In their study of the state-level party organizations in the US, Cotter et al. (1984) introduce a theory of party organizational strength, arguing that the strongest parties exhibit both organizational complexity and programmatic capacity. In the present era, organizational complexity and programmatic capacity still emerge as the primary dimensions of party organizational strength, but this research demonstrates the importance of new indicators of party technological capacity to our understanding of party effectiveness in the early 21st century. In particular, parties that hire technologically-oriented staff are best equipped to carry out party programmatic activities, as they have the capacity to conduct voter mobilization programs and sophisticated data analytics in an online environment. Using data from a 2011 survey of the state party organizations in the US, this research shows that party organizational strength and party technological capacity are interrelated and overlapping concepts and are essential to understanding the parties’ programmatic and voter outreach capabilities.
Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (1986) The Transformation in American Politics: Implications for Federalism. Report, U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, Washington, DC.
2.
AldrichJH (1995) Why Parties? The Origin and Transformation of Political Parties in America. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
3.
AldrichJH (2000) Southern parties in state and nation. The Journal of Politics62: 643–670.
4.
AldrichJH (2011) Why Parties? A Second Look, Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
5.
BroxBJ (2013) Back in the Game: Political Party Campaigning in an Era of Reform, Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
6.
CattellRB (1966) The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research1: 245–276.
7.
CotterCPGibsonJLBibbyJF. (1984) Party Organizations in American Politics, New York: Praeger.
8.
CotterCPGibsonJLBibbyJF. (1989) State party organizations, 1960–1980: [United States]. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) [distributor]. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR08281.v1.
9.
DulioDAGarrettRS (2007) Organizational strength and campaign professionalism in state parties. In: GreenJCCoffeyDJ (eds) The State of the Parties: The Changing Role of Contemporary American Parties. 5th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, pp. 199–216.
10.
ElmerGLangloisGMcKelveyF (2013) The Permanent Campaign: New Media, New Politics. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.
11.
FarmerRFenderR (2003) Casting a weak net: Political party web sites in 2000. In: GreenJCFarmerR (eds) The State of the Parties: The Changing Role of Contemporary American Parties. 4th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, pp. 190–202.
12.
ForeroCGMaydeu-OlivaresAGallardo-PujolD (2009) A Monte Carlo study comparing DWLS and ULS estimation. Structural Equation Modeling16: 625–641.
GibsonRRommeleA (2001) Changing campaign communications: A party-centered theory of professionalized campaigning. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics6: 31–43.
15.
GibsonRK (2015) Party change, social media and the rise of ‘citizen-initiated’ campaigning. Party Politics21: 183–197.
16.
GilleyWFUhligGE (1993) Factor analysis and ordinal data. Education114: 258–264.
17.
GoodhartNJ (1999) The new party machine: Information technology in state political parties. In: GreenJCSheaDM (eds) The State of the Parties: The Changing Role of Contemporary American Parties. 3rd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, pp. 120–134.
18.
HuckshornRJ (1976) Party Leadership in the States. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.
19.
KaiserHF (1960) The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement20: 141–151.
20.
KlinghardD (2010) The Nationalization of American Political Parties, 1880–1896. New York: Cambridge University Press.
21.
KreissD (2012) Taking Our Country Back: The Crafting of Networked Politics from Howard Dean to Barack Obama. New York: Oxford University Press.
22.
La RajaRJ (2008) Small Change: Money, Political Parties, and Campaign Finance Reform. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
23.
LeeC-TZhangGEdwardsMC (2012) Ordinary least squares estimation of parameters in exploratory factor analysis with ordinal data. Multivariate Behavioral Research47: 314–339.
24.
MargolisMResnickDLevyJ (2003) Major parties dominate, minor parties struggle: US Elections and the internet. In: GibsonRNixonPWardS (eds) Political Parties and the Internet: Net Gain?New York: Routledge, pp. 53–69.
25.
MayhewDR (1986) Placing Parties in American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
26.
National Municipal League (1967) State Party Structures and Procedures: A State-by-State Compendium. Report, National Municipal League, New York.
27.
NorrisP (2005) Political Parties and Democracy in Theoretical and Practical Perspectives: Developments in Party Communications. Report, National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, Washington, DC.
28.
OlsonDM (1971) Attributes of state political parties: An exploration of theory and data. In: RiedelJA (ed.) New Perspectives in State and Local Politics. Waltham: Xerox College Publishing, pp. 123–158.
OwenD (2013) Political parties and the media: The parties respond to technological innovation. In: BrewerMDMaiselLS (eds) The Parties Respond: Changes in American Parties and Campaigns. 5th ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, pp. 237–264.
TeeceDJ (1996) Firm organization, industrial structure, and technological innovation. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization31: 193–224.
37.
ThurstoneLL (1947) Multiple Factor Analysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
38.
WardSGibsonRNixonP (2003) Parties and the internet: An overview. In: GibsonRNixonPWardS (eds) Political Parties and the Internet: Net Gain?London and New York: Routledge, pp. 11–38.
39.
WareA (2002) The American Direct Primary: Party Institutionalization and Transformation in the North. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40.
WringDHorrocksI (2001) Virtual hype? The transformation of political parties? In: AxfordBLugginsR (eds) New Media and Politics. London: Sage, pp. 191–209.
