Political Party Project
1. Identify the major ideas of the two major
parties
Criticism: Explore the criticism supporters
of the parties have of each other
Identify positive
legislation/directives/agencies/policies &
so on for each party
2. Create a Political Party for the 21st
Century:
-Name
-Platform
-Target Constituency
-Future Plans/Plans for a better America
-Domestic Policy
-Foreign Policy
3. Third Parties
CRITICAL ESSAY: Why do Third Parties
experience limited success in America?
(Consider history, political strength,
access, and what would it take to gain a
major victory?).
4. Realignment
MAGAZINE ARTICLE: (a) Discuss the issue
of realignment involving African
Americans’ shift from the Republican
Party to the Democratic Party;
(b) and the dominance of the Democratic
Party in the South to the emergence of
the Republican Party’s influence in the
region.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After students have read and studied this chapter, they should be able to:













Distinguish between a political party, an interest group, and a faction.
Identify the functions of a political party.
Identify the two major-party face-offs that developed in the years before the Civil War
crisis.
Distinguish between the various parties or tendencies that have adopted the name
Republican.
Explain the transformation of the Democratic Party from a party of limited government,
states’ rights, and racism to a party of strong government, national authority, and support
for civil rights.
Describe the core constituents and economic beliefs of the Republican and Democratic
parties.
Explain how economic politics and cultural politics often pull in different directions.
Describe the three faces of a political party, including the party organization, the party in
electorate, and the party-in-government.
Explain how the winner-take-all election system works against third parties.
Distinguish between ideological third parties and splinter parties.
Explain what realignment is and identify the four most important realignments in
American history.
Briefly describe the rise of independent voters and split ticket voting.
Define the concept of demographically based political tipping.
TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION
Do democratic governments need political parties? If a democratic government has political
parties, will the structure always be a two-party system? What factors impact how many
political parties will exist?
Would proportional representation for the House of Representatives be a good idea? How
about for the Electoral College?
Why does the U.S. have only two major parties?
Is the United States returning to the era of personal politics? Consider the increase in the
number of independent voters and ticket splitters.
Is party identification a major factor for voters in presidential elections?
Why is it difficult for independent candidates or minor party candidates to get elected to
Congress?
What types of factors influence one’s party identification? If you consider yourself to be a
“party identifier,” why do you identify with your party?
What inferences can be made about the voting population through the closely divided elections
of 2000 and 2004?
What role did third parties play in the 2000 presidential elections?
Under what circumstances could a viable third party emerge to challenge the Democrats and
Republicans?
BEYOND THE BOOK
The question of when the anachronistic label “Democratic-Republican” came into existence to
describe the Republican Party of Thomas Jefferson is an interesting one. Despite some
effort, we have not been able to pin down who coined the term, but it clearly did not come
into use until the 20th century. The apparent purpose of the coinage was to claim that
Jefferson’s party was the direct ancestor of the Democratic Party of today. While in a way
that is a true enough claim, the fact is that the Whigs could also claim to be direct
descendents of the Jeffersonian Republicans, and through them, the modern Republican
Party could make the claim as well. A footnote: the one instance in which a major political
party ever referred to itself as the “Democratic Republicans” came after the election of the
second president Adams, when the term “Democratic Republican” was, for a time, an
alternative to “Jacksonian Republican.” These people were soon to be simply the
Democrats, of course.
So how did Democrats get assigned the color blue, and Republicans the color red? This seems
a bit of a reversal, because red was traditionally the color of the political left, dating back
to the days of the French Revolution when the term “left” was first coined. And the
Democrats are presumably to the left of the Republicans. In countries such as Canada and
Britain, the conservatives are always blue and the more left-of-center parties are red. The
answer seems to be that in the United States, red came to be identified specifically with the
communist movement. During the “red scare” following World War II, certain
Republicans attempted to gain political traction by accusing the Democrats of being “soft
on communism.” (Fear of this charge, in fact, may have helped lead Democratic President
Lyndon Johnson into his fateful decision to fight Vietnamese communists with U.S.
troops.) To avoid any appearance of echoing this accusation, network news departments
avoided assigning the color red to the Democrats in election-eve results maps. They gave
it to the Republicans instead, on the assumption that there could be no confusion—no one
has ever credibly accused the Republicans of being soft on communism. The color blue
was left over for the Democrats. Hence another American political reversal, paralleling the
reversal of the meaning of liberalism as detailed in Chapter 1.
The text is purposefully vague about how proportional representation (PR) would work. It is a
complicated topic, and many groups of students might be confused by it. If your students
are relatively advanced, however, you could spend a little time on this topic. For the
House, there are basically two realistic ways to do it. One is to have fewer congressional
districts than there are available House seats. The extra House seats can be awarded to a
party’s statewide list to make up for any departure from proportionality at the district
level. This is how the Germans do it, by the way. A second method would be to transfer
surplus votes from one congressional district to another. Consider Oregon, which under
PR would almost always break 3-2 in favor of the Democrats. The actual Oregon
delegation in 2003-2005, however, was 4-1 for the Democrats. Under this PR system, the
one Republican who turned in the best relative performance while still coming in second
would go to Washington instead of the Democrat in that district. In a large state, this
system would elect some third-party candidates.
A second PR problem: If you had PR for the Electoral College, how do you keep the race from
being constantly thrown into the House? Even Ralph Nader in 2000 would have kept
either major party from obtaining a majority. Some countries have a set minimum percent
of the vote a party must reach before votes for that party begin to count. In Germany, that
threshold is 5%, which would certainly have eliminated Nader’s ability to tie up the race.
As noted below, however, Ross Perot received 19% in 1992. What could stop such a
candidate from sending the race to the House? The answer: awarding electoral votes only
to the top two finishers in each state. Under such a modified PR system, Perot would have
gotten exactly four electoral votes, two from Bush and two from Clinton. Of course, such
a plan would tend to preserve the two-party system. Its only real benefit would be to make
the electoral vote a more faithful reflection of the popular one.
Do cultural politics trump economic politics nowadays? A map of the presidential election
results would seem to argue that this is so. Prosperous culturally liberal states confront
less-well-off culturally conservative ones. However, cultural issues may have more to do
with whether a particular state goes Republican or Democratic than whether the country as
a whole goes Republican or Democratic. The reason for this is that cultural politics may
have a stronger regional component than economic politics. “The poor you will always
have with you,” and the rich as well. In any locality, the rich and poor measure themselves
against each other, and not against people living in some more remote region. Though
some states are richer than others, the “skewed bell curve” of income within any state or
locality looks about the same. Economic issues may likewise hit home relatively equally
all over the country. Cultural values, however, really do pit different parts of the country
against each other. Therefore, even if economic issues move many more voters than
cultural ones, the even dispersion of the impact of such issues would not change the
striking cultural appearance of the partisan map. (It would merely move some marginal
states from red to blue, or vice versa.)
The 1992 presidential election serves as an example of the impact a candidate who is not
affiliated with one of the two major parties can have on the electoral process. Ross Perot
ran as an independent candidate and received 19 percent of the total popular vote. Only
two candidates not affiliated with a major party have received a higher percentage of the
popular vote in this century (T. Roosevelt, 1912 and LaFollette, 1924). However, Perot,
like Roosevelt and LaFollette, did not win the election. In fact, Perot did not receive any
electoral votes, though he did push George H. W. Bush into third place in Maine and Bill
Clinton into third place in Utah. Nonetheless, many would contend that he impacted the
election by taking votes from either Bush or Clinton. Note also, when a candidate runs for
the office of president and is unsuccessful and then runs again four years later, the
percentage of vote the candidate receives will probably be less. Perot received only 8.5
percent of the popular vote in 1996.
CHAPTER OUTLINE
In the United States the voting population is nearly evenly divided between people who
identify themselves as Democrats, as Republicans and as “independents,” (a voter who does
not identify with a political party). Very few people are actually “card-carrying” party
members, however.
I. What Is a Political Party?
A political party is “a group of political activists who organize to win elections, to
operate the government, and to determine public policy.” This definition makes a
distinction between a political party and an interest group. Interest groups want to
influence public policy, but are not interested in controlling the government. This
definition also distinguishes parties from factions, which are smaller groups of
individuals, often within a political party, who are acting together in pursuit of some
special interest or position. For a political party to be successful, it must unite diverse
groups that have different policy orientations. These are the functions of political parties
in the United States:
 Recruiting candidates to run for elective offices at all levels of government on the
party label. By attracting quality candidates the party enhances its chance of
winning the elective positions and controlling the government.
 Organizing and running elections is technically a government responsibility, but
the parties mobilize citizens to vote and participate.
 Presenting alternative policies to the electorate is an essential role. By
understanding the position of each party on the major issues the voter has some
indication of the position of the party’s candidates.
 Accepting the responsibility of operating government at all levels of the
government is crucial to the functioning of the political process. Parties
organize Congress (see Chapter 11 for details on committee organization),
affect how the president selects individuals to serve in the executive branch (see
Chapters 12 and 13 for details) and how the president nominates federal judges
(see Chapter 14 for details on the nomination process). Parties also perform the
same functions at the state and local levels of government.
 Providing organized opposition to the party in power is an essential role for a
party that does not control one or another branch of the government.
II. A History of Political Parties in the United States
Political parties did not exist when the Constitution was drafted and are not mentioned
anywhere in the Constitution. Yet the debate on the ratification of the Constitution
helped give rise to the first political parties.
A. The Formative Years: Federalists and Anti-Federalists. The two-party system can
be said to have originated in the debate between supporters of the Constitution (the
Federalists) and those who though the states should be the locus of authority and
advocated a Bill of Rights (the Anti-Federalists). Under George Washington and
John Adams, the Federalist Party was the first party to control the national
government. By 1796, however, another party came into the political process. This
party was headed by Thomas Jefferson and was called the Republicans. (Do not
confuse this party with the later party of Lincoln.) While Jefferson’s party
supported the Constitution, it was clearly the heir of the pre-revolutionary
republican movement and the later Anti-Federalists.
B. The Era of Good Feelings. The Federalist Party began to erode as a viable party
after 1800. (It was fatally identified with aristocratic tendencies.) By 1820 it was
unable to field a presidential candidate and was essentially extinct. Only the
Republicans were left to control the government. This period, sometimes called the
Era of Good Feelings, is perhaps the only time in which the United States did not
have a two-party system. Given the relative insignificance of parties, it is also
referred to as the era of personal politics.
C. National Two-Party Rule: Whigs and Democrats. With the fiercely contested
election of 1824, the Republican Party split into the Democrats (Jackson supporters)
and the National Republicans (Adams supporters). The National Republicans soon
renamed themselves the Whigs.
D. The Civil War Crisis. The argument over slavery first split the Whigs and then the
Democrats along North/South lines. Northern Whigs formed the largest element in
the new anti-slavery Republican Party.
E. The Post-Civil War Period.
The abolition of the “three-fifths” rule meant counting all former slaves in
allocating House seats and electoral votes. With this addition, and after the
readmission of all Confederate states, the reunited Democratic Party was now about
as strong as the Republicans.
1. “Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion.” Cultural factors divided the parties. The
Republican ranks contained an aggressive Evangelical Protestant element that
was hostile to Catholicism and favored moralistic initiatives such as banning the
sale of liquor. Democrats opposed a strong national government that could
impose coercive moralistic measures in the North and protect the rights of the
“freedmen” in the South.
2. The Triumph of the Republicans. The Republicans did not gain a decisive edge
until 1896, when, at the bottom of an economic depression, the Democrats
endorsed a pro-debtor populist platform that frightened Eastern workers. The
Republicans won just in time to benefit from the end of the depression, and thus
sealed their reputation as the party of prosperity.
F. The Progressive Interlude. A temporary split in the Republican ranks allowed the
Democrats to gain control of the government under President Woodrow Wilson
from 1912 to 1920. This period is significant because under Wilson, the Democrats
began to move away from their former hostility to government action in the
economy.
G. The New Deal Era. “The Great Depression shattered the working-class belief in
Republican economic competence.” President Franklin Roosevelt completed the
evolution of the Democrats into a party of active government. (One characterization
by a sympathetic professor was, “Hamiltonian means, Jeffersonian ends.”)
Roosevelt’s “big tent” was big enough to welcome African Americans, an
unprecedented development.
H. An Era of Divided Government. Northern Democratic support for the civil rights
movement tended to push Southern conservatives out of the party. The unrest of the
late 1960s (urban riots, anti-Vietnam War protests) alienated other cultural
conservatives from the Democrats. These voters largely became Republicans,
though the process was a slow one lasting decades, not an overnight revolution such
as was seen in 1896 and 1932.
1. The Parties in Balance. In any event, the result has been a nation very evenly
divided between the two major parties. In the years after 1968, the pattern was
often a Republican president and a Democratic Congress. Under Democratic
President Clinton, the pattern was reversed.
2. Red State, Blue State. The extraordinarily close presidential elections of 2000
and 2004 focused attention on the supposed differences between Democratic
“blue states” and Republican “red states.” The geographic pattern of state
support for the parties is the reverse of the pattern of 1896, neatly exemplifying
the reversal of Democratic Party ideology and support.
III. The Two Major U.S. Parties Today
A. The Parties’ Core Constituents. These constituencies were set forth in Chapter 6.
B. Economic Beliefs. Labor and minorities have been Democratic core constituents
since the New Deal era, and their social and economic positions tend to reflect this.
“Republicans are more supportive of the private marketplace, and believe more
strongly in an ethic of self-reliance and limited government.”
1. Economic Convergence? In recent years, however, and especially under
President George W. Bush, the Republicans have in practice matched or
exceeded the Democrats in their support for public spending.
2. Republican and Democratic Budgets. Still, Democrats have the reputation of
supporting the less-well-off, and Republicans the prosperous.
C. Cultural Politics. Cultural politics have become more important in recent years as a
reason why people support one of the major parties.
1. Cultural Politics and Socioeconomic Status. In cultural politics, the upper
classes tend to be more liberal than the lower ones, a reversal of the pattern seen
in economic politics.
2. The Regional Factor in Cultural Politics. Wealthy states and regions now
appear more supportive of the Democrats, and less-well-off ones more
supportive of the Republicans.
D. The 2004 Election: Economics and National Security. Despite the importance of
cultural values in defining the parties’ core supporters, in 2004 Kerry and Bush
concentrated on foreign policy and the economy, the two issues identified by the
voters as the most important (see Chapter 6).
IV. The Three Faces of a Party
Political parties in the United States can be said to be comprised of three components.
The party in the electorate is comprised of the people who identify with the party or who
regularly vote for the candidates of the party in general elections. Without the party in
the electorate, it would not be possible for the party to have electoral success. The party
organization is the second element. The function of the party organization is to provide
leadership and structure for the party. The last element is the party-in-government. This
includes the elected and appointed officials who gained office under the label of the
party. Once in office these leaders organize to influence governmental policy toward the
platform of the party.
A. Party Organization. In theory, each party has a pyramid-shaped organization.
B. The National Party Organization. While the parties have the appearance of a
pyramid with the national organization on at the top and the local party organization
serving as the base, this theoretical structure is not realistic. Rather, American
political parties tend to operate like a confederacy, where the state parties act
autonomously and have loose connections to each other and to the national
committee.
1. Convention Delegates. The national party organization receives the most
publicity during the national convention. Members of the party who have been
selected to attend the convention meet to nominate the presidential candidate,
approve the party platform and approve the presidential candidate’s selection of
a vice-presidential candidate. This convention is held once every four years.
Convention delegates typically have political views further from the center than
the supporters of the party in the electorate.
2. The National Committee. Elected by the national convention, this body serves
as the party’s governing body until the next convention.
3. Picking a National Chairperson. This person is picked or approved by the
party’s presidential candidate. If the candidate loses, however, the National
Committee may choose a different chairperson.
C. The State Party Organization. Each state also has a party organization. There is a
state chairperson and a state central committee. Like the national party, each state
party holds a state convention, which may endorse some candidates, depending on
state law. A state party platform is drafted which focuses on state-level issues.
D. Local Party Machinery: The Grass Roots.
1. Patronage and City Machines. In the 1800s and early 1900s, major cities
typically had powerful political “machines” that supplied welfare services and
jobs to an immigrant- based clientele in return for votes. Such machines no
longer exist. Welfare services are now provided by a nonpartisan bureaucracy
and government jobs are assigned through competitive examinations.
2. Local Party Organizations Today. Local organizations have important
functions, such as getting out the vote. The local party organization differs in
different regions of the country. In some areas the party has little local
organization. In other areas there may be a very strong local organization that
controls the local governmental process. The national party has little control
over local organizations.
E. The Party-in-Government.
For the parties, winning elections is important for a number of reasons. The
majority party can dominate committees in legislatures, decide appointments in the
executive branch, and set the political agenda.
1. Divided Government. Given the system of checks and balances, it is important
to note that gaining a partisan majority does not mean absolute power. Indeed,
in the era of ticket splitting and divided government, majority partisan
advantage is almost always tempered by the opposition.
2. The Limits of Party Unity. Legislation often does not pass on party-line votes.
The reason in part is that candidates for the House and Senate are not dependent
on their party, but put together personal campaign organizations.
3. Party Polarization. Still, partisanship appears to have increased in recent years.
Computers can be used to devise “safe seats” for both parties. With little risk of
general-election competition, members of the House can be more partisan.
Also, various elements of the media have discovered that “stridency sells,” and
therefore promote polarization.
V. Why Has the Two Party System Endured?
A. The Historical Foundations of the Two-Party System. With great frequency
throughout our history, major issues confronting the country have produced two
clear sides. This duality helped to initiate a two-party system and has maintained
this system through the present.
B. Political Socialization and Practical Considerations: For generations, all that has
existed is a two party system. If individuals are not exposed to anything but a twoparty system, they will not likely seek change to a different type of system.
C. The Winner-Take-All Electoral System. This system elects the candidate who
receives a plurality of the votes. Candidates who finish second receive nothing.
Assume a situation in which a party is able to gain 19 percent of the vote
nationwide, but in no single district manages to attain a plurality. The party will
elect no candidates.
1. Presidential Voting. The winner-take-all system also works in presidential
voting. In all but two states, the presidential candidate with a plurality gets all
the electoral votes of that state. This is the unit rule.
2. Popular Election of the Governors and President. In most democratic countries,
the chief executive is a premier or prime minister elected by the legislature. If
there are three or more parties, two or more can band together to elect a
premier. In America, however, governors are elected directly by the people and
presidents are elected indirectly by the people. There is no opportunity for
negotiations between parties.
3. Proportional Representation. Many countries use proportional representation in
elections. Such a system allows a party to receive the number of legislators
equal to the percentage of the vote the party received. If a party receives 19
percent of the vote it would then receive 19 percent of the seats in the
legislature. As long as the U.S. continues to use a winner-take-all electoral
system, it is highly unlikely that a minor party will be successful.
D. State and Federal Laws Favoring the Two Parties. This occurs because the two
major parties are in control of the policy-making process. As long as the Democrats
and Republicans are in power at the state and national levels, they will continue to
pass laws which favor the two-party system and will pass laws making it difficult
for new parties to develop.
VI. The Role of Minor Parties in U.S. Politics
A. Ideological Third Parties. Many third parties are long-lived organizations with
strong ideological foundations. A historical example is the Socialist Party, which
existed from 1900 to 1972. Current examples include the Libertarian Party and the
Green Party.
B. Splinter Parties. Not all minor parties have been based on a different ideology from
the major parties. A few minor parties are formed when members of one of the two
major parties are dissatisfied with the leader of the major party, or the members are
dissatisfied with the platform of the major party. These are usually referred to as
spin-off parties. For example, the Bull-Moose Progressives were a spin-off of the
Republican Party. The Progressives were those reform-minded Republicans who
supported the candidacy of Theodore Roosevelt over that of William Howard Taft.
C. The Impact of Minor Parties. No presidential candidate has been elected from a
minor party. Very few members of Congress have been elected on the label of a
minor party. But minor parties have had an impact in that they raise issues that the
two major parties must address. These parties also provide voters with another
option.
1. Influencing the Major Parties. Minor parties can raise issues that major parties
then adopt. The Populist Party was an example. Many of its policies were taken
over by the Democrats in 1896 (which ironically hurt the Democrats rather than
helping them). During its existence, the Socialist Party advanced many
proposals that were picked up by liberals (and sometimes even by a bipartisan
consensus).
2. Affecting the Outcome of an Election. Some claim that the candidacy of Ralph
Nader on the Green Party ticket hurt Democrat Al Gore’s chances of winning
the presidency, particularly given how close the election was. Nader may have
taken votes from Gore, thus giving George W. Bush an edge.
VII. Mechanisms of Political Change
A. Realignment. Key term: Realignment, a process in which a substantial group of
voters switches party allegiance, producing a long-term change in the political
landscape.
1. Realignment: the Myth of Dominance. Realignments do not have to result in a
dominant party. The realignment associated with the creation of the modern
Republicans eventually produced a country that was relatively evenly divided
between the parties. The same is true of the most recent realignment in which
conservative Democrats became Republicans.
2. Realignment: the Myth of Predictability. It is a happenstance that realignments
have been relatively evenly spaced through American history.
3. Is Realignment Still Possible? Realignments followed from party coalitions that
included contradictory elements—both slave owners and opponents of slavery
(the Whigs), both workers and their employers (the Republicans after 1896), or
both African Americans and segregationists (the Democrats after 1932). It is
almost inevitable that such coalitions will break up. The political parties today,
however, appear to have relatively compatible core constituents.
B. Dealignment. Some argue that realignment has been replaced by dealignment—a
major drop-off in support for the parties.
1. Independent Voters. The number of independents has grown steadily since the
1930s. Split ticket voting is more common.
2. Not-So-Independent Voters. But many “independents” really do prefer one or
another of the two parties. The number of true independents may not exceed
10% of the voters.
C. Tipping.
1. Tipping in Massachusetts. If one ethnic group grows more rapidly than another,
it can “tip” a state from one party to the other. The famous example is
Massachusetts, where in 1928 the Democratic Irish finally outnumbered the
Republican Yankees.
2. Tipping in California? This state appears to have recently tipped to the
Democrats due to an increase in the Hispanic and Asian population.
D. On to the Future. Will cultural and economic conservatism draw more voters to the
Republicans? Or will cultural liberalism and increased immigration help the
Democrats? Time will tell.
VIII. Features
A. What If . . . Parties Were Supported Solely by Public Funding?
The implications of public funding of parties would include smaller party budgets,
fewer party employees and most significantly, a decline in the significance of
lobbyists and the power of corporate interests.
B. Beyond Our Borders: Multiparty Systems—The Rule Rather Than the Exception.
The United States is the rarity among nations today, with most nations operating
under a system of multiple parties necessitating the formation of coalitions and the
making of compromises among factions.
C. Which Side Are You On? Should Voters Ignore Third-Party Candidates?
If a third party espouses politics that are similar to (if more radical than) the politics
of a major party, then the third party’s supporters can “shoot themselves in the foot”
by placing principle above practicality. It can also happen, however, that neither
party is at all close to a third party’s principles. Both George W. Bush and John
Kerry were a long way from being Libertarians, for example. Also, some contests
are not close, which gives third-party supporters the luxury of voting their
conscience.
POLITICAL PARTIES ASSIGNMENT
I. What Is a Political Party?
II. What are the Functions of Political Parties in the United States?
III. A Short History of Political Parties in the United States
(Magazine article or outline)
IV. The Three Faces of a Party (Diagram/Graphic Organizer)
V. Party Organization (Diagram/Graphic Organizer)
VI. The Party in Government (Examine the Party in action)
VII. The Two Major U.S. Parties and Their Members (Profile the two
major parties)
VIII. Why Has the Two Party System Endured?
IX. The Third Party: what is the Role of Minor Parties in U.S.
Political History?
Compare and contrast the two major political parties (The
Democratic and Republican parties)
Compare and contrast the two major political parties (The Democratic and Republican
parties). You are to:
1. Identify ten (10) values, from either party, that you strongly agree with.
2. Explain why you agree with the political value. (An example might be - I agree with the
Republican's party Pro-Life view (value) because my moral and religious beliefs tell me it is wrong
to take the life of an innocent, unborn child. I believe that every life is precious.)
3. After you have decided on ten, add them up to see how many were Republican values and
how many were Democratic values. If six of the ten are Democratic values, then it would indicate
that you are leaning more toward being a Democrat. Of course, this depends on which ten values
you choose. So choose the ten that you think are most important to you.
4. If you believe your political values are more identified with a third or minor political party you
may research that political party and list 10 of their political values instead of using the information
about the two major parties.
5. And finally, write at least a few paragraphs about what this exercise revealed for you. Did it
confirm what you thought about your values before you did the exercise or did you realize
something new about your political values? Did it help you to clarify your own personal political
values? How did you feel about your results?
DEMOCRATIC PARTY
The history of the Democratic Party in the United States goes back to the time
of our first Presidents. Thomas Jefferson, in the late 1700's, started the first
political party with the conviction that the federal government was assuming
too much power over domestic policy and should be stopped. His party became
known as the "Democratic" party when candidate Andrew Jackson became
President in 1828. Jackson was known as a man of the people. He took the
Democratic party that Jefferson and his elite collegues had formed and turned it
over to the citizens of the United States. The party held its first convention in
1832 to re-elect Jackson to a second term.
The Democratic National Convention began the Democratic National Committee
in 1848. It has become the longest running political organization in the world. The
Convention gave the committee the job of promoting the party causes between
the conventions and also preparing for each of the next conventions.
On the issue of slavery at the 1860 Democratic Convention, Democrats held
that each State had the right to prohibit or recognize slavery. This position
caused Northern Democrats to withdraw from the convention. The Southern
Democrats and the Northern Democrats each nominated their own separate
candidates for President that year. The election was ultimately lost to
Republican candidate Abraham Lincoln.
The Democratic Party has met every four years since 1832 to nominate a
presidential and vice-presidential candidate. From 1832 to 1968, sixteen
Democratic candidates have become President including James Polk, James
Buchanan, Grover Cleveland, Woodrow Wilson, franklin Roosevelt, Harry
Truman and John F. Kennedy.
The symbol of the donkey has become known as the Democratic mascot.
Thomas Nast, a famous political cartoonist, used the donkey first in an 1870
editorial cartoon to represent the an anti-war faction that he did not agree with.
Nast continued using it to portray Democratic press and reporters.
Cnn.com/allpolitics
Democratic Party History
From "Jacksonian Democracy" to the modern era, a look at the Democratic Party over
the years
August 2, 2000
Web posted at: 11:22 p.m. EDT (0322 GMT)
The Democratic Party is the oldest existing political party in the United States. The
Democrats have won 20 of 43 presidential elections since the party presented its first
presidential candidate, Andrew Jackson, for the public's approval in 1828.
While there is no precise date for the beginning of the Democratic Party, the organization
emerged from a wing of the dominant Democratic-Republican Party, which initially had
been organized by Thomas Jefferson in the early days of the Republic in opposition to the
Federalist Party.
In the late 1820s, Andrew Jackson led a splintered faction of the Democratic-Republicans
to form the Democratic Party.
Most historians agree that the Democratic Party as we know it began with Jackson's
successful 1828 presidential campaign. The 1828 campaign was also the origin of the
Democratic Party's mascot -- the donkey. Jackson's opponents called him a "jackass"
during the campaign, and Jacksonians adopted the legendarily stubborn animal as a
political symbol.
Leaders of the Democratic Party encouraged the Populist movement of that era and the
expansionist movement west that followed. This era was marked by grass roots
democracy at the local level, especially in the new western frontier of the Ohio Valley. If
an official date can be established for the beginning of the Democratic Party, it would be
1832, when the Democrats held their first nominating convention in Baltimore, ratifying
"Old Hickory" - Jackson -- for a second term.
The Democrats managed to dominate American politics through the beginning of the
Civil War.
Between 1828 and 1860, the last election before the Civil War, the Democrats held the
White House for 24 of 32 years. The party controlled the Senate for 26 years and the
House for 24 years during this period. The ideology of the party during the pre-Civil War
era stressed states' rights and low government spending, but the dominant issue of the
time was slavery.
In 1860, the slavery issue became so divisive and burdensome that it completely
splintered and hobbled the Democratic Party. That year, the Democrats ran two separate
tickets -- one southern and pro-slavery, and one northern, which espoused "popular
sovereignty," a system that was intended to allow new states the option to choose whether
slavery would be legalized within their borders.
This division helped Abraham Lincoln, candidate of the four-year-old, anti-slavery
Republican Party, to win the White House. Lincoln swept most states outside of the
South, while the slave states voted for the Southern Democratic ticket, and later seceded.
During the Civil War, which followed quickly after the 1860 election, the northern
Democratic Party split into two factions -- "War Democrats" and "Peace Democrats." The
War Democrats supported the war effort and Lincoln. In fact, Lincoln chose War
Democrat Andrew Johnson as a vice presidential running mate in the 1864 election.
The Peace Democrats -- also known as "Copperheads" -- actively opposed the war instead favoring a negotiated peace settlement with the South and Lincoln. This split,
along with the total defeat of the South and the legacy of the bloody war, opened the way
for the dominance of the Republican Party for the next 72 years.
The period after the Civil War stands out as the lowest point in the Democrats' history,
when the party was unable to win the White House or control Congress. The only
stronghold of Democratic power was in the South, where Republicans gave blacks the
right to vote and took that right away from southerners who had fought against the Union.
Most southerners firmly believed that the Republican Party stood against their beliefs,
and the region became "the Solid South" for the Democrats. During this 72-year period -1860-1932 -- the Democrats would occupy the White House for a scant 16 years: the
terms of Grover Cleveland, 1885-1889 and 1893-1897, and Woodrow Wilson, 19131921. In Congress, the Democrats controlled the House for 26 years and the Senate for
only 10.
In 1912, when Democrat Woodrow Wilson won the presidency with Teddy Roosevelt
splitting the GOP on his Bull Moose ticket, the Democratic Party began to shift away
from its philosophies of strict interpretation of the Constitution and limited government.
The historic 1928 candidacy of New York Governor Al Smith as the first Roman
Catholic to be nominated for president by a major party, though losing, swelled the
Democratic ranks and gave shape to a wide and potent coalition to come. The great stock
market crash of 1929 and the depression that followed finally broke the post-Civil War
GOP majority, and the Democrats now moved to take leadership of the nation as a
progressive and diverse party.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his "New Deal" swept into office in 1932 propelled by a
broad coalition of Roman Catholic ethnics, laborers, blacks, academics and the traditional
core of southern Democratic support. FDR ousted President Herbert Hoover in a
landslide that year, and the Democrats would lose only two presidential elections in the
next 32 years.
In 1928, Smith had won only eight states. By 1936, FDR carried all but two. Between
1932 and 1968, only one Republican candidate -- national hero Dwight Eisenhower -was able to capture the White House (1953-1961). During that same period, Democrats
controlled both chambers of Congress for all but four years (1947-1949 and 1953-1955).
Ideologically, the party now supported a stronger central government, a more liberal
interpretation of the Constitution and a federal government that took an activist role in
addressing the nation's economic and social ills. Major policy items that characterized
this philosophy were the New Deal programs of the 1930s, (when Social Security was
established), and President Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society programs of the 1960s,
(when Medicare and Medicaid were established).
FDR, the only man ever elected to unprecedented third and fourth terms in the White
House, died in office just months before the end of World War II in 1945. His legacy of
leadership during the Great Depression and Second World War -- and the political
coalition he created -- left him the towering American political figure of the 20th century.
Harry Truman, his vice president, assumed office and led the nation through the final
days of the war and the beginning of the Cold War against the Soviet Empire.
Truman presided over the creation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO),
the Marshall Plan and the United Nations. His "Cold War liberalism" - a combination of
New Deal social policy and anti-Communist foreign policy -- would dominate for the
next 25 years.
"Give 'em hell Harry" would also win the most famed comeback in American political
history when he led the Democrats to an upset victory over the GOP and Tom Dewey in
1948.
The turning point in modern presidential politics occurred in the 1960's. Following the
assassination of Democratic president John F. Kennedy, and beset by the Vietnam War,
the Civil Rights struggle, reactions against Johnson's Great Society spending, and the rise
of controversial cultural and social issues to the political fore, the Democratic Party
coalition strained to the breaking point.
The collapse of the Democrat's so-called Solid South accelerated, and millions of
traditionally Democratic blue-collar and middle-class voters -- particularly northern
Catholics -- strayed from the party in increasing numbers. Though LBJ defeated the
strongly conservative Sen. Barry Goldwater, R-Arizona, in an historic 1964 rout, former
GOP Vice President Richard Nixon would capture the White House just four years later.
Democrats would fail to regain the White House for 20 of the next 24 years. However,
the Democrats' losses in presidential campaigns were balanced by strength in Congress,
as well as at the state and local level.
Yet the party resisted efforts to nominate less liberal candidates for national office. The
defeat of Democratic President Jimmy Carter by Ronald Reagan in 1980 marked the lowwater point of this Democratic presidential nomination tendency.
Reagan and the GOP attacked the Democratic Party as relentlessly liberal and on the
wrong side of large parts of the public on many hot-button social issues. Reagan would
win two landslides in the 1980s, followed by the election of his vice president - George
Bush -- in 1988, all accomplished with the votes of millions of so-called Reagan
Democrats. During this time, Democrats struggled with some success to maintain their
strength in Congress and at the state level while adjusting their message to new political
realities.
In November 1992, a slow economy and public dissatisfaction with the status quo gave
the Democrats the White House for the first time in 12 years. Arkansas Governor Bill
Clinton ran as a politically moderate "New Democrat" who was pro-business and prodeath penalty, focusing on the nation's economy ("It's the economy, stupid"). Clinton won
32 states, holding then-President Bush to 37.5 percent of the vote. While the Democrats
regained the Oval Office and held Congress, the GOP picked up 10 seats in the House.
In 1994, Republicans, galvanized by Clinton administration missteps (including its illfated national health care proposal), ran on the "Contract With America," and took
complete control of Congress for the first time since 1955. Further, the GOP claimed 30
of the nation's 50 governorships, including eight of the 10 biggest electoral states, and
drew even with the Democrats in many state legislatures.
To many Republicans, the 1994 election seemed to bring about their long-anticipated
political realignment, whose origins they saw in the Reagan 80s. But while the new GOP
Congress was able to steer President Clinton to support some of its goals -- Clinton even
declared in his 1996 State of the Union address that "the era of big government is over" -Clinton would have considerable success sparring with them in the court of public
opinion.
By the 1996 elections, after signing a welfare reform bill and following a bruising fight
with the GOP over spending and tax cuts that resulted in a partial government shutdown,
Clinton had sufficiently recovered to win reelection against former Senate Majority
Leader Bob Dole. Clinton defeated Dole by an eight-point margin, with 49 percent of the
vote. The Democrats failed, however, in their concerted effort to retake Congress.
In 1997, Clinton and the congressional GOP reached a balanced budget compromise that
included tax cuts and more social spending. Before long the nation would enjoy a
balanced budget and surpluses that continue to this day, with government spending rising
to record levels. But 1998 would see the Capitol cast into the throes of the Monica
Lewinsky affair, freezing regular political business in a poisoned atmosphere of scandal,
accusation and retribution.
Amid severe political infighting and intense partisanship, the 1998 midterm elections saw
the Democrats demonstrate unexpected strength at the polls, nearly retaking the House.
Though still behind in governorships, the party claimed ever-important California.
The following month, in the face of public opposition, the House of Representatives
ratified two articles of impeachment against Clinton, who had remained under a series of
ethical clouds for most of his tenure in the Oval office.
In February of 1999, after a brief impeachment trial, the Senate acquitted Clinton of the
charges of lying under oath and obstruction of justice.
The Democrats head into the 2000 election hoping to retain the White House and reclaim
at least the House.
The Clinton years have been a period of closely balanced, hard-fought, and sometimes
stalemated political battles in which neither party has been able to fully enact its policy
prescriptions. Clinton's New Democrat politics and sharp political skills have thwarted
the Republican drive for realignment, and prevented the GOP from seeing its complete
program become reality.
Now, with his vice president, Al Gore, as the party nominee and the House within easy
grasp, it remains to be seen whether Bill Clinton has outperformed his party -- or if the
Democrats will perform better with him off center stage.
History of the Democratic Donkey
When Andrew Jackson ran for president in 1828, his opponents tried to
label him a "jackass" for his populist views and his slogan, "Let the people rule." Jackson, however, picked up
on their name calling and turned it to his own advantage by using the donkey on his campaign posters. During
his presidency, the donkey was used to represent Jackson's stubbornness when he vetoed re-chartering the
National Bank.
The first time the donkey was used in a political cartoon to represent the Democratic party, it was again in
conjunction with Jackson. Although in 1837 Jackson was retired, he still thought of himself as the Party's
leader and was shown trying to get the donkey to go where he wanted it to go. The cartoon was titled "A
Modern Baalim and his Ass."
Interestingly enough, the person credited with getting the donkey widely accepted as the Democratic party's
symbol probably had no knowledge of the prior associations. Thomas Nast, a famous political cartoonist,
came to the United States with his parents in 1840 when he was six. He first used the donkey in an 1870
Harper's Weekly cartoon to represent the "Copperhead Press" kicking a dead lion, symbolizing Lincoln's
Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton, who had recently died. Nast intended the donkey to represent an anti-war
faction with whom he disagreed, but the symbol caught the public's fancy and the cartoonist continued using it
to indicate some Democratic editors and newspapers.
Later, Nast used the donkey to portray what he called "Caesarism" showing the alleged Democratic
uneasiness over a possible third term for Ulysses S. Grant. In conjunction with this issue, Nast helped
associate the elephant with the Republican party. Although the elephant had been connected with the
Republican party in cartoons that appeared in 1860 and 1872, it was Nast's cartoon in 1874 published by
Harper's Weekly that made the pachyderm stick as the Republican's symbol. A cartoon titled "The Third Term
Panic," showed animals representing various issues running away from a donkey wearing a lion's skin tagged
"Caesarism." The elephant labeled "The Republican Vote," was about to run into a pit containing inflation,
chaos, repudiation, etc.
By 1880 the donkey was well established as a mascot for the Democratic party. A cartoon about the GarfieldHancock campaign in the New York Daily Graphic showed the Democratic candidate mounted on a donkey,
leading a procession of crusaders.
Over the years, the donkey and the elephant have become the accepted symbols of the Democratic and
Republican parties. Although the Democrats have never officially adopted the donkey as a party symbol, we
have used various donkey designs on publications over the years. The Republicans have actually adopted the
elephant as their official symbol and use their design widely.
The Democrats think of the elephant as bungling, stupid, pompous and conservative -- but the Republicans
think it is dignified, strong and intelligent. On the other hand, the Republicans regard the donkey as stubborn,
silly and ridiculous -- but the Democrats claim it is humble, homely, smart, courageous and loveable.
Adlai Stevenson provided one of the most clever descriptions of the Republican's symbol when he said, "The
elephant has a thick skin, a head full of ivory, and as everyone who has seen a circus parade knows,
proceeds best by grasping the tail of its predecessor."
What We Stand For
The Democratic Party is committed to keeping our nation safe and
expanding opportunity for every American. That commitment is reflected in an agenda that emphasizes the
strong economic growth, affordable health care for all Americans, retirement security, open, honest and
accountable government, and securing our nation while protecting our civil rights and liberties.
Guiding Principles
Our Plan
We are in a critical moment that will reverberate for generations to come. We see us through these times,
Democrats will work to end the war in Iraq and refocus our nation's efforts on those who attacked us on
September 11. We will turn our economy around with millions of new jobs, and free ourselves from our oil
dependency and invest in renewable, alternative energies. As Democrats, we will restore our civil liberties and
uphold the civil rights of all. Learn more about the Democratic agenda.
The 50-State Strategy
The Democratic Party is committed to winning elections at every level in every region of the country. When
Democrats ask for your vote, we can win anywhere. With the 50-State Strategy, we will take back this country,
neighborhood by neighborhood, block by block, and vote by vote.
Party Platform
The Democratic Party has a long and proud history of representing and protecting the interests of working
Americans and guaranteeing personal liberties for all. One of the places we articulate our beliefs is in the
Party's National Platform, adopted every four years by the Delegates at the National Convention.
Charter and Bylaws
Essentially, the Charter and Bylaws is the constitution of the Democratic Party. It outlines the structure of the
Party organization, and the relationship among the National Convention, the National Committee, and other
Party organizations or operations. The Charter and Bylaws was last amended by the Democratic National
Committee at its December 5, 2005 meeting.
Party History
At the start of the 21st Century, the Democratic Party can look back on a proud history — a history not just of
a political organization but of a national vision. It is a vision based on the strength and power of millions of
economically empowered, socially diverse and politically active Americans. Over two hundred years ago, our
Party's founders decided that wealth and social status were not an entitlement to rule. They believed that
wisdom and compassion could be found within every individual and a stable government must be built upon a
broad popular base.
The late Ron Brown — former Chairman of the Democratic Party — put it best when he wrote, "The common
thread of Democratic history, from Thomas Jefferson to Bill Clinton, has been an abiding faith in the judgment
of hardworking American families, and a commitment to helping the excluded, the disenfranchised and the
poor strengthen our nation by earning themselves a piece of the American Dream. We remember that this
great land was sculpted by immigrants and slaves, their children and grandchildren."
Thomas Jefferson founded the Democratic Party in 1792 as a congressional caucus to fight for the Bill of
Rights and against the elitist Federalist Party. In 1798, the "party of the common man" was officially named
the Democratic-Republican Party and in 1800 elected Jefferson as the first Democratic President of the United
States. Jefferson served two distinguished terms and was followed by James Madison in 1808. Madison
strengthened America's armed forces — helping reaffirm American independence by defeating the British in
the War of 1812. James Monroe was elected president in 1816 and led the nation through a time commonly
known as "The Era of Good Feeling" in which Democratic-Republicans served with little opposition.
The election of John Quincy Adams in 1824 was highly contested and led to a four-way split among
Democratic-Republicans. A result of the split was the emergence of Andrew Jackson as a national leader. The
war hero, generally considered — along with Jefferson — one of the founding fathers of the Democratic Party,
organized his supporters to a degree unprecedented in American history. The Jacksonian Democrats created
the national convention process, the party platform, and reunified the Democratic Party with Jackson's
victories in 1828 and 1832. The Party held its first National Convention in 1832 and nominated President
Jackson for his second term. In 1844, the National Convention simplified the Party's name to the Democratic
Party.
In 1848, the National Convention established the Democratic National Committee, now the longest running
political organization in the world. The Convention charged the DNC with the responsibility of promoting "the
Democratic cause" between the conventions and preparing for the next convention.
As the 19th Century came to a close, the American electorate changed more and more rapidly. The
Democratic Party embraced the immigrants who flooded into cities and industrial centers, built a political base
by bringing them into the American mainstream, and helped create the most powerful economic engine in
history. Democratic Party leader William Jennings Bryan led a movement of agrarian reformers and supported
the right of women's suffrage, the progressive graduated income tax and the direct election of Senators. As
America entered the 20th Century, the Democratic Party became dominant in local urban politics.
In 1912, Woodrow Wilson became the first Democratic president of the 20th Century. Wilson led the country
through World War I, fought for the League of Nations, established the Federal Reserve Board, and passed
the first labor and child welfare laws.
A generation later, Franklin Roosevelt was elected president running on the promise of a New Deal. Roosevelt
pulled America out of the Depression by looking beyond the Democratic base and energizing citizens around
the belief that their government could actively assist them in times of need. Roosevelt's New Deal brought
water to California's Central Valley, electrified Appalachia and saved farms across the Midwest. The Civilian
Conservation Corps, the WPA and Social Security all brought Americans into the system, freeing us from fear,
giving us a stake in the future, making the nation stronger.
With the election of Harry Truman, Democrats began the fight to bring down the final barriers of race and
gender. Truman integrated the military and oversaw the reconstruction of Europe by establishing the Marshall
Plan and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Truman's leadership paved the way for civil rights leaders
who followed.
In the 1960s, President John F. Kennedy challenged an optimistic nation to build on its great history. Kennedy
proclaimed a New Frontier and dared Americans to put a man on the moon, created the Peace Corps, and
negotiated a treaty banning atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons. Lyndon Johnson followed Kennedy's
lead and worked to pass the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act. Kennedy and Johnson worked together to
end the practice of segregation in many southern states. Following Kennedy's assassination, Johnson
declared a War on Poverty and formed a series of Great Society programs, including the creation of Medicare
— ensuring that older Americans would receive quality health care.
In 1976, Jimmy Carter was elected president, helping to restore the nation's trust in government following the
Watergate scandal. Among other things, Carter negotiated the historic Camp David peace accords between
Egypt and Israel.
In 1992, Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton was elected the 42nd President of the United States. President
Clinton ran on the promise of a New Covenant for America's forgotten working families. After twelve years of
Republican presidents, America faced record budget deficits, high unemployment, and increasing crime.
President Clinton's policies put people first and resulted in the longest period of economic expansion in
peacetime history. The Deficit Reduction Act of 1993 — passed by both the House and Senate without a
single Republican vote — put America on the road to fiscal responsibility and led to the end of perennial
budget deficits. Having inherited a $290 billion deficit in 1992, President Clinton's last budget was over $200
billion in surplus. The Clinton/Gore Administration was responsible for reducing unemployment to its lowest
level in decades and reducing crime to its lowest levels in a generation. In 1996, President Clinton became the
first Democratic president reelected since Roosevelt in 1936. In 1998, Democrats became the first party
controlling the White House to gain seats in Congress during the sixth year of a president's term since 1822.
In the 2000 elections, Democrats netted 4 additional Senate seats, one additional House seat, and one
additional gubernatorial seat. Vice President Al Gore won the popular vote for President by more than 500,000
votes. In 2001, Democrats regained control of the Senate under Majority Leader Tom Daschle, while
Democrats swept to victory in races all across the country, including races for Virginia Governor and Lt.
Governor, New Jersey Governor, and 39 out of 42 major mayoral races including Los Angeles and Houston.
While we have accomplished a great deal — as a nation and a Party, we must continue to move forward in the
21st Century. We must work to incorporate all Americans into the fabric of our nation. The history of our next
hundred years can be seen in the gorgeous mosaic of America, from the wheat fields of Nebraska to the
barrios of New York City, from the mountains of Colorado to the rocky coast of Maine. The Democratic Party is
America's last, best hope to bridge the divisions of class, race, region, religion, ethnicity and sexual
orientation. We will succeed if we continue to govern by the same principles that have made America the
greatest nation on earth — the principles of strength, inclusion and opportunity. The Democratic Party is ready
to take advantage of the opportunities we have and meet the challenges we face.
Parties in presidential contention
Further information: Political parties in the United States
Each of five parties shares a degree of national attention by attaining the mathematical
possibility of its nominee becoming President of the United States -- i.e., having ballot
status for its presidential candidate in states whose collective total is at least half of the
Electoral-College votes -- in the U.S. presidential election, 2008.





Democratic Party (1828 modern, 1792 historic)
Republican Party (1854)
Libertarian Party (1971)
Constitution Party (1992)
Green Party (1996)
[edit] Other parties that have nominated candidates in recent elections
These parties have offered candidates in recent elections, but did not in 2004, and they do
not have ballot status in enough states in 2008 to win the presidency. Some do not have
presidential candidates, but for other offices only.
This is an incomplete list, which may never be able to satisfy certain standards for
completeness. Sourced additions are welcome and you can help by expanding it.


















America First Party (2002)
Boston Tea Party (2006)
Centrist Party (United States) (2006)
Independence Party of America (2007)
Jefferson Republican Party (2006)
Moderate Party (2006)
Marijuana Party (2002)
Party for Socialism and Liberation (2004)
Peace and Freedom Party (1967) - active primarily in California
Pirate Party (2006)[1]
Prohibition Party (1867)
Reform Party of the United States of America (1995) - currently divided into two
factions both using the name of the "Reform Party"
Socialist Equality Party (1953)
Socialist Party USA (1973)
Socialist Workers Party (1938)
United States Pacifist Party (1983)[2]
Workers World Party (1959)
Working Families Party (1998)
[edit] Other parties that have not nominated candidates in recent elections
Some of these parties have nominated candidates in the past, but have not done so
recently for various reasons. Others have not yet nominated any candidates.
This is an incomplete list, which may never be able to satisfy certain standards for
completeness. Sourced additions are welcome and you can help by expanding it.




























American Party (1969)
American Centrist Party (2004)
American Patriot Party (2003)
American Heritage Party (2000)
American Reform Party (1997)
Communist Party USA (1919)
Freedom Road Socialist Organization (1986)
Freedom Socialist Party (1966)
Independent American Party (1998)
Labor Party (1995)
Light Party [3]
Libertarian National Socialist Green Party (1997)
Modern Whig Party (2007)
National Socialist Movement (1974)
New American Independent Party (2004)
New Black Panther Party (1989)
New Union Party (1974)
Populist Party of America (2002)
Progressive Labor Party (1961)
Ray O. Light Group (1961)
Revolutionary Communist Party, USA (1975)
Socialist Action (1983)
Socialist Alternative (1986)
Socialist Labor Party (1876)
Unity08 (2006)
Veterans Party (2003)
Workers Party, USA
World Socialist Party of the United States (1916)
[edit] Regional parties that have nominated candidates
Few, if any, of these parties have nominated presidential candidates. The years are when
they were founded.
This is an incomplete list, which may never be able to satisfy certain standards for
completeness. Sourced additions are welcome and you can help by expanding it.





Alaskan Independence Party (1984)
Aloha Aina Party
American Independent Party (1968) - the California affiliate of the Constitution
Party
Blue Enigma Party (Delaware) (2006)
Charter Party of Cincinnati, Ohio (1924)



















Connecticut for Lieberman Party (2006)
Conservative Party of New York (1962)
Covenant Party (Northern Mariana Islands)
Independent Citizens Movement (US Virgin Islands)
Liberal Party of Minnesota
Liberal Party of New York (1944)
Liberty Union Party (Vermont) (1970)
Marijuana Reform Party (New York) (1997)
New Jersey Conservative Party (1992)
New Progressive Party of Puerto Rico (1967)
New York State Right to Life Party (1970)
Personal Choice Party (Utah) (1997)
Popular Democratic Party of Puerto Rico (1938)
Populist Party of Maryland (Nader 2004 - affiliated, unrelated to earlier so-named
parties)
Puerto Rican Independence Party (1946)
Republican Moderate Party of Alaska (1986)
Southern Party (1999)
United Citizens Party (South Carolina) (1969)
Vermont Progressive Party (1999)
[edit] Historical political parties
The following parties are no longer functioning. Some of them had considerable
influence. Listed in order of founding.





















Federalist Party (c.1789–c.1820)
Democratic-Republican Party (1792–c.1824)
Anti-Masonic Party (1826–1838)
National Republican Party (1829–1833)
Nullifier Party (1830–1839)
Whig Party (1833–1856)
Liberty Party (1840–1848)
Law and Order Party of Rhode Island (1840s)
Free Soil Party (1848–1855)
Anti-Nebraska Party (1854)
American Republican Party (1843-1854)
American Party (“Know-Nothings”) (c.1854–1858)
Opposition Party (1854–1858)
Constitutional Union Party (1860)
National Union Party, (1864–1868)
Readjuster Party (1870-1885)
Liberal Republican Party (1872)
Greenback Party (1874–1884)
Anti-Monopoly Party (1884)
Populist Party (1892–1908)
Silver Party (1892-1902)








































National Democratic Party/Gold Democrats (1896–1900)
Silver Republican Party (1896-1900)
Social Democratic Party (1898–1901)
Home Rule Party of Hawaii (created to serve the native Hawaiian agenda in the
state legislature and U.S. Congress) (1900–1912)
Socialist Party of America (1901–1973)
Independence Party (or "Independence League") (1906-1914)
Progressive Party 1912 (“Bull Moose Party”) (1912–1914)
National Woman's Party (1913-1930)
Non-Partisan League (Not a party in the technical sense) (1915–1956)
Farmer-Labor Party (1918–1944)
Progressive Party 1924 (1924)
Communist League of America (1928–1934)
American Workers Party (1933–1934)
Workers Party of the United States (1934–1938)
Union Party (1936)
American Labor Party (1936–1956)
America First Party (1944) (1944–1996)
States' Rights Democratic Party (“Dixiecrats”) (1948)
Progressive Party 1948 (1948–1955)
Vegetarian Party (1948–1964)
Constitution Party (United States 50s) (1952–1968?)
American Nazi Party (1959-1967)
Puerto Rican Socialist Party (1959–1993)
Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party (1964)
Black Panther Party (1966-1970s)
Communist Workers Party (1969–1985)
People's Party (1971–1976)
U.S. Labor Party (1975–1979)
Concerned Citizens Party (1975-1992) Become the Connecticut affiliate of the
Constitution Party (then known as U.S. Taxpayers Party) with party founding
Citizens Party (1979–1984)
New Alliance Party (1979–1992)
Populist Party of 1980s-1990s (1984–1994)
Looking Back Party (1984–1996)
Grassroots Party (1986–2004)
Independent Party of Utah (1988–1996)
Greens/Green Party USA (1991–2005)
New Party (1992 – 1998)
Natural Law Party (1992–2004)
Mountain Party (2000-2007) Become the West Virginia affiliate of the Green
Party July 16, 2007 [1]
Christian Freedom Party (2004)
Lecture Notes:
The chapter focuses on the organization of American political parties. It offers a
historical perspective on the evolution of parties, and examines them within the context of
electoral politics. The chapter offers with a discussion of the relationship between party
organization and public influence on government. The main points are:
The ability of America’s party organizations to control nominations,
campaigns, and platforms has declined substantially. Although the parties
continue to play an important role, elections are now controlled largely by
the candidates, each of whom is relatively free to go his or her own way.
U.S. party organizations are decentralized and fragmented. The national
organization is a loose collection of state organizations, which in turn are
loose associations of autonomous local organizations. This feature of U.S.
parties can be traced to federalism and the nation’s diversity, which have
made it difficult for the parties to act as instruments of national power.
Party organizations have recently made a "comeback" by adapting to the
money and media demands of modern campaigns. However, their new
relationship with candidates is more of a service relationship than a
power relationship.
Candidate-centered campaigns are based on the media and the skills of
professional consultants. Money, strategy, and television advertising are
key components of the modern campaign.
Candidates’ relative freedom to run on platforms of their own devising
diminishes the electorate’s capacity to influence national policy in a
predictable direction. The candidate choice made by voters in any one
constituency has no necessary relation to the choices of voters in other
constituencies.
America’s political parties are relatively weak organizations. They lack control over
nominations, elections, and platforms. Primary elections are the major reason for the
organizational weakness of America’s parties; once the parties lost their hold on the
nominating process, they became subordinate to the candidates. More generally, the
political parties have been undermined by election reforms, some of which were intended
to weaken the party and others of which have unintentionally done so. The result is that a
candidate can bypass the party organization and win nomination through primary
elections, even in the face of opposition from the party. Individual candidates also
control much of the organization and money necessary to win elections and run largely
on personal platforms.
Today, the relationship among local, state, and national party organizations is marked by
paths of common interest rather than lines of authority. Recently the state and national
party organizations have expanded their capacity to provide candidates with modern
campaign services and are again playing a prominent role in election campaigns. The
most important of these "services" is money, especially since the use of soft money and
issue ads has increased so much in recent years; indeed, the greatest source of power for
the national party is its control of enormous sums of money that the candidates need.
Nevertheless, the fragmentation of parties prevents them from acting as cohesive national
organizations. Party organizations at all levels have few ways of controlling the
candidates who run under their banner. They assist candidates with campaign
technology, workers, and funds, but cannot compel candidates’ loyalty to organizational
goals. Traditionally, the local organizations have controlled most of the party’s work
force because most elections are contested at the local level. Local parties, however, vary
markedly in their vitality. (See OLC graphics, "Parties, Campaigns, and Elections -Congress" and "Party Makeup & Elections -- the President," both at
www.mhhe.com/patterson5.)
American political campaigns, especially those for higher office, are candidate-centered.
Candidates are usually "self-starters" who spend most of their time raising campaign
funds and who build their campaign organizations around professional consultants.
Strategy, image-making, and television are key components of the modern campaign; use
of the Internet as a campaign tool has increased dramatically. (See OLC simulation,
"Running a Congressional Election Campaign," at www.mhhe.com/patterson5.)
America’s party organizations are flexible enough to allow diverse interests to coexist
within them; they can also accommodate new ideas and leadership, since they are neither
rigid nor closed. However, because America’s parties cannot control their candidates or
coordinate their policies at all levels, they are unable to present many of America’s
voters with a coherent, detailed platform for governing. The national electorate as a
whole is thus denied a clear choice among policy alternatives and has difficulty
influencing national policy in a predictable and enduring way through elections.
GOP
Republican Party (USA)
From SourceWatch
(Redirected from Republican Party)
Jump to: navigation, search
The Republican Party is one of the two major political parties in the United States. It
was established in 1854 by a conglomerate of politicians and non-politicians who
opposed the expansion of slavery and held a Hamiltonian vision for modernizing the
nation. The party has occasionally been dubbed "America's natural governing party",
since 18 of the 27 US Presidents since 1861 have been Republicans. The party is not to
be confused with the Democratic-Republican party of Thomas Jefferson or the National
Republican Party of Henry Clay.
Contents
[hide]





1 Brief intro
2 Ideological base
3 History
4 List of Republican presidential nominees
5 External links
o 5.1 Related SourceWatch articles
o 5.2 References
o 5.3 Resources
o 5.4 Articles & Commentary
[edit]
Brief intro
The Republican Party was organized in Jackson, Michigan on February 28, 1854 as a
party opposed to the westward expansion of slavery.(Three other cities, including Ripon,
Wis., also claim to be the party's birthplace.)
The first convention of the U.S. Republican Party was held on July 6, 1854, in Jackson.
Many of its initial policies were inspired by the defunct Whig Party. Since its inception,
its chief opponent has been the Democratic Party.
The Republican National Committee (RNC) of the United States provides national
leadership for the United States Republican Party. It is responsible for developing and
promoting the Republican political platform, as well as coordinating fundraising and
election strategy. There are similar committees in every U.S. state and most U.S.
Counties (though in some states, party organization lower than state-level is arranged by
legislative districts). It can be considered the counterpart of the Democratic National
Committee. The chairman of the RNC, since January 2007, has been Mike Duncan.
Previous chairmen were Ken Mehlman and Ed Gillespie. [1]
The official symbol of the Republican Party is the elephant. Although the elephant had
occasionally been associated with the party earlier, a cartoon by Thomas Nast, published
in Harper's Weekly on November 7, 1874, is considered the first important use of the
symbol [1]. In the early 20th century, the traditional symbol of the Republican Party in
Midwestern states such as Indiana and Ohio was the eagle, as opposed to the Democratic
rooster. This symbol still appears on Indiana ballots.
From 2002 to 2006, the Republican Party held a majority in both the Senate and the
House of Representatives. It also held a majority of governorships, and was tied with
Democrats in the number of state legislatures it controlled. As of the 2006 election, the
Democratic Party holds a majority in all of the above areas. [2] [3] [4]
Grand Old Party is a traditional nickname, and the initials G.O.P. are commonly used
as a shorthand political designation.
[edit]
Ideological base
The outstanding difference between the mind set and political ideals of the Republican
and that of the Democrat is that the Republican tends to put forth the ideal that all things
are earned and nothing is owed. The Republican Party holds the mindset that anything
can be achieved but nothing is given. This mindset is seen most often in the party's push
for equal tax rates despite income, as well as minimized social assistance programs. This
is fought for in an attempt to treat all citizens equally despite income, race, sex, or
religion. Meanwhile Democrats seek to raise taxes so that government can provide
services such as health insurance and housing assistance to everyone. Republicans wish
to minimize these socialist ideals, because of the modern failure of governments that
attempted to invoke them. Republicans also show concerns about having big government
in charge of such vital issues as food, shelter, or health care, as they believe the private
sector and/or the individual are better suited to control their own lives. The much revered
president Ronald Reagan was a Republican and has been quoted as saying "Government
is not the solution, it is the problem."
The party tends to hold both conservative (right-wing) and libertarian stances on social
and economic issues respectively. Major policies that the party has recently supported
include a neoconservative foreign policy, including War on Terror, invasions of
Afghanistan and Iraq, strong support for democracy especially in the Middle East, and
distrust of the United Nations due to the organization's incompetent bureaucracy, anticapitalist undertone and lackadaisical approach to issues such as fighting terrorism. It has
demanded radical reforms in the UN and opposes the Kyoto Protocol due the protocol's
unfair application to certain countries (especially the United States) and that it prevents
economic growth and slows the reduction of poverty.
It generally supports free trade, especially NAFTA. It boasts that a series of across-theboard tax cuts since 2001 has bolstered the economy and reduced the punitive aspect of
the income tax. It has sought business deregulation, reduction of environmental
restrictions, and other policies that are pro-capitalism. It supports gun ownership rights,
and enterprise zones. Its national and state candidates usually favor the death penalty, call
for stronger state-level control on access to abortion, oppose the legalization of genderneutral marriage on a nation-wide level, favor faith-based initiatives, support school
choice and homeschooling, and social welfare benefit reform.
The party has called for much stronger accountability in the public schools. The party is
split on the issue of federally funding embryonic stem cell research, with many seeing it
as unethical to force tens of millions of tax payers who believe this type of research is
morally wrong to finance it. Historically Republicans have had a strong belief in
individualism, limited government, and business entrepreneurship.
Rhetoric aside however, one way to discover the value difference between Republicans
and Democrats is to research which groups support the two political parties. A close look
at this Open Secrets "Top All-Time Donor Profiles" page reveals that large corporations
usually either favor Republicans or support both parties equally while workers rights
groups (unions), which make up the rank and file of these corporations almost always
support Democrats.
[edit]
History
John C. Frémont ran as the first Republican for President in 1856, using the political
slogan: "Free soil, free labor, free speech, free men, Fremont." The party grew especially
rapidly in Northeastern and Midwestern states, where slavery had long been prohibited,
culminating in a sweep of victories in the Northern states and the election of Lincoln in
1860, ending 60 years of dominance by Southern Democrats and ushering in a new era of
Republican dominance based in the industrial north.
With the end of the Civil War came the upheavals of Reconstruction under Democratic
president Andrew Johnson and Republican president Ulysses S. Grant. For a brief period,
Republicans assumed control of Southern politics, forcing drastic reforms and frequently
giving former slaves positions in government. Reconstruction came to an end with the
election of Republican Rutherford B. Hayes through the Compromise of 1877.
Though states' rights was a cause of both Northern and Southern states before the War,
control of the federal government led the Republican Party down a national line. The
patriotric unity that developed in the North because of the war led to a string of military
men as President, and an era of international expansion and domestic protectionism. As
the rural Northern antebellum economy mushroomed with industry and immigration,
supporting invention and business became the hallmarks of Republican policy proposals.
From the Reconstruction era up to the turn of the century, the Republicans benefitted
from the Democrats' association with the Confederacy and dominated national politics-albeit with strong competition from the Democrats during the 1880s especially. With the
two-term presidency of Ulysses S. Grant, the party became known for its strong advocacy
of commerce, industry, and veterans' rights, which continued through the end of the 19th
century.
The progressive, protectionist, political and beloved William McKinley was the last Civil
War veteran elected President and embodied the Republican ideals of economic progress,
invention, education, and patriotism. After McKinley's assassination, President Theodore
Roosevelt tapped McKinley's Industrial Commission for his trust-busting ideas and
continued the federal and nationalist policies of his predecessor.
Roosevelt decided not to run again in 1908 and chose William Howard Taft to replace
him, but the widening division between progressive and conservative forces in the party
resulted in a third-party candidacy for Roosevelt on the United States Progressive Party,
or 'Bull Moose' ticket in the election of 1912. He beat Taft, but the split in the Republican
vote resulted in a decisive victory for Democrat Woodrow Wilson, temporarily
interrupting the Republican era.
Subsequent years saw the party firmly committed to laissez-faire economics, but the
Great Depression cost it the presidency with the U.S. presidential election, 1932 landslide
election of Franklin Roosevelt in 1932. Roosevelt's New Deal Coalition controlled
American politics for most of the next three decades, excepting the two-term presidency
of war hero Dwight D. Eisenhower.
The Republican Party came to be split along new lines between a conservative wing
(dominant in the West) and a liberal wing (dominant in New England) -- combined with a
residual base of inherited Midwestern Republicanism active throughout the century. The
seeds of conservative dominance in the Republican party were planted in the nomination
of Barry Goldwater over Nelson Rockefeller as the Republican candidate for the 1964
presidential election. Goldwater represented the conservative wing of the party, while
Rockefeller represented the liberal wing.
Goldwater's success in the deep south, and Nixon's successful Southern strategy four
years later represented a significant political change, as Southern whites began moving
into the party, largely due to Democrats' support for the Civil Rights Movement.
Simultaneously, the remaining pockets of liberal Republicanism in the northeast died out
as the region turned solidly Democratic. In The Emerging Republican Majority, Kevin
Phillips, then a Nixon strategist, argued (based on the 1968 election results) that support
from southern whites and growth in the Sun Belt, among other factors, was driving an
enduring Republican realignment.
While his predictions were obviously somewhat overstated, the trends described could be
seen in the Goldwater-inspired candidacy and 1980 election of Ronald Reagan and in the
Gingrich-led "Republican Revolution" of 1994. The latter was the first time in 40 years
that the Republicans secured control of both houses of Congress.
That year, the GOP campaigned on a platform of major reforms of government with
measures, such as a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution and welfare reform.
These measures and others formed the famous Contract with America, which was passed
by Congress. Democratic President Bill Clinton stymied many of the initiatives contained
therein, with welfare reform as a notable exception.
With the election of George W. Bush in 2000, the Republican party controlled both the
presidency and both houses of Congress for the first time since 1952. Commentators
speculate that this may constitute a political realignment, catalyzed by decades of Cold
War conflict and free market politics.
The Republican Party solidified its Congressional margins in the 2002 midterm elections,
bucking the historic trend. It marked just the third time since the Civil War that the party
in control of the White House gained seats in both houses of Congress in a midterm
election (others were 1902 and 1934).
President Bush was renominated without opposition for the 2004 election and the
Republican political platform was titled "A Safer World and a More Hopeful America". It
expressed President Bush's commitment to winning the War on Terror, ushering in an
Ownership Era, and building an innovative economy to compete in the world. President
Bush won the election with 62.0 million popular votes over Democratic Senator John F.
Kerry. Bush received 51% of the popular vote, the first popular majority since his father
was elected in 1988. On that election day, Republicans gained additional seats in both
houses of Congress.
[edit]
List of Republican presidential nominees




















John C. Fremont (Lost: 1856)
Abraham Lincoln (Won: 1860, 1864)
Ulysses S. Grant (Won: 1868, 1872)
Rutherford B. Hayes (Won: 1876)
James Garfield (Won: 1880)
James G. Blaine (Lost: 1884)
Benjamin Harrison (Won: 1888, Lost: 1892)
William McKinley (Won: 1896, 1900)
Theodore Roosevelt (Won: 1904)
William Howard Taft (Won: 1908, Lost: 1912)
Charles Evans Hughes (Lost: 1916)
Warren G. Harding (Won: 1920)
Calvin Coolidge (Won: 1924)
Herbert Hoover (Won: 1928, Lost: 1932)
Alfred M. Landon (Lost: 1936)
Wendell L. Wilkie (Lost: 1940)
Thomas Dewey (Lost: 1944, 1948)
Dwight D. Eisenhower (Won: 1952, 1956)
Richard M. Nixon (Lost: 1960, Won: 1968, Won: 1972)
Barry Goldwater (Lost: 1964)





Gerald R. Ford (Lost: 1976)
Ronald Reagan (Won: 1980, 1984)
George H. W. Bush (Won: 1988, Lost: 1992)
Bob Dole (Lost: 1996)
George W. Bush (Won: 2000, 2004)
Additional Notes
Politics1.com
DIRECTORY OF U.S. POLITICAL
PARTIES
THE TWO MAJOR PARTIES:
DEMOCRATIC PARTY (DNC) - After the 2006 elections, Democrats control several key
governorships (including PA, NY, MI, IL, VA, OH, NJ, NC, CO, VA and WA) and many state
legislatures. The Dems also recaptured congressional majority status inside the Beltway for the
first time since 1994. Former Vermont Governor Howard Dean tried a new "50-states strategy"
approach to rebuilding the party since becoming DNC Chair in 2005, abandoning the old
"targeted states" approach in favor of building a 50-state party organization (which proved highly
successful). Dean's fundraising has also been solid as chair, and he replaced the angry
demeanor he exhibited during his '04 White House run with a new low-key approach. DCCC
Chair Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) and DSCC Chair Chuck Schumer (D-NY) were the other key
architects, along with Dean, with the successful 2006 strategy -- even if the two insiders were
frequently at odds with Dean over tactics and spending until late in the cycle. While prominent
Democrats run the wide gamut from the near Euro-style democratic-socialist left (Barbara Lee,
Dennis Kucinich and the Congressional Progressive Caucus) and traditional liberals (Russ
Feingold, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama and Dick Durbin) to the Dem center-right (Evan Bayh,
Harry Reid and the NDN) to the GOP-style conservative right (Ben Nelson, Gene Taylor, and the
Blue Dog Coalition) to the pragmatic Democratic Leadership Council's "centrist" moderate-toliberal style (Howard Dean, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, The Third Way). The Democrats swept into
office in '06 include a combination of some vocal progressive "Deaniacs," some centrists, and
some very conservative ex-Republicans. Other official, affiliated national Democratic sites
include:






Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), The Stakeholder (DCCC
Blog) and the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), From the Roots (DSCC Blog)
and Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid.
Democratic Governors Association (DGA).
Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee.
Young Democrats of America (YDs).
College Democrats of America ("College Dems").
REPUBLICAN PARTY (RNC) - Republicans hold the big job in DC: the Presidency. President
George W. Bush -- regardless of which party holds control on Capitol Hill -- has the ability to
largely keep Congress in check with his veto power. The GOP also held control of the US House
from the Gingrich "Contract with America" anti-Clinton election sweep of 1994 until they were
ousted from power in 2006 in a backlash to the Iraq War and corruption concerns. The GOP also
hold several key Governorships (including TX, CA, GA, MN and FL), and narrowly held majority
status in the US Senate in 1995-2001 and 2003-07. In the aftermatch of the 2006 defeat, the
different ideological camps within the Republican Party are battling for control. Leading
Republicans fall into several different ideological factions: traditional conservatives (President
George W. Bush, John Boehner, John McCain, and the Club for Growth), the Religious Right
(Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee, the National Federation of Republican Assemblies and the
Christian Coalition), the rapidly dwindling old Nixon/Rockefeller "centrist" or "moderate" wing
(Arnold Schwarzenegger, Charlie Crist, Rudy Giuliani and the Republican Main Street
Partnership), libertarians (Ron Paul and the Republican Liberty Caucus), and a "paleoconservative" wing that backs strict anti-immigration controls (Tom Tancredo and Pat Buchanan).
Other official, affiliated national GOP sites include:







National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), House Minority Leader
John Boehner and House Republican Conference.
National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) and Senate Minority Leader
Mitch McConnell.
Republican Governors Association (RGA).
National Federation of Republican Women (NFRW).
Young Republican National Federation (YRs).
College Republican National Committee (CRNC).
National Teen Age Republicans (TARs).
THE THIRD PARTIES:
THE "BIG THREE" THIRD PARTIES
(Based upon vote performance over past two election cycles and ballot access)
CONSTITUTION PARTY - Former Nixon Administration official and one-time Conservative
Coalition chair Howard Phillips founded the US Taxpayers Party (USTP) in 1992 as a potential
vehicle for Pat Buchanan to use for a third party White House run -- had he agreed to bolt from
the GOP in 1992 or 1996. The USTP pulled together several of the splintered right-wing third
parties -- including the once mighty American Independent Party (below) -- into a larger political
entity. The USTP renamed itself the Constitution Party in 1999. The party is strongly pro-life, antigun control, anti-tax, anti-immigration, trade protectionist, "anti-New World Order," anti-United
Nations, anti-gay rights, anti-welfare, and pro-school prayer. When Buchanan stayed in the GOP,
Phillips ran as the USTP nominee in 1992 (ballot status in 21 states - 43,000 votes - 0.04%),
1996 (ballot spots in 39 states - 185,000 votes - 6th place - 0.2%), and 2000 (ballot status in 41
states - 98,000 votes - 6th place - 0.1%). The party started fielding local candidates in 1994, but
has fielded disappointingly few local candidates since 1998 (except in a handful of states). The
party received a brief boost in the media when conservative US Senator Bob Smith of New
Hampshire -- an announced GOP Presidential hopeful -- bolted from the Republican Party to
seek the Constitution Party nomination in 2000 (but the erratic Smith quit the Constitution Party
race a few weeks later, announced he would serve in the Senate as an Independent, and
subsequently rejoined the GOP by the end of 2000). At the 1999 national convention, the party
narrowly adopted a controversial change to the platform's preamble which declared "that the
foundation of our political position and moving principle of our political activity is
our full submission and unshakable faith in our Savior and Redeemer, our Lord
Jesus Christ" -- although the party officially invites "all citizens of all faiths" to
become active in the party. Any national candidate seeking the party's nomination
is explicitly required to tell the convention of any areas of disagreement with the
party's platform. In Spring 2002, Pat Buchanan's 2000 VP runningmate Ezola
Foster and many Reform Party leaders from California and Maryland defected to
the Constitution Party, providing a nice boost to the party. Conservative attorney
Michael Peroutka was the CP's 2004 Presidential nominee (ballot status in 36 states - 144,000
votes - 5th place - 0.1%). Former three-time GOP Presidential candidate Alan Keyes -- a former
Ambassador during the Reagan Administration -- bolted to the Constitution Party in 2008, but was
defeated for the nomination by fundamentalist pastor Chuck Baldwin. This "Religious Right" party
appears to have cemented their place as the third largest third party in the nation.
GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES - The Green Party -- the informal US-affiliate of the
leftist, environmentalist European Greens movement -- is one of the two largest third parties in
the nation. The party regularly fields candidates for local, state and federal offices in many states,
and has established active state affiliate parties in nearly all 50 states. The Greens scored a
major political points when it convinced prominent consumer advocate Ralph Nader to run as
their first Presidential nominee in 1996. Spending just over $5,000, Nader was on the ballot in 22
states and carried over 700,000 votes (4th place - 0.8%). In 2000, Nader raised millions of
dollars, mobilized leftist activists and grabbed national headlines with his anti-corporate campaign
message. Nader ignored pleas from liberal Democrats that he abandon the race because he was
siphoning essential votes away from Al Gore's campaign -- answering that Gore was not
substantially different than Bush. In the end, Nader was on the ballot in 44 states and finished
third with 2,878,000 votes (2.7%). More significantly, Nader missed the important 5% mark for the
national vote, meaning the party remained ineligible for federal matching funds. Until 2001, the
Greens were largely a collection of fairly autonomous state/local based political entities with only
a weak (and sometimes splintered) national leadership structure that largely served to coordinate
electoral activities. That faction -- formerly named the Association of State Green Parties (ASGP)
-- was the larger and more moderate of the two unrelated Green parties. The ASGP voted in
2001 to convert from an umbrella coordinating organization into a formal, unified national party
organization. Nader made another run in 2004 -- but ran as an Independent. Instead, Green Party
General Counsel David Cobb of Texas won the Presidential nomination (ballot status in 29 states
- 120,000 votes - 6th place - 0.1%). Cobb argued the party needed to nominate a candidate who
openly belonged to the party (note: Nader had never joined) and was pledged to building the
party at the local level. Cobb ran what was seen as a "safe-states" strategy -- a controversial
move whereby Cobb only made major efforts to gain votes in states where a strong Green
showing would not compromise the ability of the Democratic nominee to defeat Bush in the state.
Democrats appreciated the move, but it weakened Cobb's message. For 2008, the Greens have
adopted a strategy resolution which dumped the "safe states" strategy and commits to running an
aggressive campaign wherever possible. Former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney (D-GA)
joined the Greens in 2007 and announced her candidacy for the party's Presidential nominaton,
and easily won the Green nomination. Other official Green Party links include: Green Pages
(quarterly newspaper), Global Green Network, Green Party News Center, Campus Greens,
Lavender Green Caucus, National Women's Caucus, Disability Caucus, Coordinated Campaign
Committee, and Green Party Election Results. The Green Party Platform sets forth the party's
official stances.
LIBERTARIAN PARTY - The LP, founded in 1971, bills itself as "America's largest third party"
(and, along with the Greens, are definitely among the two largest third parties in the nation). The
Libertarians are neither left nor right: they believe in total individual liberty (pro-drug legalization,
pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-home schooling, anti-gun control, etc.) and total economic
freedom (anti-welfare, anti-government regulation of business, anti-minimum wage, anti-income
tax, pro-free trade, etc.). The LP espouses a classical laissez faire ideology which, they argue,
means "more freedom, less government and lower taxes." Over 400 LP members currently hold
various -- though fairly low level -- government offices (including lots of minor
appointed officials like "School District Facilities Task Force Member" and
"Town Recycling Committee Member"). In any given election year, the LP
fields more local and federal candidates than any other US third party -although the LP has clearly been eclipsed by the Greens in size since 1996 in
terms of having the largest third party following and garnering more media
attention. Former 1988 LP Presidential nominee Ron Paul is now a
Republican Congressman from Texas -- and made a libertarian ideological run for the a 2008
GOP Presidential nomination (although Paul remains a "life member" of the LP). The LP's
biggest problem: Ron Paul, former NM Governor Gary Johnson, humorist/journalist PJ
O'Rourke, the Republican Liberty Caucus and others in the GOP who attract ideological
libertarians into the political arena by arguing they can bring about libertarian change more easily
under the Republican label. In 2008, former Congressman Bob Barr (R-GA) and former US
Senator Mike Gravel (D-AK) both switched to the LP and campaigned for the party's Presidential
nomination -- and Barr won the nomination. In terms of results, the LP his the high point in 1980
when LP Presidential nominee and oil industry attorney Ed Clark -- with a billionaire VP
runningmate who financed the campaign -- carried over 921,000 votes (1.1%). Subsequent LP
nominees for the next dozen years, though not as strong as Clark, typically ran ahead of most
other third party candidates. The late financial consultant and author Harry Browne was the LP
Presidential nominee in 1996 (485,000 votes - 5th place - 0.5%) and 2000 (386,000 votes - 5th
place - 0.4%). Computer consulant and tax-resister Michael Badnarik was the LP Presidential
nominee in 2004 (397,000 votes - 4th place - 0.3%). And, FYI, the LP typically obtains ballot
status for the Presidential nominee in all 50 states. The LP also has active affiliate parties in
every state. The party has been divided for years between two warring factions: a more
purist/hardcore libertarian group and a more moderate "reform" faction. The hardcore group are
uncompromising anarchistic-libertarians in the Ayn Rand mold. By contrast, the moderates are
interested in focusing on only a handful of more popular issues (drug decriminalization, gun
rights, tax cuts, etc.) in exchange for attracting a larger number of voters. Allies of the hardcore
faction firmly held control of the party from the late-1980s until the moderates seized control at
the 2006 national convention and gutted the party's original platform. Other related LP sites are:
the Libertarian Party News (official LP newspaper), College Libertarians (official student group),
LP Ballot Base (official GOTV site), GrowTheLP.org (official LP outreach), Libertarian Reform
Caucus (LP moderates), LP Radicals (LP purists), Libertarian Leadership School (official LP
training program), LPedia (official LP Wiki history site).. The LP web site features a link to the
World's Smallest Political Quiz -- designed by LP co-founder David Nolan -- and take the quiz to
see if you're a libertarian (a bit simplistic, and slanted in favor of the LP, but interesting just the
same).
The Larger Third Parties
(Based Upon Performance and Ballot Access)
AMERICA FIRST PARTY - The America First Party was founded in 2002 by a large group of
arch-conservative "Buchanan Brigade" defectors who splintered away from the declining Reform
Party to form this uncompromisingly social conservative and fair trade party (with a strong
foundation in the Religious Right movement). The AFP vows to "protect our people and our
sovereignty ... promote economic growth and independence ... encourage the traditional values of
faith, family, and responsibility ... ensure equality before the law in protecting those rights granted
by the Creator ... [and] to clean up our corrupted political system." Within months of the AFP's
founding, the AFP fielded a few candidates and established affiliates in nearly 20 states -- and
they hoped to be organized in nearly all 50 states by the end of 2003. Within a year, however,
those hopes were dashed. The AFP's national leaders all resigned in mid-2003 after a radical
group affiliated with ultra-right militia movement leader Bo Gritz purportedly grabbed control of
key party elements for a short while. In addition to Gritz, pre-existing financial problems and
personality divisions within the party also contributed to the AFP's rapid collapse. The party failed
to nominate any candidates in 2004, and has been almost totally inactive since then. New
AFP leadership vowed in 2006 to start rebuild the party. However, the AFP has shown little
activity -- beyond issuing press releases -- since then.
AMERICAN PARTY - The AP is a very small, very conservative, Christian splinter
party formed after a break from the American Independent Party in 1972. US Senator
Jesse Helms (R-NC) and Governor Mel Thomson (R-NH) both flirted with the American
Party's presidential nomination in 1976, but both ultimately declined. The party won its
strongest finish in the 1976 presidential election -- nominee Tom Anderson carried
161,000 votes (6th place) -- but has now largely faded into almost total obscurity. The
party's 1996 Presidential candidate -- anti-gay rights activist and attorney Diane Templin -carried just 1,900 votes. Former GOP State Senator Don Rogers of California -- the 2000
nominee for President -- did even worse, as he failed to qualify for ballot status in any states. The
party -- which used to field a sizable amount of state and local candidates in the 1970s -- rarely
fields more than a handful of nominees nationwide in recent years, although they do claim local
affiliates in 15 states. Beyond the pro-life, pro-gun and anti-tax views that you'd expect to find, the
American Party also advocates an end to farm price supports/subsidies, privatization of the US
Postal Service, opposes federal involvement in education, supports abolition of the Environmental
Protection Agency, supports repeal of NAFTA, opposes minimum wage laws, opposes land use
zoning regulations and opposes convening a Constitutional convention. Of course, the AP also
opposes the United Nations, the New World Order, communism, socialism and the Trilateral
Commission. In 2000 and 2004, the party's Presidential ticket embarrassingly failed to qualify for
the ballot in any states and were forced to run as write-in candidates. Attorney, anti-gay activist
and frequent candidate Diane Templin -- the party's 2004 Presidential nominee -- is again the
party's nominee in 2008 (but again without any ballot access).
AMERICAN INDEPENDENT PARTY - Governor George C. Wallace (D-AL) founded the AIP and
ran as the its first Presidential nominee in 1968. Running on a fiery populist, right-wing, antiWashington, anti-racial integration, anti-communist platform, Wallace carried nearly 10 million
votes (14%) and won 5 Southern states. Although Wallace returned to the Democratic Party by
1970, the AIP continued to live on -- but moved even further to the right. The 1972 AIP nominee,
John Birch Society leader and Congressman John G. Schmitz (R-CA), carried nearly 1.1 million
votes (1.4%). The 1976 AIP Presidential nominee was former Georgia Governor Lester Maddox,
an unrepentant segregationist -- but he fell far below Schmitz's vote total. The AIP last fielded its
own national Presidential candidate in 1980, when they nominated white supremacist exCongressman John Rarick (D-LA) -- who carried only 41,000 votes nationwide. The AIP still fields
local candidates in a few states -- mainly California -- but is now merely a state affiliate party of
the national Constitution Party. For the past several presidential elections, the AIP simply conominated the Constitution Party's Presidential nominee.
AMERICAN NAZI PARTY - Exactly what the name implies ... these are a bunch of uniformed,
swastika-wearing Nazis! This party is a combination of fascists, Aryan Nations-type folks, "White
Power" racist skinheads and others on the ultra-radical political fringe. As a political party, the
American Nazi Party has not fielded a Presidential candidate since Lincoln Rockwell ran as a
write-in candidate in 1964 (he was murdered in 1967 by a disgruntled ANP member) -- nor any
other candidate for other offices since the mid-1970s (although a loosely affiliated candidate ran
for Congress in Illinois in a Democratic primary in 2000; and the party's Montana leader was a
GOP candidate for a State House seat in 2006). The ANP believes in establishing an Aryan
Republic where only "White persons of unmixed, non-Semitic, European descent" can hold
citizenship. They support the immediate removal of "Jews and non-whites out of all positions of
government and civil service -- and eventually out of the country altogether." This miniscule party
-- while purportedly denouncing violence and illegal acts -- blends left-wing economic socialism,
right-wing social fascism and strong totalitarian sentiments.
AMERICAN REFORM PARTY - The ARP, formerly known as the National Reform Party
Committee, splintered away from Ross Perot's Reform Party in 1997. The ARP chafed at Perot's
heavy-handed desire to maintain total control over the RP. In 1998, the ARP fielded some
candidates for state and federal offices in "Reform Party" primaries against candidates backed by
Perot's Reform Party with mixed results. The ARP soon shifted left and opted to "endorse"
(but not co-nominate) Green Party Presidential nominee Ralph Nader in the 2000 elections.
Since then, the ARP has become virtually invisible on the political scene -- fielding only four
state/local candidates nationwide in 2002 (plus co-endorsing several other third party
candidates) and no Presidential candidate in 2004 and 2008. Instead, the party spent the
past few years involved defending lawsuits filed by a faction which lost control of the ARP
several years ago.
BOSTON TEA PARTY - The BTP was a splinter group that broke from the Libertarian Party in
2006, when the BTP founders believed the LP was straying from its libertarian roots. The BTP
platform consists of simple, one-sentence statement of principles: "The Boston Tea Party
supports reducing the size, scope and power of government at all levels and on all issues, and
opposes increasing the size, scope and power of government at any level, for any purpose." In
2008 the BTP fielded its own Presidential ticket for the first time and obtained ballot access for
the ticket in a few states. In terms of specifics, the BTP supports an immediate US withdrawal
from Iraq, repeal of the PATRIOT Act, federal income tax cuts, and the legalization of marijuana.
As of 2008, the BTP had affiliate parties in a small number of states.
CHRISTIAN FALANGIST PARTY OF AMERICA - Time for a history lesson. A "Falangist" is a
follower of the authoritarian political views advocated by the late Spanish dictator Francisco
Franco (to wit: largely a blend of 1930s fascist ideology, strong nationalism and conservative
Catholic theology). Outside of Spain, Falanagists in Lebanan succeeded in electing Bashir
Gemayel as President in 1982 -- but he was assassinated by Muslim terrorists before taking
office. In addition to Franco and Gemayel, other deceased heroes of the movement include Italian
dictator Benito Mussolini, Austrian fascist Engelbert Dollfuss, and Argentinian dictator Juan
Peron. The CFPA -- closely affiliated with the Lebanese branch of the Falangist movement -wants to bring these Falangist politics to the Americas. The CFPA, founded in 1985, "is dedicated
to fighting the 'Forces of Darkness' which seeks to destroy Western Christian Civilization." The
CFPA site explicitly defines "Forces of Darkness" as being "Radical Islam,
Communism/Socialism, the New World Order, the New Age movement, Third Position/NeoNazis, Free Masons, Abortionists, Euthanasianists, Radical Homosexuals and Pornographers."
The CFPA fielded it's first candidate in 2004: CFPA National Chairman Kurt Weber-Heller was a
write-in candidate for President. No CFPA candidates in 2006 and 2008.
COMMUNIST PARTY USA - The CPUSA, once the slavish propaganda tool and spy network for
the Soviet Central Committee, has experienced a forced transformation in recent years. Highly
classified Soviet Politburo records, made public after the fall of Soviet communism in the 1990s,
revealed the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) illegally funneled millions of dollars to
the CPUSA to finance its activities from the 1920s to the 1980s. The flow of Soviet dollars to the
CPUSA came to an abrupt halt when the Soviet communists were ousted from power in 1991 -ultimately causing a retooling of CPUSA activities. Founded in 1924, the CPUSA reached its peak
vote total in 1932 with nominee William Z. Foster (102,000 votes - 4th place). The last national
CPUSA ticket -- headed by Gus Hall and Angela Davis -- was fielded in 1984 (36,000 votes - 8th
place). While the party has not directly run any candidates since the late 1980s, the CPUSA
sometimes backs some candidates in various local elections (often in Northeastern industrial
communities) and engages in grassroots political and labor union organizing. In the 1998
elections, longtime CPUSA leader Hall actually urged party members to vote for all of the
Democratic candidates for Congress -- arguing that voting for any progressive third party
candidates would undermine the efforts to oust the "reactionary" Republicans from control of
Congress. As for issues, the CPUSA calls for free universal health care, elimination of the federal
income tax on people earning under $60,000 a year, free college education, drastic cuts in
military spending, "massive" public works programs, the outlawing of "scabs and union busting,"
abolition of corporate monopolies, public ownership of energy and basic industries, huge tax
hikes for corporations and the wealthy, and various other programs designed to "beat the power
of the capitalist class ... [and promote] anti-imperialist freedom struggles around the world." The
CPUSA's underlying communist ideology hasn't changed much over
the years, but the party's tactics have undergone a major shift
(somewhat reminiscent of those used by the CPUSA in the late
1930s).
After the death of Stalinist CPUSA leader Hall in 2000, Gorbachevstyle
"democratic reform communist" activist Sam Webb assumed
leadership of the CPUSA. Related CPUSA websites include the
People's
Weekly World party newspaper, Political Affairs monthly party
magazine, and the Young Communists League youth organization.
DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS OF AMERICA - The DSA is the official US full member party of the
Socialist International (which includes UK's Labour Party, the French Parti Socialiste and nearly
140 other political parties around the globe). Unlike most other members of the Socialist
International, the DSA never fielded candidates for office until 2006 when a candidate for
Pennsylvania State House qualified for the ballot under the banner of the Social Democrats of
Pennsylvania (the DSA's state affiliate). The DSA explains their mission as follows: "building
progressive movements for social change while establishing an openly socialist presence in
American communities and politics." Thus, the DSA is less like a traditional US political party and
much more like a political education and grassroots activism organization. The other US full
member of the Socialist International is the Social Democrats USA (linked below). Both DSA and
SD-USA each claim to be the one true heir to the ideological legacy of Eugene Debs and Norman
Thomas, and they dispute the Socialist Party-USA's claim to the title arguing it is a modern-era
creation that appropriated the older name of the defunct party of Debs/Thomasy. The DSA -- then
named the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee (DSOC) -- split from the SDUSA in 1972
in a rift over the Vietnam War (SDUSA supported the war and opposed McGovern for President;
DSOC supported McGovern and opposed the war).
FREEDOM SOCIALIST PARTY / RADICAL WOMEN - The FSP was formed in 1966 by a
splinter group of dissident feminist Trotskyites who broke away from the Socialist Workers Party
to create a new party in the "tradition of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky." That's the reason they
also refer to their entity as "Radical Women." The FSP describe themselves as a "revolutionary,
socialist feminist organization, dedicated to the replacement of capitalist rule by a genuine
workers' democracy that will guarantee full economic, social, political, and legal equality to
women, people of color, gays, and all who are exploited, oppressed, and repelled by the profit
system and its offshoot -- imperialism." The FSP has party organizations in the US, Canada and
Australia. The FSP occasionally fields a handful of local candidates in Washington, California and
New York (often in non-partisan elections) -- but has never fielded a Presidential candidate.
Related FSP links include the Freedom Socialist newspaper and Red Letter Press (book
publishers).
THE GREENS/GREEN PARTY USA (G/GPUSA) - When people talk about "the Green Party" in
the US, they are likely NOT talking about this entity. The G/GPUSA is the older, very much
smaller, and more stridently leftist of the two Green parties. While the GPUSA also nominated
Nader for President back in 2000, Nader rejected the G/GPUSA nomination (while embracing the
other Green party, listed above). Prominent Nader campaign strategist Jim Hightower described
the two Green factions as follows in 2001: "There are two Green party organizations -- the [Green
Party of the US] whose nomination Ralph accepted and the much smaller one [G/GPUSA] ... on
the fringes ... [with] all sorts of damned-near-communistic ideas." Some in the G/GPUSA
protested that Hightower's comments were a bit unfair -- but read the G/GPUSA 2000 Platform
(which remains the current G/GPUSA platform) and decide for yourself. The G/GPUSA largely
emphasizes direct action tactics over traditional electoral politics. A majorty of the G/GPUSA
delegates and large number of party activists quit the group and bolted to the larger Green Party
of the US in 2001 (forming an informal leftist caucus within the Green Party). The small splinter
group remaining within the G/GPUSA are more dogmatically Marxist. The G/GPUSA maintain
formal local affiliates only Chicago, St. Louis and Philadelphia. The G/GPUSA has fielded a few
state and federal candidates over the years -- often running them in primaries against candidates
affiliated with the larger Green Party of the US. Related G/GPUSA links include
Synthesis/Regeneration (party magazine), and Green Politics (quarterly newspaper).
INDEPENDENCE PARTY - After two years of openly feuding
with Ross Perot's allies in the Reform Party, Minnesota Governor
Jesse Ventura and his supporters bolted from the party to launch
the new Independence Party in 2000. In departing, While this splinter party shared the
Reform Party's call for campaign finance and other political reforms, the IP shared Ventura
disagreement with the more social conservative and trade protectionist views espoused by the
Reform Party. The IP -- which describes itself as "Socially Inclusive and Fiscally Responsible" -is pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-medical marijuana, pro-gun rights and fiscally moderate. The IP
has fielded crowded slates of Congressional and state candidates in Minnesota in every election
since 2000. While Ventura initially said he wanted to take this Minnesota party national and
possibly field a Presidential nominee in 2004, few chapter exist in other states and the party did
not nominate a 2004 Presidential ticket (although the Illinois branch endorsed Nader). Ventura's
retirement in 2002 was a blow to the IP, although former Democratic Congressman Tim Penny
was a credible IP nominee for Minnesota Governor in 2002 (but finished a distant third). Also in
2002, IP co-founder Dean Barkley became the first IP member to serve in Congress when
Ventura appointed him to the US Senate to complete the two months of a term left open by the
death of incumbent Paul Wellstone (D). As for a national party organization, the Independence
Party essentially doesn't have one. It seemingly consists of separately organized state affiliates
with no central national leadership or organization to coordinate activities. Thus, each state entity
does goes its own way -- and support (even in Minnesota) is clearly dwindling. The above link
goes to the Minnesota IP. Other related links include: Independence Party of Florida (state
affiliate), and the Independence Party of Illinois (state affiliate),
INDEPENDENT AMERICAN PARTY - The small Independent American Party has existed for
years in several Western states -- a remnant from the late Alabama Governor George Wallace's
once-powerful American Independent Party of the 1968-72 era. Converting the unaffiliated IAP
state party organizations -- united by a common Religious Right ideology (similar to the
Constitution Party) -- into a national IAP organization was an effort started in 1998 by members of
Utah IAP. The Idaho IAP and Nevada IAP subsequently affiliated with the fledgling US-IAP in late
1998 ... the party established small chapters in 15 other states since then ... and has contact
persons now in all of the other states. The bulk of the IAP activities, however, remain generally
concentrated in Utah. The various IAP state parties endorsed Constitution Party nominee Howard
Phillips for President in 1996 and 2000. In December 2000, the IAP's national chairman issued a
statement noting third parties in general registered a "dismal" performance in the Presidential
election -- and questioned the IAP's future participation in Presidential campaigns. Instead, he
suggested that the IAP limit itself to congressional, state and local races in the future. Since the
2002 elections, the IAP largely "adopts" conservative candidates from various other conservative
parties (mainly the Constitution Party). Thus, as the party has attempted to grow as a network of
activists, it has also largely withdrawn from actively fielding any IAP nominees for elective office.
LABOR PARTY - The Labor Party is a liberal entity created in 1996 by a sizable group of labor
unions including the United Mine Workers, the Longshoremen, American Federation of
Government Employees, California Nurses Association and other labor union locals. The party
explains it was formed because "on issues most important to working people -– trade, health
care, and the rights to organize, bargain and strike -– both the Democrats and Republicans have
failed working people." Ideologically, they seem close to the style of the late, labor-friendly Vice
President Hubert Humphrey and US Senator Scoop Jackson wing of the Democratic Party circa
1960s. The party seems closely aligned ideologically with the New Party. The Labor Party has
adopted a policy of "running candidates for positions where they can help enact and enforce laws
and policies to benefit the working class and where we can best advance the goals and priorities
of the Labor Party." The party also gets involved in local and state ballot initiatives. The Labor
Party holds national conventions and seems to be making an efforts to revive itself as a forum for
political debates. The Labor Party endorsed its first state and federal candidates in 1998 in
Wyoming ("Green/Labor Alliance") -- and two more candidates in local races in California and
Ohio in 2001 -- but none during the 2002-2004 cycles. The party organized a state affiliate in
South Carolina and attempted to gain ballot access for its candidates there in 2006. Labor Party
rules do not allow the concept of endorsing "fusion" candidates from other parties, and they
remain committed to only nominating candidates who actually belong to the Labor Party.
LIGHT PARTY - The Light Party is is a generally liberal party -- falling somewhere between the
Greens and New Age feel of the now defunct Natural Law Party -- and seems strongly centered
around of party founder "Da Vid, M.D., Wholistic Physician, Human Ecologist & Artist" (he was
also a write-in candidate for President in 1992, 1996, 2000 and 2004 -- and seems to be the only
visible leader of the party). This San Francisco-based party's platform promotes holistic medicine,
national health insurance, organic foods, solar energy, nuclear disarmament and a flat tax. Da Vid
claims the party has "millions" of supporters -- but he counts everyone who supports any position
advocated by the party. In terms of votes, the party has nothing to show for all of Da Vid's White
House runs. The party does not seriously seek to elect candidates but advance an agenda. Not
that it has anything to do with politics, but the party does sell a nice CD of relaxing New Age
music.
MODERATE PARTY - The Moderate Party is relatively new federal party founded in 2006 by Bill
Scheuer. It first fielded a candidate in 2006 (Scheuer, seeking an Illinois Congressional seat),
registered with the FEC, and subsequently registered as a party in Florida. The Moderates hope
to expand into more states in 2008 and field a handful of congressional "peace candidates." As
for issues, the party platform covers only a few main points: ending the Iraq War and returning the
US "to its primary role as international peacekeeper," cut federal spending, abandon the current
tax code in favor of a flat tax or consumption tax plan, protect the envinromnent, strengthen the
separation of church and state, protect second amendment gun ownership rights, protect a
women's right to choose on abortion, and support for same-sex civil unions. The Moderate Party
is closely affiliated with the PeaceOverParty.org and Honk4Peace.org groups -- which were both
created by Scheuer.
NATIONAL SOCIALIST MOVEMENT - The NSM is yet another of the several odious splinter
parties seemingly created in recent years from the remnants of the old American Nazi Party of the
early 1960s. "We co-operate and work with many like minded white nationalist groups such as
the KKK (Ku Klux Klan), Aryan Skinheads, the Racial Nationalist Party of America and many
others which are either neo Nazi or at least, racially aware of our Aryan Heritage," explains the
NSM website. The NSM claims to be the largest Nazi party in the US (but so do all the other neoNazi splinter groups). The NSM is fielding its first candidate -- Presidential hopeful John Bowles -in 2008. Jeff Schoep is the Commander of the NSM and boasts that Hitler is his role model. Like
the other neo-Nazi groups, the NSM members march around in uniforms styled to resemble to
Nazi SA brownshirts of the 1930s. The NSM vows to expel all non-Whites, Jews and gays from
the US. "The leaders of the movement promise to work ruthlessly -- if need be to sacrifice their
very lives -- to translate this program into action," vows the NSM website.
NATURAL LAW PARTY - The Natural Law Party was a New Age entity founded and run by
followers of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi (the founder of the TM movement -- a movement that some
have labeled as a cult). The NLP -- under the slogan "Bringing the light of science into politics"
and using colorful imagery -- advocated holistic approaches, Transcendental Meditation (TM),
"yogic flying," and other peaceful "New Age" and "scientific" remedies for much of our national
and international problems. The party ran nuclear physicist John Hagelin as the NLP Presidential
nominee in 1992 (ballot status in 32 stares - 39,000 votes - 0.04%), 1996 (ballot status in 44
states - 7th place - 110,000 votes - 0.1%) and 2000 (ballot status in 39 stares - 7th place - 83,000
votes - 0.08%). The NLP also made a failed bid to capture control of the Reform Party in the
course of the 2000 campaign. The NLP also made a brief grab for control of the Green Party, but
that effort quickly fizzled. In 2002, the NLP tried a new strategy of stealthy infiltration by running
NLP activists as candidates under various party labels including Democratic, Republican, Green
and Libertarian. In 2003, the NLP endorsed the Presidential candidacy of Democratic
Congressman Dennis Kucinich. Unexpectedly, the NLP suddenly shuttered its doors in mid-2004
and announced it was disolved as a national party (just as it did with the other NLP entities
around the globe). However -- and the reason the NLP remains posted here -- is
that the NLP cut loose their various state affiliate parties to decide individually
whether they also wished to disband or continue to function as independent state
parties. It appears a few state NLP groups are still functioning, with the Ohio NLP
remaining the most active one. The NLP entirely abandoned using electoral
politics to advance their agenda and, instead, are now advocating something
they call the US Peace Government.
NEW PARTY - This leftist party advocates a "democratic revolution" to advance the cause of
"social, economic, & political progress" in America. Their agenda is much in the style of the
Western European socialist and labor movement -- and somewhat similar to that of the late1990s formed Labor Party (but the NP has more of a controlled growth outlook on environmental
issues). Rather than fielding their own national slate or local candidates, the New Party has taken
to largely endorsing like-minded candidates from other parties (mainly pro-labor Democrats like
Chicago Congressman Danny K. Davis and candidates from the like-minded Working Families
Party) and focusing on grassroots organizing. The New Party, to date, has endorsed candidates
in hundreds of local races around the country, and has active affiliate chapters in some
communities. The NP site details the party's long-term strategy.
NEW UNION PARTY - Founded in 1980 by defectors from the Socialist Labor Party, this
DeLeonist militant democratic socialist party "advocates political and social revolution" but
denounces violence and is "committed to lawful activities to overthrow the capitalist economic
system." The NUP fielded its first candidates in 1980 -- and ran party leader Jeff Miller as a US
Senate candidate in Minnesota in 2006 -- but ran very few candidates during the years in
between. While the old NUP site featured party history, an archive of past articles and an online
"Marxist Study Course" -- the new version of the NUP website is devoted nearly entirely to Miller's
2006 campaign.
PARTY OF SOCIALISM AND LIBERATION - The Party of Socialism & Liberation (PSL) is a
revolutionary Marxist party created "to be a vehicle for the multinational working class in the
struggle for socialism ... Only a multinational party can create the unity necessary to defeat the
most powerful capitalist class the world has ever seen ... We aim for revolution in the United
States." Additionally, the PSL explains that "the most crucial requirement for [PSL] membership is
the dedication to undertake this most important and most necessary of all tasks: building a new
revolutionary workers party in the heart of world imperialism." The PSL was founded in 2006 by a
breakaway faction of the communist revolutionary wing of the Workers World Party. The PSL
espouses a pro-Cuba/pro-China view, and the iconic Che Guevarra's call for continual world
revolution against capitalism. The PSL fielded its first candidates in 2008: a Presidential ticket
and Congressional candidates. The PSL (and PSL leaders) also sponsors or directs numerous
popular front groups including VoteNoWar.org, International ANSWER, International Action
Center, Stop War on Iran, Troops Out Now Coalition, No Draft No Way, People Judge Bush,
Sept15.org, and many others. Other related PSL websites include: VotePSL.org (party campaign
site); Liberation (party newspaper) and Socialism and Liberation (party magazine).
PEACE AND FREEDOM PARTY - Founded in the 1960s as a left-wing party opposed to the
Vietnam War, the party reached its peak of support in 1968 when it nominated Black Panther
leader Eldridge Cleaver for President. Although a convicted felon and odious personality, Cleaver
carried nearly 37,000 votes (ironically, Cleaver ultimately became a Reagan Republican in the
early 1980s, and was later a crack cocaine addict in the late 1980s, before emerging as an
environmental activist in the late 1990s). Famed "baby doctor" Benjamin Spock -- a leftist and
staunch opponent of the Vietnam War -- was the PFP Presidential nominee in 1972. Since then,
the small party has largely been dominated by battling factions of Marxist-Leninists (aligned with
the Workers World Party), Trotskyists and socialist democrats. The PFP today is small, with
activities largely centered only in California. In 1996, the PFP successfully blocked an attempt by
the WWP to capture the PFP's Presidential nomination (and a California ballot spot) for their
party's nominee. In a sign of the party's serious decline in support, the PFP's poor
showing in the 1998 statewide elections caused the party to lose its California ballot
status. The PFP finally regained California ballot status in 2003 -- and immediately
fielded a sizable slate of candidates. Native American activist Leonard Peltier -- an
imprisoned cop killer (or innocent political prisoner, depending on your views) -- was
the PFP nominee for President in 2004 (ballot status in one state - 27,500 votes).
PROHIBITION PARTY - "If you are a reform-minded conservative and a non-drinker, the
Prohibition Party wants you," exclaimed an official party message in 2002. The Prohibition Party - founded in 1869 and billing themselves as "America's Oldest Third Party" -- espouses a
generally ultra-conservative Christian social agenda mixed with anti-drug and international anticommunist views. The party's strongest showing was in 1892, when John Bidwell received nearly
273,000 votes (2.3% - 4th place). Long-time party activist Earl F. Dodge ran as the Prohibition
Party's presidential nominee in 1984, 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, and again in 2004 -- and was
already running again for the next race when he died in 2007. The party also fields a few local
candidates from time to time -- but 2002 was the first time since the 1860s that the party failed to
field any candidates for any public office. An additional party-related organization is the Partisan
Prohibition Historical Society, a group of party activists that want to turn Prohibition Party policy
into law. The anti-Dodge folks -- led by National Chairman Don Webb -- wrested control of the
party by fall 2003. Control of the party ended up in court, but Dodge died before the court ruled.
The 2004 rival ticket led by temperance lecturer, minister and artist Gene Amundson -- supported
by the anti-Dodge party leadership -- appeared on the Colorado ballot under another party name.
Now, with Dodge dead, Amundson is the party's undisputed nominee for 2008.
REFORM PARTY - Once a rapidly growing, populist third party, the Reform Party shifted far to
the right in recent years -- but then experienced massive waves of conservative defections away
into the Constitution Party and the new America First Party in 2002. First, some history: after
running as an Independent in 1992, billionaire Texas businessman Ross Perot founded the
Reform Party in 1995 as his vehicle for converting his independent movement into a permanent
political party. In 1996, Perot ran as the Reform Party's presidential nominee (8,085,000 votes 8%). Although an impressive showing for a third party, it was much less than the 19 million votes
Perot carried as an independent candidate back in 1992. The party traditionally reflected Perot's
center-conservative fiscal policies and anti-GATT/NAFTA views -- while avoiding taking any
official positions on social issues (although much of this group seemed to hold generally
libertarian social views). The RP was plagued by a lengthy period of nasty ideological battles in
1998-2000 involving three main rival groups: the "Old Guard" Perot faction, the more libertarian
Jesse Ventura faction, and the social conservative Pat Buchanan faction. A fourth group -- a
small but vocal Marxist faction led by RP activist Lenora Fulani -- generally backed the Perot
faction during these fights. To make this even more confusing, the Perot faction ultimately turned
to Natural Law nominee and Maharishi follower John Hagelin as its "Stop Buchanan" candidate
for President. After several nasty and public battles, the Ventura faction quit the RP in Spring
2000 and the old Perot faction lost control of the party in court to the Buchanan faction in Fall
2000 (and Perot ultimately endorsed Bush for President in 2000). That gave the Buchanan
Brigade the party's $12.6 million in federal matching funds. Within months, the Buchanan allies
won control of nearly the entire party organization. Along with Buchanan's rise to power in the
party, the party made a hard ideological shift to the right -- an ideological realignment that
continues to dominate the RP. In the aftermath of the 2000 elections, it is clear that Buchanan
failed in his efforts to establish a viable, conservative third party organization (comprised largely
of disenchanted Republicans). Buchanan was on the ballot in 49 states, captured 449,000 votes
(4th place - 0.4%) -- and later told reporters that his foray into third party politics may have been a
mistake. His weak showing also meant that the party is ineligible for federal matching funds in
2004. The new RP had the opportunity to become the leading social conservative third party
(think of it as a Green Party for the right) -- but more internal conflicts made this impossible. In
Spring 2002, former Buchanan VP runningmate Ezola Foster and the California and Maryland RP
leaders jumped to the Constitution Party. Almost simultaneously, the entire RP leadership in
nearly 20 other states (the core of the Buchanan Brigade folks) defected en masse to form the
new America First Party -- delivering a demoralizing and devastating blow the the future viability
of the RP. The remaining pieces of the RP appeared to drift away following that implosion.
For the 2004 Presidential election, the remaining RP leaders gave their nomination and
their ballot status in several states to Ralph Nader's fusion candidacy. The RP was just
about bankrupt by late 2004, having less than $50 remaining in its bank account. A few
state Reform chapters remain active, but the Reform Party is virtually dead as a national
entity. The party went into bankruptcy receivership in 2008.
SOCIALIST PARTY USA - The SPUSA are true democratic socialists -- advocating left-wing
electoral change versus militant revolutionary change. Many of the SP members could easily be
members of the left-wing faction of the Democratic Party. Unlike most of the other political parties
on this page with "Socialist" in their names, the SP has always been staunchly anti-communist.
Founded by labor union leader, ex-Democratic elected official and pacifist Eugene V. Debs in
1900, the SP was once a mighty national third party. Debs himself was the SP nominee for
president five times between 1900 and 1920. Debs received over 900,000 votes (6%) in 1912 -the SP's best showing ever. Former minister and journalist Norman Thomas was the SP
Presidential nominee 6 times between 1928 and 1948 -- his best showing being 883,000 votes
(2.2%) in 1932. The SP also elected congressmen, mayors and other officials throughout the 20th
Century (largely during the 1910s through 1950s). The withered and splintered so much that, by
the last 1972, it barely existed. The Democratic Socialists of American and the Social Democrats
USA --both linked below -- are the other splinter groups from the original Debs/Thomas SP.
Activist from the old SP reconstituted the party in 1976 and began to again field SP national
tickets for the first time in over two decades. Peace activist and former SP-USA National
Chairman David McReynolds was the party's 2000 Presidential nominee, earning ballot status in
seven states (7,746 votes - 8th place - 0.01% ...plus a bunch more write-in votes in New York and
other states where election officials refused to tabulate individual write-in votes). The 2000
showing was a far cry from the SP glory days, but a major improvement over the party's 1996
showing. In 2004, former Democratic State Senator Walt Brown of Oregon was the SPUSA
Presidential nominee. In 2008, progressive activist Brian Moore of Florida is the SPUSA nominee
for President. The party's youth wing -- the Young People's Socialist League -- has been in
existence since the 1910s. Another official -- and very useful -- SP-USA resource is the Socialist
Party USA Campaign Clearinghouse. The SP-USA's Socialist Net is a resource site covering the
international democratic socialist movement and the American Socialist Foundation and an SPUSA affiliated educational group.
SOCIALIST ACTION - Socialist Action is a Trotskyist political party originally founded by expelled
members of the Socialist Workers Party. While the SA shares the SWP's pro-Castro views, the
SA still tries to retain its Trotskyist ideological roots (versus the SWP, which has drifted away from
Trotskyism towards a more Soviet communist ideology). The SA states that they "oppose the
Democrats and Republicans, all capitalist political parties, and all capitalist governments and their
representatives everywhere ... [and] Stalinist and neo-Stalinist regimes from the ex-Soviet Union
to China." To date, this group of communists have fielded some local political candidates in San
Francisco and a few other communities. Youth for Socialist Action is the youth wing of the party.
SOCIALIST EQUALITY PARTY - The Socialist Equality Party (SEP) was originally named the
Workers League (WL). The WL was founded in 1966 as a Trotskyist communist group closely
associated with the electoral campaigns of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP). The goal of these
Trotskyist groups was a build a working-class labor party in the US affiliated with the International
Committee of the Fourth International (the global Trotskyist umbrella network). They believe that
"the egalitarian and internationalist legacy of the Russian Revolution" could have succeeded, but
was "betrayed by Stalinism" and its progeny. When the SWP drifted away from Trotskyism in the
early 1980s, the WL broke with the SWP and began fielding its own candidates. The WL fielded
its first Presidential ticket in 1984. The WL later renamed itself as the Socialist Equality Party in
1994. The Michigan-based SEP regularly fielded Congressional and local candidates in several
states in the late 1980s and 1990s. 1996 SEP Presidential nominee Jerry White was on the ballot
in only three states and captured just 2,400 votes. After 1996, the SEP failed to field any
candidates for any office until an SEP member competed in the 2003 California
gubernatorial recall election (6,700 votes - 14th place out of 135).
The SEP subsequently fielded a 2004 Presidential ticket and a few
other candidates. The SEP was very realistic about its chances for
success in the election, acknowledging that they would "win only a
limited number of votes." To the SEP, the campaign was an
opportunity to "present a socialist alternative to the demagogy and
lies of the establishment parties and the mass media." The SEP
fielded only one write-in congressional candidate in 2006, and is running '06 nominee Jerry White
as the SEP's write-in Presidential candidate in 2008. The SEP's news site -- the World Socialist
Web Site (WSWS) -- is updated daily with articles, analysis, history, etc., written with a hardcore
internationalist, Trotskyist perspective.
SOCIALIST LABOR PARTY - Founded in 1877, the SLP is a militant democratic socialist party.
More moderate members of the SLP bolted to create the Socialist Party USA in 1901. The SLP
ran Presidential tickets in every election between 1892 and 1976 (the SLP's final presidential
candidate won 9,600 votes in the 1976 race). The high cost of fielding a Presidential ticket and
restrictive ballot access laws caused the SLP to abandon fielding Presidential tickets after 1976,
and instead concentrates on nominating candidates for lower offices. The SLP -- which bills itself
as the party of "Marxism-DeLeonism" -- still fields a few local candidates (mainly in New Jersey).
The site features party history, info on Daniel DeLeon, a Marx-Engels archive, links and more.
The SLP newspaper The People, first printed in 1891, also publishes regularly updated online
editions.
SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY - Originally a pro-Trotsky faction within the Communist Party
USA, the SWP was formed in 1938 after the CPUSA -- acting on orders from Soviet dictator
Joseph Stalin -- expelled the American Trotskyites. The SWP was for many years the leading
voice of Trotskyism in the USA. Since the 1980s, the SWP has drifted away from Trotskyism and
moved towards the brand of authoritarian politics espoused by Cuban leader Fidel Castro's style
of Marxism (the SWP sites calls Castro's Cuba "a shining example for all workers"). The SWP
has run candidates for President in every election since 1948 -- plus federal and local candidates
in various states. Marxist political organizer James Harris was the SWP Presidential nominee in
1996 (ballot status in 11 states - 8,500 votes - 0.01%) and 2000 (ballot status in 14 states - 7,378
votes - 9th place - 0.01%). You can also read the SWP's newspapers The Militant (English) and
Perspectiva Mundial (Spanish) online. Marxist political organizer and journalist Róger Calero was
the SWP Presidential nominee in 2004 -- ballot status in 14 states - 10,791 votes - 9th place 0.01% -- even though he was constitutionally ineligible as a foreign citizen living in the US as a
Permanent Resident Alien. Calero's ineligibility forced to party to field James Harris as a
surrogate nominee in several of those states. The SWP again nominated Calero as their
Presidential nominee in 2008.
U.S. MARIJUANA PARTY - Founded in 2002, the US Marijuana Party (USMJP) is -- as you
would expect -- a marijuana legalization entity espousing generally libertarian views. "The civil
rights of Americans have been compromised by the war on drugs. Because the vast majority of
citizens who use any illegal substance use only marijuana, the war on drugs is basically a war on
marijuana. If you can pull the plug on the war on marijuana, you end the war on drugs as we
know it. You shut down the prison industrial complex, and you restore the liberties that have been
eroded because of this futile war on marijuana," explains the USMJP. The party -- which already
has chapters formed in several states -- is seeking marijuana legalization on a state-by-state
basis. The USMJP has fielded a few candidates on state ballots under the party banner starting in
2004 -- but most USMJP nominees to date have been relegated to running as write-in
candidates. .
U.S. PACIFIST PARTY - This tiny political party fielded a write-in candidate for President in 1996,
2000 and 2004, and a US Senate candidate in Colorado in 1998. In 2008, for the first time, the
USPP Presidential nominee achieved ballot status in one state (Colorado). The USPP opposes
military actions in all circumstances and wants to transform the US military into "a non-violent
defense and humanitarian service corps." The USPP platform advocates generally leftwing political stances and slashing the military budget to "zero." Staunchly opposed to
nuclear weapons, the USPP believes that "unless nuclear weapons are deactivated,
and nonviolent means developed to take the place of military violence for achieving
justice and peace, civilization is doomed." To date, the USPP has run party founder
Bradford Lyttle -- a lifelong activist for pacifism -- as a Presidential candidate four times.
VETERANS PARTY OF AMERICA - The Veterans Party was founded in 2003. The
party vows to "give political voice for the first time since 1776, to the men and women who were
willing to give the ultimate sacrifice for this country. No longer will they have to grovel and beg
and fill out paperwork for years just to get what they proudly earned and were promised." The
VPA fielded a few candidates in 2004, including a US Senate candidate in Florida. The party is
not limited only to veterans, but is also intended to advocate for the families of US veterans. The
centrist party has already registered in eight states, and is in the process of attempting to
organize in dozens of additional states. As for issues, the party avoids many of the social/morality
issues. "If you want religious issues, go to your congregation and discuss it there ... Morals and
morality come from your family not the govt. so if you want to tell other people how to live their
lives, how to think, how to dress or what they can and cannot do to their bodies, then become a
prison warden, or a political party in some middle eastern country and rule there," explains the
party's platform preface. The Veterans Party wants to represent the rights and needs of veterans
across the political spectrum -- which is why the party's top priority is improving the lives of those
who served. Bitter in-fighting caused the party to split into two rival factions in 2006, and showed
little sign of life in 2008.
WORKERS WORLD PARTY - The WWP was formed in 1959 by a pro-Chinese communist
faction that split from the Socialist Workers Party. Although the WWP theoretically supports
worker revolutions, the WWP supported the Soviet actions that crushed worker uprisings in
Hungary in the 1950s, Czechoslovakia in the 1960s and Poland in the early 1980s. The WWP
was largely an issue-oriented revolutionary party until they fielded their first candidate for
president in 1980. WWP Presidential nominee Monica Moorehead was on the ballot in 12 states
in 1996 (29,100 votes - 0.03%) -- and was again the WWP's Presidential nominee in 2000 (ballot
status in 4 states - 4,795 votes - 10th place - 0.004%). The militant WWP believes that "capitalist
democracy produces nothing but hot air" and that "the power of the workers and the oppressed is
in the streets, not in Washington." FBI Director Louis Freeh attacked the WWP in his May 2001
remarks before a US Senate committee: "Anarchists and extremist socialist groups -- many of
which, such as the Workers World Party -- have an international presence and, at times, also
represent a potential threat in the United States" of rioting and street violence. The well-designed
site features regularly updated news stories from a pro-Cuba/pro-China communist perspective,
so expect lots of dogmatic stories denouncing the US government, sexism, racism, the police and
capitalists. The revoltionary wing of the WWP broke away in 2006 to form the Party of Socialism
& Liberation. While the WWP formerly sponsored or directed numerous popular front groups --
including VoteNoWar.org, International ANSWER, International Action Center -- those groups all
appear as of 2008 to be aligned instead with the rival PSL. As for the 2008 Presidential race, the
WWP declined to field a Presidential slate and instead endorsed Green Party nominee Cynthia
McKinney. The WWP described McKinney's campaign as "Black-led, anti-imperialist, workingclass-centered and has a multinational radical base with the potential of unlimited growth."
OTHER PARTIES
(Parties that have yet to field or endorse any candidates for office)
American Patriot Party - The The APP, established in 2003, was "founded on the basic
principals set forth by our founding fathers, that the federal government should only have the
powers set forth in the framework of the Constitution and all other power to be delegated back to
the states. Although everyone has thier own opinions on all issues, we believe it is up to the
states to decide what should and should not be mandated, banned or regulated." The APP
supports a crackdown on illegal immigration, making English fluency a requirement of US
citizenship, abolishing the IRS and repealing the federal income tax, imposing steeper taxes and
tariffs on imported goods, abolition of the centralized Federal Reserve System, withdrawing the
US from the Untied Nations, imposing a foreign policy of non-interventionism, and ending federal
involvement in education. No candidates fielded to date, but the APP have formed party chapters
in several states -- with the Oregon state party group taking the lead in attempting to organize a
national effort. The APP vows that their candidates will be "statesmen, not politicians."
American Socialist Party - Despite the word "Socialist" in their title, this new group, founded in
2004 and based in Arizona, is far out of the traditional definition of socialist parties. The ASP
denounces "immorality, and materialism," supports "the removal of illegal immigrants ... [and the
imprisonment of] businesses/officials who hire, or allow them to enter," sees capitalism as
"failing," and -- in a language that make them sound more like a crypto-fascist group -- promises
to "defend you and your family if faced with government officials intimidating you, or, violating
your rights, with the same force." From the ASP website's repeated attacks the problem of illegal
immigration (an "invasion"), that is clearly a top concern. However, the platform comes off more
like a vanity thing a few friends threw together one night over some beers, as it appears
somewhat incoherant and largely inconsistent with any recognizable socialist ideology.
Constitutionalist Party - This quasi-libertarian new party "seeks to improve America and
preserve the freedom of the people by supporting a closer adherence to the Constitution." As for
specific issues, the CP is pro-choice (but believes abortion issues need to be decided at the state
level), pro-gun rights, anti-death penalty, anti-Affirmative Action quotas, anti-regulation of sexual
activities between consenting adults, pro-medical marijuana, pro-flat tax, pro-tax cuts, and antiUnited Nations. The entire, detailed platform is posted on the CP site. No site updates since early
2001.
Libertarian National Socialist Green Party - Politically correct Nazis? These Libertarian Green
Nazis are either the strangest conglomeration of diametrically opposed political ideologies of a
political party I have ever seen -- or one of the most wry political practical jokes found anywhere
on the net (I'm not certain which conclusion is correct, but I strongly suspect the latter). This party
purports to be comprised of atheist, peaceful, pro-gay, pro-drug legalization, anti-racist,
environmentalist Nazis who acknowledge the Holocaust likely occurred (but are neutral as to its
justification) and oppose the government sponsored killing of Jews, Christians & gays and the
disabled. The LNSGP "rejects Judeo-Christian moral standards, victim mentality political
behavior, capital-centric value systems, and authority." While membership is open to anyone
regardless of their race or sexual orientation, individuals who openly profess a belief in either
Judaism or Christianity are denied party membership. Articles, platform, FAQ and graphics.
Worth a visit -- even if only to decide for yourself if this is a joke or if it is serious. In the past -and as an indicator that the LNSGP is probably a practical joke -- the LNSGP's site had sections
dedeicated to claims of participation in a public service project named the "Jewish Community
Brothership" (to "Communicate the modern interpretations of Nazism and its implications for Jews
in today's multicultural Reich") and some links to very bizarre "news" articles (example: "Nazi
Moon Bases Established in 1942").
Multicapitalist Party - This quirky party supports "capitalism for all people equally" -- but it is
hard to tell exactly what that means. The MP equally denounces capitalism ("The rich riding on
the backs of the poor") and communism/socialism ("The weak riding on the backs of the strong").
Instead, the MP claims to be an economic ideology whereby "the government insures that every
citizen will become a successful capitalist and land owner without excessive taxation or loss of
privacy or freedom." Beyond the economic issues, the party believes all social issues (drugs, sex,
abortion, criminal punishment, etc.) should be decided by a direct democratic vote of the nation in
plebiscites -- with the states individually following the positions held by a majority of the
voters in each state.
Pansexual Peace Party - The PPP is a generally left-wing party that has yet
to field any candidates -- they don't take themselves too seriously -- and, oh
yeah, and the PPP is founded on Wiccan (i.e., witchcraft) roots. Check out
the PPP platform plank on sexual issues, which carries the title: "Sex is
Good! Sex is Great! Yea, Sex!" The PPP site also contains a short but harsh anti-libertarian
essay. To date, the PPP's political activities seem confined to printing some PPP t-shirts and
bumper stickers. Jimi Freidenker is the founder and "Chairentity" of the PPP.
Pot Party - The Pot Party is exactly what you'd expect -- a bunch of marijuana legalization
advocates ("mandate pot growing") ranging in age -- seemingly -- from late teens to middle aged.
In fact, their current tag line seems to be: "A movement to pretty much legalize marijuana." One
profile of a Pot Party leader boasts that he won High Times magazine's "Bong-of-the-Month"
Award. Unlike the denials of a certain recent national politician, these people quite obviously,
proudly and regularly inhale. No real candidates fielded to date (but they did endorse an
unsuccessful candidate in 2000 for the Green Party's nomination for US Senator from California).
They also seem to be actively involved in an online fantasy government entitled the USA
Parliament (official description: "A coalition of US voters based on votes cast, where 1/100th of
the votes cast elects one of the one hundred members of parliament"). The party currently has
state chapters formed in California, Illinois and Virginia.
Progressive Labor Party - The PLP is a New York-based, militant, Stalinist-style communist
party dedicated to bringing about a world-wide, armed, communist revolution. The PLP abhors
democracy, elections, freedom of nearly any sort, capitalism and religion -- while praising dictator
Joseph Stalin's Soviet Union as their role model. Because they denounce all elections as
"frauds," the PLP vows to never field any candidates for public office (for these guys, its either
armed victory or nothing at all). Lots and lots of online ideological articles written in the typical
dogmatic communist style ... with titles like "The Hoax of the 1932-33 Ukraine Famine," "Fascism
Grows In The Auto Industry," "The Road to Revolution." Articles in English, Spanish, Russian,
German, etc.
Revolutionary Communist Party USA - The RCP is based upon the teachings of the late
Chinese Communist Party Chairman Mao Tse-tung (a form of communism derivative of LeninistStalinist Marxism). The party strongly denounces capitalism and advocates a "Marxist-LeninistMaoist Programme" as "a battle plan for destroying the old and creating the new [and] is a kind of
road map for how to win the revolution." Even the RCP's logo is consistent with the proletarian
revolutionary theme (i.e., note the red flag flying from a rifle bayonet). The RCP clearly advocates
change through revolution (and various popular front groups), not elections -- so don't look for
any RCP candidates on the ballot. RCP Chairman Bob Avakian and his writings also recieve
extensive coverage on the party's official site. With Avakian currently hiding in France to evade
arrest in the US, Maoist activist C. Clark Kissinger seems to be running the day-to-day operations
of the RCP. The party's newspaper -- Revolutionary Worker -- is available online in English and
Spanish versions. Prominent RCP popular front groups include Refuse & Resist! and the the antiwar Not In Our Name project.
Social Democrats USA - Like the Democratic Socialists of America (above), the SD-USA is the
other official US full member party of the Socialist International. Like the DSA, the SD-USA has
never fielded candidates for office. The SD-USA is a group more ideologically centrist, more
staunchly anti-communist and more directly aligned with the Democratic Party than the more
traditionally leftist DSA. In fact, the views of the SDUSA in 1972 caused the DSA (then named the
DSOC) to splinter away in a ideological rift. The SDUSA refused to support George McGovern for
President that year because of his opposition to the Vietnam War -- versus the DSOC, which
supported McGovern and an immediate end to the war. While both DSA and SDUSA claim to be
the one true heir to the ideological legacy of Eugene Debs and Norman Thomas.
The Third Party - The Third Party's site states that it is working towards fielding a candidate for
the 2004 Presidential election. Frustrated by traditional partisan politics and the quality of national
media coverage of elections, this party proposes to seek "direct input" from the public to mold this
new politically centrist party into a vehicle that unifies America in the 21st Century. The posted
forum page is creatively entitled "Convention Floor." In the interests of promoting an informed
electorate, The Third Party's site even provides links to the web pages of all the competing US
political parties.
Workers Party, USA - The WP-USA is a hardcore Marxist-Leninist political party founded by
Michael Thorburn in 1992. The party was established to "bring the working class out as an
independent class force." The WP-USA shares much of the CPUSA's ideology -- and likely is a
splinter group with CPUSA origins. While the WP-USA has yet to field any candidates, the
Chicago-based party publishes a bi-weekly newspaper named The Worker and a quarterly
theoritical journal named -- not surprisingly -- The Worker Magazine. The WP-USA site features
an extensive on-line archive of dogmatic screeds largely denouncing "monopoly capitalists,"
Western imperialism, the USA, etc. -- and praising the working class and "revolutionary politics."
Thorburn's Anti-Imperialist News Service ("assisting the people's struggles against war and
militarism") is also affiliated with the WP-USA.
World Socialist Party of the USA - The WSP-USA are seemingly utopian Marxists. They
believe true socialism can only work when it is established worldwide. They renounce violence,
Soviet-style totalitarianism, money and all forms of leadership. They advocate a classless,
"wageless, moneyless, free access society" without any national borders. They don't run
candidates nor endorse other socialist or left candidates as they believe a vote for ANY candidate
under the current system is a vote in support of capitalism. Understanding that world socialism
"has clearly not yet been established," they believe that "democratically capturing the State
through parliamentary elections is the safest, surest method for the working class to enable itself
to establish socialism" -- although they have yet to field any US candidates in the period to date
since the international WSP was founded in 1904.