Model Essay Answers:
AQA A-Level Politics 7152: A* US Essays [Paper 2]
Section B Extract Questions 25 Markers
● Analyse, evaluate and compare the arguments in the above extract regarding the extent to which the US can be
said to have a two-party system. [23/25]*
*Extract redacted due to third-party copyright reasons.
Section C US & UK Comparative Essay Questions 25 Markers
● ‘Checks and balances work better in the US Constitution than in the UK Constitution.’ Analyse and evaluate this
statement. In your answer you should draw on material from across the whole range of your course of study in
politics. [24/25]
● ‘Devolution has brought the UK closer to the federal system of government found in the US.’ Analyse and evaluate
this statement. [23/25]
● ‘Money is the main factor for Pressure Group Success in the US & UK’. Analyse & Evaluate the statement. [25/25]
© 2026 Grades Express
, US Party Systems Practice Extract Question 25 Marker
Score: [23/25]
[Extract redacted due to third-party copyright reasons.]
Analyse, evaluate and compare the arguments in the above extract regarding the extent to which the US can be said to have
a two-party system. [25 Marker]
────────────
The provenance is from an academic textbook for A-level students suggesting it is writing to inform rather than persuade
and, thus, is likely to provide a balanced view of the US being a two party system: being the latest edition, it would also be
providing up-to-date arguments, regarding electoral outcomes, legislative and executive control as well as the nature of the
major parties in the US.
The US conforms to the two party definition that the two major parties consistently earn more than 80% of the popular vote
- (they consistently earn more than 95%); in 2024 it was 98% and in 2004 & 2012 it was 99%. This suggests, third parties are
not viable competitors in the presidential race (e.g. in 2021 Jill Stein- the most successful independent candidate only
gained 0.6% of the vote). Hence, the two parties exercise control over the executive with every president since 1853 being a
Democrat or GOP member. This is highly affected by the electoral College winner takes all system, which disadvantages third
parties with wide the shallow support e.g. In 1992, Perot won 0 ECV on 18.9% of the vote whereas Clinton & G.W.Bush won
301, 191 ECV on 42.7% & 43.4% of the popular vote respectively). However, third parties exercise indirect electoral success
via a 'spoiler effect' e.g. Green Party candidate Nader in 2000 having 4,700 votes in Florida which could have gained Al Gore
an electoral victory; Likewise, Perot split the conservative (Republican) vote in 1992 leading to Clinton's decisive victory.
They may also indirectly influence policy e.g. Perot's budget deficit and balanced budget Commitments were successfully
implemented by Clinton and accepted by GOP members. However, these influences, though arguably significant, are highly
limited and may even disadvantage third parties e.g. Perot 1996 lost his key campaign driver (his policy that was
appropriated by Democrats) - hence, a multiparty system doesn't seem a reasonable evaluation.
Likewise, legislative dominance by Democrats and GOP is consistently greater than 90%. In state governments in 2009, 2020
and 2024 all state governors were Democrat or Republican, with only one independent in 2011. This is reflected in federal
governments as FPTP incentivizes tactical voting to avoid wasted votes as third parties with widespread support in the
country are unlikely to gain a plurality of the vote - this has resulted in a bicameral legislature dominated by the two parties
e.g. in 2024 & 2020 there were 2 independent senators and 1 & 0 members of the HoR respectively that were independent.
This lack of democratic representation hinders policymaking by third parties. Independents also tend to caucus with
Democrats and join Democrat committee meetings e.g. Angus King (Maine) & Sanders (Vermont) in 2016 - enhancing lack of
diverse views and pluralist democracy as Democrats may simply enforce party agendas on independents. However,
independents have been crucial in 'close votes' allowing them to gain power in the legislative process e.g. Sanders was the
needed 60th vote for Obama care which he accepted on the condition of $10 billion funding to community health centres.
However, this third party influence is a rare occurrence and the two party control over legislation continues to dominate, in
agreement with the extract.
Alternatively, it has been suggested that the USA is (as the extract mentions) a 50 party system as federalism has led to a
lack of national leadership, centralisation and discipline in the two major parties. This has led to increased factionalism as
elections are run on a state-by-state basis e.g. Joe Manchin a conservative Blue Dog in West Virginia (a red state) and AOC a
member of the progressive caucus in New York (a blue state) - meaning states are offered adequate representation - like in a
multi-party system consisting of a diversity of views. By contrast, this may enhance the two party presence of the USA as
'Catch-All' / Big Tent parties crowd out third parties and independents as voters are more likely to take part in 'groups' /
'movements' e.g. Tea Party, which created a strong Right Wing presence in the GOP rather than supporting a new third party
with similar views. This means there is little ideological space for third parties to compete. However an increase in partisan
identification (ANES states only 11.8% of US voters in 2020 identified as 'independent', while those on lower magnitudes of
leans were still more likely to behave as committed voters) and increasing party polarization is potentially creating new gaps
e.g. Sinema (a former Blue Dog Democrat) went independent in 2023 as conservative Democrats saw declining membership
in the Blue Dogs - thus, this argument may no longer be significant.
Furthermore, the extract acknowledges that GOP or Democrat party membership grants previous outsiders an advantage in
the election, e.g. Eisenhower & Trump, which can help win the elections. This is due to systematic challenges firstly in
campaign finance which champion the two party system: the presidential race matched funds needed by big national
© 2026 Grades Express
AQA A-Level Politics 7152: A* US Essays [Paper 2]
Section B Extract Questions 25 Markers
● Analyse, evaluate and compare the arguments in the above extract regarding the extent to which the US can be
said to have a two-party system. [23/25]*
*Extract redacted due to third-party copyright reasons.
Section C US & UK Comparative Essay Questions 25 Markers
● ‘Checks and balances work better in the US Constitution than in the UK Constitution.’ Analyse and evaluate this
statement. In your answer you should draw on material from across the whole range of your course of study in
politics. [24/25]
● ‘Devolution has brought the UK closer to the federal system of government found in the US.’ Analyse and evaluate
this statement. [23/25]
● ‘Money is the main factor for Pressure Group Success in the US & UK’. Analyse & Evaluate the statement. [25/25]
© 2026 Grades Express
, US Party Systems Practice Extract Question 25 Marker
Score: [23/25]
[Extract redacted due to third-party copyright reasons.]
Analyse, evaluate and compare the arguments in the above extract regarding the extent to which the US can be said to have
a two-party system. [25 Marker]
────────────
The provenance is from an academic textbook for A-level students suggesting it is writing to inform rather than persuade
and, thus, is likely to provide a balanced view of the US being a two party system: being the latest edition, it would also be
providing up-to-date arguments, regarding electoral outcomes, legislative and executive control as well as the nature of the
major parties in the US.
The US conforms to the two party definition that the two major parties consistently earn more than 80% of the popular vote
- (they consistently earn more than 95%); in 2024 it was 98% and in 2004 & 2012 it was 99%. This suggests, third parties are
not viable competitors in the presidential race (e.g. in 2021 Jill Stein- the most successful independent candidate only
gained 0.6% of the vote). Hence, the two parties exercise control over the executive with every president since 1853 being a
Democrat or GOP member. This is highly affected by the electoral College winner takes all system, which disadvantages third
parties with wide the shallow support e.g. In 1992, Perot won 0 ECV on 18.9% of the vote whereas Clinton & G.W.Bush won
301, 191 ECV on 42.7% & 43.4% of the popular vote respectively). However, third parties exercise indirect electoral success
via a 'spoiler effect' e.g. Green Party candidate Nader in 2000 having 4,700 votes in Florida which could have gained Al Gore
an electoral victory; Likewise, Perot split the conservative (Republican) vote in 1992 leading to Clinton's decisive victory.
They may also indirectly influence policy e.g. Perot's budget deficit and balanced budget Commitments were successfully
implemented by Clinton and accepted by GOP members. However, these influences, though arguably significant, are highly
limited and may even disadvantage third parties e.g. Perot 1996 lost his key campaign driver (his policy that was
appropriated by Democrats) - hence, a multiparty system doesn't seem a reasonable evaluation.
Likewise, legislative dominance by Democrats and GOP is consistently greater than 90%. In state governments in 2009, 2020
and 2024 all state governors were Democrat or Republican, with only one independent in 2011. This is reflected in federal
governments as FPTP incentivizes tactical voting to avoid wasted votes as third parties with widespread support in the
country are unlikely to gain a plurality of the vote - this has resulted in a bicameral legislature dominated by the two parties
e.g. in 2024 & 2020 there were 2 independent senators and 1 & 0 members of the HoR respectively that were independent.
This lack of democratic representation hinders policymaking by third parties. Independents also tend to caucus with
Democrats and join Democrat committee meetings e.g. Angus King (Maine) & Sanders (Vermont) in 2016 - enhancing lack of
diverse views and pluralist democracy as Democrats may simply enforce party agendas on independents. However,
independents have been crucial in 'close votes' allowing them to gain power in the legislative process e.g. Sanders was the
needed 60th vote for Obama care which he accepted on the condition of $10 billion funding to community health centres.
However, this third party influence is a rare occurrence and the two party control over legislation continues to dominate, in
agreement with the extract.
Alternatively, it has been suggested that the USA is (as the extract mentions) a 50 party system as federalism has led to a
lack of national leadership, centralisation and discipline in the two major parties. This has led to increased factionalism as
elections are run on a state-by-state basis e.g. Joe Manchin a conservative Blue Dog in West Virginia (a red state) and AOC a
member of the progressive caucus in New York (a blue state) - meaning states are offered adequate representation - like in a
multi-party system consisting of a diversity of views. By contrast, this may enhance the two party presence of the USA as
'Catch-All' / Big Tent parties crowd out third parties and independents as voters are more likely to take part in 'groups' /
'movements' e.g. Tea Party, which created a strong Right Wing presence in the GOP rather than supporting a new third party
with similar views. This means there is little ideological space for third parties to compete. However an increase in partisan
identification (ANES states only 11.8% of US voters in 2020 identified as 'independent', while those on lower magnitudes of
leans were still more likely to behave as committed voters) and increasing party polarization is potentially creating new gaps
e.g. Sinema (a former Blue Dog Democrat) went independent in 2023 as conservative Democrats saw declining membership
in the Blue Dogs - thus, this argument may no longer be significant.
Furthermore, the extract acknowledges that GOP or Democrat party membership grants previous outsiders an advantage in
the election, e.g. Eisenhower & Trump, which can help win the elections. This is due to systematic challenges firstly in
campaign finance which champion the two party system: the presidential race matched funds needed by big national
© 2026 Grades Express
