It has been shown that ethnicity does play a part in voting behaviour. In 1997, 70% of Asian and 86% of black voters supported the Labour Party. Indeed, between 1974 and 1997 the proportion of black and Asian voters voting Labour has often been in the 80s. Ethnicity is clearly a very influential factor in voting behaviour.
Class remains the single most important social factor in determining voting behaviour. In the period 1945 to 1970, nearly two-thirds of all voters voted for their ‘natural’ class party. Indeed, Pulzer (1968) suggested that ‘class is the basis of voting behaviour – all else is embellishment and detail’.
Traditionally, class is related to occupation, with those in manual jobs – the working class – expected to vote Labour, whilst those in non-manual jobs – middle and upper class – expected to vote Conservative. However, since 1979, psephologists such as Crewe have argued that class dealignment has taken place; the link between occupational class and party preference is therefore now far weaker.
In 1997, 39% of non-manual workers voted Conservative and 40% voted Labour, 25% of manual workers voted Conservative and 60% voted Labour. On the other hand, in 1964, 62% of non-manual workers voted Conservative and 22% voted Labour, 22% of manual workers voted Conservative and 64% voted Labour. This shows an overall fall in the difference between the voting behaviour of manual and non-manual workers, but that class is still an influence.
In general social factors do influence the voting behaviour of some people, though this is not true for the majority. Therefore, there must be other reasons for their voting behaviour that lie in the political issues.
The party identification model refers to a psychological attachment to a political party, which influences attitudes and directly affects voting behaviour. This influence has been shown to be decreasing since 1970 due to a drop in the number of voters identifying strongly with the main parties, known as partisan dealignment.
The rational choice model emphasises the significance of making rational decisions rather than emotional ones. Within this model there is the suggestion that people vote according to the issues directly affecting them; however it is difficult to find an exact link. It also suggests there is a connection between voters’ political values, ideologies, and their voting behaviour. People can also vote for the party they judge most likely to raise or protect their present or future standard of living, or they might focus retrospectively on the parties’ past records. Another, and increasingly significant, factor that could affect people’s voting behaviour is their view of the competence of the party leader.
I suggest that political issues nowadays influence voting behaviour more than social factors. Social factors used to be a lot more influential in the past, but as time has moved on their influence has decreased. This could be due to greater social mobility, as well as revised attitudes to issues such as class, gender and religion. I do however acknowledge the influence of ethnicity in voting behaviour though do not feel it is as significant as that of political issues and ideologies.
OTHER POINTS YOU MIGHT LIKE TO CONSIDER
- Right up until the 1960s, about a third of the working class voted Conservative out of DEFERENCE – i.e. they saw it as their duty to vote for ‘the natural party of government’. Today, deference has all but disappeared.
- There has been significant CLASS DEALIGNMENT since the 1960s – i.e. many of the working class became more affluent and often adopted middle class lifestyles, and thus voted Conservative. This ‘embourgeoisement’ was clearly seen in the 1980s, when large numbers of the ‘new working class’ (non-trade union member, non public sector worker, non council house resident) supported the Conservatives, and were attracted by their policies – on tax and council house sales in particular.
- Partisan Dealignment has also been evident since the 1970s, and accounts for the greater volatility of the electorate, and also for the rising trend support for third parties.
- INSTRUMENTAL voting has been a major feature of all elections since at least 1979 – i.e. the growing tendency of ‘floating’ voters to support the party that will bring them the greatest personal benefits. Voters tend, in increasing numbers, to ‘shop around’ for the best party to meet their particular needs. This links with perceptions of general COMPETENCE in office – in particular, the Conservatives were trusted to handle the economy better until after 1992; now the roles are reversed – with Labour’s transition to ‘New Labour’, the party is now seen as capable of managing the economy more successfully and prudently.
- There are marked REGIONAL variations in voting patterns – so, for example, the Conservatives now have only one seat in Scotland, none in Wales, and none in most northern cities. In many rural and some suburban areas, the two party contest is really now between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. There are far fewer marginal seats than before, which suggests that the country is more regionally polarised.
- Party image has become critical. In particular the electorate does not vote for divided parties (Conservatives, 1997 and 2001) or for parties seen as extreme (Labour, 1983 and 1987). The image of the PARTY LEADER has become much more important too – so, for example, Kinnock (1992) and Hague (2001) did not LOOK LIKE prime ministers.
- Tactical voting was a big feature of the 1997 and 2001 elections – i.e where voters support the party most likely to oust the Conservative incumbent. This has helped the Liberal Democrats to target seats and to achieve their largest number of MPs since the 1920s. People are also increasingly willing to vote for smaller parties if they feel passionately about a single issue – the Referendum Party (1997) and UKIP (2001) are obvious examples.
- Turnout fell below 60% in 2001. This suggests a growing number of voters are alienated from ALL parties. Note also that many people vote very differently in non-parliamentary elections – for example, UKIP’s support in the European Parliament elections gave them a dozen seats, the Greens have seats in the Greater London Assembly, etc.
