From Party Formation to Party Collapse: Could the GOP Go the Way of the Whigs?

Does the GOP face a real risk of becoming a regional party incapable of competing for the presidency or congressional majorities after the recent turn in electoral trends, or is it part of a regular political cycle as the Democrats saw in 1994 and 2002? When attempting to solve this rather perplexing question, we must look at both the short-term and long-term historical trends which led to America's most classic example of demise and party collapse, the Whig party in 1857.

It is of no doubt that the GOP is in a downward political spiral, and hemorrhaging elected members on all levels; local, state, and federal. However, the complete collapse and dismantling of a major political party in modern America is close to impossible (even though in politics, nothing is "impossible"). The current GOP is at a standstill, and has been having recent difficulties in formulating strong policy objectives and recruit strong party leaders. To understand the relevance, we must look at what the Whigs once had, and what they were left with.

The Whig party had similar problems as the modern GOP, but this was in an era of American expansion, and the ensuing deep divides of the slavery debate. The Whigs, in their short tenure on the national stage (even though they held dozens of seats in Congress, along with four presidents having been Whigs) never developed a national policy platform and left their only main objective to be gaining political office. Formed in 1833 due to growing opposition to Andrew Jackson (who was at the time currently president) and his Democratic Party, the party was a large coalition, but existed for just over two decades until its collapse in 1856. The Republican party capitalized on the this collapse due to those very rising concerns of slavery. The 1852-1853 elections were the beginning of the end for the Whigs, when they held only 71 House seats and 22 seats in the Senate. Two years later, the Democrats gained a heavier majority in the Senate, but the Whigs were unable to take advantage of their inability to gain in the House. The growing Republicans (who were mainly a regional party of the North) were able to caucus with an outright majority of 108 seats, and the largest minority in the Senate with 15 seats. In 1857, the Whig party (once a commanding alliance of office seekers) was simply gone.

How does the Whig party of the mid 19th century relate to the troubles of the Republican party in the 21st? To best understand, we must first see that the main purpose of a political party is to gain political office. Second, when selecting a political party, candidates would ask themselves "what party has the best chance of gaining majority status?" Simply stated, once the slavery debate divided the Whigs into anti- and pro- factions, most decided to join the new Republicans. As it stands now, there are only two major political parties in America. Candidates must make a choice of whether to run as a Democrat, a Republican, or an Independent. Of course, one could run under any party label, but with a party label come a brand name. "Candidate X - Republican." The party affiliation goes a long way into placing a candidate along a political spectrum, even though in the current electoral system mostly all elections are candidate-centered as opposed to a party-candidate.

The current GOP, for as much as it seems to be heading down the same path as the Whigs, and thus running the risk of becoming a regional party incapable of taking on national elections, will not face the same collapse as history would tell. Although the GOP is facing the same decentralized party leadership as the party whose place it had taken in the mid-19th century, Duverger's law currently (nearly) prevents any third party from arising. This law states that voters vote strategically, and when faced with the prospect of their candidate (as an example, a third party candidate) losing an election, they will vote for the next best candidate of their choice, as to not "throw their vote away." The best example is the following: You prefer candidate C, even though they stand no chance of winning election. You prefer candidate B over A. Since you know C will not win, you would rather vote for B to make sure A does not win. Hence, the never ending cycle of the denial of entry of third party candidates.

What the current GOP faces is nothing more than a basic cycle in American politics. Once the GOP centralizes their leadership and drafts a platform for the 21st century, they will have a resurgence once again. Never forget that what the GOP is currently facing is the same as the Democrats did in 2002, when the DNC was heavily criticized for lacking a strong political platform, and was absent of any real viable policy alternatives. But as we had seen, the political tides shifted without the Democrats having to lift a finger, and were easily handed sizable victories in 2006 and 2008. Sometime after the 2002 election cycle, Karl Rove once proclaimed that they had created a "permanent Republican majority." Only six years later the GOP is a conglomerate of factions struggling to create a message that resonates with the electorate, and has to play a game of "wait and see" when deciding how to counter Democratic actions. When their resurgence will occur is impossible to predict. What happens today will be forgotten tomorrow, and what happens tomorrow could change the course of politics as we know it. One thing is certain, however, and that is the GOP will rebound.

Of course, there is always a possibility of a third party gaining moderate support, most likely on a local or state level. Perhaps the factions within parties themselves will create new parties all together. The New Democrats Coalition could splinter off the Democratic party itself, and form a new party for fiscally conservative Democrats. But both of our major parties are heterogeneous in nature and have the "big tent" message. Although you may not agree with 100% of a party platform, you pick the party that you either feel has the best chance of winning, or most closely represents your ideals. There are pro-life members of Congress who are Democrats, and pro-gun control Republicans who serve as well. These factions within the parties do create tension, but when banded together, they create a coalition capable of winning elected office. The GOP will not disappear off the electoral map. If anything, the red states will become more red as their values and ideologies are threatened. No matter who the candidates are, odds are there will not be a Democratic-controlled Congressional delegation from Alabama. The flips in electoral control (when the Democrats used to own the South, as the Republicans owned the North) are rather dated, and the great expansionism of this country is over. The instability seen in the past, in both the growing nature of the United States and the weak institutionalization of Congress, is over. The greatest attribute of a healthy democracy is heavy partisanship and a clear division of political parties. Today, we see heavier divides than ever before. These divides are the very reason the GOP will eventually rebound, and the Democratic party will possibly someday once again serve in the capacity of the minority.