Political parties in a critical era

American political history is ordinarily divided into categories called party systems. Each system contains within it a broad similarity, an apparent "equilibrium" or "politics as usual" that distinguish it from all others. The generational regularity of the transition from one party system to the next is remarkable. Or, at least it was until the critical era expected in the 1960s apparently failed to materialize. Richard Niemi and I earlier argued that, in fact, there was a critical era in the 1960s, but it failed to be noticed because it was not a partisan realignment, bringing a new voting majority to power. Nonetheless, the change in public opinion, leadership, institutional structure, and policy agenda and coalition were pervasive. In this paper, I build on the argument mat the 1960s was a critical era. If it was, then we should be reaching the end of the consequent sixth party system moving toward (or actually being in) a new critical era, leading toward the seventh party system The dramatic electoral events of the 1990s provide a prima facie case that we may be encountering the end of politics as usual. The analysis in this paper fleshes our that argument. particular components considered include the change in electoral fortunes, noted above. The generational transition in presidential leadership and the nearly as dramatic change in congressional leadership are also considered. The rise of the South in the Republican congressional parry, in its sheer numbers, its source of leadership, and its impact on the party's agenda is also examined. Notice is taken as well of changes in electoral behavior, particularly recent increases in partisan identification and strength of attachment, declines in split-ticket voting, and the weakening of the electoral strength of incumbency. Collectively, this evidence suggests that the 1992 and, especially 1994 and 1996 elections show signs of the beginnings of a critical era.