Canadian Party system

Political parties: key to democratic development

A. ^^Przeworsk^^i: “Democracy is a system in which parties lose elections”

^^Quality of a demo linked to competitive party system^^

Party system changes ^^through electoral rules^^ and underlying bases of party support (^^cleavage structures^^)

Dichotomy for parties= having a soul or winning (ideally both)

Cleavages structures

@@underlying ideas@@, values that @@structure vote choice@@

In CAN = @@national question, place of Quebec, language.@@

Median voter theorem

Assumptions: $2 alternatives on 1 dimension$ (only 1 issue driving votes), $single peaked voter preferences$ ( will vote for closest to position on dimension)

Prediction: $convergence to the moderate middle$

Thus spatial theory of voting, moderation > purity, will converge to have more chance of winning

Brokerage parties

2 dominant parties → %%stable instability%% w/ conservative boom and bursts

%%electoral pragmatism%% = build broadest possible support base

%%Aversion to caolition%% in House of commons

%%leader fixated%%

Parliamentary caucus = policy, local riding association → local autonomy

%%volatile anti system%% parties= W + QC (insurgents), appear and disappear both prov and fed (Bloc QC, United farmers of AB…)

Distinctive party system

==Liberals== = ==center== on left/right spectrum + national Q, support from catholics until 1970s, ==QC = pivot==

^^Conservatives^^: ^^spectacular wins and fails^^, win when QC nationalists on board + West insurgents (cf Mulroney wins and fail when BQ in 93)

@@NDP@@: regional base = western and south ONT, @@success in provincial@@ pol, @@relatively weak class voting@@ (division of working class votes, still @@main base@@ cf Polacko and Johnston readings)