Sprache: Englisch
Verlag: Cambridge University Press, 2009
ISBN 10: 0521139899 ISBN 13: 9780521139892
Anbieter: World of Books (was SecondSale), Montgomery, IL, USA
Zustand: Good. Item in good condition and has highlighting/writing on text. Used texts may not contain supplemental items such as CDs, info-trac etc.
Sprache: Englisch
Verlag: Cambridge University Press, 2009
ISBN 10: 0521139899 ISBN 13: 9780521139892
Anbieter: Ria Christie Collections, Uxbridge, Vereinigtes Königreich
EUR 44,59
Anzahl: Mehr als 20 verfügbar
In den WarenkorbZustand: New. In.
Sprache: Englisch
Verlag: Cambridge University Press, 2009
ISBN 10: 0521139899 ISBN 13: 9780521139892
Anbieter: Kennys Bookstore, Olney, MD, USA
Zustand: New. Why Dominant Parties Lose develops a theory of single-party dominance, its durability, and its breakdown into a fully competitive democracy. Num Pages: 368 pages, 19 tables. BIC Classification: 1KLCM; JPB; JPL; KCP. Category: (P) Professional & Vocational. Dimension: 229 x 154 x 22. Weight in Grams: 476. . 2009. Illustrated. paperback. . . . . Books ship from the US and Ireland.
Sprache: Englisch
Verlag: Cambridge University Press, 2009
ISBN 10: 0521139899 ISBN 13: 9780521139892
Anbieter: AHA-BUCH GmbH, Einbeck, Deutschland
Taschenbuch. Zustand: Neu. Druck auf Anfrage Neuware - Printed after ordering - Why have dominant parties persisted in power for decades in countries spread across the globe Why did most eventually lose Why Dominant Parties Lose develops a theory of single-party dominance, its durability, and its breakdown into fully competitive democracy. Greene shows that dominant parties turn public resources into patronage goods to bias electoral competition in their favor and virtually win elections before election day without resorting to electoral fraud or bone-crushing repression. Opposition parties fail because their resource disadvantages force them to form as niche parties with appeals that are out of step with the average voter. When the political economy of dominance erodes, the partisan playing field becomes fairer and opposition parties can expand into catchall competitors that threaten the dominant party at the polls. Greene uses this argument to show why Mexico transformed from a dominant party authoritarian regime under PRI rule to a fully competitive democracy.