Tuesday, April 05, 2005
Focus group
I have been known to be sceptical about focus groups. The problem is not what they tell us but how political parties use that information to mould policies, feed spin and override internal party democracy. This article however, had me intriqued, if only because it reinforced what I am picking up on doorsteps. It helps as well, of course, that the Liberal Democrats came out of the exercise in a good light.
Ironically, the 30 undecided voters brought together by Newsnight had as their chief hate the spin and insincerity that focus groups breed in politicians.
Although they came from diverse political backgrounds, our 30 undecideds agreed on much more than you would expect. All the party leaders spin. All say what they think voters want to hear. No one is addressing the issues that concern them.
The big loser of the evening, was Mr Blair. He was called “liar”, “dishonest”, “promise breaker”, and “patronising” — and that was by his 2001 Labour supporters. The feeling of everyone was the same: incredibly high hopes when he came to office in 1997 and shattered expectations today.
The problem for Mr Blair, and why Labour could have its majority sliced in half, is that the more he struggles to lower public expectations, the more he sinks in people’s estimation. The swing voters overwhelmingly picked him as both the most likely party leader to cheat at golf (“he’ll do anything to win”), and also the leader that they would most trust to watch their daughter for a weekend — “his soft, gentle talk is patronising to us, but a nine-year-old would like it”.
The more Mr Blair tells voters he is listening, the more convinced they are that he is not. The more he claims he is not courting popularity, the more they assume he is just spinning. Mr Blair, if you read these words . . . stop.
Tony Blair's association with George Bush goes down particularly badly, whilst the war in Iraq still seems to be a live issue amongst the electorate. The problem, and I think the article hints at this, is that the disillusionment generated by these factors amongst the electorate is more likely to make them stay at home rather than come out and vote for another party.
Ironically, the 30 undecided voters brought together by Newsnight had as their chief hate the spin and insincerity that focus groups breed in politicians.
Although they came from diverse political backgrounds, our 30 undecideds agreed on much more than you would expect. All the party leaders spin. All say what they think voters want to hear. No one is addressing the issues that concern them.
The big loser of the evening, was Mr Blair. He was called “liar”, “dishonest”, “promise breaker”, and “patronising” — and that was by his 2001 Labour supporters. The feeling of everyone was the same: incredibly high hopes when he came to office in 1997 and shattered expectations today.
The problem for Mr Blair, and why Labour could have its majority sliced in half, is that the more he struggles to lower public expectations, the more he sinks in people’s estimation. The swing voters overwhelmingly picked him as both the most likely party leader to cheat at golf (“he’ll do anything to win”), and also the leader that they would most trust to watch their daughter for a weekend — “his soft, gentle talk is patronising to us, but a nine-year-old would like it”.
The more Mr Blair tells voters he is listening, the more convinced they are that he is not. The more he claims he is not courting popularity, the more they assume he is just spinning. Mr Blair, if you read these words . . . stop.
Tony Blair's association with George Bush goes down particularly badly, whilst the war in Iraq still seems to be a live issue amongst the electorate. The problem, and I think the article hints at this, is that the disillusionment generated by these factors amongst the electorate is more likely to make them stay at home rather than come out and vote for another party.
