Populism and the American Party System: Opportunities and Constraints

Abstract

Does populism threaten American democracy, and if so, what is the nature of that threat? In dialogue with the comparative literature on populism, this article considers the opportunity structure available to populist parties and candidates in the American political system. I argue that compared to most other democracies, the US system offers much less opportunity for organized populist parties but more opportunity for populist candidacies. Today’s major parties may also be more vulnerable to populist insurgency than at other points in US history because of (1) changes in communications technology, (2) the unpopularity of mainstream parties and party leaders, and (3) representation gaps created by an increasingly racialized party system. Although no democratic system is immune to deterioration, the US constitutional system impedes authoritarian populism, just as it obstructs party power generally. But the vulnerability of the major parties to populist insurgency poses a threat to liberal democratic norms in the United States, just as it does elsewhere.

Ethnic antagonism erodes Republicans’ commitment to democracy

“…Frances Lee has enumerated a variety of formidable institutional barriers to the consolidation of “authoritarian power over American national government.” Nonetheless, she concluded that “A racialized party system in an electorate with a questionable commitment to liberal values is a troubling development. It is difficult to manage racial tensions in a democracy in any case, much less when race becomes a principal line of political cleavage” ( 29 ). The findings reported here underline the extent to which race—and, more broadly, ethnic conflict—has indeed become a principal line of political cleavage, not only in American electoral politics but also in America’s broader, ongoing struggle to embrace and instantiate democracy.…”

Gender, Race, Ethnicity, and the Racialization of Attitudes Toward Descriptive Representation

“…For instance, Casellas and Wallace (2015) find much lower support for descriptive representation among Latino Republicans, who may believe that an increase in Hispanic representation would result in the election of more Democrats. They also find support for co-ethnic descriptive representation among white Republicans, which may be unsurprising given the Republican Party has been more than 20% more white than the national population since 2012 (Lee, 2020). Partisan effects are also consistent with recent trends; in 2018, a majority of women (76%) and Latinos (69%) serving in Congress were Democrats (Bernal, 2017; Center for American Women and Politics, 2018; Elder, 2008).…”

“…Significant evidence points to race, ethnicity, and gender playing a key role in recent presidential elections, especially in 2016 (Cassese & Barnes, 2019; Jardina, 2019; Lee, 2020; Michelson & Lavariega Monforti, 2018; Schaffner et al, 2018; Wilkinson, 2018). In such a political environment, if increasing representation by members of historically marginalized groups is one potential solution to legitimizing and promoting views of group members, it follows that attitudes toward any one of these groups could also predict attitudes about diverse representation by other groups.…”

Populism and Polarization in Comparative Perspective: Constitutive, Spatial and Institutional Dimensions

“…Although populism is intrinsically polarizing, it does not necessarily emerge in polarized environments. The rise of Donald Trump as a right-wing populist figure in an increasingly polarized US political system is something of an anomaly, one attributable in part to the institutional particularities of American politics: presidentialism combined with a two-party system, plurality elections and an open primary system that allows insurgent outsiders to challenge established party elites for presidential nominations (see Lee 2020). These institutional features allowed Trump to serve as a political vessel for pre-existing polarizing tendencies at work in American politics (Mason 2018; McAdam and Kloos 2014), rather than their catalyst, and to transform the Republican Party into a vehicle for his populist leadership.…”