With an election coming up
in September, the various political parties are already gearing up for the
pre-election period. The rhetoric is becoming sharper and the various political
leaders are visibly challenging each other on the issues of the day. Candidates
are being sought and local nominations are already taking place.
Despite the fact that the
Parties and their Leaders appear to have each other in their sights, all of
these activities are aimed at one target – the voter.
As Don Desserud and others
have observed, New Brunswick
Even though these electoral
shifts are dramatic, the Liberals and PCs maintain a “duopoly” over
representation in the Legislature. The New Democrats have been without a seat
in the Legislature since 2005 and neither the Green Party nor the People’s
Alliance Party, relative newcomers to the provincial political scene, have been
able to win seats.
Rather than focus on the
parties, we should try understanding the process by which voters decide how to
cast their vote. This is a challenging endeavour – a voting decision is as
individual as the voter who casts their ballot. Some may vote according to a
long-held partisan belief. Others may be torn between their options or, as
decreasing turnout numbers attest, will not cast a vote at all.
Since 1965, a consortium of
political scientists has been studying the electoral behaviour of Canadians
through the Canadian Elections Study
(CES). Based primarily on data collected during federal elections, the CES
takes an in-depth look at the many factors that contribute to a voting
decision. (You can check out the CES at http://ces-eec.org).
One of the key conclusions I
have drawn from this information is that policy, rather than the Leader or the
local candidate, is the primary driver in the voter’s decision-making process.
Having the right policies, and having the perceived competence to deliver on
them, accounts for approximately one-half of the vote choice.
It is not enough to have
popular policies; you also need to have credibility that you can deliver on
these policies. There is no political benefit in espousing popular policies
that conflict with each other or promoting a policy agenda that you are constitutionally,
legally or financially unable to deliver.
Despite the dominance of
political personalities in media coverage of politics and elections, party
leaders only account for about one-quarter of a voting choice. Of course,
Leaders are the chief spokespersons for their respective parties and their key
messages tend to focus on the policy issues they think are vote-getters. More
often than not, party leaders stress the policy differences between their
respective parties rather than promote (or critique) their personal attributes
and differences.
Like Party Leaders, local
candidates account for one-quarter of the voting decision. Given their
importance to local voters, it is no surprise that a great deal of effort goes
into the selection of these local standard-bearers.
One interesting factor in
the vote choice dynamic is that Party Leaders tend to be more slightly more
important for voters in urban areas represented by multiple ridings. In rural
areas, or in urban areas that are represented by a single seat, the local
candidate is slightly more important to the voter than the Party Leader.
But even local candidates
tend to use policy-based arguments and messages at the doorstep, in town halls
or with the media. No one expects every candidate to be a policy expert but
they are expected to know and promote their Party’s platform and key election
planks.
Clearly, candidates and
leaders are important to the political process. But, if they are searching for
political success, they need to have a mastery of the policy agenda. Voters may
be swayed by “hot-button” issues but, more often than not, they are persuaded
by a Party’s ability to govern.
The most recent British
Columbia Election is a good example of this factor at work. While Adrian Dix
and the NDP were seen as a sure bet to win the election, Christy Clark and the
BC Liberals were able to win with relentless messaging on their ability to
govern as well as taking full advantage of the policy gaffes offered up by Dix
and the NDP.
When voters decide, it is
policy (and policy competence) that makes the difference.
- 30 -
This article was originally published in the December 17, 2013 edition of The Telegraph-Journal.
