Talk:Sixth Party System

Importance of Supreme Court Decision Citizens United

The Section "Rules of the game" should include the 2010 Supreme Court decision "Citizens United" as an important impact on The Rules of the Game: there is no question that this decision has had a major influence on the amount of, and distribution of, funding for elections.

Similarly, the Section "Key Events" should include an item on the Citizens United decision. Tony (talk) 17:09, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

"Rules of the game" seems incorrect. The purpose of this article is to talk about the sixth party system, which started sometime in the 1960-2000 period. Citizens United might be an important aspect of a seventh party system, if it turns out that Obama/Trump started one. It can't have been important to the creation of the sixth, as the sixth predates Citizens United by fifteen to fifty years. It might make sense to discuss in a "results of the sixth party system". I.e. it wasn't part of the "rules of the game" for the period from 1968 through 2008. It seems more likely that it will be part of a period of dealignment, which might be 2008-2020 as 1958 to 1968 prepared for the sixth party system. Note that the typical party system has lasted less than forty years, which is why there have been six in 231 years (1789-2020). Of course, it may be premature to start a seventh. Perhaps Biden is a return to politics as normal. But I wouldn't bet on it. Mdfst13 (talk) 05:21, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

The article is about the American political system in the late 20th century. No historian or political scientists says that it arrived all at once fully formed. Citizens United played a major role--but it did not come out of a vacuum---for years conservatives had been pushing for--and liberals against--free spending on campaigns. As for the 7th -- my speculation is tghat Trump really changed everything and 2016 looks like a major beginning. Rjensen (talk) 08:25, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Southern strategy

Southern strategy = Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965 ? Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk)

Introduction

Why is the lead devoted entirely to when the Sixth Party System began instead of the standard introduction?--Ratha K (talk) 09:04, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Map & article need updating to 2016

The electoral-balance map included here is 1968-2012. It needs to be updated to cover the results of the 2016 presidential election. Actually, the whole article could use a 2016 update. ---Shane Landrum (cliotropic | talk | contribs) 18:26, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Removal of "differing opinions" not NPOV?

I believe the statement "Increased unity of control as each party and partisans eliminate....differing opinions" in the section "Characteristics" is POV; not only is it unreferenced, but it is untrue of my party, the Republican Party of the United States (and so arguably of the Democratic Party; this can be seen in the articles. Note, however, this does not include the elimination of moderates.) Bettering the Wiki (talk) 00:04, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

not POV -- it represents the consensus of the reliable sources i have seen--note the 95% disappearance of liberal republicans and conservative Democrats from Congress in last couple decades. for examples of recent scholarship see 1) http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajps.12152/full 2) http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajps.12089/full 3) https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=-If8CwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=ideological+polarization+american+parties&ots=R2wvXki-jW&sig=sCLEO8i1YpiIswnHloV9Vhz1ssQ#v=onepage&q=ideological%20polarization%20american%20parties&f=false Rjensen (talk) 04:29, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

What I mean is, there are differing interpretations of their respective ideologies (the statement is also unreferenced, as is the section). Bettering the Wiki (talk) 09:30, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

what are the different interpretations? let's add them. Rjensen (talk) 05:23, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

I meant the social vs. economic versions (also, there are different ideologies, such as the Rs' Conservatism against Right-wing populism against purer Right-libertarianism, or the Ds' battle pitting Liberalism with Left-wing populism with Social democracy, with Ron and Rand Paul, and Bernie Sanders being the best expressions of their respective major party's last listed ideology.) Bettering the Wiki (talk) 04:33, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

The drive for uniformity means expelling liberals from GOP and conservatives from Dem party. That still leaves factions that you mention -- (but all on the right for GOP and all on the left for Dems), with no middle ground for independents. Rjensen (talk) 04:42, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

(Outdent) How about "...and through expelling factions in opposition to the party's position on the Left-Right political spectrum"? It solves your problem, while not implying absolute uniformity of ideology. Bettering the Wiki (talk) 05:06, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

good idea--go with it. Rjensen (talk) 05:37, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Lots of issues

If there was a template message for "hot mess," I would put that template on this article. I am not even sure the article should exist, given that there appears to be no consensus about when the Sixth Party System began or whether it even exists. Putting that aside, the article needs a lot more sources. The section on the "possible dealignment period" probably should not be here, but if it is going to be here, it needs sources and it needs to be edited so that it actually makes sense. SunCrow (talk) 06:46, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Does it exist?? It does in the minds and models of 21st century political science. For example: 1) it is listed as the current party system in Marjorie Randon Hershey. Party Politics in America (17th edition 2017) p 152. 2) "the sixth party system emerged in the 1960s" says William Crotty, Winning the Presidency 2012 (Routledge, 2015) ch 2; 3) "spatial error processes have been the operative process in all but one presidential election during the Sixth Party System" says David Darmofal, and Ryan Strickler. "Modeling the Political Geography of Presidential Voting." in Demography, Politics, and Partisan Polarization in the United States, 1828–2016 (pringer, 2019) pp. 101-121. 4) " prior to the partisan realignment that ushered in the Sixth Party System" says Matthew Seligman, "Constitutional Politics, Court Packing, and Judicial Appointments Reform." Cardozo Legal Studies Research Paper No. 548 (2018). 5) "a sixth party system is now in place" p 511 of The Logic of American Politics (2017) by Samuel H. Kernell, Gary C. Jacobson, et al. Rjensen (talk) 17:04, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

OK, Rjensen, point taken. Thank you for your recent edits. I still have some concerns about the article (the whole idea of an article on an era is problematic to me when opinions on when the era started, what defines it, etc. are so widely divergent), but it is in a much better place now than it was. The added sources are a help. SunCrow (talk) 07:07, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

OK. From the point of view of historiography of historical movements that are identified and defined by scholars, it's very hard to sharply date a process that is still going on. When did globalization begin? For that matter, historians have even greater variance in the dating the beginning and ending and scope of the Renaissance or the Age of Enlightenment . Rjensen (talk) 08:29, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

I have removed a bunch of unsourced material and irrelevant material. SunCrow (talk) 09:29, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Good article

I just want to stop by and say that this is a really high-quality article in its coverage of facts, accurate representation of the era, and neutral point of view. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 01:08, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Seventh Party System??

Mark D. Brewer and L. Sandy Maisel speculate:

in the wake of Donald Trump's 2016 presidential victory, there is now strengthening debate as to whether we are entering a new party system as Trump fundamentally reshapes the Republican party and the Democratic party responds and evolves as well....In our view it is too early to do much more than speculate on whether the sixth party system continues or is in the process of transitioning to a new, seventh party system.

References

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjensen (talk • contribs) 2020-12-09 (UTC)

Responses

• I don't think it makes sense to try to find consensus about the "seventh party system" when we don't seem to have clear consensus about the beginning of the sixth party system. The Sixth Party System article needs to be clearer about the beginning of that system. -- RobLa (talk) 02:24, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Our job as editors is to report what the reliable secondary sources are saying. Those experts are the ones who create and announce a consensus. -- and they are still debating the dates. Historians usually take a few decades of scholarship before agreeing on when something began. Rjensen (talk) 08:20, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
    • I agree. One might just as well argue that the sixth system lasted from 1972 (formation of what would later be called the Reagan coalition) through 2004. A new realignment started in 2008 (the first election where a major party presidential nominee did not conform to the public financing rules since the system was created) and is ongoing. So the 1968-2016 claim for the dates is itself highly suspect. It might just as well be 1972-2004 (32 years) or 1968-2008 (where 1968 and 2008 would not be part of the sixth system). I find it particularly suspicious that all those dates overlap. It seems far more likely that each system had transitions. For example, there's still no consensus about the start of the first party system (1788? There were no parties in 1788, but there were by 1800 at the latest--another transition period). Under that standard, each party system was much shorter (e.g. the first was from 1800-1824, with the second going from 1828 or 1832 to 1852). 1856-1864 were transition elections, followed by Reconstruction which was under an entirely different environment. Similarly, 1968 had a major shift, as the Southern Democrats (voters) moved away from the Democrats in presidential elections. But that shift wasn't finished. It continued as late as 2014 (when the last of the Southern Democratic politicians left the House), with significant dates of 1964, 1968, 1972, 1980, 1994, and 2010 (and with 1976, 1992, and 2006 fighting the trend). It may even be ongoing -- Manchin is more liberal than most of the Southern Democrats were, but he is more conservative than every other Senate Democrat. Or look at how African-American voters went from supporting the party of abolition (Republicans) to supporting the party that had supported slavery (Democrats). There's an argument that transition started in 1928 and that it was still ongoing in 2008 and 2012 (the years of highest African-American support for Democrats over Republicans). But we can see signs that we are in a different system now. For example, Democrats have won three of the last four presidential elections, despite only winning three of the previous nine (and only under exceptional circumstances: Watergate and Ross Perot). We can't really wait until a consensus is reached, as things are happening now. I do think that we should be able to differentiate between the period of Republican presidential domination and the succeeding period. We seem to be dumping a bunch of stuff that involves the transition to the next system into the sixth, often in confusing ways. Mdfst13 (talk) 20:39, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
• The Sixth Party System is over. Events in the first two months of 2021 have made it plenty clear that we have entered a new era politically.
  First Political System 1788-1824 = 36 years
  Second Party System, 1824-1856 = 32 years
  Third Party System, 1856-1896 = 40 years
  Fourth Party System, 1896–1932 = 36 years
  Fifth Party System, 1932-1968 = 36 years
  Sixth Party System, 1968-2016 = 48 years
  It is insane to presume that the Sixth Party System is still in effect 20 years longer than any other alignment has lasted.scooteristi (talk) 01:34, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Removal of factual, cited analysis

I note that "In 2008, Barack Obama forewent public financing so as to raise beyond the allowed limits." was removed. However, I can't see any reason to remove that other than POV. The person who removed it believes that it was overwhelmingly liberals who supported campaign finance limits and conservatives who opposed them. But there is a major event where the liberal (Obama) ended support for a limit while the conservative (McCain) continued to support it. Note that McCain was the last major party nominee to participate in the public financing system (i.e. Obama started a trend). Just because the facts conflict with your opinion is no reason to remove the facts. It would be much better to reexamine your opinions. At the very least, you should accept that there is data that contradicts your opinion and include why you don't find it convincing. Mdfst13 (talk) 19:41, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

References

New Article

There should be a separate article for the Seventh Party System so it doesn't get cluttered or be confused with the Sixth Party System article. Does anyone else agree? Rager7 (talk) 18:02, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I support a 7th party system article, for 2016 to the present after the election of Donald Trump. There are several characteristics of this party system that I believe distinguish it from the prior one:

1. Economics and the COVID-19 pandemic--this isn't featured as much, but both parties have largely opposed an expansion of free trade and globalization. The COVID-19 pandemic's impact and inflation surge can be considered a useful turning point, due to the 2021-2023 inflation surge.

2. Abortion--this one could be left out except for a mention of the 2022 landmark Dobbs v. Jackson decision, as its repercussions are still ongoing and controversial--NPOV on this will be difficult.

3. The continued appearance of Donald Trump: before 2016, Trump was a relatively minor media personality & businessman. He has been a major candidate in 2016, 2020, and the 2024 elections (i.e. his polling lead in the 2024 Republican presidential primaries).

4. Artificial intelligence and social media--Trump heavily used Twitter in 2016 and 2020 (he hasn't come back since 2020), and artificial intelligence (i.e. ChatGPT) will play a prominent role in the 2020s. The rise of disinformation/misinformation due to social media and AI is different from before the 2010s, when false information was far less easily spread. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 16:57, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree. I would hold off for now on AI -- but social media is very central to what is happening. A major theme is polarization between red and blue -- with deep distrust between the coalitions--the worse it's been since the 1930s. Rjensen (talk) 17:20, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Aborftion is a major part of the 7th party system. NPOV is not a major problem -- we report what voters did with that issue-- for example here's some religion correlation: Rjensen (talk) 10:47, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

[text from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_abortion&oldid=1194859741#United_States

see footnote 75] Hindu Americans are more supportive of abortion's legality than Mormons; Catholics are relatively split; Mainline Protests are more supportive than Evangelical Protests = (Pew Research Center 2015). Evangelical Protestant and some mainline Protestant churches oppose abortion in varying degrees, while other mainline Protestant churches favor in varying degrees permitting the practice."Religious Groups' Official Positions on Abortion". 16 January 2013.   Rjensen (talk) 10:47, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

.

Rjensen, the fact that the political situation has changed since the early 1980s is not in dispute. But what are the sources which specifically identify a new party system? Dimadick (talk) 15:08, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

numerous scholars are saying the 7th system is probably here--others say it's too soon to be certain. Nobi\ody I have read rejects the idea of a new party system underway now. Here are some quotes: (1). Yaling Pan, The Transformation of American Political Culture (2021) "... seventh party system. Although much debate remains, the seventh party system in American history is likely to look like this: Democrats will become the party of urban cosmopolitan business liberalism, and the Republicans will...." (2). David A. Hopkins Red Fighting Blue: How Geography and Electoral Rules... (2017) p. 113 "seventh party system. In any event, the 1990s marked a relatively sharp and durable break with the previous pattern of partisan outcomes and geographic coalitions – a shift that endured, and even intensified, in the first two decades" of 21st century. (3). Neil Howe, The Fourth Turning Is Here: What the Seasons of History Tell... (2023) p 125 "America is currently well into a Crisis era, and the relevant indicators are shifting in the expected direction. Since 2016 voter participation has soared to rates not seen in over a century; national party partisanship is off the charts; and third parties are getting throttled....A political realignment...may have already begun as well....with the rise of America's seventh party system." (4). J. H. Aldrich, & R. G. Niemi "The sixth American party system: Electoral change, 1952–1992" Broken Contract? (1996) "the shape of the seventh party system [is] not well formulated...entering into a seventh party system unlike anything in our" [past]. (5). David R Mayhew, Electoral Realignments: a Critique of an American Genre (2008) "Recently, Aldrich has speculated about the existence of a new “critical era” inaugurating a “seventh party system”. (6). Mark D. Brewer, and L. Sandy Maisel. Parties and Elections in America: The Electoral Process (2020) ".In our view it is too early to do much more than speculate on whether the sixth party system continues or is in the process of transitioning to a new, seventh party system." Rjensen (talk) 16:36, 12 January 2024 (UTC)