" Never the less state as well as national parties continue to exist and function, and they show many signs of being stronger, more complex, and better financed than they were a generation ago. If this is true, it must be because the parties are doing a better job of serving the candidates." (Political Parties. 48) The author refers to political parties as doing a better job of serving their candidates. A political parties main focus is to obtain public office, if this is true, a party must do everything in its power to serve its candidates. Parties provide massive financial support to aid their candidates with numerous incurred expenses in running a campaign. They also perform many laborious and time-consuming tasks such as: mailings, advertisements, websites, scheduling, and registering and mobilizing voters. Parties are beginning to become more efficient in the "business" of politics. I agree that political parties have become stronger, more complex, and better financed. It almost seems like the party that runs the better business during an election is the party that wins. Parties sell their candidates to us like mutual funds, with emphasis on track record, piece of mind, stability and the promise of growth. As much as parties serve their candidates lets just hope that candidates turned incumbents don't blindly serve their parties. "Why multiparty is preferable. The most powerful argument for multiparty is that it is more natural." (Multiparty Politics in America. 59) The author describes how a well-practiced multiparty system would be better at producing majority rule than our present bi-hegemonic system. In a bi-hegemonic system it is not necessary for either party to win a majority of the eligible votes, but only the majority of the votes cast. Party leaders consider it a waste of time and money to campaign for the habitual nonvoters (most likely the result of lack of agreement with either party platform).