The Nationalization of American Political Parties, 1880–1896

Abstract

This book investigates the creation of the first truly nationalized party organizations in the United States in the late nineteenth century, an innovation that reversed the parties' traditional privileging of state and local interests in presidential nominations and the conduct of national campaigns. Between 1880 and 1896, party elites crafted a defense of these national organizations that charted the theoretical parameters of American party development into the twentieth century. With empowered national committees and a new understanding of the parties' role in the political system, national party leaders dominated American politics in new ways, renewed the parties' legitimacy in an increasingly pluralistic and nationalized political environment, and thus maintained their relevance throughout the twentieth century. The new organizations particularly served the interests of presidents and presidential candidates, and the presidencies of the late nineteenth century demonstrate the first stirrings of modern presidential party leadership.

Presidents as Agents of Change

“…Taken all together, then, a shift in the party's approach on the issue held the potential to directly benefit Cleveland's various political purposes, including renomination and reelection. Although very few nineteenth‐century presidents had received a second nomination, Cleveland realized that if he took the lead in disciplining the Democratic Party on this issue, he might be able to “establish his reputation as a party leader,” thereby making himself indispensable to his party and ensuring his renomination (Klinghard , 166).…”

“…This break with tradition drew considerable attention, which was precisely Cleveland's intention. Klinghard explains that Cleveland strategically sought to “grab popular attention, inviting public comment and giving the party‐in‐the‐electorate reason to read the message in the privacy of their homes—it was the ‘campaign of education’ applied to presidential leadership” (Klinghard , 167).…”

“…Of course, the Democratic platform already stood for tariff reform, so what Cleveland's message did was to raise the salience of the issue, “goading” Democrats to take a firm stand in favor of reform prior to the election. In this roundabout way, Cleveland sought to make subsequent legislative action more likely (Klinghard , 166‐67).…”

“…Congressional Democrats mobilized for tariff reform, and on relevant roll call votes in the House between 1888 and 1897, the oppositional Democratic bloc disappeared completely. Some were replaced by Republicans after the 1888 elections, but Cleveland's effect on his party was clear: over 30 state party conventions endorsed tariff reform, many mentioning Cleveland by name; and the leader of the Democratic protectionists, Randall, was rebuked by his own state party and local party club (Bensel , 471; Klinghard , 169). Cleveland's message was also instrumental in ensuring his renomination in 1888.…”

“…Cleveland's message was also instrumental in ensuring his renomination in 1888. By tying himself so closely to the tariff reform issue, he required of his party “either an about‐face on the tariff or a difficult effort to explain how another nominee better represented the party's stance” (Klinghard , 171).…”