X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

Please note: Previously subscribers used a 'WebID' to log into the website. Your subscriber number is not the same as the WebID. Please ensure you use the subscriber number when you link your subscription.

Coffee House

‘We called quite a few dead people’: How the Tories’ lack of data let them down in Eastleigh

2 March 2013

3:54 PM

2 March 2013

3:54 PM

At 9.15pm, with 45 minutes until polls closed in the Eastleigh by-election, the ‘get out the vote’ telephone operation at Conservative Central Headquarters stopped. As one fellow volunteer put it, it was so late in the day that we were just ‘pissing people off’. Having been there all day, I’d had that feeling for several hours, as voter after voter spoke of the harassment they had received during the Eastleigh campaign from all of the major parties. By the early evening we were calling people who not only had received several calls already that day to remind them to vote, as well as one or two visits to their doorstep, but these poor voters had sent in their ballots by post, and had told everyone that. One of the practical reasons the Conservatives lost was a lack of data: banks of volunteers young and old spent hours on the phone and walking the streets pestering postal voters who’d already sent off their votes and we’d failed to record this fact. We called quite a few dead people.

Much is already being written about the influence of UKIP on this election. I spoke to dozens of people who voted for UKIP wilfully aware that by not voting Conservative they would be making a Liberal Democrat win more likely: many of them didn’t care about splitting the vote on the right, because they wanted to send a message. Daniel Hannan’s astute point that ironically the rise of UKIP may be the thing which denies the public a referendum on Europe after 2015 wouldn’t have troubled these voters: they were voting for UKIP in protest. Astonishingly some of them even admitted to me that they knew it was ‘the wrong thing to do’ but expressed anger at cuts in the welfare their children were receiving, and the slow pace of reform.

[Alt-Text]


Despite being in favour of the change myself, there can be no denying that in a place like Eastleigh gay marriage hurt the Conservative vote. In the immediate aftermath of the vote, with so many still stunned by this undeniable social change, UKIP may have been the beneficiaries of opposing gay marriage. People spoke of the shock in their local communities at this change, a shock that the Conservatives must now hope subsides with time.

We were not as bad as the Liberal Democrats for bombarding the voters of Eastleigh with flyers, voters told me. In electioneering there is no perfect number of flyers you can put through the letterbox: for 30 years the Conservatives sent nothing, one caller told me, and now there was a deluge of material. Neither was what she would have wanted. More than one person complained that they started to receive leaflets on polling day at 6am. Voters – it would seem – always feel either deluged or ignored. One voter followed up this complaint at the sea of paper coming through his door by saying that he’d have voted for Maria Hutchings instead of UKIP if he’d known that she was against gay marriage, despite her opposition being one of the most famous things about her candidacy. We may not have been as bad at harassing the voters with leaflets as the Liberal Democrats, but then they won the seat. The local data required to win elections takes years of work by active grassroots supporters.

There will be a huge collective sigh of relief in Eastleigh: people can go back to picking up their phones, and they won’t need snow ploughs to clear the carpet beneath their front doors. No constituency will received the resources come the general election that the voters were subjected to in Eastleigh, a fact which will doubtless dilute UKIP’s ability to perform as strongly. I have never seen an election in which the voters were so saturated with information: usually you get more than the odd household where they don’t even know that it’s taking place.

Whilst the writers of Westminster decide what this all means for 2015, we would do well to remember that by-elections are unusual creatures, and that people use them to send different messages from the ones they send at general elections. For the voters of Eastleigh, as one harangued man put it to me at about 8pm, it’s all over.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
Close