Question:
Evaluate the view that the outcomes of general elections are mostly decided by election campaigns and manifestos.
Answer:
The extent to which election campaigns and manifestos mostly decide the outcomes of general elections is a subject of considerable debate in UK politics. Election campaigns allows the party leader to represent themselves through advertising whilst manifesto announces the party's alignments and goals. However, it could be said that these factors only have short-term influence, as party leaders could move away from their party's manifesto and their main purpose from the campaigns. Instead, leadership in particular fundamentally influence the outcome of the general elections such as the strong leadership from Tony Blair ended 18 years of the Conservative ruling, demonstrating that a strong leadership will bring about more votes through perceived competence and charismatic appeal. Therefore, this essay will analyse the importance of all three factors while also considering leadership as the main factor that decides the outcomes of the general elections.
Conversely, proponents argue that election campaigns are, in fact, the dominant force determining election results. Campaigns allows party leaders to appeal to and advocate themselves to win the general elections. For instance, Ed Davey's campaign with his media stunts and his talk about his sick son, all contribute to his attempt to campaign the Liberal Democrats. Ed Davey's effort in campaigning for his party were reflected in the recent 2024 general election, where the Liberal Democrats secured 72 seats. Despite being a minor party, his campaign reflected the views of the youth which ultimately brought him more seats compared to the 2019 elections where he won only 11 seats. This gradual growth suggests that campaigns could positively impact the outcomes of general elections for minor parties, resulting in more seats and votes. Although campaigns could provide a sense of stability for minor parties, without having a stronger representation such as the Conservatives' Kemi Badenoch and Labour's Keir Starmer, it is difficult to examine the extent of campaigns for minor parties such as SNP and Reform. This suggest that despite offering a well responded campaign, without having a strong leadership for your own party, it makes it difficult for minor parties to immensely impact the outcomes of the general elections. However, the impact of even well-executed campaigns is often overshadowed by the fundamental influence of party leadership. On the other hand, the strongest argument is that leadership is the most fundamental factor to impact the outcomes of the general elections. Boris Johnson's witty behaviour allowed him to gain a 365 majority seats in the 2019 general elections. This characteristic of his presented his leadership as relatable, as his appeal to the election brought in more younger votes, bringing a strong turnout of 67.3%. Johnson's perceived competence gave him a stronger advantage to carry out his Brexit policies from the 2016 referendum. This strong leadership secured him a large parliamentary majority, demonstrating that a united government, underpinned a clear mandate, can enfore its legislative agenda far more effectively than one constrained by internal division or a weaker public backing. Therefore, the extent to a strong leadership in general outcome is prevalent, compared to campaigns, leadership offers a greater platform to appeal to younger and older votes which is shown by the drastic gap between the labour government and the conservative government in the 2019 elections. Despite being a dominant party, Johnson's competence prevented minor parties from taking the seats and votes from them. Overall, currently, leadership is more significant for the long-term as it allows party leaders to enforce their policies more greatly compared to campaigns which suggests that campaigns offer a short-term resolution to establish their reputation.
Furthermore, some would argue that manifestos are crucial for the outcomes of the general elections, as it aligns the party's ideologies and goals in policies. This allows voters to consider which party represent their views better, providing them greater choice when it comes to the elections. For instance, Starmer being the middle way to both Old Labour and New labour gained him a parliamentary majority with 412 seats. This suggests that Stamer's movement to a both social and traditional policies offered him with greater support from voters. For example, the nationalisation of key industries while also providing some sense of a free market economy benefited more than if he focussed on one strand. Moreover, his commitment to net zero emissions by 2050 allowed him to steal some of the green party's voters which shows that providing a manifesto with a diverse but specific policies that is altered to meet the demands of people, ensured Labour's success in the 2024 election. This clear majority ultimately made it easy for Labour to proceed with its manifesto, demonstrating that a clear and concise manifesto could guarantee a win in the general election. However, despite its influence, if a party leader is not fit to meet the interest of the people by being included in scandals, it could hold them accountable in the next general election. This shows that leadership is essential to secure a stable government, instead of creating a divided government. Overall, this is recently shown in the recent conflicts between Starmer and Peter Mandelson, which is ruining Starmer's reputation in the long-run. This is supported by the idea that leadership is fundamental to the outcomes of the general elections, as being involved in scandals could result in less support in the long run. For instance, Starmer's recent case with Mandelson where he's been involved with the predator Jeffery Epstein caused dissatisfaction amongst Labour's cabinet and voters. This ultimately led to the resignation of 16 ministers, causing a strain in Labour's government. This negatively impacted Starmer's reputation as this shows the instability of Labour which is shown when Starmer's personal deputy minister Angela Rayner resigned by January. This shows the significance of leadership, as incompetence could prevent party leaders from gaining support in the future. In recent opinion polls, it shows that the Reform party is now leading the polls with 27% whilst Labour has 19%. Starmer's lack of accountability as a party leader led to minor parties securing the votes, demonstating the severity of leadership when it comes to outcomes of the general elections. Therefore, the strongest argument is that leadership is the most influential when it comes to election outcomes, as despite having a strong mandate, being involved in scandals such as Starmer can tarnish their reputation as party leader. This demonstrates that leadership is fundamental in leading the UK, as lacking competence could effectively hold them accountable in the next general election.
To conclude, whilst campaigns and manifestos offer a strong parliamentary majority if effectively used, in practice, leadership shows a more crucial impact on the outcome of the general elections. Strong competence and and charismatic appeal such as Johnson allowed him to gain 365 majority seats which shows the influence of leadership in particularly appealing to older and younger votes. However, if being involved in scandals such as Starmer, demonstrates the importance of leadership. This is shown where 16 ministers resigned, ultimately ruining his reputation. Although campaign and manifestos are essential in creating a stable government, with a lack of strong leadership, it would lead to a lack of national support in the long run. Therefore, while campaigns and manifestos play a role, their influence is less decisive than leadership in shaping overall general elections.