I don’t know if that is quite accurate. California used to require you to be a member of a party to vote in the primary. Voters who were not in a party could only vote for nonpartisan offices in California such as district attorney or State Superintendent of Public Instruction.
California had to change its blanket primary law because the Democratic and Republican Parties challenged it in court saying that they had the right to have their parties’ presidential nominations decided only by voters of their own party.
I don’t think this is true. Someone who has lost a general election and holds no other elective office usually has no power at all.
The thing is that in the U.S., the party structure is quite loose. Except for very high population areas, each county party might have a permanent, unpaid staff of one or two people and then a string of volunteers who show up around election time. Other than that, there isn’t much of a party to “control” at the local level. There are only those party members who actually hold office.
Unless you have some other source of influence, such as personal connections, large donations to the party coffers, or some office, then being a general election loser really means you’re a nobody as far as the party is concerned, because the party itself is not a source of power.
This is also reflected at the national level, where political parties do have chairmen and other officials, but no real “leader,” who sets party policy and guides its members, be they candidates or office holders.
Not so. A politician’s job during election season is to get elected. Only the officeholder has the power of office; everyone who didn’t win is just a loser. Nobody “controls” the party in his district or nationally, except for force of personality combined with force of elective office - in fact, we have an excess of scorn for failures.
There is no way to “join” a US party other than by voter registration, and consequently no way for a party to expel or control anyone.
In states where one party is dominant, the primaries effectively select the winner. The minority party rarely has a contested race for the nomination, and often can’t even field a candidate. That means that, if you wish to actually influence who the winner will be rather than simply make a statement, it’s best to register as a member of the dominant party.
In Massachusetts, if you’d rather not sign up, be sure to call yourself “unenrolled”. If you register as an Independent, you’ll find yourself joining the Independent Party, a cult of paranoid hard-right survivalists. More than one person has found that out the unpleasant way.
Policy disagreements and evolutions that are reflected in party affiliations in parliamentary countries generally take place internally in the US parties. A third party, based on a particular agenda issue as they almost always are, that gains a significant level of support will find its issue co-opted by whichever of the majors is closer to it. Its supporters then tend to vote for that major party, on the grounds that it institutionally will be actually able to do something about the issue.
The lack of institutional control of the government’s branches by the party mechanisms, other than by Congress’ own self-adopted operating rules, actually tends to force the existence of 2 major parties. If there is only one major party and multiple smaller ones, the little guys have to join forces to have any power. With a parliamentary system, they can keep their identities and stay as temporary allies instead of merging.
That has been the pattern of US history from the beginning. With some shuffling of the deck in the pre-Civil-War era, there have always been 2 dominant parties and an occasional short-lived third one.
Winning the primary is only the primary goal if you are running into a district that is very favorable to you. Most of the largest cities have districts that are nearly entirely Democratic, especially in New York, L.A. and Chicago.
And there are many suburban and rural districts where the Republicans don’t have to worry about most races.
The trend now in reapportionment seems to be to protect the incumbents of both parties. It’s usually the safest way to get a reapportionment bill passed. Unless the state is losing a seat or two, the boundaries of the Congressional districts will be redrawn to make sure that all the players come back for a return engagement.
Unless you’re Gary Condit, who had his district chopped up, because the Democrats didn’t want him around any more. And he got trounced in his primary election.
I want to reiterate the point about winning the primary. I was surprised when my poly sci professor pointed this out, but he made a very good case. And he was experienced in politics being, as it were a grandson of Wayne Morse who had single-handedly turned Oregon from a one-party state ® to one that elected a lot of Dems. He was actually a student of Richard Neuberger who was a protege of Morse, died young of cancer and his wife Maureen took over his seat and held it for a number of years.
Anyway, here is now it works. Let us say you are a dem and have won the primary for US Rep, but lost the election. Maybe the governor is D and he has to make an appointment in your district. Who do you think he goes to for a recommendation? Or maybe the president is D and both senators are R. In PA, each county is governed by a 3 person county commission that has two from one party and one from the other. So even the minoity member has some clout and he will go to you for advice and help. The result is that even the losers in the general election can exercise considerable power if things break right. But the primary losers have nowhere to go. Although my information goes back 45 years, I think it has only gotten more so in recent years as primaries have taken over from any other form of political expression (caucuses, conventions, etc.).
It’s not really the case these days that a state governor can make a lot of significant appointments in a county. There might be one or two small offices, like a county representative of some state economic development department or the deputy registrar of motor vehicles, but these days positions like the latter are increasingly governed by laws requiring a fair bidding process.
I don’t know about Pennsylvania, but in Ohio, the three county commissioners are elected, so to even attain that level of influence, you have to actually win a general election. I think the reality is that there are very few counties that have absolutely no party activists, such that the only person available to consult is someone who has won a primary and lost the general election but has no other sources of power.
Most states are full two-party states now and there isn’t really the circumstance that there is no contact at the county level for the state party. That’s not to say a general election loser can’t garner some level of influence, but he or she will have to do something more than just win a primary and lose the general. At the very least, he’ll have to become buddies with the chairman of the county party or other local party activists or office-holders.