Suchergebnisse

In this article, we use a structural equation model (latent variable mediator analysis) to show that a strong local base has two key effects on Liberal Democrat support in the 2010 general election. First, it has a direct effect on Liberal Democrat support at Westminster elections by bridging the electoral 'credibility gap'. Second, local success has a significant indirect effect on party performance through campaign effort. Here we find that the Liberal Democrats obtain appreciable electoral benefits where they campaign intensely. They also use grassroots campaigning to recruit local activists and party workers, which cements the local party infrastructure and enables the party to be more effective in targeting local resources. The total standardised effect is therefore fairly substantial even after controlling for an array of other predictors. It is also larger than the total effect of local election success on both Conservative and Labour Party support in 2010. Far from being inconsequential, winning seats at the local level provides a significant boost to the Liberal Democrats' performance in general elections. Adapted from the source document.

In this article, we use a structural equation model (latent variable mediator analysis) to show that a strong local base has two key effects on Liberal Democrat support in the 2010 general election. First, it has a direct effect on Liberal Democrat support at Westminster elections by bridging the electoral 'credibility gap'. Second, local success has a significant indirect effect on party performance through campaign effort. Here we find that the Liberal Democrats obtain appreciable electoral benefits where they campaign intensely. They also use grassroots campaigning to recruit local activists and party workers, which cements the local party infrastructure and enables the party to be more effective in targeting local resources. The total standardised effect is therefore fairly substantial even after controlling for an array of other predictors. It is also larger than the total effect of local election success on both Conservative and Labour Party support in 2010. Far from being inconsequential, winning seats at the local level provides a significant boost to the Liberal Democrats' performance in general elections.

Following the first leaders' debate, the Liberal Democrats poll rating surged and remained high throughout the election campaign. There was an expectation that the party would perform much better than in 2005 and bridge the "credibility gap". The reality proved to be much different. Here we explore the factors that shaped the Liberal Democrat vote in the 2010 election. Using seemingly unrelated regression models, we identify continuity with the past: importance of local election success, first-time incumbency and Liberal Democrat incumbents building a personal vote. We also provide evidence that the Liberal Democrats failed to advance in those new types of area that proved so fruitful in 2005. Using the 2010 BES, we also show that party identification mattered and Clegg proved to be a valuable asset to the party. However, the credibility problem proved once again to be a significant barrier to the party achieving an electoral breakthrough. Adapted from the source document.

Following the first leaders' debate, the Liberal Democrats poll rating surged and remained high throughout the election campaign. There was an expectation that the party would perform much better than in 2005 and bridge the 'credibility gap'. The reality proved to be much different. Here we explore the factors that shaped the Liberal Democrat vote in the 2010 election. Using seemingly unrelated regression models, we identify continuity with the past: importance of local election success, first-time incumbency and Liberal Democrat incumbents building a personal vote. We also provide evidence that the Liberal Democrats failed to advance in those new types of area that proved so fruitful in 2005. Using the 2010 BES, we also show that party identification mattered and Clegg proved to be a valuable asset to the party. However, the credibility problem proved once again to be a significant barrier to the party achieving an electoral breakthrough.

Leaders' visits are now an integral part of British general election campaigns. Yet, outside of a few cross-sectional explorations of leaders on the campaign trail, it remains under-explored. Here, we redress this imbalance. Using a unique data source collected by the authors over the four most recent British general elections, we explore where leaders visit, what determines these visits and whether the reasons have changed over time. For the first time, we also put forward an original typology of leader visits in England. Our findings detail how the type of visit varies over time according to the electoral context, by respective campaign strategies, closeness to election-day and how it is often shaped by the personalities of the leaders themselves. In the final part, our evidence suggests that leaders' visits impact party support although the effects vary for parties across elections.

Content, messages and the way voters are contacted are all increasingly tailored to the individual. But are voters really contacted in the way they prefer? What actually drives campaign preferences? Who are parties tailoring these preferences to? For the first time, we address this gap in the literature. Our findings suggest that there is considerable heterogeneity in voters' contact preferences. While some voters prefer not to be contacted, those who do prefer traditional methods (leaflets) and, in some cases, more personalised modes such as doorstep canvassing. Preferences are primarily driven by previous exposure to the mode, political interest, having an extraverted personality and age. We also examine preference 'matching' and find that parties are no more likely to 'match' a voter's specific preference if they have contacted them before. Preference contact matching is significantly more likely to be targeted at women, middle-age voters and especially weak or nonpartisans.

AbstractSocial norms play an important role in our understanding of why people vote, yet very little is known about the relative importance of descriptive and injunctive norms for voter turnout or how normative influence is affected by the political and social relationship between citizens. Using political discussion network data from the British Election Study, this article examines the joint effect of descriptive and injunctive norms on turnout. It demonstrates that citizens follow the example of those closest to them (descriptive norms), especially their partner, but they also respond to social approval of voting from political discussants regardless of the nature of their relationship.

In this article, we offer an analysis of the gender gap in political ambition that takes personality and other canonical predictors of levels of ambition into account simultaneously. We use original large-N survey data from Britain. We find that the gender gap in nascent ambition is robust to the inclusion of measures of personality alongside traditional socio-economic predictors of political ambition. Second, we find that increased extraversion is related to higher levels of nascent ambition, but only for women. Third, we find that personality does not drive any move from intending to run for office to actually doing so.

In this article, we offer an analysis of the gender gap in political ambition that takes personality and other canonical predictors of levels of ambition into account simultaneously. We use original large-N survey data from Britain. We find that the gender gap in nascent ambition is robust to the inclusion of measures of personality alongside traditional socio-economic predictors of political ambition. Second, we find that increased extraversion is related to higher levels of nascent ambition, but only for women. Third, we find that personality does not drive any move from intending to run for office to actually doing so.