A couple of
weeks ago, Roger Scully’s Elections in
Wales blog carried a guest
post by a new colleague of his, Dr Stuart Fox. It dealt with the subject of young voters and
how to appeal to them. It concluded, in
essence, that the difference between younger voters and their older peers isn’t
about the issues that concern them so much as about their willingness to vote
at all; in broad terms, their concerns largely mirror those of other sections
of the electorate.
I thought that
it was an interesting conclusion. By and
large, the thrust of what the various parties are doing to attract younger
voters assumes almost the direct opposite, and is largely based on the
assumption that younger voters do have a different agenda and can be motivated
to go out and vote for party X by an electoral offering which targets those
policy areas which the parties assume are of direct personal interest to the
target group.
In a sense, the
parties are behaving in a consistent fashion here in assuming that issues like
tuition fees and voting age will motivate younger voters – they also assume
that issues such as pensions will motivate older voters, and so on. It’s possible of course that the parties are
right and the pollsters are wrong on this.
By that, I don’t necessarily mean that the pollsters are wrong in the numbers
or in their analysis of the numbers – the post shows plenty of evidence to
support the conclusions and analysis drawn from them.
But the
validity of all that depends on the veracity of the responses given by people
when asked the questions, and there are two obvious ways in which the answers
might be invalid. The first is that
people might just be lying. It is at
least possible that people might say one thing (because they might not want to
appear selfish) but do another; I seem to remember that there was some evidence
of that phenomenon a few years ago in relation to the idea of an income tax
rise. The other is that people might be
drawing a distinction in their own minds between what they see as being the ‘most
important issues’ facing the country and what might actually motivate them to
vote as individuals. If either of those
were to be true, than perhaps the parties have got it right after all.
But what if
they’re not? What if the responses given
are entirely truthful, so that the analysis and conclusions drawn are entirely
valid? That would suggest (and not just
for young people) that the electorate was going to decide much more on the
basis of what they feel is right for the country as a whole rather than on a
narrowly selfish basis. (And I realise, of course, that ‘group selfishness’ in
this context isn’t at all the same thing as altruism). That would suggest that continued and
repeated appeals to the more selfish instincts of particular groups of people
might simply add to the cynicism about politicians and parties rather than
improve the motivation to participate.
And I suspect that that cynicism, coupled with a feeling that ‘it doesn’t really make any difference’ (given that the offerings are all so similar) might actually be a more accurate reason for low turnout than any failure to ‘press the right buttons’ for any particular section of the electorate.
And I suspect that that cynicism, coupled with a feeling that ‘it doesn’t really make any difference’ (given that the offerings are all so similar) might actually be a more accurate reason for low turnout than any failure to ‘press the right buttons’ for any particular section of the electorate.