The powerful party of the unaligned is falling for David Cameron's charm

By William Rees-Mogg (THE TIMES, 28/08/06):

PLATO DID NOT much like democracy: he would have detested opinion polls. One of the best known passages in The Republic gives his view of democratic opinion: “Suppose a man was in charge of a large and powerful animal, and made a study of its moods and wants: he would learn when to approach and handle it, when and why it was especially savage or gentle, what the different noises it made meant, and what tone of voice to use to soothe or annoy it.”

Plato preferred the rule of “philosopher kings” to that of democracy. Philosopher kings are in short supply nowadays, and have been since the early presidents of the United States. However, we do need to understand the moods of the large animal: democratic politicians have to be able to handle it.

Last week there were two polls published on current political opinion. An ICM poll in The Guardian gave the Conservatives 40 per cent, Labour 31 and the Liberal Democrats 22. The second, a YouGov poll published in The Daily Telegraph on Friday gave the Conservatives 38 per cent, Labour 31 and the Lib Dems 18.

These polls are remarkable close together, though the two polls use different methods and had different numbers of respondents. The most noticeable difference between them is that the ICM poll showed a swing of 2.5 per cent from Labour to the Conservatives in the previous month, whereas the YouGov swing was only 1 per cent. ICM suggests that Labour’s rate of decline may have accelerated in August. Yet these differences are still inside normal statistical error. The two polls confirm each other. Incidentally both polls have a good record of accuracy.

At the last general election, both ICM and YouGov underestimated the Tory vote by 1 per cent: ICM over estimated the Labour vote by 2 per cent and YouGov by 1 per cent. That is pretty good forecasting.

It is difficult to translate poll results into likely gains or losses of seats, particularly as the next general election could be postponed until June 2010: there will almost certainly be a different Labour leader by then. However, the YouGov poll gave a regional breakdown, which showed that the Conservatives are gaining support where they need it most. In Scotland, where there are few marginals, the swing to the Conservatives since the 2005 election is only 3 per cent. In London, where there are numerous marginals, it is 9 per cent. London is always volatile, and sometimes ahead of the rest of the country. Labour is in deep trouble in London.

These two polls suggest that Labour would need a big recovery, on the scale of a 5 per cent swing back, to retain its overall majority at the next election. On these polls, the Conservatives would probably be the largest party and might have a small overall majority. Since the last election the large animal seems to have been changing its mind. It snarls angrily at Labour; it purrs contentedly for the Tories. However, it remains both formidable and changeable.

Further clues to the animal’s mood are given by a third opinion poll, taken by ICM and published in The Sunday Times yesterday. This shows that men would prefer Gordon Brown to David Cameron as prime minister by 42 to 36 per cent, but women would prefer Mr Cameron to Mr Brown by 40 to 34. This is in line with YouGov which shows a 2 per cent swing to the Conservatives since the last election among men, but a 6 per cent swing among women.

In recent elections, partly because of the appeal of Tony Blair, the Conservatives lost their advantage among women voters; they have now regained it. Mr Cameron is a good looking young man, as Mr Blair was in 1997. This is politically significant, as it was in the careers of David Owen or Anthony Eden. His appeal to women gave Mr Blair the edge over Mr Brown; it may do the same for Mr Cameron.

The Sunday Times poll also gave interesting figures on party loyalties. Non-party voters are now by far the largest group. Voters without a party commitment amount to 40 per cent, another 10 per cent support small parties, including Nationalists, the Greens and UKIP. Those who have loyalties to the three main parties split 24 per cent Labour, 17 per cent Conservative and only 9 per cent Lib Dem. The old politics, which was decided by the solid blocks of party loyalists, belongs to the past.

Again one can see the importance of the Cameron factor. Just as he is the leader who is the most attractive to women, he is also the most attractive to independents. Whereas Labour currently converts the 24 per cent of voters who are Labour loyalists into 21 per cent of current support, Cameron converts the 17 per cent who are Conservative loyalists into ICM’s estimate of 40 per cent current support. That suggests that Cameron is beating Labour among independent voters by an exceptionally wide margin, and is also beating the Lib Dems.

The parallel with Mr Blair in 1997 is again obvious. He won women voters and voters without a party allegiance for new Labour. Mr Cameron is winning the same groups for the Conservatives. He is not doing it by policy, but by personal appeal, image and his non-partisan approach. Independents are, almost by definition, non-partisan voters. Women are less partisan than men: they do not identify their politics with competitive sport, let alone war.

Mr Cameron is the non-party leader of his party: he identifies best with non-party voters, who are, paradoxically, the largest party. He has to take account of traditional Conservatives, but most of them are delighted to be ahead in the polls. At the moment, the powerful beast bellows with anger when its old Labour keeper offers it scraps of food, but likes to have its tummy tickled by that nice young keeper David Cameron.