Psephology: Personal votes
What is the actual importance and effect of the personal vote of a candidate in a highly partisan political system?
This is particularly relevant in the United Kingdom, whose Parliament uses first past the post only but where the constituencies are not particularly large by international standards. It of course depends on the candidate, but it matters more in some areas than others. In Britain, MPs with particularly strong personal votes in the London commuter belt are rare, for example, but in the few constituencies entirely or almost entirely composed of just one community (e.g. Cheltenham) personal votes and renown play a substantial part in the result.
They have mostly mattered in bad times for particular political parties, such as that associated with Sir Charles Irving's swing against the Liberals in Cheltenham. Upon Sir Charles' retirement, there was an above average swing to the Liberal Democrats, who gained the seat, of 5.2%. The Conservative candidate selected to replace Sir Charles, John Taylor, had no local roots in Cheltenham and this proved decisive.
Often personal votes are more attributable to candidates than MPs, as shown in Leominster in Roger Pincham's five attempts at capturing the seat (replaced by North Herefordshire in 2010, with almost the same boundaries as pre-1983 Leominster), and with Stuart Mole in Chelmsford. After their candidacies ceased, the Liberal challenge to the Conservatives faded away in both constituencies; the Liberal vote share drops in both constituencies were more than double the national average in percentage terms.
Personal votes are mostly measurable only subjectively, as they are dependent on a multitude of factors in relation to the MP in question; often high turnout can be another sign of a personal vote. Ipswich is a good example of this, and a rare example of Labour MPs being able to demonstrate a significant personal vote, helped by (then) a well-organised local press.
This is particularly relevant in the United Kingdom, whose Parliament uses first past the post only but where the constituencies are not particularly large by international standards. It of course depends on the candidate, but it matters more in some areas than others. In Britain, MPs with particularly strong personal votes in the London commuter belt are rare, for example, but in the few constituencies entirely or almost entirely composed of just one community (e.g. Cheltenham) personal votes and renown play a substantial part in the result.
They have mostly mattered in bad times for particular political parties, such as that associated with Sir Charles Irving's swing against the Liberals in Cheltenham. Upon Sir Charles' retirement, there was an above average swing to the Liberal Democrats, who gained the seat, of 5.2%. The Conservative candidate selected to replace Sir Charles, John Taylor, had no local roots in Cheltenham and this proved decisive.
Often personal votes are more attributable to candidates than MPs, as shown in Leominster in Roger Pincham's five attempts at capturing the seat (replaced by North Herefordshire in 2010, with almost the same boundaries as pre-1983 Leominster), and with Stuart Mole in Chelmsford. After their candidacies ceased, the Liberal challenge to the Conservatives faded away in both constituencies; the Liberal vote share drops in both constituencies were more than double the national average in percentage terms.
Personal votes are mostly measurable only subjectively, as they are dependent on a multitude of factors in relation to the MP in question; often high turnout can be another sign of a personal vote. Ipswich is a good example of this, and a rare example of Labour MPs being able to demonstrate a significant personal vote, helped by (then) a well-organised local press.
Comments
Post a Comment