The Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada

1977 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 403
Author(s):  
H. G. Thorburn ◽  
John C. Courtney
Keyword(s):  
National Party ◽  
Party Leaders ◽  
Selection Of

Party Brands and the Democratic and Republican National Committees, 1952–1976

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boris Heersink
Keyword(s):  
Service Providers ◽  
National Minority ◽  
National Committee ◽  
National Party ◽  
White House ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
Party Leaders ◽  
Party Organizations ◽  
Minority Party ◽  
Party Brands

Political scientists have traditionally dismissed the Democratic and Republican National Committees as “service providers”—organizations that provide assistance to candidates in the form of campaign funding and expertise but otherwise lack political power. I argue this perspective has missed a crucial role national committees play in American politics, namely that national party organizations publicize their party's policy positions and, in doing so, attempt to create national party brands. These brands are important to party leaders—especially when the party is in the national minority—since they are fundamental to mobilizing voters in elections. In case studies covering the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Republican National Committee (RNC) in the period 1952–1976, I show that minority party committees prioritize their branding role and invest considerably in their publicity divisions, inaugurate new publicity programs, and create new communication tools to reach out to voting groups. Additionally, I show that in cases where the party is out of the White House, the national committees have considerable leeway in deciding what party image to publicize. Rather than being mere powerless service providers, I show that party committees have played crucial roles in debates concerning questions of ideology and issue positioning in both parties.

Facing a Changing Party

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Schickler
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
Focal Point ◽  
National Party ◽  
Party Leaders

This chapter analyzes the battle for control of the national Democratic Party as the players empowered by the coalitional and ideological changes after 1937 battled not just against southern Democrats but also against national party leaders desperate to hold together the fragile North–South coalition. The bland national platforms that Democrats adopted in the 1940s and 1950s belied the vigorous efforts by the liberal civil rights coalition to push for a strong platform plank, which became a regular focal point of dispute starting in 1944. The national platform fights exemplify both the much stronger push for civil rights on the part of important Democratic constituencies (compared to Republicans) and the efforts of national party leaders to avoid a clear stand. A survey of convention delegates from 1956 shows that despite the two parties' similar national platforms, the distribution of delegate preferences was decidedly more pro-civil rights among Democrats.

Changes to Candidate Selection and Political Recruitment

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joy K. Langston
Keyword(s):  
Electoral Competition ◽  
Good Deal ◽  
Candidate Selection ◽  
National Party ◽  
Party Leaders ◽  
Political Recruitment ◽  
Demand Control

This chapter examines how the PRI’s candidate selection and recruitment changed from the hegemonic to the democratic era to capture how electoral competition strengthened the governors at the expense the corporatist sectors and other PRI groups. Under hegemony, the president controlled (through choosing or vetoing) which PRI politician appeared on the ballot, and thus could punish or benefit ambitious politicians within the wide-flung coalition. Once competition grew, however, a candidate’s popularity with voters began to weigh on these decisions and governors began to demand control over nominations for subnational and federal posts. Regime leaders had to devolve power over federal candidacies to state executives because of their ability to win votes for the party, decentralizing the party. National party leaders won a good deal of control over the closed-list PR seats for both the Chamber and the Senate. Most party-affiliated unions lost nomination power because they were unable to choose popular candidates or procure electoral victories, weakening their position within the party.

CREOLE NATIONALISTS AND THE SEARCH FOR NATIVIST AUTHENTICITY IN TWENTIETH-CENTURY ZANZIBAR: THE LIMITS OF COSMOPOLITANISM

2014 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathon Glassman
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Political Authority ◽  
Historical Narrative ◽  
National Party ◽  
Party Leaders ◽  
Pan Africanism

AbstractThe founders of the Zanzibar National Party can be understood as creole nationalists, who imagined their political authority as stemming from membership in a transnational Arab elite. But in the mid-twentieth century, prompted by the rising hegemony of territorial nationalism and by subaltern challenges informed by pan-Africanism, they crafted a new historical narrative that depicted their movement as having originated with indigenous villagers. Party leaders then related this narrative to Western scholars, whose publications helped reproduce the myth throughout the rest of the century. This article traces the genesis of this masquerade and asks what it implies about the nature of the creole metaphor and its supposed link to discourses of cosmopolitan hybridity. The conventional contrast betweencréolitéand nativist essentialism is shown to be illusory.

Shoring Up Partisan Control: The Speakership Elections of 1839 and 1847

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffery A. Jenkins ◽  
Charles Stewart
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Small Group ◽  
National Party ◽  
Roll Call ◽  
Early Nineteenth Century ◽  
Party Leaders ◽  
Antebellum Period

This chapter examines the speakership elections of 1839 and 1847, each of which highlighted the conflicting impulses of party and region at a time when national party leaders were striving for greater organization over House affairs. It explores the dynamics of roll call votes once the House began electing Speakers and other officers through viva voce voting, first in the 26th Congress (1839–1841), when the officer choices were dictated by a small group of nominal Democrats led by John C. Calhoun, and then in the succeeding four Congresses. The chapter also considers whether the coalition that elected Speakers in the early nineteenth century could look like a governing coalition, or even a procedural cartel. It shows that controlling the speakership was no guarantee of controlling the floor for the remainder of the antebellum period.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document