Katana VentraIP

Political realignment

A political realignment, often called a critical election, critical realignment, or realigning election, in the academic fields of political science and political history, is a set of sharp changes in party ideology, issues, party leaders, regional and demographic bases of power of political parties, and the structure or rules of the political system, such as voter eligibility or financing. The changes result in a new political power structure that lasts for decades, replacing an older dominant coalition. Scholars frequently invoke the concept in American elections and occasionally those of other countries. American examples include the 1896 United States presidential election, when the issues of the American Civil War political system were replaced with those of the Populist and Progressive Era, and the 1932 United States presidential election, when the Populist and Progressive Eras were replaced by the New Deal-era issues of New Deal liberalism and modern conservatism. Realigning elections typically separate (what are known in the field of comparative politics as) party systems—with 1828, for example, separating the First Party System and the Second Party System in the US. It is generally accepted that the United States has had five distinct party systems, each featuring two major parties attracting a consistent political coalition and following a consistent party ideology, separated by four realignments.

Political realignments can be sudden (1–4 years) or can take place more gradually (5–20 years). Most often, however, particularly in V. O. Key Jr.'s (1955) original hypothesis, it is a single "critical election" that marks a realignment. By contrast, a gradual process is called a secular realignment. Political scientists and historians often disagree about which elections are realignments and what defines a realignment, and even whether realignments occur. The terms themselves are somewhat arbitrary, however, and usage among political scientists and historians does vary. In the US, Walter Dean Burnham argued for a 30–38 year "cycle" of realignments. Many of the elections often included in the Burnham 38-year cycle are considered "realigning" for different reasons.


Other political scientists and quantitative elections analysts reject realignment theory altogether, arguing that there are no long-term patterns. Political scientist David R. Mayhew states, "Electoral politics is to an important degree just one thing after another ... Elections and their underlying causes are not usefully sortable into generation-long spans ... It is a Rip Van Winkle view of democracy that voters come awake only once in a generation ... It is too slippery, too binary, too apocalyptic, and it has come to be too much of a dead end."


Sean Trende, senior elections analyst at RealClearPolitics, who argues against realignment theory and the "emerging Democratic majority" thesis proposed by journalist John Judis and political scientist Ruy Teixeira in his 2012 book The Lost Majority states, "Almost none of the theories propounded by realignment theorists has endured the test of time... It turns out that finding a 'realigning' election is a lot like finding an image of Jesus in a grilled-cheese sandwichif you stare long enough and hard enough, you will eventually find what you are looking for."[1] In August 2013, Trende observed that U.S. presidential election results from 1880 through 2012 form a 0.96 correlation with the expected sets of outcomes (i.e. events) in the binomial distribution of a fair coin flip experiment.[2] In May 2015, statistician and FiveThirtyEight editor-in-chief Nate Silver argued against a blue wall Electoral College advantage for the Democratic Party in the 2016 U.S. presidential election,[3] and in post-election analysis, Silver cited Trende in noting that "there are few if any permanent majorities" and both Silver and Trende argued that the "emerging Democratic majority" thesis led most news coverage and commentary preceding the election to overstate Hillary Clinton's chances of being elected.[list 1]

United States[edit]

Political realignment in United States history[edit]

Here is presented a list of elections most often cited as "realigning", with disagreements noted:

The first party system emerged from pre-Confederation colonial politics, had its "heyday" from 1896 to 1911 and lasted until the , and was characterized by local patronage administered by the two largest parties, the Liberals and the Conservatives.

Conscription Crisis of 1917

The second system emerged following the First World War, and had its heyday from 1935 to 1957, was characterized by regionalism and saw the emergence of several protest parties, such as the , the Social Credit Party, and the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation.

Progressives

The third system emerged in 1963 and had its heyday from 1968 to 1983 and began to unravel thereafter. The two largest parties were challenged by a strong third party, the . Campaigns during this era became more national in scope due to electronic media, and involved a greater focus on leadership. The dominant policy of the era was Keynesian economics.

New Democratic Party

The fourth party system has involved the rise of the , the Bloc Québécois, and the merger of the Canadian Alliance with the Progressive Conservatives. It saw most parties move to one-member-one-vote leadership contests, and a major reform to campaign finance laws in 2004. The fourth party system has been characterized by market-oriented policies that abandoned Keynesian policies, but maintained the welfare state.

Reform Party

1977 Indian general election

Indian National Congress

2014 Indian general election

[59]

1977 Israeli legislative election

Likud

2000 Taiwanese presidential election

James Soong

2002 Turkish general election

Grand National Assembly of Turkey

2006 Palestinian legislative election

Hamas

American election campaigns in the 19th century

Cyclical theory

First Party System

Second Party System

Third Party System

Fourth Party System

Fifth Party System

Sixth Party System

Seventh Party System

Wave election

Wagner, Matthew L., and Paul White Jr. Parties and Democratic Transitions: The Decline of Dominant and Hegemonic Parties (2014).

A New Nation Votes: American Election Returns, 1787–1825