General election case study: since 1997 | Edexcel A-Level Politics
Updated: 7 days ago
For Specification 9PL0
Edexcel A-Level Politics | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time: 50–60 minutes
This General election case study: since 1997 A-Level Politics revision page uses the 2017 general election as the required post-1997 case study. The election is particularly useful because Edexcel's own materials provide detailed evidence about age, employment, region, media readership, party manifestos and changing support during the campaign. It also provides a valuable contrast with Labour's landslide election victory twenty years earlier, showing how voting behaviour had become more volatile and less easily explained by traditional party loyalties alone.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Explain the result and political impact of the 2017 general election.
Explain how party campaigns, leadership and manifestos affected the election.
Analyse the importance of age, class, employment and region in explaining voting behaviour.
Use national voting data to support explanations of the election outcome.
Explain the significance of media readership and opinion polling.
Evaluate whether short-term campaign factors or longer-term voting patterns provide the strongest explanation for the result.
Revision Notes 📚
What does Edexcel require you to know?
Edexcel requires students to study three general elections:
one election from 1945-92
the 1997 election
one election since 1997.
For each election, students must understand:
the result and its impact on parties and government
party policies and manifestos
election campaign techniques
the wider political context
class-based voting
partisanship and voting attachment
gender, age, ethnicity and region
turnout and electoral trends
national voting-behaviour data and explanations for variations within it.
This page uses 2017 as the post-1997 case study because the supplied Edexcel examination materials contain substantial national voting data for that election.
You can develop the demographic concepts introduced here further through class, age, ethnicity and regional voting.
The 2017 general election result
The supplied Edexcel materials show that the 2017 election was considerably more volatile than the older pattern of predictable post-war elections.
An Edexcel 2019 source records that 70 seats changed hands in 2017, compared with 111 in 2015. It uses this evidence to challenge the idea that modern elections are stable and predictable.
The political impact of the result can also be seen in Edexcel's 2019 mark scheme, which refers to the subsequent DUP deal at Westminster as evidence that governing parties could require support from smaller parties rather than governing entirely independently.
This makes 2017 important when considering both voting behaviour and the relationship between electoral outcomes and government formation.
Precise overall seat totals and national vote shares have therefore not been added from outside the supplied materials.
Why was the 2017 result politically significant?
The election demonstrates several important characteristics of contemporary UK politics.
It showed:
significant movement between parties and constituencies
increased importance of age as an electoral dividing line
continued regional variation
changing party support during the election campaign
the potential importance of manifestos
the importance of party leadership
difficulties in accurately predicting election outcomes
increased significance for smaller parties in government formation after the election.
Edexcel's 2019 material presents 2017 as evidence that elections may now be more volatile, with policies, leaders, age and education potentially becoming more important than older patterns of fixed class and partisan loyalty.
This provides a sharp contrast with the historically more stable voting patterns examined in the earlier post-war case study.
Factor 1: the Conservative manifesto
The election provides particularly strong evidence that manifestos can matter.
Edexcel's 2021 paper notes that opinion polling during the 2017 campaign showed Conservative support falling over the issue of social care. It states that Labour's manifesto gained support while the Conservative manifesto put voters off.
The 2024 mark scheme develops this further. It identifies Conservative proposals concerning the cost of elderly care, which became labelled the "dementia tax", as an example of unpopular manifesto content damaging a political party during an election campaign.
The analytical chain is important:
manifesto proposal → negative public response → decline in support → pressure to alter or withdraw the proposal → damage to campaign credibility
This demonstrates why a manifesto is more than a list of promises.
It can:
communicate a party's priorities
establish its political image
attract new voters
reassure existing supporters
create unexpected political problems.
This connects directly to how the established parties use policies to compete for electoral support.
Factor 2: the Labour manifesto
The supplied Edexcel material also identifies Labour's manifesto as a factor contributing to changing support during the campaign.
The 2021 source states that polling showed Labour's manifesto gained the party support.
This is significant because it provides a direct contrast with the Conservative experience.
Labour | Conservatives |
Manifesto associated with increasing support | Manifesto associated with declining support |
Campaign benefited from policy presentation | Social-care proposals damaged campaign |
Jeremy Corbyn's ratings improved during the campaign | Theresa May's ratings declined during the campaign |
The strongest analysis does not simply conclude that one manifesto was "good" and the other "bad".
Instead, ask why manifestos mattered.
Edexcel's 2024 mark scheme explains that in an age of class and partisan dealignment, voters may be less automatically attached to a party and therefore more willing to choose according to policies and perceived self-interest.
So the significance of manifestos may actually increase as traditional party loyalty weakens.
Factor 3: the election campaign
Edexcel's 2024 mark scheme explicitly identifies 2017 as an example of how campaigns can make or break an election outcome.
A campaign can matter because it provides an opportunity for voters to:
learn about new policies
compare party leaders
reassess previous voting intentions
respond to campaign mistakes
judge whether a party appears competent
decide whether its manifesto serves their interests.
The 2017 campaign appears particularly significant because political support changed during it.
Edexcel's 2021 source states that opinion polls successfully recorded:
Theresa May's ratings falling
Jeremy Corbyn's ratings rising
Labour's manifesto increasing support
the Conservative manifesto reducing support.
This provides evidence against the claim that election campaigns simply confirm decisions voters made long beforehand.
However, campaign effects should still be evaluated against longer-term influences such as social class, region and party attachment.
Factor 4: leadership
The 2017 election also illustrates the potential importance of party leaders.
Edexcel's materials describe a significant change in perceptions during the campaign:
Theresa May's rating fell
Jeremy Corbyn's rating rose.
The 2024 mark scheme also notes that Theresa May declined to participate in a party leaders' debate and Amber Rudd attended instead. Edexcel uses this as an example of how leaders may seek to avoid potentially damaging media scrutiny.
Leadership can influence voting because leaders become:
public representatives of their parties
the main communicators of campaign messages
symbols of governing competency
central figures in televised and media coverage.
A voter may therefore judge not only policies but whether the leader appears capable of delivering them.
However, leadership and campaigning are difficult to separate completely.
For example:
May's changing popularity may partly reflect reaction to Conservative policies.
Likewise:
Corbyn's improved ratings may partly reflect greater exposure to Labour's manifesto and campaign.
This is why stronger answers explain relationships between factors rather than treating each factor as entirely independent.
Factor 5: age
Age was one of the clearest demographic dividing lines in 2017.
The Edexcel 2020 examination paper reproduces national YouGov analysis showing a striking relationship between age and party choice.
According to the graph:
for every 10 years older a voter was, the likelihood of voting Conservative increased by 9 percentage points
for every 10 years older a voter was, the likelihood of voting Labour decreased by 9 percentage points
the Labour-Conservative crossover occurred at approximately age 47.
This is powerful evidence that age was closely associated with voting behaviour.
What does the age data show?
Suppose two voters differ in age by 30 years.
Using the relationship shown in Edexcel's source:
$$3 \times 9 = 27$$
The older voter's likelihood of supporting the Conservatives would therefore be approximately 27 percentage points higher according to the pattern shown in the source.
At the same time, Labour support would decline by approximately:
$$3 \times 9 = 27$$
percentage points across the same age difference.
This does not mean every older voter supported the Conservatives or every younger voter supported Labour.
It means age showed a strong national statistical relationship with voting choice.
That distinction is essential.
Why might age have become more significant?
Edexcel's 2020 source states that age had become important because recent governments had treated older and younger people differently.
The 2019 mark scheme goes further by presenting age and education as factors that had become stronger indicators of voting choice in recent elections, potentially overtaking class and traditional party loyalty.
The broader implication is that the social divisions structuring elections can change.
Where class might once have been an especially reliable indicator, newer divisions can emerge.
This idea is central to changing patterns of voter choice.
Factor 6: employment and class
Age did not make social class irrelevant.
The same Edexcel 2020 source identifies important differences according to employment.
It states that:
the Conservatives led Labour by 11 points among private-sector workers
Labour led the Conservatives by 10 points among public-sector workers.
This shows that a voter's position within the economy remained associated with party preference.
Group | Voting pattern in source |
Private-sector workers | Conservatives led Labour by 11 points |
Public-sector workers | Labour led Conservatives by 10 points |
The source explicitly concludes that employment, social class and occupation remained important influences on voting behaviour.
Therefore, saying "age replaced class" is too simplistic.
A more accurate conclusion is:
Age became a very strong predictor, but occupational and class-based differences remained visible.
Class dealignment
Class dealignment means a weakening relationship between social class and party choice.
Edexcel's 2019 material contrasts older, more predictable patterns of class voting with recent voter volatility and stronger influences from age, education, policy and leadership.
This does not mean class disappeared.
Instead, it means that:
voters may be less automatically loyal to the traditional party associated with their class
other demographic influences can become more important
voters may respond more strongly to policies and leaders
election campaigns may have greater potential to change voting intentions.
The 2017 election is therefore useful evidence for class dealignment, not evidence that class has ceased to exist as a political influence.
Partisan dealignment
Partisan dealignment refers to the weakening of long-term loyalty to individual political parties.
This helps explain why modern elections can be volatile.
If fewer voters think:
"I always vote for this party",
then more voters may instead ask:
Which manifesto benefits me?
Which leader do I trust?
Which party appears competent?
Which policies matter most to me?
Has the party I previously supported changed?
The 2019 Edexcel mark scheme connects modern volatility with voters acting more independently and making choices based increasingly on perceived rational self-interest.
This may increase the importance of both manifestos and election campaigns.
Factor 7: region
Regional voting remained significant in 2017.
The Edexcel 2020 source states that:
Labour was no longer as dominant in Scotland
the Conservatives remained stronger in southern England outside London.
The 2021 source also notes that opinion polls correctly identified a significant switch from the Scottish National Party (SNP) to the Conservatives in Scotland during the election.
This demonstrates two important points.
First, regional political patterns remained strong.
Second, those patterns were capable of changing.
That means region should not be treated as permanently determining voting behaviour.
A voter living in Scotland, London or southern England may be more likely to encounter a particular regional political pattern, but electoral shifts can disrupt established party dominance.
This relationship between party competition and geography also connects with the changing UK party system.
Factor 8: media readership
The 2017 national data also showed a very strong association between newspaper readership and voting behaviour.
According to the Edexcel source:
73% of Guardian readers voted Labour
79% of Telegraph readers voted Conservative.
At first sight, this appears to demonstrate extremely strong media influence.
However, there is an important analytical problem.
Does newspaper choice cause political preference, or do voters choose newspapers that already reflect their political beliefs?
These are different explanations.
Media persuasion explanation
Newspaper coverage may:
frame political issues
influence perceptions of leaders
emphasise some stories rather than others
persuade voters towards a particular party.
Reinforcement explanation
Alternatively:
a voter already holds broadly left-wing or right-wing opinions
they choose a newspaper reflecting those opinions
the newspaper reinforces rather than creates their voting preference.
Therefore:
correlation between newspaper readership and voting choice does not automatically prove media causation.
This distinction is central when studying media bias, persuasion and opinion polls.
Factor 9: opinion polls
Opinion polling was itself politically significant in 2017.
Edexcel's 2019 examination source describes the election as evidence that opinion polls were no longer reliable predictors of final outcomes.
However, the 2021 source gives a more nuanced interpretation.
It argues that although polls did not perfectly forecast the final result, they successfully captured changes during the campaign, including:
falling ratings for May
rising ratings for Corbyn
Conservative losses over social care
support gained from Labour's manifesto
Liberal Democrat stagnation
collapsing UKIP support
movement from the SNP towards the Conservatives in Scotland.
This distinction is useful:
Predicting the exact result and tracking changes in public opinion are not the same thing.
Polls may perform poorly at the first while still providing useful evidence about the second.
Factor 10: party policies and issues
Edexcel's 2019 source explicitly contrasts predictable class-based voting with modern voting based increasingly on:
policies
issues
party leadership
media support.
This makes 2017 an important example of issue-based voting.
The social-care controversy demonstrates how a specific proposal can suddenly affect political support.
This matters particularly in an era of dealignment.
If voters feel less attached to parties, they may be more willing to change their vote because of one important policy.
However, the same voter can still be influenced simultaneously by:
age
class
employment
region
media
leadership.
Voting behaviour is therefore usually multi-causal.
What happened to smaller parties?
The 2021 Edexcel source identifies several significant changes:
Liberal Democrat support had stalled
UKIP support collapsed
the SNP lost some support to the Conservatives in Scotland.
These patterns matter because an election result is not simply a contest between Labour and the Conservatives.
Votes moving away from one smaller party may indirectly affect:
which larger party gains seats
the electoral geography of the UK
the balance of power after the election.
The subsequent Westminster arrangement involving the DUP also illustrates how smaller parties can become politically significant even when they do not rival Labour or the Conservatives nationally.
National voting patterns: key 2017 data
The following figures are all contained within the supplied Edexcel examination material.
Factor | 2017 evidence | What it suggests |
Age | Each additional 10 years increased Conservative likelihood by 9 points | Strong age divide |
Age | Each additional 10 years reduced Labour likelihood by 9 points | Younger voters much more Labour-leaning |
Age | Labour-Conservative crossover at about age 47 | Age was a major predictor |
Media | 73% of Guardian readers voted Labour | Strong relationship between media readership and party choice |
Media | 79% of Telegraph readers voted Conservative | Strong relationship between media readership and party choice |
Employment | Conservatives led by 11 points among private-sector workers | Occupational differences remained important |
Employment | Labour led by 10 points among public-sector workers | Employment continued to structure voting |
Region | Significant SNP-to-Conservative movement in Scotland | Regional voting patterns were changing |
Electoral volatility | 70 seats changed hands | Considerable movement between constituencies |
Gender, ethnicity and turnout
The Edexcel specification requires students to consider gender, ethnicity and turnout when studying election voting patterns.
Which factor mattered most?
This is where knowledge becomes evaluation.
Several interpretations are possible.
Argument 1: age was the strongest demographic factor
The statistical relationship was extremely clear:
Conservative support rose steadily with age
Labour support declined steadily with age
the crossover occurred at approximately 47.
This provides unusually strong numerical evidence.
Argument 2: campaigns and manifestos were more important
Support actually changed during the election campaign.
Labour benefited from its manifesto, while Conservative support fell following controversy over social-care proposals.
That suggests voters did not simply enter the election with fixed demographic preferences.
Argument 3: leadership mattered
May's popularity declined while Corbyn's improved.
This suggests that personal perceptions of party leaders could influence electoral movement.
Argument 4: class and employment remained important
Private-sector and public-sector workers displayed clearly different voting patterns.
This challenges claims that traditional socioeconomic influences had disappeared.
Argument 5: region remained significant
Scotland and southern England outside London continued to display distinctive party patterns, even though movement between parties occurred.
Strongest overall interpretation
The 2017 election is best understood as evidence that no single factor determines voting behaviour.
Age produced one of the clearest demographic patterns, but age alone cannot explain:
changing party support during the campaign
the manifesto effect
regional variation
employment differences
shifts between smaller parties
changing perceptions of May and Corbyn.
Similarly, campaign factors alone cannot explain why different demographic groups responded differently to the same campaign.
A stronger argument therefore identifies interaction between factors:
dealignment increased voter availability → manifestos and campaigns became more influential → voters responded differently according to age, employment and region → leadership and media helped shape perceptions of those choices
That is much stronger AO2 than simply producing a list.
These terms form part of the specification's required vocabulary for Voting Behaviour and the Media.
Hints from the Examiner Reports 💡
Examiner hint: Use general elections as evidence for an argument rather than writing a chronological account of what happened.
The 2025 examiner report found that candidates often became too narrative when they structured answers election by election. Stronger responses used election evidence to support themed arguments about voting behaviour.
Examiner hint: Connect factors rather than simply listing them.
The 2025 report praised stronger candidates who recognised connections between class and region, and between demographic factors and political issues.
For 2017, you could therefore connect:
age + manifesto policy
or:
region + changing party attachment
rather than treating every factor as isolated.
Examiner hint: Use statistics to strengthen arguments, but explain what they prove.
Edexcel's 2019 examiner feedback noted that relevant voting statistics could be deployed effectively. A number without analysis is less useful than a figure followed by an explanation of its political significance.
Instead of writing:
"73% of Guardian readers voted Labour."
Develop it:
"73% of Guardian readers voted Labour, showing a strong association between newspaper readership and voting choice, although this does not establish whether the newspaper persuaded the voter or merely reflected an existing political preference."
Examiner hint: Keep your answer focused on the precise question.
The 2019 examiner report found that some students became sidetracked into discussing whether individual factors such as media or polling were important instead of answering the actual question about electoral predictability.
Every example should therefore end by linking back to the judgement you are being asked to make.
Examiner hint: Sustain evaluation throughout.
The 2025 report recommends sustained, evidenced judgements and effective pairing of themed points rather than saving AO3 for the conclusion.
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Saying age completely replaced class
Why this is incorrect: Age produced a strong relationship with voting behaviour, but the same Edexcel source shows significant differences between public-sector and private-sector workers.
How to improve: Write:
"Age became a stronger predictor of voting behaviour, although occupational and class differences remained significant."
Mistake: Assuming newspaper readership proves media persuasion
Why this is incorrect: The relationship may operate in either direction. Newspapers may influence readers, but readers may also choose newspapers because they already share their political views.
How to improve:
Distinguish between:
persuasion
reinforcement
correlation.
Mistake: Treating the manifesto controversy as the whole explanation
Why this is incorrect: The Conservative manifesto affected support, but voters were also influenced by leadership, age, employment, region and existing political attachments.
How to improve: Evaluate whether the manifesto caused electoral change itself or intensified wider problems within the campaign.
Mistake: Saying opinion polls were simply "wrong"
Why this is incorrect: The Edexcel source shows that polls successfully tracked important movements in support during the campaign even if they did not provide a perfect prediction of the final outcome.
How to improve: Distinguish:
forecasting the final result from measuring changes in public opinion.
Mistake: Treating class and region as interchangeable
Why this is incorrect: Regional differences may overlap with class, employment and economic interests, but location does not automatically identify a voter's social class.
How to improve: Explain how factors interact without claiming that one automatically causes another.
Mistake: Listing statistics without analysing them
Why this is incorrect: AO1 knowledge needs to support AO2 analysis and AO3 evaluation.
How to improve: Use the pattern:
data → pattern → explanation → alternative explanation → judgement
For example:
Age +10 years → Conservative support +9 points → age is a strong predictor → but employment also matters → therefore age is important but not sufficient alone.
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Question 1
Define partisan dealignment. (2 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Answer:
Partisan dealignment is the weakening of long-term identification or attachment between voters and particular political parties.
Award credit for:
declining party attachment
recognition that this concerns long-term voting loyalty.
Question 2
Using the 2017 data, explain one way in which age was associated with voting behaviour. (4 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative answer:
For every ten years older a voter was, the likelihood of voting Conservative increased by nine percentage points, while the likelihood of voting Labour fell by nine points. This demonstrates a strong age divide, with older voters more Conservative-leaning and younger voters more Labour-leaning.
Question 3
Study the following data.
Group | Voting pattern |
Guardian readers | 73% voted Labour |
Telegraph readers | 79% voted Conservative |
Private-sector workers | Conservatives led Labour by 11 points |
Public-sector workers | Labour led Conservatives by 10 points |
Analyse two conclusions that can be drawn about voting behaviour in the 2017 general election. (8 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative answer:
One conclusion is that newspaper readership was strongly associated with party preference. Large majorities of Guardian and Telegraph readers supported different parties. However, this does not prove that newspaper coverage caused the voting difference.
A second conclusion is that employment remained important. The contrasting preferences of public and private-sector workers show that socioeconomic position continued to influence voting even while age was becoming a stronger predictor.
Higher-level answers should compare the explanatory value of the factors.
Question 4
Explain two reasons why party manifestos may have influenced the outcome of the 2017 general election. (6 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative answer:
One reason is that Labour's manifesto was associated with increasing support during the campaign, suggesting voters responded positively to its policy offer.
A second reason is that Conservative social-care proposals became politically damaging and were associated with declining support. This shows that unpopular policies can weaken an otherwise planned campaign.
Question 5
A student states:
"79% of Telegraph readers voted Conservative in 2017, so the Telegraph persuaded 79% of its readers to vote Conservative."
Evaluate this claim. (6 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative answer:
The conclusion is not supported by the data. The figure demonstrates a correlation between Telegraph readership and Conservative voting, but not causation. Readers may have chosen the newspaper because it already reflected their political attitudes. Newspaper coverage could still reinforce or influence preferences, but additional evidence would be needed to prove persuasion.
Question 6
Study this original source.
Source
One explanation for the changing pattern of support in the 2017 general election is that the campaign itself mattered greatly. Party support moved during the campaign, the Labour manifesto attracted voters and Conservative social-care proposals damaged support. Perceptions of the two principal party leaders also changed.
An alternative interpretation is that electoral behaviour continued to reflect deeper social divisions. Age was strongly associated with party choice, employment remained important and distinctive regional voting patterns were still visible.
Using the source, evaluate the view that the 2017 general election was determined more by campaigns and manifestos than by demographic voting patterns. (30 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative mark scheme:
Arguments supporting the view could include:
Labour gained support after publication of its manifesto
Conservative social-care proposals damaged support
May's popularity fell during the campaign
Corbyn's popularity rose
polling demonstrated changing opinions
class and partisan dealignment may make voters more responsive to short-term factors.
Arguments challenging the view could include:
age showed a strong and consistent relationship with voting
the Conservative-Labour age crossover occurred at around 47
private and public-sector workers showed very different preferences
regional patterns remained significant
party and demographic attachments may shape how voters respond to campaign messages.
Higher-level responses should directly compare the explanatory strength of these factors and sustain a judgement throughout.
Question 7
Evaluate the view that age was the most important factor influencing voting behaviour in the 2017 general election. (30 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative mark scheme:
Arguments supporting the view could use:
the nine-point change in Conservative support for each ten-year increase in age
the corresponding nine-point decline in Labour support
the crossover at approximately age 47
Edexcel material identifying age as a stronger modern predictor.
Alternative explanations could include:
occupation and class
region
party manifestos
campaign performance
leadership
media influence
partisan attachment.
A strong conclusion should distinguish between the strongest demographic predictor and the strongest overall cause of the election outcome, which are not necessarily the same thing.
Question 8
Evaluate the view that traditional voting patterns had become unreliable by the 2017 general election. (30 marks)
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Indicative mark scheme:
Arguments supporting the view:
70 seats changed hands
age and education had become stronger predictors
partisan and class dealignment encouraged voter switching
manifestos and campaign events changed support
UKIP support collapsed
the SNP experienced movement towards the Conservatives in Scotland
opinion polls struggled to predict the final outcome accurately.
Arguments challenging the view:
regional patterns remained visible
Conservatives remained stronger in southern England outside London
Labour and Conservative support varied significantly according to employment
class continued to influence political preference
newspaper readership showed highly predictable partisan differences.
The strongest response should conclude that 2017 displayed both continuity and change. Traditional factors had weakened, but they had not disappeared, while age, leadership, policies and campaign effects had become increasingly important alongside them.
Comments