known as “first past the post” or “winner take all”) tends to produce a two-party system, because it excludes parties that may gain substantial numbers of votes but not the majority of votes necessary to elect a representative within a constituency . The majority system with a second ballot (also known as the two-round system) favours a multiparty system tempered by alliances between parties. The German Empire (1871–1914) and the French Third (1870–1940) and Fifth (since 1958) republics adopted this system for legislative elections. France also uses the two-round system to select its head of state, as do Austria and Portugal. In the developing world, the two-round system is most often found in former French colonies such as Vietnam, Togo, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo . Voters choose between the parties that did best in a first ballot. This leaves small parties at a disadvantage but, nevertheless, gives them opportunity to strengthen their role during the second balloting as long as they are willing to enter into alliances with the leading parties.

Another factor producing multiparty systems is the intensity of political conflicts. If, within a given political movement, extremists are numerous, then it is difficult for the moderates in that party to join with them in a united front. Two rival parties are likely to be formed. Thus, the power of the Jacobins among 19th-century French liberals contributed to the inability of the moderates to form one great liberal party, as was successfully achieved in Great Britain. Likewise, the power of the extremists among the conservatives was an obstacle to the development of a strong conservative party.

The distinction between the multiparty system and the two-party system corresponds largely to a distinction between two types of Western political regime . In a two-party situation the administration has, in effect, an assurance of a majority in the legislature, deriving from the predominance of one party; it has, therefore, a guarantee of continuance and effectiveness. Such a system is often referred to as majority parliamentarianism. In a multiparty situation, on the other hand, it is quite rare for one party to have a majority in the legislature; governments must, therefore, be founded on coalitions, which are always more heterogeneous and more fragile than a single party. The result is less stability and less political power. Such systems may be referred to as nonmajority parliamentarianism.

In practice, majority and nonmajority parliamentary systems do not coincide exactly with two-party systems and multiparty systems. For, if each of the two parties is flexible and does not control the voting patterns of its members (as is the case in the United States), the numerical majority of one of the parties matters little. It can happen, moreover, that one party in a multiparty system will hold an absolute majority of seats in the legislature so that no coalition is required. Such a situation is unusual but did occur in West Germany (1949–90), Italy, and Belgium at various times after 1945.

Ordinarily, however, a coalition will be the only means of attaining a parliamentary majority within the framework of the multiparty system. Coalitions are by nature more heterogeneous and more unstable than a grouping made up of one party, but their effectiveness varies greatly according to the discipline and organization of the parties involved. In the case of flexible parties that are undisciplined and that allow each legislator to vote independently, the coalition will be weak and probably short-lived. The instability and weakness of governments is at its maximum in such situations, of which the Third French Republic provides a good example.

If, on the other hand, the parties involved in a coalition are rigid and disciplined , it is possible for a system quite similar to the two-party system to develop. This is often the case when two opposing alliances are formed, one on the left and one on the right, and when both are strong enough to endure through a legislative session. This type of coalition, referred to as bipolarized, introduces elements of the two-party system into a multiparty framework. A situation of this type developed in the mid-20th century in Sweden , where conservative, liberal, and agrarian parties aligned against the Swedish Social Democratic Party , which allied itself with the Communist Party (now the Left Party).

The system of bipolar alliances may be contrasted with the system of a centrist alliance. Rather than the parties on the right forming a centre-right coalition to oppose a centre-left coalition, there is the possibility that the centre-left and the centre-right will join forces and reject the extremes at both ends of the political spectrum . Such a situation occurred in Germany during the Weimar Republic , when the government rested on a majority formed of a coalition of Catholic centrists and social democrats, with opposition coming from the communists and the nationalists on the extreme left and right.

Centrist coalitions all tend to give the average citizen a sense of political alienation. In rejecting both extremes, coalitions may well be isolating the radical , unstable elements, but the governing coalition may tend to be unresponsive to new ideas, uninspiringly pragmatic , and too ready to compromise. This situation gives rise to a more or less permanent breach between practical politics and political ideals. An advantage of bipolarization or of the two-party system is that the moderates of both sides must collaborate with those who are more extreme in their views, and the extremists must be willing to work with those who are more moderate; the pressure from the extremists prevents the moderates from getting bogged down, while collaboration with the moderates lends a touch of realism to the policies of the extremists.

9.3 The Shape of Modern Political Parties

Learning objectives.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Differentiate between the party in the electorate and the party organization
• Discuss the importance of voting in a political party organization
• Describe party organization at the county, state, and national levels
• Compare the perspectives of the party in government and the party in the electorate

We have discussed the two major political parties in the United States, how they formed, and some of the smaller parties that have challenged their dominance over time. However, what exactly do political parties do? If the purpose of political parties is to work together to create and implement policies by winning elections, how do they accomplish this task, and who actually participates in the process?

The answer was fairly straightforward in the early days of the republic when parties were little more than electoral coalitions of like-minded, elite politicians. But improvements in strategy and changes in the electorate forced the parties to become far more complex organizations that operate on several levels in the U.S. political arena. Modern political parties consist of three components identified by political scientist V. O. Key: the party in the electorate (the voters); the party organization (which helps to coordinate everything the party does in its quest for office); and the party in office (the office holders). To understand how these various elements work together, we begin by thinking about a key first step in influencing policy in any democracy: winning elections.

THE PARTY-IN-THE-ELECTORATE

A key fact about the U.S. political party system is that it’s all about the votes. If voters do not show up to vote for a party’s candidates on Election Day, the party has no chance of gaining office and implementing its preferred policies. As we have seen, for much of their history, the two parties have been adapting to changes in the size, composition, and preferences of the U.S. electorate. It only makes sense, then, that parties have found it in their interest to build a permanent and stable presence among the voters. By fostering a sense of loyalty, a party can insulate itself from changes in the system and improve its odds of winning elections. The party-in-the-electorate are those members of the voting public who consider themselves to be part of a political party and/or who consistently prefer the candidates of one party over the other.

What it means to be part of a party depends on where a voter lives and how much they choose to participate in politics. At its most basic level, being a member of the party-in-the-electorate simply means a voter is more likely to voice support for a party. These voters are often called party identifiers , since they usually represent themselves in public as being members of a party, and they may attend some party events or functions. Party identifiers are also more likely to provide financial support for the candidates of their party during election season. This does not mean self-identified Democrats will support all the party’s positions or candidates, but it does mean that, on the whole, they feel their wants or needs are more likely to be met if the Democratic Party is successful.

Party identifiers make up the majority of the voting public. Gallup, the polling agency, has been collecting data on voter preferences for the past several decades. Its research suggests that historically, over half of American adults have called themselves “Republican” or “Democrat” when asked how they identify themselves politically ( Figure 9.8 ). Even among self-proclaimed independents, the overwhelming majority claim to lean in the direction of one party or the other, suggesting they behave as if they identified with a party during elections even if they preferred not to publicly pick a side. Partisan support is so strong that, in a poll conducted from August 5 to August 9, 2015, about 88 percent of respondents said they either identified with or, if they were independents, at least leaned toward one of the major political parties. 38 Thus, in a poll conducted in January 2016, even though about 42 percent of respondents said they were independent, this does not mean that they are not, in fact, more likely to favor one party over the other. 39

Strictly speaking, party identification is not quite the same thing as party membership. People may call themselves Republicans or Democrats without being registered as a member of the party, and the Republican and Democratic parties do not require individuals to join their formal organization in the same way that parties in some other countries do. Many states require voters to declare a party affiliation before participating in primaries, but primary participation is irregular and infrequent, and a voter may change identities long before changing party registration. For most voters, party identification is informal at best and often matters only in the weeks before an election. It does matter, however, because party identification guides some voters, who may know little about a particular issue or candidate, in casting their ballots. If, for example, someone thinks of themself as a Republican and always votes Republican, they will not be confused when faced with a candidate, perhaps in a local or county election, whose name is unfamiliar. If the candidate is a Republican, the voter will likely cast a ballot for that candidate.

Party ties can manifest in other ways as well. The actual act of registering to vote and selecting a party reinforces party loyalty. Moreover, while pundits and scholars often deride voters who blindly vote their party, the selection of a party in the first place can be based on issue positions and ideology. In that regard, voting your party on Election Day is not a blind act—it is a shortcut based on issue positions.

THE PARTY ORGANIZATION

A significant subset of American voters views their party identification as something far beyond simply a shortcut to voting. These individuals get more energized by the political process and have chosen to become more active in the life of political parties. They are part of what is known as the party organization. The party organization is the formal structure of the political party, and its active members are responsible for coordinating party behavior and supporting party candidates. It is a vital component of any successful party because it bears most of the responsibility for building and maintaining the party “brand.” It also plays a key role in helping select, and elect, candidates for public office.

Local Organizations

Since winning elections is the first goal of the political party, it makes sense that the formal party organization mirrors the local-state-federal structure of the U.S. political system. While the lowest level of party organization is technically the precinct , many of the operational responsibilities for local elections fall upon the county-level organization. The county-level organization is in many ways the workhorse of the party system, especially around election time. This level of organization frequently takes on many of the most basic responsibilities of a democratic system, including identifying and mobilizing potential voters and donors, identifying and training potential candidates for public office, and recruiting new members for the party. County organizations are also often responsible for finding rank and file members to serve as volunteers on Election Day, either as officials responsible for operating the polls or as monitors responsible for ensuring that elections are conducted honestly and fairly. They may also hold regular meetings to provide members the opportunity to meet potential candidates and coordinate strategy ( Figure 9.9 ). Of course, all this is voluntary and relies on dedicated party members being willing to pitch in to run the party.

State Organizations

Most of the county organizations’ formal efforts are devoted to supporting party candidates running for county and city offices. But a fair amount of political power is held by individuals in statewide office or in state-level legislative or judicial bodies. While the county-level offices may be active in these local competitions, most of the coordination for them will take place in the state-level organizations. Like their more local counterparts, state-level organizations are responsible for key party functions, such as statewide candidate recruitment and campaign mobilization. Most of their efforts focus on electing high-ranking officials such as the governor or occupants of other statewide offices (e.g., the state’s treasurer or attorney general) as well as candidates to represent the state and its residents in the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives. The greater value of state- and national-level offices requires state organizations to take on several key responsibilities in the life of the party.

Link to Learning

Visit the following Republican and Democratic sites to see what party organizations look like on the local level. Although these sites are for different parties in different parts of the country, they both inform visitors of local party events, help people volunteer to work for the party, and provide a convenient means of contributing to the party.

First, state-level organizations usually accept greater fundraising responsibilities than do their local counterparts. Statewide races and races for national office have become increasingly expensive in recent years. The average cost of a successful House campaign was $2.4 million in 2020; for Senate races, it was $27.2 million. 40 While individual candidates are responsible for funding and running their own races, it is typically up to the state-level organization to coordinate giving across multiple races and to develop the staffing expertise that these candidates will draw upon at election time.

State organizations are also responsible for creating a sense of unity among members of the state party. Building unity can be very important as the party transitions from sometimes-contentious nomination battles to the all-important general election. The state organization uses several key tools to get its members working together towards a common goal. First, it helps the party’s candidates prepare for state primary elections or caucuses that allow voters to choose a nominee to run for public office at either the state or national level. Caucuses are a form of town hall meeting at which voters in a precinct get together to voice their preferences, rather than voting individually throughout the day ( Figure 9.10 ).

Second, the state organization is also responsible for drafting a state platform that serves as a policy guide for partisans who are eventually selected to public office. These platforms are usually the result of a negotiation between the various coalitions within the party and are designed to ensure that everyone in the party will receive some benefits if their candidates win the election. Finally, state organizations hold a statewide convention at which delegates from the various county organizations come together to discuss the needs of their areas. The state conventions are also responsible for selecting delegates to the national convention.

National Party Organization

The local and state-level party organizations are the workhorses of the political process. They take on most of the responsibility for party activities and are easily the most active participants in the party formation and electoral processes. They are also largely invisible to most voters. The average citizen knows very little of the local party’s behavior unless there is a phone call or a knock on the door in the days or weeks before an election. The same is largely true of the activities of the state-level party. Typically, the only people who notice are those who are already actively engaged in politics or are being targeted for donations.

But most people are aware of the presence and activity of the national party organizations for several reasons. First, many Americans, especially young people, are more interested in the topics discussed at the national level than at the state or local level. According to John Green of the Ray C. Bliss Institute of Applied Politics, “Local elections tend to be about things like sewers, and roads and police protection—which are not as dramatic an issue as same-sex marriage or global warming or international affairs.” 41 Presidential elections and the behavior of the U.S. Congress are also far more likely to make the news broadcasts than the activities of county commissioners, and the national-level party organization is mostly responsible for coordinating the activities of participants at this level. The national party is a fundraising army for presidential candidates and also serves a key role in trying to coordinate and direct the efforts of the House and Senate. For this reason, its leadership is far more likely to become visible to media consumers, whether they intend to vote or not.

A second reason for the prominence of the national organization is that it usually coordinates the grandest spectacles in the life of a political party. Most voters are never aware of the numerous county-level meetings or coordinating activities. Primary elections, one of the most important events to take place at the state level, have a much lower turnout than the nationwide general election. In 2012, for example, only one-third of the eligible voters in New Hampshire voted in the state’s primary, one of the earliest and thus most important in the nation; however, 70 percent of eligible voters in the state voted in the general election in November 2012. 42 People may see or read an occasional story about the meetings of the state committees or convention but pay little attention. But the national convention s, organized and sponsored by the national-level party, can dominate the national discussion for several weeks in late summer, a time when the major media outlets are often searching for news. These conventions are the definition of a media circus at which high-ranking politicians, party elites, and sometimes celebrities, such as actor/director Clint Eastwood ( Figure 9.11 ), along with individuals many consider to be the future leaders of the party are brought before the public so the party can make its best case for being the one to direct the future of the country. 43 National party conventions culminate in the formal nomination of the party nominees for the offices of president and vice president, and they mark the official beginning of the presidential competition between the two parties.

In the past, national conventions were often the sites of high drama and political intrigue. As late as 1968, the identities of the presidential and/or vice-presidential nominees were still unknown to the general public when the convention opened. It was also common for groups protesting key events and issues of the day to try to raise their profile by using the conventions to gain the media spotlight. National media outlets would provide “gavel to gavel” coverage of the conventions, and the relatively limited number of national broadcast channels meant most viewers were essentially forced to choose between following the conventions or checking out of the media altogether. Much has changed since the 1960s, however, and between 1960 and 2004, viewership of both the Democratic National Convention and the Republican National Convention had declined by half. 44

National conventions are not the spectacles they once were, and this fact is almost certainly having an impact on the profile of the national party organization. Both parties have come to recognize the value of the convention as a medium through which they can communicate to the average viewer. To ensure that they are viewed in the best possible light, the parties have worked hard to turn the public face of the convention into a highly sanitized, highly orchestrated media event. Speakers are often required to have their speeches prescreened to ensure that they do not deviate from the party line or run the risk of embarrassing the eventual nominee—whose name has often been known by all for several months. And while protests still happen, party organizations have becoming increasingly adept at keeping protesters away from the convention sites, arguing that safety and security are more important than First Amendment rights to speech and peaceable assembly. For example, protestors were kept behind concrete barriers and fences at the Democratic National Convention in 2004. 45

With the advent of cable TV news and the growth of internet blogging, the major news outlets have found it unnecessary to provide the same level of coverage they once did. Between 1976 and 1996, ABC and CBS cut their coverage of the nominating conventions from more than fifty hours to only five. NBC cut its coverage to fewer than five hours. 46 One reason may be that the outcome of nominating conventions are also typically known in advance, meaning there is no drama. Today, the nominee’s acceptance speech is expected to be no longer than an hour, so it will not take up more than one block of prime-time TV programming.

This is not to say the national conventions are no longer important, or that the national party organizations are becoming less relevant. The conventions, and the organizations that run them, still contribute heavily to a wide range of key decisions in the life of both parties. The national party platform is formally adopted at the convention, as are the key elements of the strategy for contesting the national campaign. And even though the media is paying less attention, key insiders and major donors often use the convention as a way of gauging the strength of the party and its ability to effectively organize and coordinate its members. They are also paying close attention to the rising stars who are given time at the convention’s podium, to see which are able to connect with the party faithful. Most observers credit Barack Obama’s speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention with bringing him to national prominence. 47

Insider Perspective

Conventions and trial balloons.

While both political parties use conventions to help win the current elections, they also use them as a way of elevating local politicians to the national spotlight. This has been particularly true for the Democratic Party. In 1988, the Democrats tapped Arkansas governor Bill Clinton to introduce their nominee Michael Dukakis at the convention. Clinton’s speech was lampooned for its length and lack of focus, but it served to get his name in front of Democratic voters. Four years later, Clinton was able to leverage this national exposure to help his own presidential campaign. The pattern was repeated when Illinois state senator Barack Obama gave the keynote address at the 2004 convention. Although he was only a candidate for the U.S. Senate at the time, his address caught the attention of the Democratic establishment and ultimately led to his emergence as a viable presidential candidate just four years later.

Should the media devote more attention to national conventions? Would this help voters choose the candidate they want to vote for?

Bill Clinton’s lengthy nomination speech in 1988 was much derided, but served the purpose of providing national exposure to a state governor. Barack Obama’s inspirational speech at the 2004 national convention resulted in immediate speculation as to his wider political aspirations.

THE PARTY-IN-GOVERNMENT

One of the first challenges facing the party-in-government , or the party identifiers who have been elected or appointed to hold public office, is to achieve their policy goals. The means to do this is chosen in meetings of the two major parties; Republican meetings are called party conferences and Democrat meetings are called party caucuses. Members of each party meet in these closed sessions and discuss what items to place on the legislative agenda and make decisions about which party members should serve on the committees that draft proposed laws. Party members also elect the leaders of their respective parties in the House and the Senate, and their party whips. Leaders serve as party managers and are the highest-ranking members of the party in each chamber of Congress. The party whip ensures that members are present when a piece of legislation is to be voted on and directs them how to vote. The whip is the second-highest ranking member of the party in each chamber. Thus, both the Republicans and the Democrats have a leader and a whip in the House, and a leader and a whip in the Senate. The leader and whip of the party that holds the majority of seats in each house are known as the majority leader and the majority whip. The leader and whip of the party with fewer seats are called the minority leader and the minority whip. The party that controls the majority of seats in the House of Representatives also elects someone to serve as Speaker of the House. People elected to Congress as independents (that is, not members of either the Republican or Democratic parties) must choose a party to conference or caucus with. For example, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who originally ran for Senate as an independent candidate, caucuses with the Democrats and ran for the presidency as a Democrat. He returned to the Senate in 2017 as an independent. 48

The political parties in government must represent their parties and the entire country at the same time. One way they do this is by creating separate governing and party structures in the legislature, even though these are run by the same people. Check out some of the more important leadership organizations and their partisan counterparts in the House of Representatives and the Senate leadership.

Get Connected!

Party organization from the inside.

Interested in a cool summer job? Want to actually make a difference in your community? Consider an internship at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) or Republican National Committee (RNC). Both organizations offer internship programs for college students who want hands-on experience working in community outreach and grassroots organizing. While many internship opportunities are based at the national headquarters in Washington, DC, openings may exist within state party organizations.

Internship positions can be very competitive; most applicants are juniors or seniors with high grade-point averages and strong recommendations from their faculty. Successful applicants get an inside view of government, build a great professional network, and have the opportunity to make a real difference in the lives of their friends and families.

Visit the DNC or RNC website and find out what it takes to be an intern. While there, also check out the state party organization. Is there a local leader you feel you could work for? Are any upcoming events scheduled in your state?

One problem facing the party-in-government relates to the design of the country’s political system. The U.S. government is based on a complex principle of separation of powers, with power divided among the executive, legislative, and judiciary branches. The system is further complicated by federalism, which relegates some powers to the states, which also have separation of powers. This complexity creates a number of problems for maintaining party unity. The biggest is that each level and unit of government has different constituencies that the office holder must satisfy. The person elected to the White House is more beholden to the national party organization than are members of the House or Senate, because members of Congress must be reelected by voters in very different states, each with its own state-level and county-level parties.

Some of this complexity is eased for the party that holds the executive branch of government. Executive offices are typically more visible to the voters than the legislature, in no small part because a single person holds the office. Voters are more likely to show up at the polls and vote if they feel strongly about the candidate running for president or governor, but they are also more likely to hold that person accountable for the government’s failures. 49

Members of the legislature from the executive’s party are under a great deal of pressure to make the executive look good, because a popular president or governor may be able to help other party members win office. Even so, partisans in the legislature cannot be expected to simply obey the executive’s orders. First, legislators may serve a constituency that disagrees with the executive on key matters of policy. If the issue is important enough to voters, as in the case of gun control or abortion rights, an office holder may feel their job will be in jeopardy if they too closely follow the party line, even if that means disagreeing with the executive. A good example occurred when the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which desegregated public accommodations and prohibited discrimination in employment on the basis of race, was introduced in Congress. The bill was supported by Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, both of whom were Democrats. Nevertheless, many Republicans, such as William McCulloch, a conservative representative from Ohio, voted in its favor while many southern Democrats opposed it. 50

A second challenge is that each house of the legislature has its own leadership and committee structure, and those leaders may not be in total harmony with the president. Key benefits like committee appointments, leadership positions, and money for important projects in their home district may hinge on legislators following the lead of the party. These pressures are particularly acute for the majority party , so named because it controls more than half the seats in one of the two chambers. The Speaker of the House and the Senate majority leader, the majority party’s congressional leaders, have significant tools at their disposal to punish party members who defect on a particular vote. Finally, a member of the minority party must occasionally work with the opposition on some issues in order to accomplish any of their constituency’s goals. This is especially the case in the Senate, which is a super-majority institution. Sixty votes (of the 100 possible) are required to get anything accomplished, because Senate rules allow individual members to block legislation via holds and filibusters. The only way to block the blocking is to invoke cloture , a procedure calling for a vote on an issue, which takes 60 votes.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/american-government-3e/pages/1-introduction

• Authors: Glen Krutz, Sylvie Waskiewicz, PhD
• Publisher/website: OpenStax
• Book title: American Government 3e
• Publication date: Jul 28, 2021
• Location: Houston, Texas
• Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/american-government-3e/pages/1-introduction
• Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/american-government-3e/pages/9-3-the-shape-of-modern-political-parties

© Jul 18, 2024 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

Political Parties in the United States Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

The two-party system in the United States has been historically dominant for a variety of reasons. Firstly, most prominent political issues in the United States, starting with the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, typically had two sides to them, lending themselves to the two-party split (Harrison 281). Secondly, the two-party system has been fueled by the winner-take-all nature of the elections in the U.S., as opposed to the proportional representation system present in many other countries (Harrison 282). Thirdly, the election system has been created by the members of the two dominant parties, which makes it difficult for any third-party candidate to gain traction (Harrison 284). These can be summed up as the main reasons for the historical prevalence of the two-party system.

A certain argument can be made regarding whether there is currently a sixth-party system. The fifth-party system is said to have ended in 1968 with the election of Richard Nixon (Harrison 277). The previous party systems have been characterized by the dominance of one party over the other. In comparison, the main aspects of the post-Nixon election period are “intense party competition” and “a divided government” (Harrison 277). These distinctions could indicate that there is currently a sixth-party system.

The new developments in technology have notably shifted the political landscape in the U.S. Both parties employ big data to gather information about the attitudes of their voters in order to better potential target supporters (Harrison 291). Moreover, with the parties making an effort to communicate with the population via social media and mobile apps, the focus of political networking seems to have shifted to these new channels (Harrison 291). These are the changes in how the parties interact with their constituents.

Recent polls have shown low approval for President Joe Biden. Certain “fundamentalists” have claimed that based on these findings and other fundamentals, such as previous election results, the most likely outcome of the Congress elections would be a Democratic loss (Silver). However, despite being based on statistics, this approach has several flaws. Although certain Democrats disapprove of Biden (The Economist), it is unlikely that they would vote for Republicans in Congress (Silver). Moreover, other statistical evidence points out that “presidential approval and the race for Congress have diverged, not converged” (Silver). These are the main reasons why “fundamentalists” could be right or wrong regarding their prediction.

Works Cited

Harrison, Brigid C., et al. American Democracy Now . 6th ed., McGraw-Hill Education, 2019.

Silver, Nate. “ Biden Is Very Unpopular. It May Not Tell Us Much about the Midterms. ” FiveThirtyEight , 2022. Web.

“Why Young Democrats Disapprove of Joe Biden.” The Economist , 2022. Web.

• The Tammany Hall Political Machine Critique
• The United States Federalism and Political Culture
• The Formation of American History
• Democracy in the United States System
• Comparison of the US Parties
• Public Interest in Parliamentary Law Making
• Colorado and Statewide Political Culture
• Instruments of Statecraft in Australian Foreign Policy
• Western Ideology vs. Political Islam in Turkey
• Analysis of the Political Frame Skills
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, December 14). Political Parties in the United States. https://ivypanda.com/essays/political-parties-in-the-united-states/

"Political Parties in the United States." IvyPanda , 14 Dec. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/political-parties-in-the-united-states/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Political Parties in the United States'. 14 December.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Political Parties in the United States." December 14, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/political-parties-in-the-united-states/.

1. IvyPanda . "Political Parties in the United States." December 14, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/political-parties-in-the-united-states/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Political Parties in the United States." December 14, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/political-parties-in-the-united-states/.

• Political Parties

In our country, there are several political parties that stand for the election . The presence of the political party is actually a healthy situation for the nation. It gives people a choice to make a more evolved and effective decision. Moreover, it drives the other political parties to get better than their competitors to win elections and rule the nation. So, this is the basic backdrop of political parties. But what is a political party? Why do we need a political party? Let’s find out.

Suggested Videos

Introduction to Political Party

A political party basically, is a group of people. These people come together to contest elections in order to hold power in the government . It is a way to mobilize voters to support common sets of interests, concerns, and goals. The primary role of the political party is to fix the political agenda and policies. So, each party tries to persuade people by claiming their policies are better than those of other parties.

In a broader perspective, a political party is a means via which the people can speak to the government and have a say in the governance of any country. So, every political party must have three key components:

• Active Members

Access and learn all the chapters of Political Science here .

Functions of a Political Party

Every political party has a number of functions to perform. Here we have listed some of them.

• A political party contests elections by putting up candidates.
• In countries like the USA, the candidates are selected by members and supporters of a party.
• On the other hand, in countries like India , the candidates are chosen by top party leaders.
• Every party has different policies and programmes. Voters make a choice in accordance with the policies and programmes liked by them.
• In a democratic country , a large group of people that has certain similar opinions group together and form a party. Then then, give a direction to the policies adopted by the government.
• Those parties which lose elections form the opposition. They voice different views and criticise the government for their failures and mobilize opposition to the government.
• Political parties shape public opinion. With the help of the pressure groups, the parties launch movements for solving problems faced by the people.
• Parties even offer access to government machinery and welfare schemes. The local party leader serves as a  link between the citizen and the government officer.

What is the concept of Federalism? .

Importance of Political Parties

A democracy cannot exist without the presence of a political party. This is clear from the function performed by the political parties. In case, there are no political parties then:

• Every candidate in the election would be an independent candidate. Any individual candidate does not have the efficiency to promise any major policy change to the people. In such a scenario, no one will be responsible for how the country is run.
• In the long run, only a representative democracy can survive. Political parties are the agencies that gather different views on various issues and present them to the government.

Party System

There are three types of party systems:

•  One-Party System

Two-Party System

Multi-party system, one-party system.

In a one-party system, there is no competition in this system. Here, the lone party nominates the candidates and the voters have only two choices i.e.

• Not to vote at all or
• write ‘yes’ or ‘no’ against the name of the candidates nominated by the party

Such a political system has been prominent in authoritarian regimes and communist countries such as China, North Korea, and Cuba. Before the collapse of communism, this system was also prevalent in USSR.

What are the Outcomes of Democracy?

In a two-party system, the power shifts between two major, dominant parties. So, for winning the elections, the winner will have to get the maximum number of votes. However, please know that maximum number of votes is not equivalent to a majority of votes.

So, the smaller parties tend to merge with the bigger parties or they drop out of elections. Such a  parliamentary system prevails in Canada and Great Britain, in which there are two parties holding the maximum numbers of seats.

The third and the most common form of government is the multi-party system. In such a system, there are three or more parties which have the capacity to gain control of the government separately or in a coalition.

In case, no party achieves a clear majority of the legislative seats, then several parties join forces and form a coalition government. Countries like India, follow a multi-party system. Some people are of the view, that a multi-party system often leads to political instability in a country.

Solved Example for you

Q1: Who among the following is the founder of the Bahujan Samaj Party?

•  Kanshi Ram
•  Sahu Maharaj
•  B.R. Ambedkar
•  Jotiba Phule

Sol:   The correct answer is the option ”a”.  Kanshi Ram is the founder of the Bahujan Samaj Party

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

3 responses to “Political Parties”

I thought it was interesting what you said about democracy not being able to exist without political parties. My sister is just starting to vote, but she has no idea what her political beliefs are. I bet she would benefit from reading this article so that she can vote well.

Democracy will be realised more in a No Party System than in any party system.

In Afghanistan there is no major party but democracry is running smoothly. The independent candidates winning the presidential campaign from last 19 years.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

Parties Grouped by Classification Parties Alphabetically

Home ❯ 2020 General Election ❯ 2020 Political Parties Pa…

The Classification of Political parties listed on TheGreenPapers.com.

• Democrats and affiliates
• Republicans and affiliates
• Major Third Parties and affiliates (any Party, other than a Major Party [as defined in 1. above], receiving a minimum of 15/100ths of 1 percent of the nationwide popular vote in any presidential election between 1984 and 2016 and which fielded candidates in the previous presidential election [2016] are hereby defined as "Major third parties" for the purposes of "The Green Papers" website. Excluded from this are non-party Independent bids for President which received at least 0.15% of the nationwide popular vote. See Criteria for including Major Third Parties .)
• Other Third Parties (i.e., not a Major Third Party)
• Independents (covering Unaffiliated, Nonpartisan and all the other synonyms/euphemisms for Independent)
• Write-in/Scattered/otherwise not readily classifiable
• Affiliates: Democratic-Farmer Labor; Democratic-Nonpartisan League
• 404 Incumbents
• 697 Candidates
• Affiliate of: Democratic
• Based in: Minnesota affiliate of the Democratic Party
• 3 Incumbents
• 11 Candidates
• Based in: North Dakota affiliate of the Democratic Party
• 6 Candidates
• 423 Incumbents
• 688 Candidates
• Affiliates: American Constitution; Concerned Citizens; Independent American; Nebraska; U.S. Taxpayers
• 36 Candidates
• Affiliate of: Constitution
• Based in: Colorado affilate of the Constitution Party
• 2 Candidates
• Based in: Connecticut affiliate of the Constitution Party
• Based in: Nevada affiliate of the Constitution Party
• 8 Candidates
• Based in: Nebraska affiliate of the Constitution Party
• 4 Candidates
• . Former name for the Constitution Party.
• Affiliates: D.C. Statehood Green; Desert Greens; Green Independent; Green-Rainbow; Minnesota Green Party; Mountain; Pacific Green; Peace And Justice; Progressive Party of Missouri; Wisconsin Green
• 84 Candidates
• Affiliate of: Green
• Based in: DC affiliate of the Green Party
• Based in: Utah affiliate of the Green Party
• Based in: Maine affiliate of the Green Party
• 1 Candidate
• Based in: Massachusetts affiliate of the Green Party
• Based in: Minnesota
• Based in: Based in West Virginia
• . On 8 July 2007, the Mountain Party voted to become the West Virginia affiliate of the Green Party.
• Based in: Oregon affiliate of the Green Party
• Based in: New York affiliate of the Green Party
• Based in: Missouri Green Party affiliate
• Based in: Wisconsin
• 1 Incumbent
• 233 Candidates
• Affiliates: Integrity
• Affiliate of: Reform
• Based in: New York
• . Originally "New York Moderates" however state law disallows the use of the state's name in party names so the party name was changed to "Moderates".
• . Founded circa January 2013. The party's goal is to "find intelligent and sustainable solutions for our national challenges."
• Based in: Washington
• Based in: New Jersey
• Based in: Based in Alaska
• Affiliates: Independence; Independent Party of Connecticut
• Based in: South Carolina
• . Founded circa 2014. Was The American Party of South Carolina
• Affiliate of: Alliance Party
• Affiliates: Independent Greens
• 15 Candidates
• . December 2020: Affiliate with the Alliance Party.
• Based in: Connecticut
• 3 Candidates
• . circa April 2020: The Independent Party of Connecticut has joined forces with The Alliance Party.
• Affiliate of: Independence
• Based in: Virginia
• . The "Independent Greens" are not affiliated with the "Green Party of the United States".
• Based in: Hawai'i
• Affiliates: American Independent
• Based in: Fenton, Michigan
• . Associated with Alan Keyes
• Affiliate of: America's Independent Party
• Based in: California affiliate of America's Independent Party
• . On 28 June 2008 a dispute arose in the American Independent Party which resulted in the party changing its affiliation from the Constitution Party to America's Independent Party of Fenton, Michigan on 28 June 2008.
• Based in: Colorado
• . Founded circa 16 August 2004.
• American Delta Party
• Based in: West Virginia
• . 1 February 2013: American Third Position Party changes its name to American Freedom Party. The American Third Position Party believes the United States discriminates against white people.
• Based in: Dennis Andrew Ball of Illinois
• Based in: Florida
• Based in: Hawaii
• 31 Candidates
• Based in: Vermont
• Based in: Louisiana
• Based in: Arkansas
• Based in: Delaware
• . "The Boston Tea Party is a reaction to the Libertarian Party's decision, at its 2006 national convention, to abdicate its political responsibilities to the American people." The Florida affiliate of the party disaffiated with the national party on 19 October 2008.
• Based in: Maryland
• Based in: Based in New York
• . formerly the American Heritage Party
• Citizens Freedom Party
• . The Citizens Party was founded in 2004 as the New American Independent Party in Wayne, Pennsylvania. In 2011, the party changed its name to the Citizens Party.
• Based in: Iowa
• Based in: Massachusetts
• Based in: Rhode Island
• 25 Candidates
• Based in: Louisana
• Based in: Northern Mariana Islands
• Based in: Based in Vermont and New Jersey
• . The Democratic-Republican Party is not allowed to use its name on the New Jersey ballot. They are listed as the "D-R Party".
• . The Democratic/Republican Party is not allowed to use its name on the New Jersey ballot. They are listed as the "D-R Party".
• . Ralph Nader 2008 Presidential
• . The Florida Whig Party is a political party in the State of Florida that was formed in 2006 and obtained ballot access in 2007. The Florida Whig Party is not associated with the Modern Whig movement.
• Based in: Kentucky
• Based in: Kansas, New York
• 5 Candidates
• . The Green Mountain Party is not affiliated with any other party.
• Based in: Based in Pennsylvania
• . Also called American Healthcare
• HeartQuake '08
• Based in: Arizona
• . New York U.S. House CD 25
• Based in: Based in Delaware
• Based in: Oregon
• . The party was formed in 2007 because in 2005, the state Legislator enacted a law that prohibiting anyone voted in the most recent party primary from signing the nominating petitions for an unaffiliated candidates.
• Based in: Utah
• . Founded in June 1996.
• Based in: Based in Vermont
• Based in: Lousiana
• . The Louisiana Independent Party is not affiliated with any other party in any state.
• . The Louisiana Taxpayers Party has placed Ron Paul and Barry Goldwater Jr. on the 2008 Louisiana ballot as Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates, respectively.
• Based in: California
• Based in: Puerto Rico
• . A pro-independence party. No longer a registered party.
• . Citizens Victory Movement
• Affiliates: United Party
• . "The US Peace Government ( http://www.uspeacegovernment.org ) is now carrying forward the programs, policies, and ideals of the Natural Law Party. Dr. John Hagelin, the 2000 NLP presidential candidate, is now president of the US Peace Government, and many former NLP candidates and supporters have taken leadership positions in this new, complementary government, whose purpose is to prevent social violence, terrorism, and war and to promote harmony and peace in the U.S. and throughout the world. We encourage all supporters of the Natural Law Party to consider giving their support now to the US Peace Government."
• Affiliate of: Natural Law
• Based in: Idaho branch of the defunct Natural Law Party
• Based in: Illinois
• . Illinois Presidential Candidate John Joseph Polachek
• Based in: The New American Independent Party was founded in 2004 in Wayne, Pennsylvania.
• . The New American Independent Party is not affiliated or related to any other political party except for the Interdependent 3rd Party in Massachusetts. Affiliates in California, Delaware, Nevada, New York, and Vermont call themselves the Self Reliance Party to avoid confusion with other parties with similar names.
• Based in: Arizon
• . On 2 February 2008, Dr. Tom Stevens formed the Objectivist Party which seeks to promote Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism in the political realm. The 25 May 2008 National Convention in Denver Colorado nominated Thomas Robert Stevens (New York) for President and Alden Link (New Jersey) for Vice-President.
• . The minority Puerto Rican Independence Party , (in Spanish: Partido Independentista Puertoriqueño - or PIP) is Puerto Rico's principal "third Party".
• 2 Incumbents
• . The New Progressives (in Spanish: Partido Nuevo Progresista and abbreviated PNP) tend to be somehat more pro-Statehood than the PPD and also tend to be the more aligned with the Republicans in the US.
• . The Popular Democrats (in Spanish: Partido Popular Democrático , usually abbreviated as PPD) have tended to be pro-Commonwealth and, hence, largely anti-Statehood (though there has been a minority pro-Statehood faction within the PPD) and tends to be more or less aligned with the Democrats of the US.
• . Puerto Ricans for Puerto Rico Party. The Party, PPR, was founded in 1996 and certified as a ballot qualified party in May 2007.
• Based in: Puerto Rico Working People's Party
• 13 Candidates
• . Ralph Nader, Oregon, 2008 Presidential Election. 17 September 2009: Filed paperwork with the Secretary of State to change the party name to Progressive Party.
• Based in: Based in California
• 14 Candidates
• Based in: Wisconise
• Based in: Based in Utah
• 12 Candidates
• Based in: Progressive Party of Oregon
• . The Oregon Progressive Party is is not associated with any party in any other state.
• Affiliates: Concerns Of People
• Affiliate of: Prohibition Party
• Based in: Colorado affiliate of the Prohibition Party
• . Wisconsin U.S. House CD 4 candidate Michael D. LaForest
• Based in: School Tax Relief

• Based in: Seattle, Washington
• 7 Candidates
• Star Spangled Banner Independent
• Based in: Texas
• . aka Independent Party of Texas
• . The "The Greens / Green Party USA" is not affiliated with the "Green Party of the United States".
• Based in: New Mexico
• . The New Mexico Independent Party was formed in 2008 to support independent and progressive candidates.
• Based in: Nevada
• . 2010 Constitution, Bylaws, and Officers
• Based in: Based in South Carolina
• United States Pacifist Party
• United States Pirate Party
• 9 Candidates
• . New Jersey party designation
• . New York Congressional District 15
• . Wisconsin Presidential/Vice Presidential candidates: Jeffrey J. Wamboldt / David J. Klimisch
• 34 Candidates
• Based in: Wyoming
• . The Wyoming Country Party was founded in 2011.
• . Used when party is left blank on the ballot.
• By Petition
• 4 Incumbents
• 230 Candidates
• . Senator Joseph I. "Joe" Lieberman, re-elected in 2006 as an Independent, is listed as an "Independent Democrat" by the U.S. Senate.
• No Ballot Designation
• Based in: Appearing on the ballot in Michigan
• Based in: Appearing on the ballot in Connecticut
• Nominated By Petition
• 53 Candidates
• 6 Incumbents
• Based in: Appearing on the ballot in Louisiana
• 21 Candidates
• Based in: Ohio
• Petitioning Candidate
• 61 Candidates
• Based in: Maine
• Based in: Michigan
• Based in: Idaho
• Not readily classifiable
• 314 Candidates
• 654 Candidates

2020 General Election Outline

• 2020 General Election Home
• President Popular Vote and FEC Total Receipts by Party
• 117th U.S. Senate Popular Vote and FEC Total Receipts by Party
• Gubernatorial Popular Vote by Party
• 117th U.S. House Popular Vote and FEC Total Receipts by Party
• Close Contests Summary - Decision by 2% or less
• Contests Where No Candidate Received a Majority
• How Appointed
• Meeting Place
• Tabulation Joint Session of Congress
• Duly Appointed Electors
• THE "FAITHLESS ELECTORS" - Presidential Electors who have defected in the past
• May Electors Defect?
• DATES OF U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION "EVENTS": 1789 to the present
• "APPARENT" ELECTORAL VOTE for President of the United States: 1856 to present
• ELECTORAL VOTE for President of the United States (as pledged and as officially counted)
• ELECTORAL VOTE for Vice President of the United States (as pledged and as officially counted)
• Alphabetically
• Alphabetically with Filing Deadlines
• Chronologically
• Chronologically with Filing Deadlines
• Primary/Runoff/Special Elections Poll Closing Times (across time zones)
• General Election Poll Closing Times Alphabetically (across time zones)
• General Election Poll Closing Times Chronologically (across time zones)
• Electoral College Poll Closing Times Chronologically (across time zones)
• Primary/Special Elections Only
• General Elections Only
• Presidential Candidates by State
• Presidential Candidate Ballot Access by State
• Senators by 'Class'
• Senate Electoral Classes
• Governors by election 'cycle'
• Gubernatorial Primaries at a Glance
• Senatorial Primaries at a Glance
• Open Governor's Chairs, Senate and House Seats (the incumbent is not running for re-election)
• Governor's Chairs, Senate, and U.S. House Seats with no incumbent running for them
• Uncontested Governor's Chairs, Senate, and U.S. House Seats (one candidate running for office)
• Governor's Chairs, Senate, and U.S. House Seats with multiple incumbents running for them
• Governor's Chairs, Senate, and U.S. House Seats with only one major party candidate running for office
• 2020 Partisan Composition by State
• Political Parties
• Statewide Political Party Strength going into the 2020 Presidential Election
• Comparative Political Party Predominance in each State, 2000 thru 2016
• Political Party Floor Leaders in the Congress of the United States
• Dates of DIRECT PRIMARY Elections re: Major Party Nominations for Statewide and/or Federal Office
• Length of Terms of Office of STATE Governors throughout American History
• Dates of U.S. Presidential Election "Events": 1789 to present
• Complete Constitutional provisions for the election of the President and Vice-President
• Complete Federal Law governing the election of a President and Vice-President and filling of vacancies of the same
• Downloadable data files

• Page Content
• Sidebar Content
• Main Navigation
• Quick links

• All TIP Sheets
• Writing a Summary
• Writing Paragraphs
• Writing an Analogy
• Writing a Descriptive Essay
• Writing a Persuasive Essay
• Writing a Compare/Contrast Paper
• Writing Cause and Effect Papers
• Writing a Process Paper
• Writing a Classification Paper
• Definitions of Writing Terms
• How to Write Clearly
• Active and Passive Voice
• Developing a Thesis and Supporting Arguments
• Writing Introductions & Conclusions
• How to Structure an Essay: Avoiding Six Weaknesses in Papers
• Writing Book Reports
• Writing about Literature
• Writing about Non-Fiction Books
• Poetry: Meter and Related Topics
• Revising and Editing
• Proofreading

Writing A Classification Paper

TIP Sheet WRITING A CLASSIFICATION PAPER

Classification is sorting things into groups or categories on a single basis of division. A classification paper says something meaningful about how a whole relates to parts, or parts relate to a whole. Like skimming, scanning, paraphrasing, and summarizing, classification requires the ability to group related words, ideas, and characteristics.

Prewriting and purpose It is a rare writer, student or otherwise, who can sit down and draft a classification essay without prewriting. A classification paper requires that you create categories, so prewriting for a classification paper involves grouping things in different ways in order to discover what categories make the most sense for the purpose you intend.

An important part of creating useful categories is seeing the different ways that things can be grouped. For example, a list of United States presidents may be grouped in any number of ways, depending on your purpose. They might be classified by political party, age on taking office, or previous occupations, but you could just as well, depending on your purpose, classify them by the pets they keep or how they keep physically fit. If your purpose was to analyze presidential administrations, you would group information focusing on the presidents' more public actions–say, cabinet appointments and judicial nominations. On the other hand, if you intended to write about the private lives of presidents, you might select information about personal relationships or hobbies.

Make sure the categories you create have a single basis of classification and that the group fits the categories you propose. You may not, for example, write about twentieth century presidents on the basis of the kinds of pets they kept if some of those presidents did not keep pets. The group does not fit the category. If you intend to talk about all the presidents, you must reinvent the categories so that all the presidents fit into it. In the example below, the group is "all U.S. presidents" and the two categories are "those who kept pets and those who did not":

Some U.S. presidents have indulged their love of pets, keeping menageries of animals around the White House, and others have preferred the White House pet-free.

Alternatively, in the following example, the group is "twentieth century U.S. presidential pet-keepers" and the three categories are "dog lovers, cat lovers, and exotic fish enthusiasts."

Among the twentieth century presidents who kept pets, presidential pet-keepers can be classified as dog-lovers, cat-lovers, or exotic fish enthusiasts (for who can really love a fish?).

Developing a thesis Once you have decided on your group, purpose, and categories, develop a thesis statement that does the following three things:

names what group of people or things you intend to classify describes the basis of the classification labels the categories you have developed

Here is a thesis statement for a classification paper written for a Health and Human Fitness class that includes all three of the above elements, underlined:

Our last five U.S. presidents have practiced physical fitness regimens that varied from the very formal to the informal . They have been either regular private gym-goers, disciplined public joggers, or casual active sports enthusiasts.

Ordering categories Order is the way you arrange ideas to show how they relate to one another. For example, it is common to arrange facts and discussion points from most- to least-important or from least- to most-important, or from oldest to most recent or longest to shortest. The example thesis statement above is ordered from most- to least-formal physical fitness activities. There is no one right way; use an ordering system that seems best to suit your purpose and the type of information you are working with.

For example, suppose you are writing about the last five U.S. presidents for a psychology class. If you wish to show that these presidents' public decisions spring directly from negative issues in their personal relationships, you might order your information from most private to more public actions to clearly establish this connection. Or, if you wish to give the reader the impression that he is moving into increasingly intimate knowledge of personal presidential foibles, you may choose the reverse, ordering your information from public to private.

Signal words Signal phrases, or transitions, typically used for classification papers include the following:

this type of... several kinds of... in this category... can be divided into... classified according to... is categorized by...

These phrases signal to the reader your intention to divide and sort things. They also contribute to the unity of the paper.

Classification requires that you invent (or discover) abstract categories, impose them on a concrete whole, and derive something new-a tall order that you can, nevertheless, manage if you resist the temptation to skip the brainstorming steps. Remember that clinical dissection is never an aim in itself; the point of classification is to reveal and communicate something meaningful.

Home | Calendars | Library | Bookstore | Directory | Apply Now | Search for Classes | Register | Online Classes  | MyBC Portal MyBC -->

Butte College | 3536 Butte Campus Drive, Oroville CA 95965 | General Information (530) 895-2511

• CBSE Notes For Class 10
• Class 10 Social Science Political Science
• Chapter 6 Political Parties

CBSE Notes Class 10 Political Science (Civics) Chapter 6 - Political Parties

According to the CBSE Syllabus 2023-24, this chapter has been renumbered as Chapter 4.

Till now, you have learned that in the arena of democratic politics, political parties work as a vehicle for the federal sharing of political power and as negotiators of social divisions. In this chapter, you will learn about the nature and workings of political parties in our country. We have covered all the important topics of this chapter in CBSE Notes Class 10 Political Science Chapter 6 – Political Parties. Through these notes, you will get introduced to the national and regional political parties in today’s India. Also, this chapter will help you understand what is wrong with political parties and what can be done about it.

• Chapter 1 Power Sharing
• Chapter 2 Federalism
• Chapter 3 Democracy and Diversity
• Chapter 4 Gender Religion and Caste
• Chapter 5 Popular Struggles and Movements
• Chapter 7 Outcomes of Democracy
• Chapter 8 Challenges to Democracy

CBSE Notes Class 10 Political Science Chapter 6 – Political Parties

Why do we need political parties.

A Political Party is a group of people who come together to contest elections and hold power in the government. They agree on some policies and programmes for society with a view to promoting the collective good. Parties reflect fundamental political divisions in society. Thus, a party is known by which part it stands for, which policies it supports and whose interests it upholds. A political party has three components:

• The leaders
• The active members
• The followers

Functions of Political Parties

Political parties fill political offices and exercise political power. Parties do so by performing a series of functions mentioned below:

• Parties contest elections.
• Parties put forward different policies and programmes, and the voters choose from them.
• Parties play a decisive role in making laws for a country.
• Parties form and run governments.
• Those parties that lose in the elections play the role of opposition to the parties in power by voicing different views and criticising the government for its failures or wrong policies.
• Parties shape public opinion.
• Parties provide people access to government machinery and welfare schemes implemented by governments.

The Necessity of Political Parties

We need political parties because they perform all the functions which are mentioned above. Apart from this, political parties help represent different views on various issues to the government. They bring various representatives together so that a responsible government can be formed. They work as a mechanism to support or restrain the government, make policies, and justify or oppose them. Political parties fulfil the needs that every representative government has.

How Many Parties Should We Have?

In a democracy, any group of citizens is free to form a political party. More than 750 parties are registered with the Election Commission of India. But not all these parties are serious contenders in the elections. So the question, then, is how many major or effective parties are good for democracy?

In some countries, only one party is allowed to control and run the government. These are called one-party systems . This system is not considered as a good option for democracy.

In some countries, power usually changes between the two main parties. Such a party system is called a two-party system . E.g., The United States of America and the United Kingdom.

If several parties compete for power, and more than two parties have a reasonable chance of coming to power either on their own strength or in alliance with others, it is called a multiparty system . E.g., India.

When several parties in a multi-party system join hands for the purpose of contesting elections and winning power, it is called an alliance or a front .

National Parties

Every party in the country has to register with the Election Commission. It offers some special facilities for large and established parties. The Election Commission has laid down detailed criteria for the proportion of votes and seats that a party must get in order to be a recognised party.

• A party that secures at least 6% of the total votes in an election to the Legislative Assembly of a State and wins at least 2 seats is recognised as a State Party .
• A party that secures at least 6% of the total votes in Lok Sabha elections or Assembly elections in 4 States and wins at least 4 seats in the Lok Sabha is recognised as a National Party .

Major National Parties in India

There were 7 recognised national parties in the country in 2018. Here are the details of these parties:

1) All India Trinamool Congress (AITC)

• Launched on 1 January 1998 under the leadership of Mamata Banerjee.
• Recognised as a national party in 2016.
• The party’s symbol is flowers and grass.
• Committed to secularism and federalism.
• Has been in power in West Bengal since 2011 and has a presence in Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur and Tripura.
• In the General Elections held in 2014, it got 3.84% of votes and won 34 seats, making it the fourth-largest party in the Lok Sabha.

2) Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP):

• Formed in 1984 under the leadership of Kanshi Ram.
• Seeks to represent and secure power for the Bahujan samaj, which includes the Dalits, Adivasis, OBCs and religious minorities.
• Stands for the cause of securing the interests and welfare of the Dalits and oppressed people.
• It has its main base in the state of Uttar Pradesh and a substantial presence in neighbouring states like Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Delhi and Punjab.
• Formed government in UP several times by taking the support of different parties at different times.

3) Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)

• Founded in 1980, formed by Syama Prasad Mukherjee in 1951.
• Wants to build a strong and modern India by drawing inspiration from India’s ancient culture and values and Deendayal Upadhyaya’s ideas of integral humanism and Antyodaya.
• Cultural nationalism (or ‘Hindutva’) is an important element in its conception of Indian nationhood and politics.
• Earlier limited to north and west and to urban areas, the party expanded its support in the south, east, northeast and to rural areas.
• Emerged as the largest party with 282 members in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections.

4) Communist Party of India (CPI):

• Formed in 1925. Believes in Marxism-Leninism, secularism and democracy.
• Opposed to the forces of secessionism and communalism.
• Accepts parliamentary democracy as a means of promoting the interests of the working class, farmers and the poor.
• Significant presence in the states of Kerala, West Bengal, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu.
• It secured less than 1 per cent votes and 1 seat in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections.

5) Communist Party of India – Marxist (CPI-M):

• Founded in 1964. Believes in Marxism-Leninism. Supports socialism, secularism and democracy and opposes imperialism and communalism.
• Accepts democratic elections as a useful and helpful means for securing the objective of socio-economic justice in India.
• Enjoys strong support in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura.
• The party was in power in West Bengal without a break for 34 years.
• In the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, it won about 3% of votes and 9 seats.

6) Indian National Congress (INC):

• Popularly known as the Congress Party. One of the oldest parties in the world. Founded in 1885 and has experienced many splits.
• Under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru, the party sought to build a modern secular democratic republic in India.
• The ruling party was at the centre till 1977 and then from 1980 to 1989. After 1989, its support declined, but it continues to be present throughout the country.
• The party’s main idea is to promote secularism and the welfare of weaker sections and minorities.

7) Nationalist Congress Party (NCP):

• Formed in 1999 following a split in the Congress party.
• Supports democracy, Gandhian secularism, equity, social justice and federalism.
• A major party in Maharashtra and has a significant presence in Meghalaya, Manipur and Assam.
• A coalition partner in the state of Maharashtra in alliance with the Congress. Since 2004, a member of the United Progressive Alliance.

State Parties

The Election Commission has classified some of the major parties of the country as ‘state parties’. These are also referred to as regional parties. Some of these parties are:

• Biju Janata Dal
• Sikkim Democratic Front
• Mizo National Front
• Telangana Rashtra Samithi

The Map below shows the Regional Parties in India (as of 13th April 2018):

Challenges to Political Parties

Popular dissatisfaction and criticism have focused on 4 problem areas in the working of political parties. These are:

• Lack of internal democracy within parties. Parties do not keep membership registers, do not hold organisational meetings, and do not conduct internal elections regularly.
• Most political parties do not practice open and transparent procedures for their functioning, so there are very few ways for an ordinary worker to rise to the top of a party. In many parties, the top positions are always controlled by members of one family.
• The third challenge is about the growing role of money and muscle power in parties, especially during elections. Since parties are focused only on winning elections, they tend to use shortcuts to win elections. In some cases, parties support criminals who can win elections.
• People do not find parties to be a meaningful choice for their votes. Sometimes people cannot even elect very different leaders either because the same set of leaders keeps shifting from one party to another.

How Can Parties Be Reformed?

Have a look at some of the recent efforts and suggestions to reform political parties and their leaders in India. Some efforts are listed below:

• The Constitution was amended to prevent elected MLAs and MPs from changing parties.
• The Supreme Court passed an order to reduce the influence of money and criminals. Now, it is mandatory for every candidate who contests elections to file an AFFIDAVIT giving details of his property and criminal cases pending against him.
• The Election Commission passed an order making it necessary for political parties to hold their organisational elections and file their income tax returns.

Besides these, many suggestions are made to reform political parties. These suggestions have not yet been accepted by political parties.

• A law should be made to regulate the internal affairs of political parties.
• It should be made mandatory for political parties to give a minimum number of tickets, about one-third, to women candidates. Similarly, there should be a quota for women in the decision-making bodies of the party.
• There should be state funding of elections. The government should give parties money to support their election expenses.

There are two other ways in which political parties can be reformed.

• People can put pressure on political parties. This can be done through petitions, publicity and agitations.
• Political parties can improve if people who want change can join political parties. It is difficult to reform politics if ordinary citizens do not take part in it and simply criticise it from the outside.

We have compiled History, Geography, Political Science and Geography notes in one place. You can access them by visiting CBSE Class 10 Social Science Notes at BYJU’S. Keep learning and stay tuned for further updates on CBSE and other competitive exams. Download the BYJU’S App and subscribe to the YouTube channel to access interactive Maths and Science videos.

Frequently Asked Questions on CBSE Class 10 Political Science Chapter 6 Political Parties

What are the functions of political parties.

1. Contest elections 2. Introduce programmes and policies for the welfare of the public 3. Take legislative decisions and execute them legally

How many political parties are there in India?

The Election Commission of India recorded a count of 2858 political parties all over India in September 2021.

What is the minimum age in India to join a political party?

A person should be of a minimum age of 25 years to be a part of any political party in India.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your Mobile number and Email id will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Request OTP on Voice Call

Post My Comment

This is very important points in political parties.

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

Register with byju's & watch live videos.

Home — Essay Samples — Government & Politics — Politics — Political Party

Essays on Political Party

The relationship between political parties and interest groups in the government, research in irish politics, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Politicians Votes Related to Campaign Financing Need Regulation

Party loyalty and constitutional obligation, investigation of libertarian party concepts and principles, the spectre of populism in politics, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Political Parties: Positions and Significance

Relevant topics.

• Political Corruption
• Interest Groups
• Nation Building
• Public Service
• Anti Federalist
• Republican Party
• Political Ideology

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

A classification of Latin American political parties

Related Papers

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics

Laura Wills-Otero

Since the beginning of the third wave of democratization in the late 1970s, Latin American party systems have confronted several challenges, and they have frequently been transformed. There have been various types of changes. While some systems collapsed in the 1990s (e.g., Venezuela and Peru), others realigned (Colombia, Chile, and Uruguay), or expanded (Argentina and Mexico), or were able to become consolidated and ensure their stability over time (e.g., Brazil). What factors explain the transformations in party systems during the past three decades, and how can Latin American party systems be classified according to their attributes? In trying to answer these questions, scholars of Latin America have undertaken studies that are both theoretically and empirically rich. Their work has increased our knowledge of the party systems and representative democracies in the region. Different factors have been highlighted in order to explain the changes these systems have undergone since the third wave of democratization. Some works emphasize the importance of institutional reforms introduced by politicians or by constitutional assemblies. The questions they address are the following: What political reforms have been introduced into Latin American political systems, and what effects have they had on the party systems in different countries? The researchers do not limit their attention to reforms of electoral systems. For example, some of them also study decentralization processes and their effects on party systems. From a different perspective, other authors focus on changes in electoral preferences and their effects on the configuration of political power, exploring how regional economic, political, and social changes have affected voter preferences and the political configuration of party systems. Still others consider the crises of democratic representation in these countries, underlining the decline in the programmatic character of parties as an explanatory variable for the crises and noting that the level of institutionalization of a party system declines when parties abandon this distinctive feature and become clientelistic or personalistic instead. On the other hand, in order to describe party systems and to observe the changes they have undergone, academics have proposed a set of concepts and measurements that make it possible to identify their levels of institutionalization (i.e., stability vs. volatility), nationalization, and programmatic structuration, among other aspects. The operationalization of these concepts has provided researchers with useful data for describing, comparing, and analyzing the party systems of the region transversely over time. Understanding the transformation and characteristics of Latin American party systems over time sheds light on both the progress democratic regimes have made and the setbacks they have suffered within specific countries and in the region at large. Keywords: Latin America, party systems, electoral reforms, voter realignment, democratic representation, fragmentation, institutionalization, volatility, nationalization, party system structuration, Latin American politics

Democratization

Kenneth Bunker

Book Review

Thomas Kestler , Juan B Lucca

Although Lijphart's typology of consensus and majoritarian democracy can be regarded as the most widely used tool to classify democratic regimes, it has been rarely applied to Latin America so far. We try to fill this gap by adapting Lijphart's typological framework to the Latin American context in the following way. In contrast to previous studies, we treat the type of democracy as an independent variable and include informal factors such as clientelism or informal employment in our assessment of democratic patterns. On this basis, we aim to answer the following questions. First, how did the patterns of democracy evolve in Latin America over the two decades between 1990 and 2010 and what kind of differences can be observed in the region? Second, what are the institutional determinants of the observed changes? We focus on the emergence of new parties because of their strong impact on the first dimension of Lijphart's typology. From our observations we draw the following tentative conclusions: If strong new parties established themselves in the party system but failed to gain the presidency, they pushed the system towards consensualism. Conversely, new parties that gained the presidency produced more majoritarian traits.

Annual Review of Political Science

Javier Vázquez-D'Elía , Scott Morgenstern

Tomas Dosek

Contrary to the situation in Europe, comparative study of party membership in Latin America is virtually nonexistent. The goal of this essay is to fill this gap in the study of party politics and the internal organization of parties in the region. This essay examines the statutes of the principal political parties in Latin America and analyzes the role given to party members in fifty-one political parties in the region. This information is organized into three categories: entry requirements; members' rights; and members' duties (in formal terms). The essay argues that these aspects are rather homogenous among Latin American countries; unlike the situation in Europe, they cannot explain differences in party membership growth rates. The essay evaluates six alternative hypotheses, concluding that the varying levels of party membership in Latin American countries are the result of a combination of historical factors, candidate selection procedures, and party strategies.

Gilles Serra

Why do political parties adopt primary elections? This study develops a theory of party democratization. It is motivated by the recent proliferation of primary elections in Latin America, which has been well documented but not fully explained. The explanation in this paper consists on making two claims. First, primaries select more electable but less loyal candidates. This claim is made precise with a decision-theoretic model whose predictions are consistent with the main empirical findings of the existing empirical literature. And second, the incentives for party leaders to select electable candidates have increased in the past quarter century. This claim is based on some historical trends in Latin American politics, namely the increased penetration of television, a more investigative journalism, and a decrease in electoral fraud.

Latin American Research Review

Peter Siavelis

The study of party systems and political parties is one of the largest subfields in political science. Classic studies in advanced democracies focused primarily on party systems and developed theories about the causes and consequences of different types of systems. In recent years, new academic work begun to differentiate parties within systems by understanding their organizational structure, their internal dynamics, the different ways in which they interact with their constituencies, and the strategies that they use to attract voters. Studies show that parties within the same system behave and react differently given their internal conditions. This article reviews three scholarly books that deal with this issue. The works analyze the internal dynamics of Latin American political parties and their capacity to respond and adapt their structures when environmental challenges take place.

This article explains variation in the electoral trajectories of Latin American traditional parties since transitions to democratic governments in the late 20th century until the first half of the 2000s, when democracies were already consolidated. This article addresses the question of why some parties suffer more than others under challenging contextual conditions, or why some parties are able to weather difficult external environments, e.g. economic crises, institutional reforms or political scandals, while others fail. This study argues that the internal organization of parties matters: it affects their ability to react and survive, especially in contexts of environmental change. Variation in parties' internal characteristics explains different outcomes in their electoral performance. An empirical analysis of 48 traditional parties over almost three decades (1978–2006) provides support for this argument.

Contrary to the situation in Europe, the research of political parties’ internal structure in Latin America has been rather limited. Moreover, comparative study of party membership is virtually nonexistent (Levitsky 2001; Wills-Otero 2009; for some exceptions, see Alcántara Sáez and Freidenberg 2003; Webb and White 2007; Alenda 2011; Ponce 2013; and Combes 2011; Muñoz Armenta and Pulido Gómez 2010 for case studies on Mexico). The goal of this paper is to contribute to fill the gap that evidences this area of study of party politics from the perspective of party membership. To achieve this goal, I examine the statutes of the principal political parties in Latin America and analyse the role given to the party members in approximately 60 political parties in the region. I organize this information according to three dimensions: entry requirements, members’ rights and members’ duties (in formal terms). First, I explore the conditions that the persons interested to become party members have to accomplish, focusing on whether there is any special condition. Second, I look at the role party members have with respect to the internal democracy, i.e., candidate selection and programme formulation, and if there is any condition of membership seniority. Third, I analyse the extent to what party are obliged to pay membership dues. I argue that these aspect are rather homogenous among the Latin American countries and cannot explain the differences in party membership levels. I posit some possible hypothesis and claim that these difference are due to a specific combination of historical, institutional and party-centred variables. This paper constitutes the first part of a larger project which will be complemented with an expert survey on party strategies regarding the role and influence of party members (second part) and with a field work consisting interviewing both party elites to contrast the official membership data and of interviews to grassroots party members (in particular about its motivations and its ideological positions) from various political parties-case studies selected based on the first and second part of the project.

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Cristina Rivas

Third World Quarterly

Omar Sanchez-Sibony

The Crisis of Democratic Representation in the Andes

Eduardo Pizarro

Juan Manuel Trak

miriam kornblith

Auslandsinformationen

Angel Arellano

Journal of Latin American Studies

Juan Pablo Luna

Revista Latinoamericana de Opinión Pública

Jorge Vargas Cullell

Political Populism

María Esperanza Casullo

Working Paper University of Hradec Králové

Revista Latinoamericana de Opinión Pública (RLOP)

Revista Latinoamericana de Opinión Pública (RLOP) , Cristina Rivas , Araceli Mateos

Como citar: Díaz-Jiménez, Oniel Francisco, & Vivero-Ávila, Igor. (2015). Las dimensiones de la competencia en el sistema de partidos mexicano (1979-2012). Convergencia, 22(68), 13-49.

Oniel Francisco Díaz Jiménez

Proletina Puspa Negara

Latin American Politics and Society

Miguel Centellas

Latin American Politics and Society 53 (2): 1-28

David Altman

Lucas Cunha

Daniel Eduardo E Varnagy Rado

Electoral Studies

Raul Madrid

Estudios Políticos

Rickard Lalander

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• DOI: 10.1080/19331680802149608
• Corpus ID: 12981628

Classifying Party Affiliation from Political Speech

• Bei Yu , Stefan Kaufmann , D. Diermeier
• Published 14 July 2008
• Political Science
• Journal of Information Technology & Politics

160 Citations

Text to ideology or text to party status.

• Highly Influenced
• 10 Excerpts

Language and Ideology in Congress

Computational identification of ideology in text : a study of canadian parliamentary debates, “ a nation divided ” : classifying presidential speeches, a longitudinal study of language and ideology in congress, predicting political party affiliation from text, what’s in a word detecting partisan affiliation from word use in congressional speeches, a natural language measure of ideology in the brazilian senate, analysis of speech transcripts to predict winners of u.s. presidential and vice-presidential debates, predicting party group from the lithuanian parliamentary speeches jurgita kapočiūtė –, 31 references, get out the vote: determining support or opposition from congressional floor-debate transcripts, identifying and classifying subjective claims, extracting policy positions from political texts using words as data, an automated method of topic-coding legislative speech over time with application to the 105th-108th u.s. senate, exploring the characteristics of opinion expressions for political opinion classification, congress: a political-economic history of roll call voting, thumbs up sentiment classification using machine learning techniques, recounting the courts toward a text-centered computational approach to understanding the dynamics of the judicial system, a comparison of event models for naive bayes text classification, machine learning in automated text categorization, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Your Article Library

Classifications of political parties in india.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

The major ways in which the Indian parties can be classified are as follows:

In terms of geographical spread there are four types of Parties, All India parties, trans-regional parties, regional parties and local parties. In terms of orientation, there are parties of left, right, centre and leader oriented parties.

Among the left there are communist parties and socialist groups, among the right there are traditional parties formed around religious community and caste. We may further classify Indian Parties in the following way:

(i) All India political parties or National Parties:

All-India political parties have been officially defined as those national parties with broad-based national support and able to win at least six per cent of valid votes polled in any four or more States at the general elections to the Lok Sabha or to the Legislative Assembly and in addition win at least four seats in the Lok Sabha from any State or States.

The other criteria is that a political party wins at least two per cent seats in the Lok Sabha from at least three different States. There should be a minimum of 11 MPs among the 543 directly elected representatives, thereby giving weight-age to party presence in the Lok Sabha.

(ii) Regional Parties:

The second group consists of regional parties, which clearly represent sub- regional nationalism based upon the common language, culture and history of a region. These parties try to aggregate regional interests regardless of the caste and religious affiliations of their members.

Their power base and voting strength are confined to a particular geographic area. The following are the best known regional parties: DMK and ADMK (Tamil Nadu); Telugu Desam (Andhra Pradesh), the National Conference (Jammu & Kashmir), and Assam Gana Parishad (Assam).

(iii) Commercial Parties:

The third group includes those parties and organisations that are exclusive in their membership; that is, they accept as members only those inhabitants of a particular religious or ethnic community.

They seek to protect and promote the interest of that particular community alone, are basically non-aggregative in their nature, and generally mobilize their supporters by appealing to their particularist sentiments. The following parties fall into this category: Muslim League (Kerala) and Akali Dal (Punjab).

(iv) Ad hoc Parties:

The last group of parties consists of those organised around powerful persons or local and state issues. Such parties may not survive very long; some may appear only for a short period and then disappear completely or merge into other parties. The Bangla Congress, the Kerala Congress; the BKD of Charan Singh are some examples of such ad hoc parties

Related Articles:

• Political Parties: Three Main Types of Political Parties in India
• Political Parties: Functions and Classification of Political Parties in India

Political Parties

No comments yet.

Leave a reply click here to cancel reply..

You must be logged in to post a comment.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

I Have Been Studying Poker for Years. Kamala Harris Isn’t Bluffing.

By Nate Silver

Mr. Silver is the author of the book “On the Edge: The Art of Risking Everything.”

In recent years, for a new book , I have spent time in a community of like-minded thinkers who take calculated risks for a living. These people, from poker players to venture capitalists — I call them the River, and they are from Silicon Valley, Wall Street, sports betting, crypto — make decisions based not on what they know at the moment but on expected value. For them, when it is time to make a decision, the question is: Do the risks outweigh the rewards?

The River is the rival of the group of academics, journalists and policy wonks that I call the Village. This term might be more familiar: It’s the East Coast expert class. Harvard and Yale. The New York Times and The Washington Post. Together, these communities make up only a small percent of the population — in short, they are elites.

The Village tends toward risk aversion, as evident in its Covid caution and its increasing wariness about free speech (which very much can have sticks-and-stones consequences ). It tends to make decisions by consensus, with dissenters punished by ostracization — or if you prefer, cancellation.

The River has been on a winning streak in terms of its impact on society and our economy: Its core industries, tech and finance, continually grow as fractions of the economy, and Las Vegas is bringing in record revenues. Not just baseball but pretty much everything has been “Moneyball”-ized, which is to say quantified and then monetized in some way.

Looking at politics through the lens of the River and Village communities, and their approaches to risk, can offer some interesting insight — and surprise.

The groups don’t map equally clearly onto our political institutions. In Trumpian times, with voting highly polarized along educational lines, the Village is overwhelmingly Democratic. The River’s politics aren’t quite as straightforward. Aloof and analytical, preoccupied with pursuits such as poker, not everyone in the River is a G.O.P. partisan. In fact, if you surveyed people I consider part of the River about their preferred presidential candidates, my guess is that Kamala Harris would get more votes than Donald Trump — although with an outsize third-party vote.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .