how did "support of free silver","lack of wealthy backers", "advocating a greater voice in government", and "third-party status" contribute to the end of Populist Party?

Here are some sites that will help you with that question. ( History section)

thanks...but I still do not really understand...

You will be helped specifically about the first two items on your list of reasons why the Populist party ended. Once you understand those reason the others together with the links that you were given should be easier. Many students find this topic to be amongst the most difficult in US History.

The economics behind the free silver movement is not easy to understand. Free silver meant the unlimited coinage of silver which would result in higher prices for farm goods and easier repayment of debts such as farmers mortgages, since there would be a period of monetary inflation.

Hint: The support of free silver meant the support of farmers who were debtors and the silver interests. They faced the opposition of creditors, and the enlarged number of factory workers. With that hint in mind now consider why wealthy people did not back the Populist farmers who wanted inflation and the devaluation of our monetary supply.

well..thanks...but I don't really get the "third-party status" term...

Read carefully.

Remember that we're not going to do your homework FOR YOU, but we'll be happy to point you in the right direction and give you feedback once you come up with your own thoughts on a question.


The Populist Party was a prominent political party in the late 19th century in the United States. Several factors, including support of free silver, lack of wealthy backers, advocating a greater voice in government, and third-party status, contributed to the party's decline and eventual end. Let's take a closer look at each of these factors and how they played a role:

1. Support of Free Silver: The Populist Party strongly supported the coinage of silver to be used as money alongside gold. They believed that increasing the money supply with silver would help alleviate economic hardships for farmers and promote inflation, benefiting those in debt. However, this position was not widely supported by the general public, nor by powerful financial interests, who favored the gold standard. The lack of broad support for free silver made it difficult for the Populist Party to gain political traction and undermined their ability to achieve their policy goals.

To understand the opposition to free silver, you can explore the economic debates of the era, monetary policy discussions, and the interests of various stakeholders such as bankers, industrialists, and farmers.

2. Lack of Wealthy Backers: The Populist Party heavily depended on the support of farmers, labor unions, and other working-class groups. Unlike major parties like the Democrats and Republicans, the Populists did not have significant backing from wealthy individuals or corporate interests. This lack of financial resources limited the party's ability to finance campaigns, engage in widespread advertising, and effectively compete against major party candidates. Without substantial financial backing, the Populist Party struggled to sustain its operations, reach a broader audience, and remain competitive in elections.

To explore this further, you can study the financial support mechanisms of political parties during that period, campaign financing, and the influence of money in politics.

3. Advocating a Greater Voice in Government: The Populist Party emerged as a response to perceived inequalities and disenfranchisement. They advocated for reforms that would give a greater voice and political power to farmers, workers, and other marginalized groups in society. However, their calls for radical changes to the political and economic system were met with resistance from established elites and mainstream politicians who saw these demands as a threat to their power.

To understand the challenges faced by the Populist Party in advocating for a greater voice in government, you can study the resistance to reform, the response of existing political institutions to populist demands, and the dynamics of power in the political arena.

4. Third-Party Status: The Populist Party operated as a third party, separate from the two major parties, the Democrats and Republicans. While the Populists were able to gain some electoral victories and exert influence at the state and local levels, the two-party system posed significant hurdles. The dominance of the Democrats and Republicans prevented the Populists from establishing a more significant presence on the national stage. It also limited the resources and opportunities available to third-party candidates, making it difficult for them to compete effectively in national elections.

To explore the challenges faced by third parties, you can examine the historical context of the two-party system in the United States, the barriers to third-party success, and the impact of third parties on the political landscape.

By analyzing these factors, we can see how the support of free silver, lack of wealthy backers, advocating a greater voice in government, and third-party status collectively contributed to the decline and ultimate demise of the Populist Party. Understanding the historical and political context surrounding these factors is crucial to gaining a comprehensive understanding of their impact on the party.