Factors influencing voting behaviour | Edexcel A-Level Politics
Updated: 7 days ago
For Specification 9PL0
Edexcel A-Level Politics | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time: 55–65 minutes
This Factors influencing voting behaviour A-Level Politics revision page explains why different groups of voters support different political parties and why these patterns change over time. Edexcel requires you to understand class-based voting, partisanship and voting attachment, alongside gender, age, ethnicity and region as influences on voting behaviour, turnout and electoral trends. You also need to analyse class dealignment and partisan dealignment, using elections as evidence rather than treating any one factor as a complete explanation.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Explain class-based voting, partisanship and voting attachment.
Explain class dealignment and partisan dealignment.
Examine how age, gender, ethnicity and region may influence voting behaviour.
Analyse how social and demographic factors may affect electoral turnout.
Compare traditional voting patterns with more recent patterns of electoral behaviour.
Evaluate the relative importance of different influences on voting behaviour.
Revision Notes 📚
What does Edexcel require you to know?
Voting behaviour forms part of Topic 4, Voting behaviour and the media.
The specification requires students to study:
class-based voting
partisanship and voting attachment
gender
age
ethnicity
region
their influence on voting behaviour
their influence on turnout
trends in these relationships over time.
Two particularly important trends are:
class dealignment
partisan dealignment.
The three election case studies provide evidence with which these wider patterns can be tested. This means you should draw comparisons between the historical pattern of voting, the changes visible in 1997 and your more recent election evidence.
Voting behaviour is multi-causal
The first principle to understand is that voters rarely vote because of one factor only.
An individual's vote may reflect a combination of:
social class
age
ethnic background
gender
region
party attachment
policies
leadership
governing competency
campaign performance
media influence.
These factors can also overlap.
For example:
social class → economic interests → preference for particular policies → party choice
or:
age → different political priorities → policy preferences → party choice
The strongest A-Level analysis therefore asks not only which factor matters, but also how factors interact.
Class-based voting
Class-based voting occurs when a person's social class is associated with the party they are more likely to support.
Historically, class was a major predictor of British voting behaviour. Edexcel's 2019 mark scheme links social class, region and party alignment with historically stable post-war electoral behaviour and the existence of large numbers of safe seats.
The traditional logic was:
people identified themselves with a social class
political parties were associated with different class interests
voters developed attachments to the party they believed represented their interests
this produced relatively stable and predictable voting behaviour.
Class could therefore help explain both:
individual voting choice
geographical concentrations of party support.
Why might class influence voting?
Edexcel's 2025 mark scheme identifies several ways in which class can remain politically relevant.
Class can be associated with:
occupation
housing
economic interests
turnout
the political concerns voters prioritise.
This is important because class does not have to operate through a voter explicitly saying:
"I am working class, so I vote for Party X."
Instead, class may affect:
economic circumstances → political interests → judgement of party policies → voting choice
This allows class voting to continue even when voters identify less strongly with formal class labels.
Evidence that class still matters
Edexcel's 2020 election material provides evidence from the 2017 election.
It states that:
the Conservatives led Labour by 11 percentage points among private-sector workers
Labour led the Conservatives by 10 points among public-sector workers.
This suggests that employment and economic position continued to be associated with different political preferences.
The 2025 mark scheme also argues that class remains relevant because higher social classes have shown higher turnout than lower social classes across recent elections.
This creates an important distinction:
Class may influence not only which party a person votes for, but whether they vote at all.
Class and turnout
Turnout affects political power.
Imagine two social groups of equal size.
Group | Number eligible to vote | Turnout |
Group A | 1,000 | 80% |
Group B | 1,000 | 50% |
The number voting would be:
$$1,000 \times 0.80 = 800$$
for Group A, compared with:
$$1,000 \times 0.50 = 500$$
for Group B.
Even though the groups are the same size, Group A contributes 300 more votes.
This illustrates the principle identified in Edexcel's 2025 mark scheme: differences in turnout can magnify the political importance of social class.
Class dealignment
Class dealignment is defined in the Edexcel specification as the process by which individuals no longer identify themselves as belonging to a particular class and therefore fail to make the same connection between class and voting behaviour.
Put simply:
social class becomes a less reliable predictor of voting choice.
This does not mean:
class no longer exists
everyone votes independently of economic interests
there are no differences between social groups.
It means the connection has weakened.
Evidence of class dealignment
Edexcel's 2025 mark scheme identifies several examples of changing class patterns.
It includes:
the movement of middle-class voters towards Labour in 1997
the collapse of Labour's traditional "Red Wall" support in 2019
disruption to traditional Conservative "Blue Wall" support in 2024.
These examples demonstrate that party-class relationships are capable of changing.
For instance, middle-class movement towards Labour in 1997 challenges a simple traditional model in which middle-class voters would automatically support the Conservatives.
Likewise, changes in traditionally Labour-supporting constituencies demonstrate that voters historically associated with one party can switch.
Has class declined or simply changed?
This is an excellent evaluation debate.
Argument: class has declined
Class dealignment means:
fewer people identify strongly with a class
traditional Labour-Conservative class divisions have weakened
voters switch parties more readily
age, ethnicity, policy and leadership can become better predictors.
The 2019 mark scheme identifies age and education as increasingly important indicators, overtaking class and party loyalty in some recent elections.
Counterargument: class has changed rather than disappeared
The 2025 mark scheme provides a more nuanced interpretation.
Social class may remain important because it is connected to:
occupation
housing
economic interests
turnout.
Therefore, traditional party-class loyalties may decline while socioeconomic circumstances continue to influence political choices.
A strong conclusion is therefore:
Class dealignment has weakened the traditional relationship between class and particular political parties, but it has not necessarily removed the political importance of socioeconomic circumstances.
Partisanship and voting attachment
Partisanship refers to a voter's attachment or loyalty to a particular political party.
A voter with strong party attachment may continue supporting the same party across several elections.
This can make elections more predictable.
The traditional relationship can be represented as:
social identity → party identification → repeated voting for the same party
Strong partisanship means campaign events may have relatively little effect because the voter has already formed a durable party preference.
Why does party attachment matter?
Strong voting attachment can:
create loyal voting blocs
contribute to safe seats
make electoral outcomes more predictable
reduce the number of floating voters
make short-term campaigns less significant.
Edexcel's 2019 material explains that historically a person's identification with a social class could be reinforced by identification with a party perceived to represent their interests.
Class and partisanship were therefore closely connected.
Partisan dealignment
Edexcel defines partisan dealignment as the process by which individuals no longer identify themselves on a long-term basis with a particular political party.
In simple terms:
party loyalty becomes weaker.
This produces more floating voters, who may decide between parties from one election to another.
Consequences of partisan dealignment
If voters become less attached to parties, other influences may become more significant.
These can include:
party policies
manifestos
leadership
campaign performance
governing competency
political issues
rational self-interest.
Edexcel's 2024 mark scheme explicitly links class and partisan dealignment with the increasing importance of manifestos, because floating voters may make decisions according to policies and perceived self-interest.
The relationship is:
weaker party attachment → more floating voters → greater opportunity for persuasion → increased significance of short-term electoral factors
Dealignment and electoral volatility
Partisan and class dealignment can make election results less predictable.
The Edexcel 2019 materials contrast traditional stability with more recent voter volatility, in which voters are more willing to change preference between elections.
This means parties cannot necessarily depend upon traditional supporters.
It also helps explain why elections increasingly need to be understood through a combination of:
demographic factors
party policies
leadership
campaigning.
Age
Age has become a particularly important demographic indicator of voting behaviour.
Edexcel's 2020 examination source provides detailed national evidence from the 2017 general election.
The data showed:
for every 10 years older a voter was, their likelihood of voting Conservative increased by 9 percentage points
for every 10 years older a voter was, their likelihood of voting Labour declined by 9 percentage points
Labour and Conservative support crossed at approximately age 47.
This creates a remarkably clear age-vote relationship.
Interpreting the age data
Consider two voters who differ in age by 20 years.
According to the relationship represented in the source:
$$2 \times 9 = 18$$
The older voter would have an approximately 18 percentage-point greater likelihood of voting Conservative.
The same 20-year difference would be associated with an approximately:
$$2 \times 9 = 18$$
percentage-point reduction in the likelihood of voting Labour.
However, this is a statistical pattern, not a rule about every individual voter.
An examiner would expect you to distinguish between:
"older voters were more likely to vote Conservative"
and the inaccurate claim:
"older people vote Conservative."
Age and turnout
Voting choice is only part of the significance of age.
The 2020 Edexcel mark scheme warns that the importance of age must also be considered alongside turnout. It notes that turnout among younger age groups is lower than among older age groups.
This matters because:
party preference × turnout = electoral impact
A demographic group might heavily favour a political party but have less effect on the final result if many members of that group do not vote.
So, when evaluating age, discuss both:
how people vote
whether they vote.
Why might age matter?
The Edexcel sources indicate that different age groups may experience politics differently and may therefore hold different priorities.
However, age can also overlap with:
class
employment
housing
region
political issues.
The 2025 examiner report notes that stronger candidates recognised tensions and overlaps between age and class rather than treating them as completely independent factors.
For example, what appears to be an age effect might partly reflect differences in economic circumstances between younger and older voters.
Therefore:
correlation with age does not prove that age itself is the only cause.
Ethnicity
Edexcel explicitly requires ethnicity to be examined as a factor affecting voting behaviour and turnout.
The 2025 mark scheme suggests that ethnic background can now be a stronger demographic indicator than traditional social class in some circumstances.
It identifies a broad tendency towards:
Labour, Green and Liberal Democrat support among ethnic minority voters
relatively stronger Conservative or Reform support among white voters.
However, this should be handled carefully.
Ethnic minority voters are not one politically uniform group.
A strong answer should therefore avoid statements such as:
"Ethnic minorities vote Labour."
Instead write:
"Ethnicity can be associated with differences in party support, although voting patterns vary and ethnicity interacts with other factors."
Ethnicity and other factors
The significance of ethnicity can overlap with:
region
age
social class
economic interests
national identity.
The 2025 examiner report specifically praises candidates who recognised connections between region and race, rather than treating demographic categories as entirely separate.
This is important because electoral data can show a relationship without identifying a simple single cause.
For example, an apparent ethnic voting pattern could also reflect:
where particular populations live
age profiles
economic circumstances
different political priorities.
Ethnicity and turnout
The specification requires ethnicity to be considered in relation to turnout as well as party choice.
Do not invent percentages if you cannot support them with reliable data.
Gender
Edexcel also requires gender to be considered as an influence on voting behaviour and turnout.
Gender may therefore be used as one demographic variable when comparing national voting patterns across elections.
The key examination principle is nevertheless important:
Gender should be treated as a possible influence rather than an automatic determinant of political preference.
It should also be evaluated against stronger or competing demographic indicators.
Indeed, Edexcel's 2020 mark scheme identifies age as potentially more significant than gender when explaining voting behaviour.
Region
Region refers to geographical differences in political support.
Regional voting can produce identifiable party heartlands and geographical patterns.
The Edexcel materials identify examples including:
Labour strength in the North
Labour strength in London and major cities
Conservative strength in southern England
stronger Conservative support in rural areas
changing SNP support in Scotland.
Regional patterns can therefore make location a useful predictor of electoral behaviour.
Why might region influence voting behaviour?
Region may reflect differences in:
local economic conditions
occupational patterns
social class
national identity
political history
party organisation and established political loyalties.
This means region may sometimes operate as a proxy for several other factors.
For example:
region → different economic structure → different political priorities → different voting pattern
Therefore, saying "region causes people to vote differently" is less analytical than explaining why those regional differences exist.
Region and class
Class and region often overlap.
The 2025 examiner report found that stronger candidates recognised this connection.
However, examiners also identified a common oversimplification:
assuming the North is automatically working class
assuming the South is automatically middle class.
That is too crude.
A better explanation is:
Some regional voting differences partly reflect differences in socioeconomic composition, but neither the population nor the political behaviour of an entire region is socially uniform.
Regional voting patterns can change
Regional patterns are not fixed permanently.
The 2025 mark scheme identifies:
disruption of Labour's Red Wall in 2019
changes in Conservative Blue Wall support in 2024
changes in Labour's support in Scotland since 2015.
These shifts demonstrate that regional alignment can weaken or change.
That means region may still matter without producing the same party preference in every election.
Gender, age, ethnicity, class and region: comparison
Factor | How it may influence voting | Main limitation |
Class | Economic position, occupation, housing and interests may affect party preference. | Class dealignment has weakened traditional party-class relationships. |
Age | Different generations show different patterns of party support and turnout. | Age overlaps with class, housing, employment and political issues. |
Ethnicity | Different ethnic groups can display different patterns of party preference. | Ethnic groups are internally diverse and ethnicity overlaps with region, age and class. |
Gender | Gender may be associated with differing political preferences and turnout. | The supplied material does not establish a consistent numerical party pattern. |
Region | Different geographical areas can develop distinctive political patterns and party heartlands. | Regions are socially diverse and their party alignments can change. |
The most important skill is not memorising this table. It is being able to compare the explanatory power of the factors.
Turnout and voting behaviour are different
A crucial distinction is:
Voting behaviour asks:
Which party does someone vote for?
Turnout asks:
Does someone vote at all?
A factor may have different effects on each.
For example, Edexcel's materials indicate that:
age is associated with both party preference and turnout
class is associated with both party preference and turnout.
This means turnout can magnify demographic inequalities.
If one group is more likely to participate, its political preferences are more strongly represented in the actual election result.
Disillusion and apathy
Edexcel defines disillusion and apathy as disengagement from politics and political activity, involving a lack of confidence that politics and politicians can solve problems or make a difference. The specification connects this with low turnout and poor political awareness.
This provides another explanation for turnout.
A voter may not abstain because of:
age
class
gender
ethnicity
region alone.
They may also abstain because they feel politically disengaged.
Therefore, demographic turnout patterns need to be analysed alongside political attitudes.
Are voters becoming more independent?
The decline of class and partisan alignment leads to an important broader debate.
One interpretation is that voters have become more independent.
Edexcel's 2019 mark scheme describes modern voters as potentially more instrumental, making choices according to what they perceive to be in their rational interest.
If this interpretation is correct, voters may increasingly assess:
party policies
economic self-interest
political issues
leadership
governing competency.
Edexcel's 2025 mark scheme similarly identifies policy choices and economic self-interest as alternatives to class-based voting.
Governing competency
Governing competency is the perceived ability of the governing party to manage the state effectively. It can also describe voters' perceptions of whether an opposition party would govern effectively if elected.
It matters because a voter may decide:
"I usually identify with this party, but I no longer believe it is competent."
This can weaken partisan voting.
Similarly, an opposition party may attract new supporters if voters begin to see it as a credible government.
This was important when studying Labour's transition into government.
Long-term versus short-term influences
A useful way to organise voting behaviour is to distinguish between long-term and short-term influences.
Long-term influences | Shorter-term influences |
Social class | Manifestos |
Party attachment | Campaign performance |
Region | Leadership |
Age | Political issues |
Ethnicity | Governing competency |
Gender | Media coverage |
This division is not absolute.
For example, governing competency may develop over several years, while demographic characteristics may shape how voters respond to a particular manifesto.
Nevertheless, this provides a powerful essay structure.
Which factors have become more important?
Edexcel's mark schemes support the argument that the traditional class-party model has weakened.
Evidence includes:
class dealignment
partisan dealignment
greater voter volatility
age becoming a strong predictor
ethnicity becoming an important demographic indicator
increasing significance of policies and leadership.
However, the alternative case remains important.
Class and region continue to matter because:
economic interests differ
occupation remains significant
turnout varies
geographical party patterns remain visible
apparent alternatives may themselves reflect class or region.
The key debate: replacement or interaction?
Avoid arguing that one influence has simply "replaced" another.
A stronger interpretation is that the pattern of voting behaviour has become more complex.
For example:
Class dealignment reduces automatic class voting.
This makes voters more available to other influences.
Then:
age + policy interests + leadership + region + economic position
can combine to shape the final decision.
Likewise, partisan dealignment may increase the importance of campaigns, but voters still interpret campaign messages through their existing social circumstances.
How to analyse factors in an examination
A strong paragraph should move through four stages.
1. Identify the factor
For example:
Age became an important indicator of voting behaviour in the 2017 election.
2. Use precise evidence
For example:
Every ten-year increase in age was associated with a nine-point increase in the likelihood of Conservative voting.
3. Analyse what the evidence suggests
This suggests age had become a strong demographic dividing line.
4. Evaluate against another explanation
However, the same election also showed substantial differences between public and private-sector workers, indicating that economic and class-based influences had not disappeared.
That creates:
AO1 → AO2 → AO3
rather than a paragraph consisting only of factual description.
Bringing the factors together
You should ultimately be able to compare:
Traditional explanations
class
region
party loyalty.
Changing demographic explanations
age
ethnicity
gender.
Changing political explanations
issues
policies
manifestos
leadership
governing competency.
Participation explanations
turnout
disillusion
apathy.
The next step is to consider how information about these choices is presented and potentially shaped by newspapers, broadcasting, social media and opinion polling.
Hints from the Examiner Reports 💡
Examiner hint: Use elections to prove arguments, not as separate stories.
The 2025 examiner report found that elections were most effectively used as supporting evidence. Candidates who structured an essay as one section on each election often became descriptive rather than analytical.
For example, organise a paragraph around:
Has class voting declined?
Then use 1997, 2019 or another relevant election as evidence.
Do not simply write:
"First I will discuss 1997, then 2019, then 2024."
Examiner hint: Do not treat class and region as completely independent.
Stronger candidates recognised that the two factors can be intertwined. However, examiners warned against reducing this to an assumption that the North is working class and the South is middle class.
Examiner hint: Consider what replaces a factor if you argue that it has declined.
The 2025 report found that stronger candidates recognised that if class or region no longer explains a pattern, another factor must do so. They considered alternatives such as age, race, political issues and election-specific factors.
Examiner hint: Make connections between factors.
The best answers recognised relationships between region and ethnicity and between age and class.
Instead of writing six disconnected paragraphs, consider comparisons such as:
class versus age
class and region
ethnicity and region
partisanship versus issue voting
Examiner hint: Keep evaluation running throughout the essay.
The 2025 report recommends giving equal weight to AO3 through sustained and evidenced judgements rather than adding evaluation only in the conclusion.
A useful final sentence for each paragraph is:
"Therefore, although X remains significant, Y provides the stronger explanation because..."
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Saying class no longer matters
Why this is incorrect: Class dealignment means the traditional relationship between class and party support has weakened. It does not mean socioeconomic circumstances have stopped influencing political behaviour.
How to improve: Distinguish between:
declining class-party alignment
and:
the continuing political importance of occupation, housing, economic interests and turnout.
Mistake: Saying older people vote Conservative and younger people vote Labour
Why this is incorrect: Voting data shows statistical tendencies, not rules applying to every member of a demographic group.
How to improve: Use phrases such as:
"Older voters were more likely to support the Conservatives."
Mistake: Treating ethnic minority voters as one uniform group
Why this is incorrect: Ethnicity may correlate with political behaviour, but ethnic groups contain considerable internal diversity.
How to improve: Describe broad patterns cautiously and compare ethnicity with age, class and region.
Mistake: Assuming the North is working class and the South is middle class
Why this is incorrect: This oversimplification was specifically identified by Edexcel examiners. Regions contain socially and politically diverse populations.
How to improve: Explain that class may partly contribute to regional patterns without claiming the two factors are identical.
Mistake: Discussing only how groups vote
Why this is incorrect: The specification also requires you to analyse turnout.
How to improve:
For each demographic factor, ask two questions:
Does it influence which party someone supports?
Does it influence whether they vote at all?
Mistake: Listing every possible voting factor
Why this is incorrect: A list demonstrates AO1 knowledge but does little to compare their relative importance.
How to improve: Pair competing explanations and reach a mini-judgement:
class versus age
party loyalty versus policies
region versus issue voting.
Mistake: Assuming correlation proves causation
Why this is incorrect: If two characteristics occur together, this does not necessarily prove one causes the other.
For example, age may correlate strongly with voting choice while also being connected to employment, housing and class.
How to improve: Ask:
Is this factor itself causing the pattern, or might it represent another underlying influence?
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Question 1
Define class dealignment. (2 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Answer: Class dealignment is the weakening relationship between an individual's identification with a social class and their voting behaviour.
Award credit for:
declining class identification
weakened connection between class and voting choice.
Question 2
Define partisan dealignment. (2 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Answer:
Partisan dealignment is the weakening of long-term identification or loyalty between voters and a particular political party.
Question 3
Explain two ways in which social class may still influence electoral outcomes despite class dealignment. (6 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative answer:
One way is through economic interests. Occupation, housing and economic circumstances can influence which policies voters prefer, meaning class can continue to shape party choice even without explicit class identification.
A second way is through turnout. Edexcel material indicates that higher social classes have higher turnout than lower social classes across recent elections, meaning their political preferences can have a greater effect on the result.
Question 4
Study the following data from the 2017 general election.
Pattern | Result |
Change in Conservative likelihood for every additional 10 years of age | +9 percentage points |
Change in Labour likelihood for every additional 10 years of age | -9 percentage points |
Conservative lead among private-sector workers | 11 points |
Labour lead among public-sector workers | 10 points |
Analyse what the data suggests about the relative importance of age and socioeconomic factors in voting behaviour. (8 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative answer:
The age data demonstrates a strong and consistent relationship between age and voting behaviour, suggesting age had become an important demographic predictor. However, the differences between private and public-sector workers show that employment and socioeconomic circumstances also remained significant. The evidence therefore supports the view that age had become increasingly important but does not demonstrate that class-related factors had disappeared.
Question 5
Explain why partisan dealignment may increase the importance of election campaigns and manifestos. (6 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative answer:
Partisan dealignment reduces the number of voters with automatic long-term party loyalties. This creates more floating voters who may consider policies, leadership and self-interest when deciding how to vote. Campaigns and manifestos therefore have a greater opportunity to influence voters who have not already committed themselves to one party.
Question 6
A student states:
"Because age is now a better predictor of voting than class, social class no longer affects UK elections."
Evaluate this claim. (8 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative answer:
The claim is too strong. Age has become an important predictor and in 2017 displayed a clear relationship with Labour and Conservative voting. However, class remains connected to occupation, housing, economic interests and turnout. Differences between private and public-sector workers also show that socioeconomic circumstances remain politically significant. Class dealignment therefore means that class has become a less reliable party predictor, rather than that class has ceased to matter.
Question 7
Study this original source.
Source
One interpretation of modern voting behaviour is that traditional political identities have declined. Class and partisan dealignment mean that voters are less likely to follow the party preferences traditionally associated with their social class. Age and ethnicity may now provide clearer demographic patterns, while voters also respond increasingly to individual policies and party leaders.
An alternative interpretation is that class and region remain fundamental. Occupation, housing and economic interests continue to structure political choices, turnout differs between social groups and substantial regional party patterns remain visible. Some apparently new influences may therefore reflect underlying class and regional differences.
Using the source, evaluate the view that class and region are no longer important influences on voting behaviour. (30 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative mark scheme:
Arguments supporting the view could include:
class dealignment
partisan dealignment
movement of middle-class voters towards Labour in 1997
changes in traditional regional party heartlands
age becoming a stronger predictor
ethnicity becoming an important demographic indicator
increased importance of policies, leadership and rational self-interest.
Arguments challenging the view could include:
class remains linked to occupation, housing and economic interests
class differences in turnout increase its political importance
regional patterns remain visible
Labour remains strong in some northern areas, London and major cities
Conservatives retain greater strength in some southern and rural areas
age or issue voting may themselves overlap with class
region may combine class with national identity and other factors.
Higher-level responses should:
compare factors directly
use election evidence rather than narrating elections
recognise overlap between class and region
consider alternative explanations
sustain judgement throughout.
Question 8
Evaluate the view that age is now the most important demographic influence on UK voting behaviour. (30 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative mark scheme:
Arguments supporting the view:
strong age-party correlation in the 2017 data
Conservative likelihood increased by nine points per ten years of age
Labour likelihood declined by nine points
age can also be associated with turnout
class and partisan dealignment make traditional predictors weaker.
Arguments challenging the view:
class continues to influence occupation, economic interests and turnout
ethnicity may be a strong demographic indicator
region produces distinctive electoral patterns
age overlaps with class, housing and employment
demographic factors may be less significant than policies, leadership or governing competency.
A strong conclusion should distinguish between:
the strongest demographic predictor
and:
the strongest overall influence on voting behaviour.
These are not necessarily the same thing.
Question 9
Evaluate the view that partisan dealignment has made general elections less predictable. (30 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative mark scheme:
Arguments supporting the view could include:
weaker long-term party loyalty
more floating voters
greater voter switching
greater significance of campaigns and manifestos
changing regional party heartlands
increased voter volatility.
Arguments challenging the view could include:
demographic patterns remain identifiable
age may now provide predictable party differences
class continues to matter
regional party patterns remain visible
voters may have changed the basis of their political attachment rather than become completely unpredictable.
The strongest responses should recognise that dealignment changes the basis of electoral predictability rather than necessarily eliminating predictable voting patterns altogether.
Comments