This is because they are always having to change their leader and people in charge. For every election there is a new person to rally behind.
Chat with our AI personalities
the two major parties are often described as though they were highly organized, close knit, well disciplined groups. neither party is anything of the kind, both are highly decentralized, fragmented, disjointed, and often beset by factions and internal squabbling. (Federalism, the nominating process)
yes
Political Parties.
Interest groups are different from political parties in the sense that they are the ones paying the political parties to help them represent certain views or get certain bills passed in their favor.
Political parties in the U.S. are highly decentralized and "weak" (according to most political scientists). This is likely because of the primary system combined with a first-past-the-post electoral system, in which voters from individual districts choose the nominee for each party. This allows voters to choose who most reflect their values (like pro-gun, anti-abortion Democrats in the South). In the UK, where the parties are much stronger and more centralized, the leadership of the parties choose the nominees for each district -- the voters get no say. This lends itself to party members falling in line with the wants of the party leaders much more. John McCain and Arlen Specter are basically impossible in the UK.