Is this true? The core problem with the party system is that it acts as a natural magnet for what is described as the far left and the far right who naturally dominate between campaigns when the majority simply do not show up. Their strength is that they show up. Their weakness is that they have no other place to go. Read my lips. They are not particularly important.
Anyone who plans to actually win must merely placate the extremes. What he must do is mobilize the ninety percent of the population who does not otherwise show up. All successful politicians do just this.
After saying all that, it turns out that a winning politician will deliver around half the votes at best. Let me spell this out. It means that in a two party fight, one in two voters supported someone else. In a three party fight, usually three out of five did not support the winner. That is why Canada has operated a first past the post system that has normally allow a clear victor for a term. Otherwise we would be constantly plagued with dysfunctional (occasionally functional at times if leader is talented) minority governments.
Otherwise money loves the current system in the USA because it allows far too much influence. If Trump structurally changes that then change is possible. It is a tall order.
Anyone who plans to actually win must merely placate the extremes. What he must do is mobilize the ninety percent of the population who does not otherwise show up. All successful politicians do just this.
After saying all that, it turns out that a winning politician will deliver around half the votes at best. Let me spell this out. It means that in a two party fight, one in two voters supported someone else. In a three party fight, usually three out of five did not support the winner. That is why Canada has operated a first past the post system that has normally allow a clear victor for a term. Otherwise we would be constantly plagued with dysfunctional (occasionally functional at times if leader is talented) minority governments.
Otherwise money loves the current system in the USA because it allows far too much influence. If Trump structurally changes that then change is possible. It is a tall order.
Professors: Trump “changing party system” in place since FDR 1932, “bigger than Reagan shift”
Political
Science professors and scholars discuss American Politics in the terms
of “Party Systems,” originating in the times of George Washington, where
his federalist faction did battle with the “Democratic-Republicans,” or
anti-Federalists headed by Jefferson. Jefferson won, and his dominance
was sealed by the “2nd Party System,” known for fights over slavery
between the Whig Party and Democratic Party.
Since 1932, we’ve been living in the 5th party system, where the
Democratic party could rely on blue collar workers, minorities, and
urbanites, while the Republicans appealed to suburbanites and rural
people, focusing on small government. Even Ronald Reagan played by the
same tactics, but globalization has changed the face of American
politics, and “Conservative” principles are becoming less and less
popular (read free trade) and more and more Americans are supporting Gay
Marriage, while more are against Abortion.
With these fundamental changes, a new party system is shaking up, and Trump is the “change agent” of this system:
Visits to campaign rallies in Florida this week confirmed what polls have been suggesting for months: Donald Trump is leading the race for the Republican nomination in large part because he’s winning over throngs of nonhabitual voters.
No comments:
Post a Comment