Political Party Project1.Identify the major ideas of the two major

partiesCriticism: Explore the criticism supporters of the parties have of each otherIdentify 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 PartiesCRITICAL 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. RealignmentMAGAZINE 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 OBJECTIVESAfter 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 DISCUSSIONDo 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 OUTLINEIn 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 StatesPolitical 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 TodayA. 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 PartyPolitical 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 two-party 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. PoliticsA. 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 ChangeA. 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. FeaturesA. 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/allpoliticsDemocratic Party HistoryFrom "Jacksonian Democracy" to the modern era, a look at the Democratic Party over the years

August 2, 2000Web 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, 1913-1921. 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 low-water 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 pro-death 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 ill-fated 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 Garfield-Hancock 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 PlanWe 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 StrategyThe 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 PlatformThe 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 BylawsEssentially, 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 contentionFurther 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.

GOPRepublican 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, anti-capitalist 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-the-board 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 gender-neutral 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-to-liberal 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 "paleo-conservative" 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, anti-gun 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, anti-Washington, 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 ex-Congressman 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 co-nominated 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/Neo-Nazis, 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, Gorbachev-style

"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 neo-Nazi 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 late-1990s 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 anti-communist 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 SP-USA 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 left-wing 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, working-class-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 anti-United 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 Leninist-Stalinist Marxism). The party strongly denounces capitalism and advocates a "Marxist-Leninist-Maoist 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 anti-war 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.