Butler and Stokes (1974) suggested three possibilities of links between class and partisanship. First option was that voters could perceive the party system as a case of 'us versus them'. It means that one party represents our interests whilst the other wants to take us down. Second, parties could represent class interests which did not have to be necessarily in conflict. They would represent one class' interests but would be by no means hostile to the other class. Third possibility was that the link could be normative, i.e. people simply identifying themselves with and therefore voting for a certain party. The majority of Labour party supporters believed the first two views to be true (39 per cent believing in opposing class interests and 47 per cent thinking in terms of the simple representation of class interests). Only 5 per cent of them were normative votes, and the rest did not believe in any linkages between class and partisanship. This situation looked different for Conservative voters. As much as 65 per cent of middle-class Tory supporters did not believe in links between class and voting while only small minorities thought of partisanship in terms of class (13 per cent, 12 per cent, and 10 per cent respectively). The differences in linking class and party identification among the two parties' supporters were caused by different portraying themselves by the parties. Labour described itself as a party representing interests of the working class whilst the Conservatives claimed to be a party of the entire nation. The Tories had to do so because they needed some support of the working class in order to be able to win elections (pp. 81-94 in: Denver 2003, p. 50).
As Crewe (1983) writes, 'in Great Britain, since World War I, “class” has been the primary, almost exclusive, social basis of party choice'. However, since the late 1960s the first signs of a weakening of links between class and voting could be noticed. New basis of party choice arose, such as language and culture in rural Wales and national identity in Scotland. A new generation of voters emerged. They were less likely to base their party choice in terms of class, unlike their parents. In 1970 class dealignment began to visibly occur (in: Denver and Hands 1992, p. 61). In the last forty years the British electorate has become more volatile (Heath et al. 1991, p. 10). One of the reasons for dealignment have been changes within the society. Manual work started being replaced by machinery and the manufacturing sector by service industry. The working class started to decline. In 1961 manual labourers made up 58 per cent of the workforce. In 1991 it was only 42 per cent. In 1961 about 38 per cent of employees worked in the manufacturing industry and 47 in the service sector. By 1991 the first figure dropped to 22 per cent and the latter went up to 71 per cent (Denver 2003, p. 77).
Also, the times when the majority of the working class voted for Labour and of the middle class for the Conservatives were over. According to Alford's Index, which measures class voting by finding the difference between percentage of Labour's working-class and middle-class votes, in the elections in the 1960s the score was 42 and 43 (the higher the score, the stronger class voting). However, in 1970 it fell to 33, then to 27 in 1979 and again to 21 in 1983. Another way of measuring class voting is finding the difference between the number of non-manual Conservative and manual Labour voters. In 1959 the proportion was 65 per cent, it dropped to 60 per cent in 1970 and finally to 47 per cent in 1983. Thus as we can see, class voting still existed but it was much less visible. Percentage of non-manual Conservative vote fell from 69 to 58 between 1959 and 1983, and manual Labour's vote dropped from 62 per cent to 38 per cent in the same period of time (pp. 183-215 in: Denver and Hands 1992, pp. 61-63).
One of the factors determining voting are issues. Issue voting means that people decide who to vote for by comparing the parties' policies on the most important issues. In the 1997, 2001 and 2005 elections, which Labour won, they led over the Conservatives in opinion polls on most of the key issues. However, this model is not perfect. Between 1979 and 1992 the Conservatives won all four elections even though the electorate supported Labour's values, not Thatcher's. Besides, both parties often have quite similar views on some issues. In such cases it is useful to distinguish these issues as 'valence'. Valence issues are those which are shared by both parties but people will vote for the party which according to them is more likely to achieve a better policy outcome (Garnett and Lynch 2009, pp. 483-485).
While party leaders were not considered to have been an important factor in voting in the era of alignment, they are thought to have a significant effect on voting nowadays. When people used to be loyal to their party, they liked their leader and disliked the leader of the opposition. However, now as fewer people have a strong party identification, they often decide who to vote for by their perception of party leaders. The modern media mostly focus on party leaders. Therefore, people are more likely to vote for the one who sells his or her party policy better. There are some restrictions of the importance of party leaders. If a party has a good leader but highly unconvincing policies, it will likely lose. For example, in 1979 Labour's James Callaghan was preferred to Margaret Thatcher but the Labour party lost the election (Garnett and Lynch 2009, pp. 487-488).
Another factor that has an impact on voting behaviour is the media, especially television and the press. In 2001, 88 per cent used television and 74 per cent used daily newspapers as a source of news and information about politics. There are significant differences how people perceive the press and television. Generally, television is described as impartial and balanced, trusted, directed at mass audience and the primary source of information. The press is seen as partisan (i.e. having a preference for one of the parties), not trusted, aimed at a segmented audience and a secondary source of information (Denver 2003, pp. 130-131). Many scholars argue over the actual effect of the media on voting. Some say it has little influence, others argue that is has a big influence on voters. As Denver (2003) writes, influence of television can be long term, and might shape people's views over a longer period of time. Besides, political campaigners spend a lot of time and money to make their party look as good as possible on television. As I have said before, party leaders have a big effect on how people vote, and people are significantly affected by the image of the leaders which they see on television. However, as Denver says, people who watch a certain party's television broadcast tend to vote for that party but not because they were influenced by the broadcast. They are already supporters of that party and the broadcast only reinforces their views (pp. 136-137). Denver (2003) presents a similar argument about the press. For him, there is evidence that people read certain newspapers, all of which are clearly partisan, in order to ensure and reinforce their party loyalties. They do not tend to change their party preference after reading a newspaper (pp. 138-141).
Voting behaviour also depends to some extent on economy. If the economy is in a good condition, it is more likely that people will vote for the governing party at the next election. However, objective factors such as inflation, taxes or employment are not the only factors that matter. What is also significant are people's personal predictions, i.e. whether they think they will be better or worse off under the governing party. That is why the Conservatives won the election in 1992. Even though the economy was in a bad state, people believed that the Tories rather than Labour would fix it. And despite that the economy was in a much better condition in 1997, the Conservatives lost the election. People believed that they would be better off under Labour not the Tories. They blamed John Major's government for tax rises, high interest rates and pound sterling's exit from the Exchange Rate Mechanism, and they did not associate them with the economic comeback (Garnett and Lynch 2009, pp. 489-490).
The last thing which, in my opinion, determines party allegiance is the ruling party's performance in the government. As Denver (2003) says, most voters currently choose their parties upon judgements (p. 124). He calls it judgemental voting and says that people's judgements of government performance are very important in party choice at general elections (Denver 1994, p. 102). If it is assumed that the governing party has been ruling well, it is likely that it will win the next election. On the other hand, if the party is thought to have failed, it is likely that it will lose the election. People base their judgements on the current state of the economy, the quality of established policies, the performance of the Prime Minister and unity within the party. For instance, the Labour party won the 1997 election because people thought that they were more competent and because the Conservative government was judged poorly. However, Labour won the 2005 election even though voters were not satisfied with Tony Blair's government. It happened though because they did not believe that the Conservatives had prepared good policies and that they had a professional attitude to rule the country (Garnett and Lynch 2009, pp. 490-491).
In my essay I tried to prove that as a result of the process of dealignment class does no longer determine party choice. It used to be a deciding factor in the 1950s and the 1960s but since 1970 it significantly declined. Today other aspects cause party allegiance. The first one that I mentioned is issue voting. People tend to vote for the party that according to them have proposed better and more successful policies. Another important factor are party leaders. It is not deciding but still very helpful if a party has a popular leader. The media is argued by many to have an influence on voting behaviour, too. People are thought to be especially affected by the press and, most importantly, television. Also the state of the economy determines how people vote. If the economy is in a good condition, people are more likely to vote for the ruling party, and vice versa. Finally I described judgemental voting, which means that people base their decision upon the ruling party's performance.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Denver, D.: Elections and Voters in Britain. Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke, 2003
Denver, D.: Elections and Voting Behaviour in Britain (2nd ed.). Harvester Wheatsheaf: Hemel Hempstead, 1994
Denver, D. and Hands, G.: Issues & Controversies in British Electoral Behaviour. Harvester Wheatsheaf: Hemel Hempstead, 1992
Garnett, M. and Lynch, P.: Exploring British Politics (2nd ed.). Pearson Education Limited: Harlow, 2009
Heath, A., Curtice, J., Evans, G., Jowell, R., Field, J. and Whiterspoon, S.: Understanding Political Change: The British Voter 1964-1987. Pergamon Press: Oxford, 1991
