Which of the following is not a reason for two-party dominance?

Abstract

Une reconsidération de la théorie de Pinard sur la montée des tiers partis. Afin d'expliquer la croissance des tiers partis au Canada, Maurice Pinard a élaboré une théorie basée sur la notion des << tendances structurales >> (structural conduciveness) telle qu'énoncée par Smelser. La théorie soutient que, dans les périodes de tensions sociales, les tiers partis auront tendance á croître dans les systémes dont la structure est marquée par la prédominance d'un parti. De plus, Pinard suggère qu'une théorie des tiers partis centrée sur les classes sociales pourrait s'avérer plus appropriée dans certaines circonstances. Aprés avoir examiné la notion de << prédominance >> et formulé une version plus explicite de la théorie basée sur les classes sociales, l'auteur applique les deux théories à trois cas bien connus de percée des tiers partis. Il s'avère que, même si on peut déceler des éléments structuraux dans tous les cas, la seconde théorie fournit une meilleure explication que la premiére dans deux des trois cas, l'inverse étant vrai dans l'autre cas.

Journal Information

Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique is published quarterly, and presents articles, notes, commentaries and book reviews in English and in French. The first objective of CJPS/Rcsp is the publication of outstanding scholarly manuscripts on all areas of political science, including the history of political thought, contemporary political theory, international relations and foreign policy, governmental institutions and processes, political behavior, public administration and public policy. In addition, as a leading omnibus journal, it is the primary publishing outlet for innovative research on all facets of Canadian politics and government. The third major objective of CJPS/Rcsp is publication of communications about current problems, recent research, and future prospects in political science through a review of recent books published by Canadian and non-Canadian authors in all fields of political science as well as comments on articles and replies to comments and field analyses.

Publisher Information

The Canadian Political Science Association was founded in 1913 and incorporated under the Canada Corporation Act in 1971. The objectives of the Association as stated in its Constitution are: To encourage and develop political science and its relationship with other disciplines; To hold conferences, meetings and exhibitions for the discussion of political science problems and the exchange of views in matters relating to political science; To purchase, acquire, take by gift, any devise, bequest, or donation for the objectives of the corporation; To give grants, scholarships or fellowships to deserving individuals, groups of persons or organizations in pursuance of the objects of the corporation; To publish journals, newspapers, books and monographs relating to political science The Association as such, will not assume a position upon any question of public policy not directly related to the discipline of political science or commit its members to any position thereupon.

Rights & Usage

This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
Canadian Journal of Political Science / Revue canadienne de science politique © 1973 Canadian Political Science Association
Request Permissions

journal article

The Two-Party System and One-Party Dominance in the Liberal Democratic State

The Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science / Revue canadienne d'Economique et de Science politique

Vol. 24, No. 3 (Aug., 1958)

, pp. 312-322 (11 pages)

Published By: Canadian Economics Association

https://doi.org/10.2307/138619

https://www.jstor.org/stable/138619

Publisher Information

With around 1400 members across the country and from abroad, the Canadian Economics Association (CEA) is the organization of academic economists in Canada. The Association has for its object the advancement of economic knowledge through the encouragement of study and research, the issuing of publications, and the furthernance of free and informed discussion of economic questions. The Association as such will not assume a partisan position upon any question of practical politics nor commit its members to any position thereupon.

Rights & Usage

This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
The Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science / Revue canadienne d'Economique et de Science politique © 1958 Canadian Economics Association
Request Permissions

This post is part of our attempt to reach new readers who are interested in American politics – but perhaps don’t speak English or understand how American government works. Use the button above to see the below story in other languages.

When Americans go to the polls in November to elect their next president, it’s almost certain that they will be selecting between only two candidates: one Republican and one Democrat.

In fact, since 1852, a candidate from the Republican or a Democratic parties has placed either first or second in U.S. presidential elections, except for one. In that election, in 1912, Theodore Roosevelt, a popular former Republican president, ran as a “third-party” candidate, and he came in second place, losing to Woodrow Wilson.

And before the Republican Party and the Democratic Party were the two major parties, the Democratic Party and the Whig Party were. Before that matchup, the Democratic Party and the National Republican Party were the dominant two. And before that? The Democratic-Republicans and the Federalists reigned.

All the while, third parties have been small players throughout U.S. presidential politics, showing up occasionally but almost never having a real chance at winning the presidency. They also rarely compete for seats in Congress, where, since World War II, no more than two out of its 535 members have been anything other than Republicans and Democrats. Among those exceptions is Bernie Sanders, the senator from Vermont who was elected to Congress as an independent and who is running this year for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Why has this happened? The answer is that the U.S. political system is set up for two major parties, because it awards seats in Congress and the presidency with a winner-take-all method. Candidates running for Congress need only to get a plurality of the vote to be elected. In 48 of 50 states, presidential candidates get all of a state’s electoral votes — the way in which presidents are elected, state by state — as long as they win a plurality of the vote in that state.

French sociologist Maurice Duverger theorized in the 1950s that this kind of setup leads to what is effectively a two-party system. “Duverger’s law” states that third parties can’t compete because there is no prize for winning, for example, 15 or even 25 percent of the vote. This leads voters to choose candidates who are most likely to win, and it leads the parties to try to broaden their appeal to half of the electorate — and ideally more.

Parties at risk of splintering will do whatever they can to avoid third-party candidates. When voters favor a party’s political ideals but have a choice between two candidates who both support those principles, that party will lose the election because those candidates will split the votes, allowing the other party to win with a plurality.

There are occasionally governors or senators from a third party, but often these parties have limited influence overall and have a difficult time becoming a national movement. Part of this problem comes from the party’s difficulty in winning in the first place; another part of the problem is that the two main parties can make it challenging for third-party candidates to qualify for the ballot in a given election. (The United States, for example, allows each state to determine how a presidential candidate gets on the ballot. That means that third-party candidates generally have to be wealthy people who can fund their own campaigns and satisfy expensive requirements to get on the ballot in all 50 states.)

While many third-party and independent candidates have run for elections in the past, few have received enough public recognition and even fewer have received states’ electoral votes. Ross Perot, who ran as an independent, received 19 percent of the overall vote in 1992 but did not win a single electoral vote.

When such candidates get electoral votes, racial tensions are often involved. George Wallace (who won 46 electoral votes in 1968) and Strom Thurmond (who 39 electoral votes in 1948) were Southerners who ran as staunch opponents of integrating black and white Americans and are the last two non-Republicans and non-Democrats to win electoral votes. Similar regional third-party candidates caught on in the time of the American Civil War but never came close to actually winning.

Apart from that, the only candidate not running under the banner of one of the two major parties to have a legitimate chance at winning a general election was Roosevelt, who was a unique candidate unto himself.

Even then, though, the former president wound up badly splitting the vote with his old party, the Republicans. He and his Republican successor as president, William Howard Taft, combined to take a majority of the popular vote in 1912, but Democratic candidate Woodrow Wilson won the presidency with a plurality of the vote — less than 42 percent.

That reinforces why the two major political parties in the United States have an incentive to keep it a two-party system.

What are two reasons for a two

Advantages. Some historians have suggested that two-party systems promote centrism and encourage political parties to find common positions which appeal to wide swaths of the electorate. It can lead to political stability which leads, in turn, to economic growth.

What are the 2 dominant political parties?

The electoral system in the U.S. is called a two-party system. That means that two parties dominate the political field in all three levels of government. In the U.S. these two parties are the Republican Party and the Democratic Party.

What is the major reason for the two

Why does the US have a two-party system? The US has a two-party political system because of two structural features in American politics: single-member districts and winner-take-all elections. Both features encourage the existence of 2 major parties, as smaller parties face great difficulty in winning elective office.