A Level Politics - Comparing Electoral and Party Systems - How the USA is still a two-party system while the UK is arguably moving towards a multiparty system

A Level Politics - Comparing Electoral and Party Systems - How the USA is still a two-party system while the UK is arguably moving towards a multiparty system
This guide compares the two-party system in the USA with the arguably multi-party system emerging in the UK. The key difference lies in the strength and historical roots of third parties.
I. Dominance of Major Parties: Similarities & Differences

• Similarity: Both the US and UK see their major parties dominating the executive and legislature at the national level.
• Difference: Third parties are significantly more influential and established in the UK than in the USA. Devolved regions in the UK frequently see single-party governments formed through alliances or power-sharing agreements, a scenario rarely seen in the US.

II. Historical Context of Third Parties: A Crucial Distinction

• UK: UK third parties have deep historical roots. The Liberal Democrats trace their lineage to the origins of modern parliamentary government, once a dominant force. Nationalist parties in Scotland (SNP) and Wales (Plaid Cymru) also have long histories, stemming from the interwar period or earlier (Northern Ireland's unionist/nationalist divide traces back to the 19th century). Sinn Féin's presence in Westminster dates back to 1918.
• USA: Major US third parties are much more recent. The Libertarian Party (founded 1971) and the Green Party (1980s origins) illustrate this. Historically, US third parties have had shorter lifespans, exemplified by George Wallace's American Independent Party.

III. Impact of Regional and Cultural Diversity: Contrasting Outcomes

• UK: Regional and cultural diversity, particularly in the devolved regions (Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland), actively fosters the growth and appeal of nationalist third parties. Distinct cultures (language, legal systems, education) provide fertile ground for these parties.
• USA: Despite even greater cultural, ethnic, and regional diversity than the UK, the sheer size and scale of the USA arguably prevents the proliferation of numerous regional parties. This leads to a national two-party system, where each major party incorporates diverse regional characteristics within its own structure. Furthermore, the American Civil War eliminated the possibility of secession, a key objective for many UK nationalist parties.

IV. Key Takeaways & Study Points

1. Historical Depth: Analyze the contrasting historical trajectories of third parties in both countries. Why have they flourished in the UK but remained comparatively weak in the USA?
2. Regionalism: Compare how regional differences manifest in the party systems. How do devolved regions in the UK differ from US states in their political dynamics?
3. National Identity: Consider the role of national identity and the concept of secession. How does this impact party formation and survival in each country?
4. Electoral Systems: Although not explicitly covered, consider the impact of different electoral systems (e.g., First-Past-the-Post vs. proportional representation) on the development of multi-party systems. This warrants further research.
5. Cultural Factors: Explore the deeper cultural reasons for the differences in the strength of third parties. This requires careful analysis of the historical, social, and political contexts of both nations.

This study guide should help you grasp the core differences between the US and UK party systems. Remember to engage with further research on the electoral systems and the specific historical events mentioned to gain a comprehensive understanding.


Study Guide: Two-Party Dominance in UK vs. USA
This guide examines why, despite both using First-Past-The-Post (FPTP), the USA exhibits stronger two-party dominance than the UK. The key difference lies in structural factors beyond the electoral system itself.
I. The Impact of FPTP (First-Past-The-Post):

• Commonality: Both the UK and USA utilize FPTP, which inherently favors larger parties and discourages third-party success. This is a baseline condition for both countries.

II. Structural Differences Promoting Two-Party Dominance in the USA:
The following structural aspects significantly hinder third-party success in the USA far more than in the UK:

• A. Restrictive Ballot Access Laws:
  • High Barriers to Entry: The US features significantly stricter requirements for third-party candidates to appear on ballots. This includes demanding large numbers of signatures or a substantial percentage of the previous election's vote. State-level variations exacerbate this problem, creating uneven playing fields.
  • Example: Oklahoma's 2020 presidential candidate filing fee of $35,000 starkly contrasts with the UK's £500 deposit (refundable with over 5% of the vote).
  • Significance: These high barriers effectively prevent many third-party candidates from even competing.
• B. Lack of a National Election System:
  • State-by-State Variations: The decentralized nature of US elections means each state can set its own rules, leading to a complex and uneven system that disproportionately disadvantages smaller parties lacking the resources to navigate numerous diverse requirements.
• C. Restrictive Presidential Debate Access:
  • The "Catch-22": To participate in televised presidential debates (crucial for visibility), US candidates must consistently poll above 15% in specific polls. This creates a vicious cycle; third parties need debate exposure to boost their polling numbers, but their lack of exposure prevents them from reaching the required threshold.
  • Significance: This effectively locks out third parties from a vital platform for gaining public support and recognition.

Comparison Table:

Feature	USA	UK
Electoral System	FPTP	FPTP
Ballot Access	Highly Restrictive (high fees, signature requirements, varying state laws)	Relatively Easy (low deposit, fewer signatures)
National System	Decentralized (state-by-state)	Nationalized
Debate Access	Highly Restrictive (15% polling threshold)	Less restrictive (likely based on other criteria)

IV. Conclusion:
While both nations utilize FPTP, the USA's significantly more restrictive ballot access laws, decentralized election system, and stringent presidential debate requirements create a much higher barrier to entry for third parties, leading to substantially greater two-party dominance compared to the UK. The differences are not simply about the electoral system, but a collection of structural factors that shape the political landscape.

Two-Party Systems: USA vs. UK - Study Guide
This guide summarizes the provided text on the dominance of two-party systems in the US and UK, highlighting key differences and rationales behind candidate and voter behavior.
I. US Two-Party Dominance
A. Reinforcement Mechanisms:

• Primaries: The US primary system incentivizes candidates to run within the two major parties (Democrats and Republicans), even high-profile individuals like Trump and Sanders. The focus on individual personalities and platforms, coupled with decentralized party organization, creates a system where candidates operate largely independently, with their own donor bases and campaign teams. This contributes to weaker party unity in Congress, despite hyperpartisanship.
• Party Defections: When defections occur, they're almost always between the two major parties (e.g., Jeff Van Drew). This reinforces the two-party structure.
• Rational Voting: Voters rationally choose one of the two major parties to avoid "wasting" their vote, given the near-universal two-party competition at state and national levels.

B. Weaknesses of Third Parties:

• The electoral system significantly handicaps third parties and independents. (Further explanation needed – see Knowledge Check question 8).

II. UK Two-Party System (Compared to the US)
A. Differences from the US:

• Lack of Primaries: The absence of a primary system in the UK makes it more appealing for candidates to run for smaller parties than Labour or Conservative.
• Party Defections: UK party defections often involve the Liberal Democrats, with MPs sometimes forming short-lived new parties (e.g., Change UK) before potentially joining the Lib Dems, or running as independents. These actions, however, often defy electoral logic as they lead to defeat (e.g., Dominic Grieve, Frank Field).
• Tactical Voting: Tactical voting, where voters strategically support a non-dominant party to prevent the success of an undesired party, plays a larger role in the UK, particularly in constituencies where Labour/Conservative dominance is less pronounced. This can benefit third parties, notably the Liberal Democrats (e.g., Daisy Cooper's win in St Albans).

B. Similarities to the US:

• Rational Voting: The tendency to vote strategically to avoid wasting votes exists in the UK as well, although tactical voting is more prominent in constituencies where the two-party dominance is less absolute.

III. Knowledge Check Answers & Discussion Points
6. Where in the UK is there not a two-party dominant system?
The text implies that constituencies where Labour/Conservative dominance is weak allow for tactical voting and increased influence of third parties, especially the Liberal Democrats. More specific geographic examples would need additional research.
7. Which are the main third parties in the USA and the UK?

• USA: The text doesn't explicitly name them, requiring further research.
• UK: The Liberal Democrats are prominently mentioned. Further research would identify others.

8. Why does the electoral system handicap third parties and independents in both countries?
This is a crucial question that requires further reading and analysis of electoral systems. The text only alludes to the handicap without explaining the mechanisms (e.g., first-past-the-post vs. proportional representation).
9. What is one of the main differences in party defections between the UK and the USA?
In the US, defections are almost exclusively between the two major parties. In the UK, while some defections involve the two main parties, the Liberal Democrats frequently receive defectors and are a more prominent destination for disillusioned MPs. The formation of short-lived third parties by defecting MPs is also more common in the UK.
IV. Further Study

• Electoral Systems: Research the different types of electoral systems (e.g., first-past-the-post, proportional representation) and their impact on the success of third parties.
• US and UK Party Systems: Explore the historical development and current state of the party systems in both countries, identifying key third parties and their influence.
• Tactical Voting: Investigate the strategies and effectiveness of tactical voting in influencing election outcomes.
• Case Studies: Analyze specific elections and defections in both countries to deepen understanding of the dynamics of two-party systems.

This study guide provides a solid framework for understanding the core concepts. Remember to fill in the gaps using additional research to answer the Knowledge Check questions fully.

To learn more about A Level Politics Click Here