According to pluralism, the power is split between the different actors of urban political arena. Robert Dahl, in his book “Who Governs” explains this theory very well and states that specialized influence exists according to which different leaders dominate different areas. Power is not only in the hands of one group of individuals.
It can be stated that the study of urban politics is not similar to that of comparative national politics. The reason is that urban politics is in abeyance whereas comparative national politics is flourishing and widely in use. Stone does not distinguish urban politics within the wider field of American politics or comparative politics. Clarence Stone’s research shows that how unfortunate it is that Comparative Politics sections comprises of double the members as that of urban politics of APSA (American Political Science Association).
Clarence Stone supports Lanyi’s balloon which can be depicted form his various research essays. He believes that politics, civil society and business are knitted together in complicated ways. So, urban regime analysis is an effort to observe how these various sections are linked together which sums up to a greater part analysis. Stone keeps on pointing to intersections to the forces, the need to differentiate each political regime from another, the varied analysis of historical trajectories, the governing differences in various cities, the resources and interests of the political actors and many other ways to resolve complexities without simplifying.