« Discussion 5: Political Parties (Due 7/2 by 11:59pm)

Discussion 5

4 replies
MM FD LT ST
Last

1.Morris Fiorina defines responsible parties as being able to entrust a complete leadership of the country and foster a cohesive party. Fiorina finds that parties today are more responsible than they have been in the past, like in the 1970s. However, parties are now again declining in trust and responsibility, due to increasing split votes. Responsible parties also hold all credit or blame for actions that occur while in power. I believe a responsible party is a party that can reach beyond partisanship and compromise with all citizens, leading to a trustworthy and representative leadership.

2.Fiorina thinks that the parties today are unable to govern effectively because of the higher margin for error in today’s society and lack of a unified government. Parties are increasingly divided, and without compromises, losing means losing everything and winning can mean total control. Elected officials also often focus on reelection over current governing, losing focus on creating real change. I believe parties are ineffective today due to this lack of compromise and increasing hostility between party members. Even when two politicians may have similar views, if they are on opposite sides of the aisle they try to isolate themselves from the other. If parties lost some of the psychological attachment to their label and worked together regardless of party identification for a common goal, then our party system could govern more effectively.

3.Masket believes parties do not die because of durability created by our system’s design. The party-in-government system provides coordination, durable coalitions, organizes political intuitions, and induces stability in institutions by having majority/minority parties. He also states that the psychological attachment voters have with their designated party stays with them for a long time and can be passed down. This leads to a near impossible environment for a third party to get elected, so it is hard to legitimatize anything other than Democrats and Republicans. I believe our party system has remained for so long because anyone who has the power to change it simply will not and that voters are loyal to their party more than their ideals.

4 replies
  1. Re: Discussion 5
    Kathryn, I agree with your answer to question 1, especially with what you believe is a responsible party! I think that the parties are so focused in destroying the other that they are losing the peoples trust. In addition, I  like your answer to question 2. How you described the parties lack of effective governing was very strong and also very easy to follow. Lastly, I really like and agree with your answer to question 3. Your explained our government system very simply and I agree with you final statement about how the party system has remained the same for so long!
  2. Re: Discussion 5
    I liked the way that you explained question 2 and how you explained how the people react to the government's choices based on their parties and how they see their parties as winning or losing! I also agree with your answer to question 3 because we see it, especially in the south, how people are raised in a household that is either one party or the other and it is hard to veer from that, especially within our society. Really strong last line as well!
  3. Re: Discussion 5
    I also agree that politicians nowadays struggle from having similar ideas but not willing to work bipartisanly. I think that figuring out a system where politicians are more likely to focus on working with each other as opposed to focusing on reelection at all costs is important. Term limits for congress or longer terms for representatives could help with this issue. 
  4. Re: Discussion 5
    In your answer to question 2 I like how you credited the lack of compromise and an increase of hostility as the reasons parties have not been able to govern effectively. I agree parties need to lose their "psychological attachments" to their labels. We created these labels.