Socially conservative parties, whether far-right or not, are mainly voted for by those who have been left behind by globalisation. Politicians appear to be an out-of-touch elite making decisions without caring about public opinion. Left-wing parties have lost touch with their traditional constituencies: the workers, farmers, and lower socioeconomic groups.
What shapes voters’ choices? When do they vote and based on what criteria do they accept or reject a party or candidate?
There has been a clear shift in voter behaviour in recent years. Alongside concerns about the economy and the management of everyday life, issues of security and identity have come to the fore. The consequences of this shift are not insignificant; they are reshaping the electoral landscape.
In an interview with Phileleftheros, Apostolos Pistolas, a strategic advisor and founder of Mastermind Analytics, explains that the increased focus on security among voters is the result of a double crisis: one relating to the decline in citizens’ purchasing power, and the other an identity crisis linked to issues such as immigration and crime.
In search of a safety net, voters turn to those they believe can provide it. This trend contributes to the rise of right-wing, and particularly far-right, parties. “Voters are increasingly seeking security and are ‘buying’ it primarily from unconventional conservative parties, as these parties are, to a large extent, ‘selling’ it,” he says.
Pistolas adds that an increasing number of parties, including those in the centre, are shifting their positions on various security issues, such as immigration, to meet the growing demand.
This has immediate consequences for left-wing parties, which have largely lost touch with their traditional support bases. “The economically weaker groups, those left behind by globalisation, the inhabitants of rural areas, now find refuge in conservative parties,” resulting in the left being in search of ideas, solutions, and, above all, voters.
It is often said that economic issues win elections. Is this still the case? What do voters primarily focus on when heading to the polls?
The economy is indeed the primary factor in most voting decisions. However, it is not the sole criterion; it is often intertwined with other issues. There are cases where dissatisfaction with the economic situation can be projected into other areas, and vice versa—where a good economic outlook can temper reactions to other problems. In short, economic issues can sometimes act as a catalyst for change or, conversely, as an inhibitor.
What explains the shift towards issues of security and immigration? Which parties benefit from this shift?
We certainly observe a shift in voters’ priorities, especially after the pandemic and the war in Ukraine, towards a greater focus on security. This is because there is a conjunction of two crises: an economic one (purchasing power crisis) and an identity one (immigration/crime). Voters seek economic protection, food security, and safeguarding of their daily lives. This quest for security leads them to vote for more conservative parties, which, in their programmes and messaging, appear to offer this security. The liberal and left-wing parties are increasingly out of step with the trends among electorates in EU countries on issues such as immigration and crime.
Is there an explanation for the growing trend of voter abstention, particularly among younger voters?
This phenomenon results from a combination of factors. Trust in the political system and politicians in general is at an all-time low, and political cynicism is on the rise. This leads to low levels of perceived external political effectiveness—voters don’t believe that governments or the political system will meet their needs. These factors, along with the perception that voting doesn’t make a difference, contribute to voter apathy. However, there is also the possibility of a combination of moderate to high external effectiveness and abstention, where voters believe that they can make their voices heard through other, more unconventional, political participation methods such as protests, rather than voting. Youth political cynicism is particularly high, as young people realise that their lives will likely be worse than those of their parents’ generation.
In many cases, we see right-wing parties sliding further towards the far-right, while some social democratic parties are compelled to collaborate with them. What are the implications of this shift, and what does it mean for the political system?
We should make a distinction between genuine far-right parties and socially conservative parties. Not all parties to the right of traditional centre-right parties are far-right. When we put them all in the same category, we risk obscuring the true extreme right-wing parties. What is happening is that some traditional parties are beginning to follow the trends within the electorate. If voters are demanding lemons and a party doesn’t provide them, they will look elsewhere.
This is currently occurring across Europe. As voters increasingly seek security, they are turning to unconventional conservative parties, which appear to offer it. Therefore, some centre-right and social democratic parties are shifting their positions on issues related to security, such as immigration, to capture some of this growing demand. With issues like inflation and immigration seemingly here to stay, traditional parties must decide whether they want to drive the agenda or simply react to it. The goal should be to detach the socially conservative voters from the far-right and integrate them into the systemic political process, as seen with Georgia Meloni in Italy.
What are the characteristics of today’s politicians? Do you agree that they are out of touch with voters and their societies?
There are indeed politicians who are disconnected from society. Many of those elected come from the so-called political “dynasties,” and their interaction with the public is more theoretical than based on shared everyday experiences. For these politicians, it can be challenging to understand the pulse of society. However, some manage this very effectively. There are also politicians who not only emerge from within society but also maintain their connections to their roots.
The perception that politicians are out of touch with voters can sometimes stem from the fact that voters seek immediate solutions, while politicians operate within a system that moves more slowly. The lack of alignment between politicians and voters seems to be a matter of poor communication on the part of the former.
Can you sketch the profile of today’s far-right voters? How have they changed over past decades?
In the past, far-right parties were supported mainly by individuals on the fringes of society, harbouring bigoted views and extreme ideologies. That is no longer the case, as these voters remain a minority, but their numbers have increased, and so has the electoral appeal of these parties. Socially conservative parties, whether far-right or not, are now primarily supported by the losers of globalisation. These are individuals who have seen their local industries collapse as production moves overseas, or friends and neighbours migrate to big cities in search of better opportunities. They are the inhabitants of rural areas who have been left behind economically and educationally compared to many city dwellers. They are often people with a strong religious background who observe traditional parties moving away from their values. There is also a conservative elite, well-educated and affluent, who vote for socially conservative parties for different reasons than the previous group and typically vote for different parties.
Melina Mercouri, a prominent Greek actress and politician, famously said, “We are not likeable anymore” about the PASOK party. With a touch of self-criticism, could the left-wing parties say the same today, especially considering their poor performance in many elections?
Left-wing parties have lost touch with their traditional constituencies: the workers, farmers, and lower socioeconomic groups. The deindustrialisation of the Western world has shrunk the working class, and globalisation and technological advances have hit the farming community hard. This, coupled with the prosperity that globalisation brought to urban centres, has caused left-wing parties to seek support elsewhere. They have shifted from being the defenders of the economically weak to the champions of societal minorities. In other words, they have moved up the Maslow pyramid as their traditional voter base has done the same over the past decades. But now, with security once again at the forefront of voters’ minds, left-wing parties seem unable to keep up with the trend. The economically weaker groups now find solace in conservative parties.
What could left-wing parties do to regain their appeal?
Left-wing parties could regain their appeal by shifting to more conservative positions on certain issues. The example of the Danish Social Democrats’ tough stance on immigration comes to mind, as does the new party of Wagenknecht in Germany. These are parties that espouse left-wing economic policies but take a hard line on immigration and social issues. They could be described as hybrid parties, blending economic leftism with social conservativism. However, most left-wing parties are product-oriented; they have a fixed programme that they seek to sell to the electorate. They are not inclined to adapt their product to the desires of the market. Within this mindset, it becomes extremely difficult for them to regain their appeal without significant changes.
What are the defining characteristics of political communication today, and how has it been impacted by the rise of social media?
The core characteristics of political communication and strategy have remained intact. Politicians still aim to sell their narratives to specific voter groups. The approach has changed with social media. Voters previously knew politicians through second-hand accounts, but now direct, unmediated contact between politicians and voters is the norm rather than the exception. We have moved from the era of fame to the era of personal experience. The arrival of social media has also brought about two significant changes. Firstly, politicians are now under constant scrutiny, increasing the risk of mistakes that could cost them dearly. Secondly, information spreads at an unprecedented rate, which means that relatively unknown figures can rapidly gain prominence, something that was much harder to achieve in the past.
What must a candidate or party do to expand their voter base and enhance their chances of success in an election?
The fundamental rule of political campaigning remains the same: politicians must identify their unique selling point—something they alone possess or do better than others—and for which there is demand in the electorate. In other words, they need to answer the question, “Why should I vote for you?” They then need to find the right channels to communicate their message effectively to the target audience. It’s worth noting, however, that voters’ desires are not static; they evolve over time, and politicians must keep pace with these changes.
