Challenges to the American Two-Party System: Evidence from the 1968, 1980, 1992, and 1996 Presidential Elections

By Abramson, Paul R.; Aldrich, John H. et al. | Political Research Quarterly, September 2000 | Go to article overview

Challenges to the American Two-Party System: Evidence from the 1968, 1980, 1992, and 1996 Presidential Elections


Abramson, Paul R., Aldrich, John H., Paolino, Philip, Rohde, David W., Political Research Quarterly


Recent successes by independent presidential candidates raise questions about the stability of the American two-party system. Students of electoral behavior point to party decline, whereas analysts of party organization see growth and transformation. Analyses of the 1968, 1980, 1992, and 1996 National Election Study surveys are used to determine whether support for Wallace, Anderson, and Perot resulted from dissatisfaction with the current two-party system. We find that there has been little erosion of support for the major political parties between 1968 and 1996. Americans with low levels of support for the major political parties were more likely to support Wallace in 1968 and Perot in 1992 and 1996. But to a large extent, support for Wallace, Anderson, and Perot resulted from dissatisfaction with the major-party candidates. Support for the major parties themselves has not eroded enough to provide a systemic opportunity for an independent candidate or for a new political party to end the Republican and Democratic duopoly

Are American political parties growing weaker, or are they being revitalized? Students of electoral behavior see decline (Dalton and Wattenberg 1993; Ladd 1993; Wattenberg 1991, 1998),` but analysts of party organization see growth and transformation (Aldrich 1995; Rohde 1991; Schlesinger 1991). There is also some evidence of a slight resurgence of the party-in-the-electorate in the last two election surveys (see Abramson, Aldrich, and Rohde 1999; Aldrich 1999; Bartels 2000; and below). These differing views of the political world are fueled by dramatic changes in American electoral politics. H. Ross Perot's 1992 candidacy was the most successful challenge to major-party dominance since Teddy Roosevelt's Progressive Party campaign in 1912. Perot initially resisted transforming his organization, United We Stand America, into a political party. Then, in September 1995, he reversed his position and announced that he would form a new political party, because, he argued, more than three out of five Americans wanted one. This new party, Perot predicted, would be "the largest party in the country" and would displace either the Democratic or Republican Party.2

The two major parties have grown weaker among the electorate. In the twenty-six presidential elections between 1864, when Abraham Lincoln was reelected, and 1964, the year of Lyndon B. Johnson's landslide election, only four minor-party candidates (and no independent candidate) won more than 5 percent of the vote. In the eight presidential elections between 1968 and 1996, George C. Wallace, John B. Anderson, and H. Ross Perot (twice) each exceeded this level.' Moreover, as Ceaser and Busch (1997) point out, the 1992 and 1996 elections were the first presidential contests since the Civil War in which the two major parties failed to win 90 percent or more of the vote in two consecutive presidential elections. In addition to this behavioral change, party loyalties among the American electorate have been eroded, a decline that began between 1964 and 1965 (Converse 1976), and which continued through 1978. Since 1980 there has been a rebound in party loyalties, but party loyalties are substantially weaker than they were during the years between 1952 and 1964 (Abramson, Aldrich, and Rohde 1999).4

Despite these changes, the major political parties continue to dominate American elections. Since the Republican Party first fielded a presidential candidate in 1856, either a Republican or a Democrat has been elected President. The two major parties dominate congressional elections, and partisanship became increasingly important within Congress after the 1970s (Rohde 1991), especially after the 1994 midterm elections (Aldrich and Rohde 1997-98). The plurality-vote win system used in the United States, Great Britain, and Canada facilitates two-party dominance (Duverger 1963, 1986; Riker 1982; but also see Cox 1997), but even in these democracies major parties have been displaced. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Challenges to the American Two-Party System: Evidence from the 1968, 1980, 1992, and 1996 Presidential Elections
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.