What Exactly Is a Political Party?
Forget what you might think. Political parties aren’t government agencies or official state institutions. At their core, they are private organizations made up of people with similar beliefs who work to win elections and control government. This distinction is the key to understanding everything about how they operate, from choosing candidates to setting their agendas.
The Big Idea: Private Organizations, Public Role
Because parties are private, they can set their own rules. However, because they play a vital public role in elections, those rules can’t be unlimited. Explore the examples below to see how this works in practice across different regions. Click on each card to learn more.
In the United States
Click to reveal details
Here in Texas
Click to reveal details
Around the World
Click to reveal details
Party Systems & Duverger’s Law
The U.S. is known for its two-party system, where the Democrats and Republicans dominate politics. This isn’t an accident. It’s largely the result of our electoral rules, a concept explained by a theory called Duverger’s Law.
Understanding Duverger’s Law
Political scientist Maurice Duverger observed that electoral systems where voters cast one vote for a candidate in a single district (“winner-take-all” or “first-past-the-post”) strongly favor a two-party system.
Why does this happen?
- Wasted Votes: Voters are hesitant to support third-party candidates they believe have no chance of winning, fearing their vote will be “wasted.”
- Strategic Voting: Instead, they often vote for one of the two major candidates who has a real chance, even if that candidate isn’t their perfect choice.
- Party Strategy: Parties must appeal to a broad range of voters to win a majority, leading to two large, “big tent” parties rather than many smaller, issue-specific ones.
Visualizing the “Winner-Take-All” Effect:
Party A Wins 100% of the Representation
Parties B and C get nothing, discouraging future voters.
The Shifting Sands: A Story of Texas Parties
Texas hasn’t always been the Republican stronghold it is today. Its political history is a dramatic story of transformation, from a one-party Democratic state to a one-party Republican state. Click the timeline entries to explore this evolution.
1836-1860s: The Republic & Early Statehood
In the early days of the Republic of Texas and early statehood, formal political parties didn’t really exist. Politics was personality-driven, largely revolving around support for or opposition to Sam Houston. After annexation to the U.S., Texas became a solidly Democratic state due to the party’s support for states’ rights and slavery.
1870s-1960s: The Solid South
Following Reconstruction, Texas entered a century of one-party Democratic rule. The Republican party was associated with the Union victory and Reconstruction, making it deeply unpopular. For decades, winning the Democratic primary was equivalent to winning the general election.
1970s-1990s: A Two-Party System Emerges
Things began to change in the mid-20th century. National Democratic party platforms on civil rights and social issues started alienating conservative white Texans. In 1978, Bill Clements became the first Republican governor since Reconstruction. This period saw Texas function as a true two-party state, with both parties competitive in statewide elections.
2000s-Present: Republican Dominance
By the early 2000s, the transformation was complete. Republicans captured all statewide offices and majorities in both houses of the legislature. Texas shifted from a one-party Democratic state to a one-party Republican state. Today, the major political battles often occur within the Republican primary between different factions of the party.
Texas Gubernatorial Elections: Party Shift Over Time
Founding Fears: Madison on Factions
The idea of political parties was not a popular one among America’s founders. James Madison, in particular, was deeply concerned about the dangers of “factions,” which he viewed as groups motivated by self-interest rather than the public good.
“Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an ailment without which it instantly expires. But it could not be less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation of air…” — James Madison, Federalist No. 10
Madison’s Argument:
Madison believed factions were inevitable in a free society. You couldn’t get rid of them without destroying liberty itself. His proposed solution wasn’t to outlaw parties, but to control their effects. He argued that a large, diverse republic would have so many competing factions that no single one could easily dominate the others. This competition would force compromise and protect the rights of minorities. It’s ironic that the very system he designed to control factions eventually gave rise to the most powerful and enduring two-party system in the world.
The Fine Print: Limits on Party Power
While parties are private, they don’t have total freedom. Because they perform a crucial public function—nominating candidates for office—the courts have placed important limits on their ability to set rules, especially when it comes to discrimination.
Case Study: The “White Primary”
For many years in Texas and other Southern states, the Democratic party banned African Americans from voting in their primary elections. They argued that as a private organization, they could determine their own membership rules. This effectively disenfranchised Black voters, as winning the Democratic primary was the only election that mattered.
The Supreme Court’s Ruling:
In the landmark case Smith v. Allwright (1944), the Supreme Court struck down the white primary. The Court ruled that because the primary election is an integral part of the overall election process, parties could not exclude voters based on race. This established a critical principle: when a private group performs a state function, it must abide by the Constitution’s non-discrimination requirements.