DOCSLIB.ORG

Two-Party System: United States of America a Case Study George Anthony and Arthur Carl Department of Political Science Universit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Two-Party System: United States of America a Case Study George Anthony and Arthur Carl Department of Political Science Universit http://www.inosr.net/inosr-applied-sciences/ George and Arthur INOSR APPLIED SCIENCES 5(1): 26-34, 2019. ©INOSR PUBLICATIONS International Network Organization for Scientific Research ISSN: 2705-165X Two-Party system: United States of America a case study George Anthony and Arthur Carl Department of Political Science University of Washington, USA Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT The two-party system is firmly rooted in either a Democrat or a Republican. No American politics and has been since the third-party candidate has come within first organized political movements shouting distance of the presidency. Some emerged in the late 1700s. The two-party historians have suggested that two-party system in the United States is now systems promote centrism and encourage dominated by the Republicans and the political parties to find common positions Democrats. But through history the which appeal to wide swaths of the Federalists and the Democratic- electorate. A political party is an Republicans, then the Democrats and the organized body of like-minded people who Whigs, have represented opposing political work to elect candidates for public office ideologies and campaigned against each who represent their values on matters of other for seats at the local, state and policy. In the U.S., home to a strong two- federal levels. For the last 163 years, the party system, the major political parties president of the United States has been are the Republicans and the Democrats. Keywords: Two-party, system, democrats, republicans, America. INTRODUCTION Two-party system is a condition or systems are often exaggerated. Within system in which two major each major party in the United States, the parties dominate a political unit. It can Republicans and the Democrats, many also be described as a political system factions are struggling for power. The consisting chiefly of two major parties, presence of divergent interests under a more or less equal in strength. The two single party canopy masks a process of party system is firmly rooted in American struggle and compromise that under a politics and has been since the first multiparty system is out in the open organized political movements emerged The modern political party system in the in the late 1700s. The two-party system in U.S. is a two-party system dominated by the United States is now dominated by the the Democratic Party and the Republican Republicans and the Democrats. But Party. These two parties have won every through history the Federalists and the United States presidential election since Democratic-Republicans, then the 1852 and have controlled the United Democrats and the Whigs, have States Congress to some extent since at represented opposing political ideologies least 1856 and campaigned against each other for A two-party system is a party system seats at the local, state and federal levels. where two major political parties [1] Two-party system, political system in dominate the political landscape. At any which the electorate gives its votes point in time, one of the two parties largely to only two major parties and in typically holds a majority in the which one or the other party can win a legislature and is usually referred to as majority in the legislature. The United the majority or governing party while the States is the classic example of a nation other is the minority or opposition party. with a two-party system. The contrasts Around the world, the term has different between two-party and multiparty senses. For example, in the United States, 26 http://www.inosr.net/inosr-applied-sciences/ George and Arthur INOSR APPLIED SCIENCES 5(1): 26-34, 2019. the sense of two-party system describes No third-party candidate has ever been an arrangement in which all or nearly all elected to the White House, and very few elected officials belong to one of the only have won seats in either the House of two major parties, and third parties rarely Representatives or the U.S. Senate. The win any seats in the legislature. In such most notable modern exception to the arrangements, two-party systems are two-party system is U.S. Sen. Bernie thought to result from various factors like Sanders of Vermont, a socialist whose winner-takes-all election rules.[2] [3] [4] In campaign for the 2016 Democratic such systems, while chances for third- presidential nomination invigorated party candidates winning election to liberal members of the party [11]. The major national office are remote, it is closest any independent presidential possible for groups within the larger candidate has come to being elected to parties, or in opposition to one or both of the White House was billionaire Texan them, to exert influence on the two major Ross Perot, who won 19 percent of the parties.[5[ [6] In contrast, in the United popular vote in the 1992 election. Kingdom and Australia and in other History of Two-party System in United parliamentary systems and elsewhere, the States of America term two-party system is sometimes used For the last 163 years, the president of to indicate an arrangement in which two the United States has been either a major parties dominate elections but in Democrat or a Republican. No third-party which there are viable third parties which candidate has come within shouting do win seats in the legislature, and in distance of the presidency. which the two major parties exert There are several reasons why, in some proportionately greater influence than systems, two major parties dominate the their percentage of votes would suggest. political landscape. There has been Explanations for why a political system speculation that a two-party system arose with free elections may evolve into a two- in the United States from early political party system have been debated. A battling between the federalists and anti- leading theory, referred to as Duverger's federalists in the first few decades after law, states that two parties are a natural the ratification of the Constitution, result of a winner-take-all voting system according to several views. [12] [13] In Although the Founding Fathers of the addition, there has been more speculation United States did not originally intend for that the winner-takes-all electoral system American politics to be partisan, [7] early as well as particular state and federal laws political controversies in the 1790s saw regarding voting procedures helped to the emergence of a two-party political cause a two-party system [14]. system, the Federalist Party and the Reporting from the floor of the Democratic-Republican Party, centred on Democratic National Convention in the differing views on federal government Philadelphia, Trace Dominguez examines powers of Secretary of the Treasury America's two-party system by rooting Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. through the strangeness of U.S. electoral [8] [9] However, a consensus reached on history, in this strangest of election years. these issues ended party politics in 1816 Polls suggest that voters don't much care for a decade, a period commonly known for either major party candidate this year, as the Era of Good Feelings.[10] and yet the vast majority of us will vote Partisan politics revived in 1829 with the for one or the other. The reason we're split of the Democratic-Republican Party stuck with this two-party system has to into the Jacksonian Democrats led by do with how U.S. congressional and Andrew Jackson, and the Whig Party, led presidential elections work. America's by Henry Clay. The former evolved into plurality electoral system -- or first-past- the modern Democratic Party and the the-post (FPTP) -- means that each state latter was replaced with the Republican has a set number of electorates, and Party as one of the two main parties in the whichever candidate gets the majority of 1850s. votes wins them all. 27 http://www.inosr.net/inosr-applied-sciences/ George and Arthur INOSR APPLIED SCIENCES 5(1): 26-34, 2019. Since there is no reward for second place, number of parties. Sachs explained how there's little incentive to create or back a the first-past-the-post voting arrangement party that will get some of the votes, but tended to promote a two-party system. not the majority. Over time, the system The main reason for America's encourages the dominance of two massive majoritarian character is the electoral political parties. The U.S. is one of just a system for Congress. Members of very few countries that uses this FPTS Congress are elected in single-member system. Most other democracies use districts according to the "first-past-the- proportional representation to elect post" (FPTP) principle, meaning that the officials, rather than a winner-take-all candidate with the plurality of votes is system. This results in multiple political the winner of the congressional seat. The parties sharing duties. Japan, for losing party or parties win no instance, has five major political parties representation at all. The first-past-the- along with several smaller parties. In post election tends to produce a small Israel, ten different parties of affiliates number of major parties, perhaps just are represented in the national two, a principle known in political science legislature. as Duverger's Law. Smaller parties are So why have political parties at all? trampled in first-past-the-post elections. Actually, we didn't use to. During the first [17] Consider a system in which voters presidential election, there were no can vote for any candidate from any one political parties and in fact George of many parties. Suppose further that if a Washington won without even party gets 15% of votes, then that party campaigning.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Brazil Ahead of the 2018 Elections
    BRIEFING Brazil ahead of the 2018 elections SUMMARY On 7 October 2018, about 147 million Brazilians will go to the polls to choose a new president, new governors and new members of the bicameral National Congress and state legislatures. If, as expected, none of the presidential candidates gains over 50 % of votes, a run-off between the two best-performing presidential candidates is scheduled to take place on 28 October 2018. Brazil's severe and protracted political, economic, social and public-security crisis has created a complex and polarised political climate that makes the election outcome highly unpredictable. Pollsters show that voters have lost faith in a discredited political elite and that only anti- establishment outsiders not embroiled in large-scale corruption scandals and entrenched clientelism would truly match voters' preferences. However, there is a huge gap between voters' strong demand for a radical political renewal based on new faces, and the dramatic shortage of political newcomers among the candidates. Voters' disillusionment with conventional politics and political institutions has fuelled nostalgic preferences and is likely to prompt part of the electorate to shift away from centrist candidates associated with policy continuity to candidates at the opposite sides of the party spectrum. Many less well-off voters would have welcomed a return to office of former left-wing President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (2003-2010), who due to a then booming economy, could run social programmes that lifted millions out of extreme poverty and who, barred by Brazil's judiciary from running in 2018, has tried to transfer his high popularity to his much less-known replacement.
    [Show full text]
  • Unit 3 the FEDERALIST ERA
    Unit 3 THE FEDERALIST ERA CHAPTER 1 THE NEW NATION ..........................................................................................................................1 CHAPTER 2 HAMILTON AND JEFFERSON— THE MEN AND THEIR PHILOSOPHIES .....................6 CHAPTER 3 PAYING THE NATIONAL DEBT ................................................................................................12 CHAPTER 4 ..............................................................................................................................................................16 HAMILTON, JEFFERSON, AND THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF THE UNITED STATES.............16 CHAPTER 5 THE WHISKEY REBELLION ........................................................................................................20 CHAPTER 6 NEUTRALITY AND THE JAY TREATY .....................................................................................24 CHAPTER 7 THE SEDITION ACT AND THE VIRGINIA AND KENTUCKY RESOLUTIONS ...........28 CHAPTER 8 THE ELECTION OF 1800................................................................................................................34 CHAPTER 9 JEFFERSONIANS IN OFFICE.......................................................................................................38 by Thomas Ladenburg, copyright, 1974, 1998, 2001, 2007 100 Brantwood Road, Arlington, MA 02476 781-646-4577 [email protected] Page 1 Chapter 1 The New Nation A Search for Answers hile the Founding Fathers at the Constitutional Convention debated what powers should be
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 6: Federalists and Republicans, 1789-1816
    Federalists and Republicans 1789–1816 Why It Matters In the first government under the Constitution, important new institutions included the cabinet, a system of federal courts, and a national bank. Political parties gradually developed from the different views of citizens in the Northeast, West, and South. The new government faced special challenges in foreign affairs, including the War of 1812 with Great Britain. The Impact Today During this period, fundamental policies of American government came into being. • Politicians set important precedents for the national government and for relations between the federal and state governments. For example, the idea of a presidential cabinet originated with George Washington and has been followed by every president since that time • President Washington’s caution against foreign involvement powerfully influenced American foreign policy. The American Vision Video The Chapter 6 video, “The Battle of New Orleans,” focuses on this important event of the War of 1812. 1804 • Lewis and Clark begin to explore and map 1798 Louisiana Territory 1789 • Alien and Sedition • Washington Acts introduced 1803 elected • Louisiana Purchase doubles president ▲ 1794 size of the nation Washington • Jay’s Treaty signed J. Adams Jefferson 1789–1797 ▲ 1797–1801 ▲ 1801–1809 ▲ ▲ 1790 1797 1804 ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ 1793 1794 1805 • Louis XVI guillotined • Polish rebellion • British navy wins during French suppressed by Battle of Trafalgar Revolution Russians 1800 • Beethoven’s Symphony no. 1 written 208 Painter and President by J.L.G. Ferris 1812 • United States declares 1807 1811 war on Britain • Embargo Act blocks • Battle of Tippecanoe American trade with fought against Tecumseh 1814 Britain and France and his confederacy • Hartford Convention meets HISTORY Madison • Treaty of Ghent signed ▲ 1809–1817 ▲ ▲ ▲ Chapter Overview Visit the American Vision 1811 1818 Web site at tav.glencoe.com and click on Chapter ▼ ▼ ▼ Overviews—Chapter 6 to 1808 preview chapter information.
    [Show full text]
  • China's Political Party System
    China’s Political Party System: Cooperation and Consultation The State Council Information Office of the People’s Republic of China June 2021 First Edition 2021 ISBN 978-7-119-12735-4 © Foreign Languages Press Co. Ltd., Beijing, China, 2021 Published by Foreign Languages Press Co. Ltd. 24 Baiwanzhuang Road, Beijing 100037, China Distributed by China International Book Trading Corporation 35 Chegongzhuang Xilu, Beijing 100044, China P.O. Box 399, Beijing, China Printed in the People’s Republic of China Contents Preamble 1 I. China’s Political Parties 3 II. A Unique Political Creation 10 III. Close Cooperation Between Political Parties 14 IV. China’s Political Party System Has Distinctive Characteristics and Strengths 16 V. The CPC Consults with Other Political Parties and Non-Affiliates 19 VI. The CPC Supports Other Political Parties and Non-Affiliates in Conducting Democratic Oversight 22 VII. The CPC Cooperates with Other Political Parties and Non-Affiliates in Governing the Country 24 VIII. Non-CPC Political Parties and Non-Affiliates Provide Advice on Economic and Social Development 27 IX. The CPPCC Is an Important Political and Organizational Platform in China’s Political Party System 30 Conclusion 33 Preamble A country’s political party system is a major component of its political framework and makes a critical contribution to democracy. The system best suited to a country is determined by its history, traditions, and realities. There are many types of political party system around the world, and there is not a single system that is good for all countries. The system of multiparty cooperation and political consultation under the leadership of the Communist Party of China (CPC) is a basic element of China’s political framework.
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom in the World Report 2020
    Brazil | Freedom House Page 1 of 19 BrazilFREEDOM IN THE WORLD 2020 75 FREE /100 Political Rights 31 Civil Liberties 44 75 Free Global freedom statuses are calculated on a weighted scale. See the methodology. Overview https://freedomhouse.org/country/brazil/freedom-world/2020 3/6/2020 Brazil | Freedom House Page 2 of 19 Brazil is a democracy that holds competitive elections, and the political arena is characterized by vibrant public debate. However, independent journalists and civil society activists risk harassment and violent attack, and the government has struggled to address high rates of violent crime and disproportionate violence against and economic exclusion of minorities. Corruption is endemic at top levels, contributing to widespread disillusionment with traditional political parties. Societal discrimination and violence against LGBT+ people remains a serious problem. Key Developments in 2019 • In June, revelations emerged that Justice Minister Sérgio Moro, when he had served as a judge, colluded with federal prosecutors by offered advice on how to handle the corruption case against former president Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva, who was convicted of those charges in 2017. The Supreme Court later ruled that defendants could only be imprisoned after all appeals to higher courts had been exhausted, paving the way for Lula’s release from detention in November. • The legislature’s approval of a major pension reform in the fall marked a victory for Brazil’s far-right president, Jair Bolsonaro, who was inaugurated in January after winning the 2018 election. It also signaled a return to the business of governing, following a period in which the executive and legislative branches were preoccupied with major corruption scandals and an impeachment process.
    [Show full text]
  • How Electoral Agency Shapes the Political Logic of Costs and Benefits
    Coalition Parties versus Coalitions of Parties: How Electoral Agency Shapes the Political Logic of Costs and Benefits by Kathleen Bawn Department of Political Science UCLA and Frances Rosenbluth Department of Political Science Yale University Draft 1.10 August 2002 Abstract This paper argues that governments formed from post-election coalitions (majority coalition governments in PR systems) and pre-election coalitions (majority parties in SMD systems) aggregate the interests of voters in systematically different ways. We show that the multiple policy dimensional policy space that emerges from PR rules motivate parties in the government coalition to logroll projects among themselves without internalizing the costs of those projects in the same way that a majoritarian party would be forced to do. The size of government should therefore tend to be larger in PR systems. We further show that, although centrifugal electoral incentives dominate in PR systems, some incentives towards coalescence across groups and across parties exist through the greater likelihood that large parties have in becoming a member of a minimal winning coalition of parties. This paper was prepared for presentation at the annual meetings of the American Political Science Association, held in Boston, Massachusetts, August 28-September 2. Frances Rosenbluth would like to thank the Yale Provost Office and the Yale Leitner Program in International Political Economy for funding. We gratefully acknowledge the able research assistance of Abbie Erler and Mathias Hounpke in conducting this research. Introduction Democratic government is government by coalition. In many parliamentary systems, governments are explicit multi-party coalitions. Even in cases of single party government, a party that wins a parliamentary majority represents -- almost by definition -- a coalition of interests.
    [Show full text]
  • The Similarities and the Differences in the Functioning of the European Right Wing: an Attempt to Integrate the European Conservatives and Christian Democrats
    Journal of Social Welfare and Human Rights, Vol. 1 No. 2, December 2013 1 The Similarities and the Differences in the Functioning of the European Right Wing: An Attempt to Integrate the European Conservatives and Christian Democrats Dr. Kire Sarlamanov1 Dr. Aleksandar Jovanoski2 Abstract The text reviews the attempt of the European Conservative and Christian Democratic Parties to construct a common platform within which they could more effectively defend and develop the interests of the political right wing in the European Parliament. The text follows the chronological line of development of events, emphasizing the doctrinal and the national differences as a reason for the relative failure in the process of unification of the European right wing. The subcontext of the argumentation protrudes the ideological, the national as well as the religious-doctrinal interests of some of the more important Christian Democratic, that is, conservative parties in Europe, which emerged as an obstacle of the unification. One of the more important problems that enabled the quality and complete unification of the European conservatives and Christian Democrats is the attitude in regard to the formation of EU as a federation of countries. The weight down of the British conservatives on the side of the national sovereignty and integrity against the Pan-European idea for united European countries formed on federal basis, is considered as the most important impact on the unification of the parties from the right ideological spectrum on European land. Key words: Conservative Party, Christian Democratic Party, CDU European Union, European People’s Party. 1. Introduction On European land, the trend of connection of political parties on the basis of ideology has been notable for a long time.
    [Show full text]
  • The Democratic Party and the Transformation of American Conservatism, 1847-1860
    PRESERVING THE WHITE MAN’S REPUBLIC: THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND THE TRANSFORMATION OF AMERICAN CONSERVATISM, 1847-1860 Joshua A. Lynn A dissertation submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History. Chapel Hill 2015 Approved by: Harry L. Watson William L. Barney Laura F. Edwards Joseph T. Glatthaar Michael Lienesch © 2015 Joshua A. Lynn ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Joshua A. Lynn: Preserving the White Man’s Republic: The Democratic Party and the Transformation of American Conservatism, 1847-1860 (Under the direction of Harry L. Watson) In the late 1840s and 1850s, the American Democratic party redefined itself as “conservative.” Yet Democrats’ preexisting dedication to majoritarian democracy, liberal individualism, and white supremacy had not changed. Democrats believed that “fanatical” reformers, who opposed slavery and advanced the rights of African Americans and women, imperiled the white man’s republic they had crafted in the early 1800s. There were no more abstract notions of freedom to boundlessly unfold; there was only the existing liberty of white men to conserve. Democrats therefore recast democracy, previously a progressive means to expand rights, as a way for local majorities to police racial and gender boundaries. In the process, they reinvigorated American conservatism by placing it on a foundation of majoritarian democracy. Empowering white men to democratically govern all other Americans, Democrats contended, would preserve their prerogatives. With the policy of “popular sovereignty,” for instance, Democrats left slavery’s expansion to territorial settlers’ democratic decision-making.
    [Show full text]
  • Brazil: Background and U.S. Relations
    Brazil: Background and U.S. Relations Updated July 6, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R46236 SUMMARY R46236 Brazil: Background and U.S. Relations July 6, 2020 Occupying almost half of South America, Brazil is the fifth-largest and fifth-most-populous country in the world. Given its size and tremendous natural resources, Brazil has long had the Peter J. Meyer potential to become a world power and periodically has been the focal point of U.S. policy in Specialist in Latin Latin America. Brazil’s rise to prominence has been hindered, however, by uneven economic American Affairs performance and political instability. After a period of strong economic growth and increased international influence during the first decade of the 21st century, Brazil has struggled with a series of domestic crises in recent years. Since 2014, the country has experienced a deep recession, record-high homicide rate, and massive corruption scandal. Those combined crises contributed to the controversial impeachment and removal from office of President Dilma Rousseff (2011-2016). They also discredited much of Brazil’s political class, paving the way for right-wing populist Jair Bolsonaro to win the presidency in October 2018. Since taking office in January 2019, President Jair Bolsonaro has begun to implement economic and regulatory reforms favored by international investors and Brazilian businesses and has proposed hard-line security policies intended to reduce crime and violence. Rather than building a broad-based coalition to advance his agenda, however, Bolsonaro has sought to keep the electorate polarized and his political base mobilized by taking socially conservative stands on cultural issues and verbally attacking perceived enemies, such as the press, nongovernmental organizations, and other branches of government.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4: Federalists and Republicans, 1789-1816
    Unit The Young Republic 1789–1850 CHAPTER 4 Federalists and Republicans 1789–1816 CHAPTER 5 Growth and Division 1816–1832 CHAPTER 6 The Spirit of Reform 1828–1845 CHAPTER 7 Manifest Destiny 1840–1848 Why It Matters Internal improvements and industrial development began to transform the United States in the early 1800s, but these changes also highlighted the growing differences between the North and South and set the stage for civil war. At the same time, Americans fought a war with Mexico and continued to expand west, building a nation that stretched from the Atlantic to the Pacific. 150 Winterthur Museum The bustle and excitement of an Election Day in Philadelphia in the early 1800s 151 Chapter FFederalistsederalists andand Republicans 1789–1816 SECTION 1 Washington and Congress SECTION 2 Partisan Politics SECTION 3 Jefferson in Office SECTION 4 The War of 1812 This detail from Jean Leon Gerome Ferris’s painting Washington’s Inauguration at Independence Hall, 1793 shows Washington being greeted by John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. 1804 • Lewis and Clark begin to explore the 1789 Louisiana Purchase • Washington Washington J. Adams Jefferson 1797–1801 1801–1809 becomes 1789–1797 1794 1803 president • Jay’s Treaty • Louisiana Purchase is signed doubles size of the nation U.S. PRESIDENTS U.S. EVENTS 1790 1795 1800 WORLD EVENTS 1789 1793 1798 • French • Louis XVI is • Quasi-War between Revolution guillotined during France and the US begins French Revolution begins 152 Chapter 4 Federalists and Republicans MAKING CONNECTIONS Why Do People Form Political Parties? The Constitution does not mention political parties, and the Founders thought they were a bad idea in a democ- racy, yet almost immediately after the federal govern- ment was created, political parties began to take shape.
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Outsider Politics: Radicalism
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Outsider politics : Radicalism as a Political Strategy in Western Europe and Latin America A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science by Verónica Hoyo Committee in charge: Professor William Chandler, Chair Professor Matthew Shugart, Co-Chair Professor Akos Rona-Tas Professor Sebastian Saiegh Professor Kaare Strom 2010 Copyright Verónica Hoyo, 2010 All rights reserved. The Dissertation of Verónica Hoyo is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: Co-Chair Chair University of California, San Diego 2010 iii DEDICATION A mis padres, Irma y Gonzalo, y a mi hermana Irma. Gracias por ser fuente constante de amor, inspiración y apoyo incondicional. Esto nunca hubiera sido posible sin ustedes. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page.............................................................................................................. iii Dedication..................................................................................................................... iv Table of Contents.......................................................................................................... v List of Abbreviations...................................................................................................... vi List of Tables................................................................................................................... xii List of Graphs................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Challenger Party List
    Appendix List of Challenger Parties Operationalization of Challenger Parties A party is considered a challenger party if in any given year it has not been a member of a central government after 1930. A party is considered a dominant party if in any given year it has been part of a central government after 1930. Only parties with ministers in cabinet are considered to be members of a central government. A party ceases to be a challenger party once it enters central government (in the election immediately preceding entry into office, it is classified as a challenger party). Participation in a national war/crisis cabinets and national unity governments (e.g., Communists in France’s provisional government) does not in itself qualify a party as a dominant party. A dominant party will continue to be considered a dominant party after merging with a challenger party, but a party will be considered a challenger party if it splits from a dominant party. Using this definition, the following parties were challenger parties in Western Europe in the period under investigation (1950–2017). The parties that became dominant parties during the period are indicated with an asterisk. Last election in dataset Country Party Party name (as abbreviation challenger party) Austria ALÖ Alternative List Austria 1983 DU The Independents—Lugner’s List 1999 FPÖ Freedom Party of Austria 1983 * Fritz The Citizens’ Forum Austria 2008 Grüne The Greens—The Green Alternative 2017 LiF Liberal Forum 2008 Martin Hans-Peter Martin’s List 2006 Nein No—Citizens’ Initiative against
    [Show full text]