Revision Update: Elections: Voting Behaviour and the Next General Election

As a general rule one should be wary of making speculative comment about the likely outcome of the next general election. Given the volatility of the electorate and the ever changing nature of the political landscape, it is incredibly difficult to make reasoned assumptions about how people will vote in the future and the factors that are likely to be of influence. Using the rational choice model however, we are able to identify certain key developments which might play some role in the next election.The rational choice model recognises that most voters are not strong identifiers and have no real connection with the political parties. They are essentially unaligned and consequently as Ivor Crewe once remarked “votes are up for grabs”. Voters then decide how to vote on the basis of a series of judgements made about several relevant factors. As an aid for revision, I have reduced these to the “4Ps”. These then are:1. Past performance2. Policies3. Personality4. Party UnityThis article is not the place to consider how these factors have each played out in recent elections. Suffice to say, they do provide a convincing explanation as to why certain parties won and lost elections. With regard to 2015, we can place some recent developments into a voting behaviour perspective.

1. Past performance. This is potentially the most important factor in that the electorate places a great deal of importance upon the ability of a government to manage the economy. The key question will not be just “Is the economy better now than it was at the time of the last election?” but rather, “who do you think is the best party to manage the economy?” Consequently, the key issue is economic competence or credibility. The Conservatives could still win the next election, even if the country is in recession, if the electorate believe that their policies are better than those of their rivals. This will invite a consideration of the effectiveness to date and consequently this assessment of the track record of government can also be termed “retrospective voting.”

2. Policies. The electorate could also look to the future and gauge which party they prefer. This can be termed prospective voting. A central issue in this regard is the state of public opinion in the sense that they may have moved to the right or to the left. There are clearly links to economic competence mentioned above as well. There is considerable debate at the moment as to whether or not the public has become less sympathetic to the plight of the poor and others as the recession has continued. Data suggests that people are giving less to charity and are less supportive of a welfare state that may encourage dependency. These factors could play into the hands of the Conservatives.

There is though a dilemma that the Conservatives face. When they adopted more right wing policies as did in the 2001 election campaign, they were deemed to be uncaring and perceived to be “the nasty party”[1]. Cameron’s success in 2010 was partly due to the makeover he gave the party in attempting to present a softer Conservative party that focused on the NHS and the environment. If he allows the party to present a tougher image that centres on right wing values such as continuing with the austerity measures, being anti-immigration and the welfare state and he adopts a more euro-sceptic approach to relations with the EU, he runs the risk of creating a vacuum in the centre ground that Labour could be quick to exploit. Lord Ashcroft[2], has recognised in Project Blueprint[3] that “that to govern alone , the Tories need to attract and hold people who did not vote for them last time and may have never done so before”.[4]

Consequently a key issue will be the extent to which the Conservative party moves to the right as some demand, such as with the recently formed Conservative Voice, led by David Davis and Liam Fox. Such a move could lose the Conservative party “the vital centre” and cost them the election if the public as a whole have not moved in a similar direction.

3. Personality. Given the increased role of the mass media as a means of political communication and information, elections in the UK have acquired a growing “presidential” quality with a focus on the leadership of the two parties. It seems highly unlikely that there will be a repeat of “Cleggmania” evident after the first leaders’ debates in 2010, but the personal qualities of Cameron and Miliband could prove crucial. Polls have shown that Cameron is presently preferred to Miliband and there have signs that the Conservative campaign will focus on Miliband as opposed to Labour’s policies as part of their election strategy.

4. Party Unity. The Conservative party has been rather divided since forming the government in 2010. There have been significant backbench rebellions over the issues of the EU referendum and the House of Lords reforms. Critics have suggested that Cameron has offered the Liberal Democrats too many concessions and there have been suggestions that the need to accommodate Lib Dems in government has denied some Conservatives the chance of promotion. As mentioned above the availability of senior Conservatives outside of the cabinet with Davis and Fox has meant that anti- Cameron sentiment has a rival camp in which to reside.

Labour have been able to maintain a fair degree of unity. “The shadow cabinet is more united than Labour has been for many a long year and Miliband has won authority over them.” according to Toynbee[5].

It should be noted that no single factor alone can provide an adequate explanation of voting behaviour but rather it is a combination of these factors over the medium term that serve to act as the key influences upon the electorate. Consequently whilst the Conservatives may lead in some areas, Labour could lead in others.