Several elements have contributed to the diminishing strength of political parties over the last decade. As citizens participated in the elections this year, an increasing number expressed dissatisfaction with national politics and their representatives. Numerous surveys indicate that Americans are progressively losing trust in the two dominant political parties, a trend that is expected to persist, according to Stanford political scientist Didi Kuo, a center fellow at the Freeman-Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI).
Similar to other democratic institutions, political parties are facing a significant challenge regarding public trust. “Political parties remain critical to organizing democracy but they are beleaguered,” said Kuo.
No longer gatekeepers
Kuo identified various elements contributing to the declining support for political parties among the American populace, particularly highlighting reforms implemented in the early 1970s.
Before these reforms, political parties wielded significant influence over the selection of their presidential nominees. However, following Hubert Humphrey’s acquisition of the Democratic Party nomination in 1968 without participating in any primary elections, modifications were introduced to the presidential nomination process. These changes aimed to enhance voter influence in determining the party’s representative for the general election. Political parties used to be gatekeepers in politics. Now, voters have a much bigger say in determining who’s going to be the presidential candidate.
The alterations facilitated Donald Trump, an unconventional candidate without formal affiliation to the Republican Party and lacking prior military or governmental experience, to attain the nomination on two occasions.
The party appears to possess limited authority in determining who may represent its label, rendering it susceptible to external and radical candidates, while also compromising its capacity to select candidates aligned with its core values. Furthermore, the party has minimal mechanisms to address internal conflicts or evaluate candidates for office when it is unable to function as a political gatekeeper. This is one of the major changes in the political process.
Increased vulnerability to external factors
Another significant alteration that contributed to the evolution of the contemporary political environment was the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002, commonly referred to as the McCain-Feingold Act. This legislation imposed restrictions on the financial contributions individuals could make to political parties and campaigns.
Proposed in 1997 by Senators John McCain, a Republican from Arizona, and Russ Feingold, a Democrat from Wisconsin, the BCRA aimed to address the deficiencies of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA) and to curb the exploitative fundraising practices observed during the 1996 federal elections.
Advocates of the BCRA aimed to uphold the integrity of the U.S. electoral system, mitigate the influence of money and corruption in politics, and provide everyday Americans with a platform to voice their political opinions without being eclipsed by major donors. Detractors, however, argued that the law’s restrictions on contributions and expenditures infringed upon First Amendment rights.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which equated corporate political speech with that of individuals, has further facilitated the emergence of new forms of political influence.
Kuo explained it like this, “We are witnessing a landscape where not only political parties compete for legislative seats or candidates, but also external organizations that may or may not be affiliated with these parties.”
“These entities are capable of producing their advertisements, rallying support for particular issues, and raising substantial amounts of money, often without disclosure, in support of specific candidates and parties.”
These party-like organizations will play a crucial role in all future elections as numerous groups are mobilizing voters around key issues and for or against particular candidates.
A growing appeal of populist candidates
An additional tide change that warrants attention is the emergence of populist and extremist candidates, a phenomenon observed not only in the United States but also globally. Over the past three decades, the prevalence of populism in politics has surged fivefold worldwide.
Populism often critiques political representation and any intermediaries that exist between the populace and their leaders or government. In its most democratic expression, populism aims to advocate for the interests and enhance the power of ordinary citizens, distinguishing it from elitist factions that are perceived as disconnected from societal realities, and it typically promotes reform rather than revolution.
In the United States, the term has historical roots in the Populist Movement, which led to the establishment of the Populist, or People’s Party in 1892.
Following the financial crisis of 2008, a growing number of voters from both the left and right have expressed dissatisfaction and grievances towards their democratic and economic institutions, leading them to once again seek out populist candidates.
Though we may be materially richer, our corporations are more profitable, but we as a country are militarily and strategically weaker, fiscally and spiritually enervated. The result is a loss of trust in the institutions that the elites control; political, scientific, journalistic, educational, and religious are all degenerating while populism is on the rise.
New ways to mobilize
The advent of digital and social media has had a transformative effect on how political parties and candidates can rally their base. In addition, data analytics afforded by these new tools has also helped candidates build targeted and effective communication strategies essentially without the backing of a political party.
Meanwhile, the same tools that have helped candidates reach people at the local level are also being used to find support beyond their precincts which then gains them support from outside their district.
No longer reflecting what voters want or believe
When Americans are asked about their opinions on various policy matters, they often reveal a surprising level of consensus. The real division appears to lie within the political elite, whose increasing polarization has left many voters feeling estranged from their respective parties.
A growing number of individuals are opting to forgo party affiliation altogether, choosing instead to identify as independents. Political scientists have noted shifts in the behavior of these independents as well.
Traditionally, it was believed that independent voters were simply those who preferred not to be labeled, yet still leaned towards either the Democratic or Republican parties.
Recent findings, however, indicate that individuals identifying as independent are disenchanted with the party system and perceive both major parties as corrupt. They express significant skepticism regarding the influence of special interest groups and often feel that their votes carry little weight. This mindset reflects a broader rejection of the party system itself. Nevertheless, the record voter turnout in 2020 suggests that such cynicism may not deter individuals from participating in elections, especially when the stakes are particularly high.
Political parties have gotten weaker over time
The aforementioned developments have led to a notable decline in the strength of political parties. In the upcoming year, it is anticipated that tensions will persist not only among political parties but also with various democratic institutions.
Kuo remarked, “I think there will continue to be a big tension between what the Supreme Court rules on things like democracy and rights and what people want,” This phenomenon has already manifested at the state level, where voters have united against issues such as restrictive abortion laws.
The most recent election is the culmination of a prolonged struggle within American politics, a struggle that has intensified since 2016. This election resulted in a victory for Donald Trump, the individual who is often credited with exacerbating these tensions. He managed to persuade disillusioned voters, weary from unfulfilled promises, that he would “drain the swamp” upon taking office.
Moreover, he has also convinced those entrenched within the political establishment that he is sincere in his intentions, leading them to take extreme measures to prevent his electoral success. Despite facing numerous challenges — including being canceled, ridiculed, slandered, libeled, investigated, searched, impeached, arrested, prosecuted, tried, and convicted — he still emerged victorious in the election.
Now a new battle will begin on Monday, January 20, 2025, at noon as the 47th President inaugurated. Despite the fights that Americans currently face and those yet unknown, to remain free the United States must have a government accountable to the people. Governed under the longest surviving Constitution in history, Americans built a society, a culture, and an economy of freedom to last.
As the country embarks on the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence which will fall under President Trump’s second presidency, hope remains that U.S. citizens will recover the meaning of that document and restore the ideas in the Constitution, which made America great in the first place.
Commentaires