'Inside the campaigns: ‘Disengagement is the meme'' diff viewer (0/1)

This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on April 06, 2015 17:36 (UTC). It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/06/general-election-campaign-analysis-andrew-cooper-marcus-roberts-miranda-green

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Previous version 1 Next version

Previous version 1 Next version

Version 0	Version 1
Inside the campaigns: ‘Disengagement is the meme'	Inside the campaigns: ‘Disengagement is the meme'
2015-04-06 17:40:14 UTC	2015-04-07 00:30:46 UTC (about 7 hours later)
Andrew Cooper, Conservative peer: ‘Disengagement is the meme. The election is in stasis’	Andrew Cooper, Conservative peer: ‘Disengagement is the meme. The election is in stasis’
The defining fact about the election campaign so far is that most people aren’t paying any attention – and many of those who are can’t wait for it to be over. Disengagement is the meme; righteous cynicism the lazy justification for not bothering to listen.	The defining fact about the election campaign so far is that most people aren’t paying any attention – and many of those who are can’t wait for it to be over. Disengagement is the meme; righteous cynicism the lazy justification for not bothering to listen.
Nothing that has been said or done yet has cut through and caught the attention of voters, let alone caused enough of them to re-evaluate their default voting intention, to cause any meaningful movement in the polls. Every few days a poll has appeared suggesting Labour or Conservative has suddenly gained a clear lead, but there invariably follows another poll soon after showing the opposite – in trend terms, scattering, as polls are meant to do, either side of the reality that the election is impossibly close and no party has any real momentum. The election is in stasis.	Nothing that has been said or done yet has cut through and caught the attention of voters, let alone caused enough of them to re-evaluate their default voting intention, to cause any meaningful movement in the polls. Every few days a poll has appeared suggesting Labour or Conservative has suddenly gained a clear lead, but there invariably follows another poll soon after showing the opposite – in trend terms, scattering, as polls are meant to do, either side of the reality that the election is impossibly close and no party has any real momentum. The election is in stasis.
There will be those in every camp pressing for dramatic, game-changing moments, off-piste from the campaign grid: commit to this bold tax change, that big spending commitment or radically tougher action against some group or institution voters don’t like. But politicians who think that singular magic-bullet policy positions win elections simply don’t understand how voters think.	There will be those in every camp pressing for dramatic, game-changing moments, off-piste from the campaign grid: commit to this bold tax change, that big spending commitment or radically tougher action against some group or institution voters don’t like. But politicians who think that singular magic-bullet policy positions win elections simply don’t understand how voters think.
People don’t, by and large, decide which party to vote for on the basis of policy pronouncements in election campaign. Normal people have no idea what is in party manifestos. Studying the detail of policy would be purposeless because the vast majority of voters know perfectly well that – even if they suspend disbelief long enough to suppose that the parties might actually do what they propose – they don’t have enough detailed knowledge to judge whether one party’s policy on, say, education, is better or worse than another’s, or whether either is practicable.	People don’t, by and large, decide which party to vote for on the basis of policy pronouncements in election campaign. Normal people have no idea what is in party manifestos. Studying the detail of policy would be purposeless because the vast majority of voters know perfectly well that – even if they suspend disbelief long enough to suppose that the parties might actually do what they propose – they don’t have enough detailed knowledge to judge whether one party’s policy on, say, education, is better or worse than another’s, or whether either is practicable.
The Tory narrative is clear. The question for most voters is whether the long-term economic plan is working for them	The Tory narrative is clear. The question for most voters is whether the long-term economic plan is working for them
Analysis of what really drives people to choose one party over another shows that the single most important factor is whether or not they think a party “shares my values”. Over the years, voters build up a picture of parties and leaders: what kind of people are they, do they have the mettle to govern, what are their motives, whose side are they on? What matters about policy positions staked out by parties and the themes of election campaigns is that they should be proof-points of values.	Analysis of what really drives people to choose one party over another shows that the single most important factor is whether or not they think a party “shares my values”. Over the years, voters build up a picture of parties and leaders: what kind of people are they, do they have the mettle to govern, what are their motives, whose side are they on? What matters about policy positions staked out by parties and the themes of election campaigns is that they should be proof-points of values.
There will be people in all parties wishing they could rewind to 2010 and start again with a different positioning, but 30 days before an election is much too late to change fundamentally the pictures voters have formed of the parties. That’s why strategic political clarity and narrative consistency throughout a parliament are so important – and why so much research, thought and argument goes into the development of each party’s narrative. Successful election campaigns stick to their message; failing election campaigns flail around.	There will be people in all parties wishing they could rewind to 2010 and start again with a different positioning, but 30 days before an election is much too late to change fundamentally the pictures voters have formed of the parties. That’s why strategic political clarity and narrative consistency throughout a parliament are so important – and why so much research, thought and argument goes into the development of each party’s narrative. Successful election campaigns stick to their message; failing election campaigns flail around.
So this is the stage of the campaign where the belief within parties in their own strategy and message becomes critical. Do they have the conviction and the discipline to stay on track, even when what they’ve done so far hasn’t made any real difference in shifting votes? Labour have failed, throughout the parliament, to settle on a consistent narrative and even now their overall message isn’t clear.	So this is the stage of the campaign where the belief within parties in their own strategy and message becomes critical. Do they have the conviction and the discipline to stay on track, even when what they’ve done so far hasn’t made any real difference in shifting votes? Labour have failed, throughout the parliament, to settle on a consistent narrative and even now their overall message isn’t clear.
The air has been slowly leaking from their tyres for the last two years. For nearly a year in the middle of the parliament, Labour’s average monthly vote share was about 43%. Since then it has slipped by 9%-10%, wiping out their lead. This equates to more than 4 million people deciding not to vote Labour after all. The pressure will grow on Ed Miliband to pander to anti-austerity voters who have switched from Labour to Green, Ukip and SNP.	The air has been slowly leaking from their tyres for the last two years. For nearly a year in the middle of the parliament, Labour’s average monthly vote share was about 43%. Since then it has slipped by 9%-10%, wiping out their lead. This equates to more than 4 million people deciding not to vote Labour after all. The pressure will grow on Ed Miliband to pander to anti-austerity voters who have switched from Labour to Green, Ukip and SNP.
Related: Battleground Britain: getting inside the minds of the UK’s undecided voters	Related: Battleground Britain: getting inside the minds of the UK’s undecided voters
The Liberal Democrats, who got nearly one vote in four at the last election, slumped to one in 10 within six months, and nothing they have done since has made any difference. They are on course to get the lowest vote share for Britain’s third party since 1970 – and to cease to be Britain’s third party, either in terms of votes or MPs. Their only hope is that strength in the constituencies they hold will mean they hang on to more seats than their pitiful national position suggests. Meanwhile, nationally, the Lib Dems press on with the attempt to re-establish equidistance between Labour and Conservatives, which has so far led them to increasingly strident attacks on the values of the party they’ve supported in government for the past five years.	The Liberal Democrats, who got nearly one vote in four at the last election, slumped to one in 10 within six months, and nothing they have done since has made any difference. They are on course to get the lowest vote share for Britain’s third party since 1970 – and to cease to be Britain’s third party, either in terms of votes or MPs. Their only hope is that strength in the constituencies they hold will mean they hang on to more seats than their pitiful national position suggests. Meanwhile, nationally, the Lib Dems press on with the attempt to re-establish equidistance between Labour and Conservatives, which has so far led them to increasingly strident attacks on the values of the party they’ve supported in government for the past five years.
Since Nick Clegg is not alone in needing the backing of pro-coalition Tory voters to survive in his constituency (Sheffield Hallam), this is tactically as well as strategically foolish.	Since Nick Clegg is not alone in needing the backing of pro-coalition Tory voters to survive in his constituency (Sheffield Hallam), this is tactically as well as strategically foolish.
Conservative party support has been remarkably steady through the second half of the parliament – with average monthly vote share in the range of 32%-34% for the past 36 months. This was relatively reassuring stability coming out of the “omnishambles” period in 2012, but increasingly frustrating in recent months as strengthening economic recovery has failed to convert into improved poll numbers.	Conservative party support has been remarkably steady through the second half of the parliament – with average monthly vote share in the range of 32%-34% for the past 36 months. This was relatively reassuring stability coming out of the “omnishambles” period in 2012, but increasingly frustrating in recent months as strengthening economic recovery has failed to convert into improved poll numbers.
The Tory narrative is clear. The question for most voters is not whether or not the long-term economic plan is working, which becomes ever harder to deny, but whether it is working for them, and when they will start to feel the benefit. The Conservatives will stick on that theme, and use every available medium to get the message through, despite the current determination of voters not to listen.	The Tory narrative is clear. The question for most voters is not whether or not the long-term economic plan is working, which becomes ever harder to deny, but whether it is working for them, and when they will start to feel the benefit. The Conservatives will stick on that theme, and use every available medium to get the message through, despite the current determination of voters not to listen.
Marcus Roberts of the Fabian Society: ‘On the economy and in Scotland, Labour must improve to win’	Marcus Roberts of the Fabian Society: ‘On the economy and in Scotland, Labour must improve to win’
A week into general election 2015 and Labour will be more pleased than worried. The party has bolstered its strengths and has begun to mitigate its weaknesses – although more work needs to be done.	A week into general election 2015 and Labour will be more pleased than worried. The party has bolstered its strengths and has begun to mitigate its weaknesses – although more work needs to be done.
Going into the campaign, Labour had three clear strengths and three significant weaknesses. Its strengths were the party’s brand advantage on matters such as the NHS and fairness; its impressive ground game in key seats; and an electoral map that favoured Labour. As for weaknesses, Labour trailed Cameron’s Conservatives on leadership and economic competence, and faces a dangerous threat from the SNP.	Going into the campaign, Labour had three clear strengths and three significant weaknesses. Its strengths were the party’s brand advantage on matters such as the NHS and fairness; its impressive ground game in key seats; and an electoral map that favoured Labour. As for weaknesses, Labour trailed Cameron’s Conservatives on leadership and economic competence, and faces a dangerous threat from the SNP.
Starting with Labour’s strengths, its first advantage is its brand position on several key issues. Poll after poll shows the NHS as one of the top issues and Labour as the most trusted party for the NHS. What’s more, Labour’s reputation for “fairness”, and being seen as the party that cares about the fabled “hardworking families” so beloved of politicians’ soundbites, are also strong selling points with voters. Labour has combined a good mix of attacking the Tory record and offering voters hope for a better future.	Starting with Labour’s strengths, its first advantage is its brand position on several key issues. Poll after poll shows the NHS as one of the top issues and Labour as the most trusted party for the NHS. What’s more, Labour’s reputation for “fairness”, and being seen as the party that cares about the fabled “hardworking families” so beloved of politicians’ soundbites, are also strong selling points with voters. Labour has combined a good mix of attacking the Tory record and offering voters hope for a better future.
The next Labour strength is its ground game. Strong field operations in key seats by canvassers taking the Labour message door to door can be worth an increase in turnout of between two and four points. That’s a potential extra 800 to 2,000 Labour votes in the average marginal constituency – enough to make the difference between winning and losing in dozens of seats. Labour volunteers, guided by sophisticated targeting, are campaigning in unprecedented numbers to this end.	The next Labour strength is its ground game. Strong field operations in key seats by canvassers taking the Labour message door to door can be worth an increase in turnout of between two and four points. That’s a potential extra 800 to 2,000 Labour votes in the average marginal constituency – enough to make the difference between winning and losing in dozens of seats. Labour volunteers, guided by sophisticated targeting, are campaigning in unprecedented numbers to this end.
The final strategic strength Labour enjoys is the efficient distribution of its vote across the electoral battleground. Simply put, because the Conservatives tend to pile up their votes in the same safe seats, while Labour tends to spread its voters out across marginal seats, Labour can win more seats with fewer votes than the Conservatives. And it is this structural advantage that has led to the somewhat worrying belief that “if we draw, we win” among some in Labour’s high command.	The final strategic strength Labour enjoys is the efficient distribution of its vote across the electoral battleground. Simply put, because the Conservatives tend to pile up their votes in the same safe seats, while Labour tends to spread its voters out across marginal seats, Labour can win more seats with fewer votes than the Conservatives. And it is this structural advantage that has led to the somewhat worrying belief that “if we draw, we win” among some in Labour’s high command.
On the NHS and fairness, as well as exploiting the electoral map via its ground game, Labour is running up the score	On the NHS and fairness, as well as exploiting the electoral map via its ground game, Labour is running up the score
On the flip side, Labour has used the campaign to mitigate some, but by no means all, of its weaknesses.	On the flip side, Labour has used the campaign to mitigate some, but by no means all, of its weaknesses.
Ed Miliband’s performances in the seven-way TV debate and Paxman grilling were followed by a boost in his personal numbers – a key area of pre-campaign concern for party strategists. The objective remains not to beat Cameron on leadership numbers but to pass an acceptability threshold with voters, so that Miliband is if not loved than at least not disliked by the electorate.	Ed Miliband’s performances in the seven-way TV debate and Paxman grilling were followed by a boost in his personal numbers – a key area of pre-campaign concern for party strategists. The objective remains not to beat Cameron on leadership numbers but to pass an acceptability threshold with voters, so that Miliband is if not loved than at least not disliked by the electorate.
The next Labour weakness is its economic brand problem. This is, of course, the mainstay of the Tory attack. Here the shadow chancellor’s team, combined with the party’s attack-and-rebuttal unit, has done a good job of responding to Tory attack dossiers, deconstructing their figures within hours and pushing back hard on false claims. But the fact that the pro-Tory businesses letter was answered, albeit cleverly, by a mixture of workers and celebrities rather than say, a hundred pro-Labour companies or a thousand small business owners, still speaks to a weakness in both Labour’s economic credentials and private sector stakeholder relations. The party will need to demonstrate an improvement in both in the weeks to come.	The next Labour weakness is its economic brand problem. This is, of course, the mainstay of the Tory attack. Here the shadow chancellor’s team, combined with the party’s attack-and-rebuttal unit, has done a good job of responding to Tory attack dossiers, deconstructing their figures within hours and pushing back hard on false claims. But the fact that the pro-Tory businesses letter was answered, albeit cleverly, by a mixture of workers and celebrities rather than say, a hundred pro-Labour companies or a thousand small business owners, still speaks to a weakness in both Labour’s economic credentials and private sector stakeholder relations. The party will need to demonstrate an improvement in both in the weeks to come.
The final problem Labour faces strategically is Scotland. In sum, to keep Labour losses to just 19 seats, Labour needs to get the SNP’s lead down from its current standing in the high teens to just high single digits. Here there is little left for the hyperactive Scottish Labour leader Jim Murphy and his impressive deputy Kezia Dugdale to do. They have already overhauled the party’s communications, policy and campaigning efforts. It simply remains to be seen whether Scottish voters will reward their good efforts.	The final problem Labour faces strategically is Scotland. In sum, to keep Labour losses to just 19 seats, Labour needs to get the SNP’s lead down from its current standing in the high teens to just high single digits. Here there is little left for the hyperactive Scottish Labour leader Jim Murphy and his impressive deputy Kezia Dugdale to do. They have already overhauled the party’s communications, policy and campaigning efforts. It simply remains to be seen whether Scottish voters will reward their good efforts.
An age-old axiom of what electoral victory requires is this: you win by running up the score where you’re strong, keeping it closer than expected where you’re weak and winning the middle. On the NHS and fairness, as well as exploiting the electoral map via its ground game, Labour is running up the score. On leadership, Miliband is increasingly contesting the space with some success. But on the economy and in Scotland, Labour must improve its standing for victory to be achieved.	An age-old axiom of what electoral victory requires is this: you win by running up the score where you’re strong, keeping it closer than expected where you’re weak and winning the middle. On the NHS and fairness, as well as exploiting the electoral map via its ground game, Labour is running up the score. On leadership, Miliband is increasingly contesting the space with some success. But on the economy and in Scotland, Labour must improve its standing for victory to be achieved.
Miranda Green, journalist: ‘Being the national lollipop lady, helping us all in coalition, is a dowdy role’	Miranda Green, journalist: ‘Being the national lollipop lady, helping us all in coalition, is a dowdy role’
Labour briefing notes for last week’s debate, left behind in the dressing room, tell us that Ed Miliband was instructed by aides to sell himself as a “happy warrior”, a phrase borrowed from Wordsworth via Barack Obama. But it is Nick Clegg, one-time hate figure with a Tumblr blog devoted to pictures of him looking sad, who is managing to pull this off.	Labour briefing notes for last week’s debate, left behind in the dressing room, tell us that Ed Miliband was instructed by aides to sell himself as a “happy warrior”, a phrase borrowed from Wordsworth via Barack Obama. But it is Nick Clegg, one-time hate figure with a Tumblr blog devoted to pictures of him looking sad, who is managing to pull this off.
Week one found him remarkably chirpy given the horrendous national Lib Dem poll rating, and yes, he faces the fight of his life. Sheffield Hallam is not (yet) an official Labour target. And Clegg’s local battle, aiming to squeeze those soft Tory votes (16% of them, according to the latest Ashcroft poll) is a microcosm of the wider campaign, with the Lib Dems fighting mini byelections across the UK.	Week one found him remarkably chirpy given the horrendous national Lib Dem poll rating, and yes, he faces the fight of his life. Sheffield Hallam is not (yet) an official Labour target. And Clegg’s local battle, aiming to squeeze those soft Tory votes (16% of them, according to the latest Ashcroft poll) is a microcosm of the wider campaign, with the Lib Dems fighting mini byelections across the UK.
Both Tory and Labour have focused on a core vote of 30% plus, seeming reluctant to reach out beyond the certainties that motivate their own base. The Lib Dem vote has no inherited social-class base, no link to either unions or big business, and even the Celtic-fringe regional loyalties don’t play as strongly as they once did.	Both Tory and Labour have focused on a core vote of 30% plus, seeming reluctant to reach out beyond the certainties that motivate their own base. The Lib Dem vote has no inherited social-class base, no link to either unions or big business, and even the Celtic-fringe regional loyalties don’t play as strongly as they once did.
To those worrying about the next government swerving to right or left, Lib Dems in power means stability and reform	To those worrying about the next government swerving to right or left, Lib Dems in power means stability and reform
So the Lib Dems have no choice, at the end of five years in government and nevermore the insurgents, other than to reach out to the centrists and the undecideds – which is healthy but fraught in such a tight race. For months now, the party has concentrated on the ground war – hand-to-hand fighting on the doorsteps of between 40 and 50 of the seats it hopes to hold (some have been written off), and of a handful of others they hope to gain – Watford, Oxford West and Abingdon, and Montgomeryshire could deliver three sorely needed female faces on the Lib Dem benches.	So the Lib Dems have no choice, at the end of five years in government and nevermore the insurgents, other than to reach out to the centrists and the undecideds – which is healthy but fraught in such a tight race. For months now, the party has concentrated on the ground war – hand-to-hand fighting on the doorsteps of between 40 and 50 of the seats it hopes to hold (some have been written off), and of a handful of others they hope to gain – Watford, Oxford West and Abingdon, and Montgomeryshire could deliver three sorely needed female faces on the Lib Dem benches.
The so-called air war, of national messages pumped out through the media operation, now has to big-up the coalition record, the argument to those worrying about the next government swerving either to right or left if unchecked that Lib Dems in power means stability and reform.	The so-called air war, of national messages pumped out through the media operation, now has to big-up the coalition record, the argument to those worrying about the next government swerving either to right or left if unchecked that Lib Dems in power means stability and reform.
There’s one huge downside: being the national lollipop lady, helping us all, in the words of the campaign adverts, ”cross safely”, is a dowdy role. The other drawback is that every attempt to attack the Conservative economic plan sounds as if it undermines the partnership politics that the Lib Dems need to sell. In this respect, distinctiveness comes at a high price.	There’s one huge downside: being the national lollipop lady, helping us all, in the words of the campaign adverts, ”cross safely”, is a dowdy role. The other drawback is that every attempt to attack the Conservative economic plan sounds as if it undermines the partnership politics that the Lib Dems need to sell. In this respect, distinctiveness comes at a high price.
~~Related: Who won the leaders' debate? The Guardian columnists' verdict~~
And there are many internal doubters – those who yearn for the old days of fired-up radicals trying to sell the single transferable vote to an electorate more interested in the economy and the NHS.	And there are many internal doubters – those who yearn for the old days of fired-up radicals trying to sell the single transferable vote to an electorate more interested in the economy and the NHS.
But Team Clegg may be reassured to see the top questions Googled during last Thursday’s seven-way leaders’ debate about the Lib Dems were about what the party has done in government, and how much influence it has had in the coalition. Does four weeks give them time to explain? As Lynton Crosby likes to tell his Tory team: ”You can’t fatten a pig on market day.”	But Team Clegg may be reassured to see the top questions Googled during last Thursday’s seven-way leaders’ debate about the Lib Dems were about what the party has done in government, and how much influence it has had in the coalition. Does four weeks give them time to explain? As Lynton Crosby likes to tell his Tory team: ”You can’t fatten a pig on market day.”