The female vote

What women really want

Much the same as men—but with subtle differences politicians hope to exploit

Tomorrow’s Dadsnetter

WITH a tight race looming, all the parties are looking for any advantage they can find. One promising place is in the small but consistent political differences between the sexes. All three main parties are wooing women.

The fairer sex is a familiar target for political parties. “Soccer moms” were thought vital to Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign in 1996, and “Worcester woman” was said to be crucial to Tony Blair’s victory in 1997. Today it is the “Mumsnet voters”, named after a website that many mothers frequent, who are in the crosshairs. Such is the importance attached to the group who are drawn to the site that the leaders of the three main parties have fallen over themselves to be interviewed on it. David Cameron, the Conservative leader, travelled to Bristol recently to discuss nappies for disabled children with a Mumsnetter who was dissatisfied with the answers he gave online.

The site serves relatively well-heeled women with young children, most of whom are at school. Until 1997 such women were more likely to vote Conservative than Labour. They switched their allegiance to Tony Blair: indeed, according to Ipsos-MORI, a polling firm, in 2005 more women than men voted for Labour, the first time that has ever happened.

Rosie Campbell of Birkbeck College, London attributes the shift to the increase in the number of working women. When fewer women worked outside the home, she says, they tended to support political parties that kept the state out of that home. Now that most women have jobs, they seek state help not only with employment law but also with pressing practical matters such as child care. Ms Campbell thinks women view politics “through a lens of family life” in a way that men do not. Yet she reports that the trend towards Labour may be going into reverse.

The reasons for the apparent volte-face remain mysterious. But it is consistent with some observers’ perception that women are harder to second-guess than their male counterparts. Women are thought to remain undecided for longer, often making up their minds as they enter the polling booth. They also appear less tribal and more likely to switch their affections—one reason why politicians are so keen on courting them. And women are more dutiful democrats: in the 2005 election they were about four percentage points more likely to vote than men, says Ms Campbell.

So far the Tories seem to be winning the battle for female hearts and minds. A Mumsnet survey suggests a small Conservative lead, although the results fluctuate from poll to poll. But the Tory message could use a little fine-tuning: in their posts many Mumnetters oppose giving tax breaks to married couples, the details of which Mr Cameron has promised to reveal before the election. A lot of them are unmarried, and many of those who are wed think it unfair to penalise single mothers. Others are worried that the proposals favour stay-at-home mothers at the expense of their working counterparts. And some with philandering husbands claim to see the tax break as a potential “golden hallo” to a new wife.

The Tories appear to be gaining support from poorer mothers too. A rival website called Netmums, which caters for the less prosperous, published a more rigorous poll on April 4th. This showed that 34% of its members intended to vote for the Conservatives (up from 16% in 2005), 24% of them for Labour (down from 35%) and 16% for the Liberal Democrats (up from 12%). Good news all round then for Mr Cameron, who is due to become a father again after the election.