Voting Behaviour at the
2010 General Election
Dr Justin Greaves
University of Warwick
A significant election
• TV debates between
the three party
leaders
• Rise and fall (and
rise again?) of Nick
Clegg
• First ‘hung
parliament’ since
Feb 1974 (and first
coalition since 1945)
The results
• Con:
• Lab:
• LD’s:
36.1%
29%
23%
(307 seats)
(258 seats)
(57 seats)
• Turnout: 65.1%
(* these are all UK figures – will get
slightly different figures if exclude NI)
What is a ‘swing’?
• Swing is a tool which
helps explain how
elections are won and
lost
• In simple terms it is a
way of measuring
how the public's
support of political
parties changes from
one election to the
next
The calculation
• Step 1. Add the rise in one party's share
in the vote to the fall in the second
party's share of the vote
• Step 2. Divide your figure by two. The
resulting figure is the swing
An example
• In the 2005 General Election the Labour
Party had a lead of 3% over the
Conservative Party
• In 2010, the Conservatives had a 7%
lead over Labour.
• So the swing is 3 + 7/2
5%
Too much celebrity?
• Is it becoming too
much like the X
Factor or Britain’s
Got Talent?
• Leaders judged on
how good they look
on TV?
The Lib Dem surge
• Surge after first
debate
• Did not translate into
votes
• Made up of younger
people less likely to
vote?
• ‘Spiral of enthusiasm’
• Did it ever exist?
Brown’s bigot gaffe
• Gordon Brown calls
Gillian Duffy a ‘bigot’
• But how important are
election campaigns?
• EG: Labour still win
Rochdale
• BUT turnout higher in
marginal seats (so
campaigning harder
matters?)
• Curtice et al provide
a helpful analysis on
the 2010 general
election
Some general points (1)
• Decline in two party system (party
identification?)
• Just 2/3rds of the electorate voted for
the Conservative and Labour Parties
(lowest than at any election since and
including 1922)
Some general points (2)
• Almost one voter in 10 (9.7%) in Great
Britain voted for someone other than the
three main parties
• This was higher than in any other
previous election
• The previous record was set in 1918,
when the figure was 8.8%
Labour Party
• Labour’s share of
the total vote was
the second worst
since 1918
• Only the party’s
performance in 1983
was worse
Conservative Party
• Vote share modest
• 5th lowest in 24 elections since and
including 1922
• Never before has party achieved office
(albeit on coalition) on such a low share
of the vote
• But still 7% ahead of Labour
Disappointing turnout (1)
• Between 1922 and
1997 turnout had
never been lower
than 70%, before
falling precipitately
to just 59% in 2001
and 61% in 2005
Disappointing turnout (2)
• ‘While the anticipated closeness of the
election outcome might have helped
bring some voters to the polls, it would
appear that the British electorate can no
longer be relied upon to vote simply out
of duty or habit’ (Curtice et al)
The recession and voting
• ‘Those parts of the
country that had
suffered most from
the recession were
indeed the most
likely to have lost
faith in Labour’s
ability to govern’
(Curtice et al)
Economy in 2010
• Labour’s reputation
for economic
competence lost
• Banking crisis and
recession
• Undermining of
Brown’s claim of ‘no
more boom and
bust’ (but thought to
handle GFC well?)
Ashcroft’s millions
• ‘Even on a generous
reading of the
evidence the exercise
headed by Lord
Ashcroft had limited
success at most in
ensuring the
Conservatives
generally performed
well in key Labour
held marginal seats’
(Curtice et al)
• Ipsos MORI:
Analysis of Voters
• Total sample = 10,
211 electors
interviewed between
6 April – 6 May 2010
• Weighted to final
result of 2010
general election
Election stats: Ipsos MORI
• Women less likely to vote Conservative
than men – more likely to vote Labour
and (esp) LD
• Conservatives did better amongst the
older age groups (65+ 44%)
• Class still of some significance –
interesting how LD’s do best amongst
ABs and worst amonst DE’s
Turnout: Ipsos MORI
• Turnout up in all age groups (from
2005)
• It increases with age (18-24 44%, 65+
76%)
• Trend continues of young women being
less politically engaged than men (1824 men = 50%, 18-24 women 39%)
The Sun
• Sun readers swung
towards the Tories
more than the readers
of any other paper
• In 2010, 43% of Sun
readers voted Tory
and 28% voted
Labour.
• Compared with 2005,
that represented a
13.5% swing
The Guardian
• Guardian readers less
likely to vote Lib Dem
in 2010 than in 2005 –
even though the
paper endorsed the
Lib Dems
• 46% of Guardian
readers backed
Labour, 37% the Lib
Dems (down four
points since 2005)
• Other Ipsos MORI polling throws up
some interesting results
• See http://www.ipsosmori.com/Assets/Docs/News/General_E
lection_2010-An_Overview.PDF
Importance of leaders
• For the first time
leaders were as
important as policies
in determining how
people voted
• Would Labour have
done better with a
different leader?
• If you had a total of ten points to allocate
according to how important each of these
was to you, how many points would you
allocate to the leaders of the party you
intend voting for, how many to its policies,
and how many to the party as a whole?
• Mean scores of 3.9 (leaders), 3.8 (policies)
and 2.2 (party)
• Cameron seen as
the most capable
PM
• But quite a narrow
lead (33% to 29%)
over Brown
• Clegg on 19%
The economy
• No party had a clear
lead on the
economy
• Con 29 %
• Lab 26 %
• LD’s 12%
Who had the best policies?
• The Conservative
Party was seen as
(marginally) having
the best policies
overall
• Con: 29%
• Lab: 27%
• LD: 16%
• Does all this data
help explain why the
Conservatives
ended up ahead but without a
majority?
• A fit with ‘rational
choice’ models of
voting?
Cameron targets ‘Worcester
Woman’
• Did the
Conservative’s
failure to win a
majority in 2010
reflect the view they
had not
‘modernised’
enough or moved
sufficiently to the
‘centre ground’?
But relevance of left-right
spectrum?
• Occasionally YouGov ask how voters
perceive parties, party leaders and
themselves on the left-right spectrum
• Before last election
Con + 37 (Cameron +34)
Lab - 27 (Brown - 25)
LD - 9
(Clegg - 10)
‘Yourself’ - 4
Key point
• Ideological differences between the
parties have narrowed
• Therefore, perceptions of competence
(managerial competence) have become
more important
• Leadership is the primary means by
which voters assess this
• Spatial versus valence models
Finally: incumbency
• Popular MPs hold
on against the trend
(eg: Vernon Coaker)
• ‘Asteroids’ hit less
well respected MPs
• Those caught up in
expenses scandal
hit worst
Some useful sources
• ESRC British election study
http://www.bes2009-10.org/
• Ipsos-Mori
http://www.ipsos-mori.com/
(In particular - http://www.ipsosmori.com/researchpublications/research
archive/poll.aspx?oItemId=2613&view=
wide)
• Thank you for
listening
• You can find out
more about my
teaching and
research at
http://www2.warwick
.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/s
taff/greaves