According to Klaus von Beyme

- socialist and social democratic parties

Since the age of 24, Beyme has been a member of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) Social democratic parties were popular during the 1950s – 1960s

Their organization being focused on two social pillars: the working class and salaried middle strata

Especially after 60 s Social democratic parties took all their power from working class General type of social democratic party was like;1- The constitution of the party in the form of a mass party , a great membership

organization with a remarkable capacity for the mobilization and orientation of its social base.

2- The constitution of the party most often in the form of an organization with a stronge armature , a well-formed and well-developed bureaucracy, possessing its own financial basis.

3- The constitution of the party as the strategic centre of a relatively wide spectrum of collateral organizations (unions, associations).

- agrarian parties Von Beyme (1985) considers the agrarians as a “sub-family” within the liberal “super-

family” which also contains radical liberals and liberal conservatives. Agrarian party represented farmers and their interests, built around culturally

conservative and economically moderate ideals. It is a party type that has been increasingly studied over the past few decades is the

revolves around either a regional or ethnic identity and characterized by economic conservatism and extreme cultural conservatism especially in terms of issues like immigration.

Agrarian parties formed through small farmers and peasants. These groups were injured by industrialization and economic depression—throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.

Agrarian parties were much more dominant in smaller countries where nation building was too gradual and small towns suffered greatly; mostly, In Scandinavia and Eastern Europe.

An agrarian party also formed in the United States and Australia. They fought the industrial powers undermining agriculture. In Minnesota, in the 1930s, Agrarians captured, the state government.

The agrarian parties, like the past communist parties, have since changed their names, or have been, taken in by larger colleagues.

Otto Kirchheimer's concept of the catch-all party (1966 ) ??? ‘’there is no Electoral party’’

According to Otto Kirchheimer’s thesis; Mass integration parties formerly held together by economic class or religious denomination and transformed themselves into a new party type, the catch-all party.

Catch-all parties can be identified by their size as larger mainstream (ana akım) parties, by their pursuit of votes at the expense of ideology and by their organizational style that is elite driven.

- I think there is nothing like Catch all party right now. Because every party has a target and way to show people that they are this

Majority Election

At least 50% of the votes plus one or a number greater than half of the total votes cast. With the majority election system, small parties have no chance to win a mandate unless

there are some constituencies with a population having political views differing much from those in the rest of the country.

The majority election system leads to parties uniting or building blocks until only two major players remain on the political scene.

So voters are forced to select between the candidates of two big parties Supporters of a minority party might feel not being represented by the member of

parliament rooted in their region because he or she represents the other party and other political concepts.

In a big nation, one member of parliament is going to represent some 100,000 inhabitants (nufus).

Two round system;

- The central feature of the two round system is a requirement for a second election if the first election does not produce a candidate with an absolute majority of the vote.

Alternative Vote;

- Under this system, voters not only indicate their first preference among the candidates, but also rank in order alternative preferences.

- To win, a candidate must receive a majority of the vote. To determine the winner, the number of first preference votes are tallied.

- If a candidate wins a majority of first preference votes, he or she is declared the winner.