Requirements:
Respond to the basic questions for the assignment.
1. Written Assignment should be 2 pages in length.
2. The paper must be typed, double-spaced, and 12 font size.
5. Respond to all of the questions in the assignment. 1 through 5 covers the minimum requirements: 5 points
6. Correct application of the Chicago Style on the in-text citations and bibliography: Cite the readings and the lectures. When citing the readings, make sure to use the Chicago Style (see Module 9)…(author, date, page number) and when you cite the lecture notes make sure to identify them in your citation as identified in the modules (Example if you’re using the powerpoint: S14MexicanPolitics2ppt(2) (1).ppt.) Make sure to use all of the readings and lectures. Correct application of the Chicago Style will give you at a minimum 7 points.
7. Application of readings and class notes and documents from the module. A strong paper applies readings and class notes or documents from the modules.
8. At the end of the assignment post the bibliography of the sources cited in the paper. Follow the Chicago Style.
*Submission of the correct structure of the paper and the requirements listed in the assignment, plus the correct application of the Chicago Style ( in-text citations, and bibliography), integration, full integration of class notes, ppt documents and other material provided is required.
All relevant/required materials will be provided. Use all of them in your essay. I will also provide an example of how the assignment and the citations/intext should look like. Please follow it. NO plagiarism or use of AI.
Questions:
1. Pietro Nivola seems to strike a counterintuitive note on partisanship. What is the basis for his argument that partisanship in Washington could be beneficial in certain ways? One of the assertions is about the United States becoming more “parliamentary” as a result, which begs the question: If Nivola thinks this is beneficial, should the United States not shift to a parliamentary system of government? Do you believe the United States should d so, and why or why not?
2. The pieces in this section ( Nivola, Risen and Friedman) illustrate different party systems. How do you think the structure of these party systems (such as single party vs multi-party systems) affects how interest groups participate in the political process differently? What about the citizenry at large? Do single-party and dominante party systems (like China) imply that individuals and interest groups don’t really matter in politics, since the same party always wins elections? Why or why not?
3. Consider the two-party system in the United States, in which the Democrats and Republicans routinely win nearly all national elections, even as Congress and the parties themselves are often unpopular and many people wish for a third party to emerge. What about the electoral system and the social realities in the United States raises obstacles to third parties? Or, why do you think the existing two-party system is so stable, seemingly making it impossible for a multi-party system?
4. Pick one of the case studies in the Module: Mexico and France. What do we learn about the nature of political parties in the above two countries? Apply the concepts from the readings in our textbook as well as the readings in Dickovick and Eastwood.