Friday 26th August 2011 | 13:06

Champagne Socialists coming home

Consumption patterns have long been seen as a major determinant of political affiliation. Segmentation and micro-targeting of the electorate were pioneered by Bill Clinton’s 1996 strategist Mark Penn. Penn devised a system for identifying and winning over tiny sections of the population based on attitudes and consumption, the most famous of which were ‘soccer moms’. The Republicans and Conservatives use a ‘Voter Vault’ system, which once claimed to be able to predict their success based on which toilet tissue a voter used. Famous segments in recent British elections have included ‘Worcester woman’, ‘pebbledash people’, ‘Motorway man’ and ‘Holby City woman’.

There have, however, also been less formal segments of voting demographics for more than a century. Under Disraeli and Lord Salisbury, ‘Villa Toryism’ characterised the emergence of an affluent suburban Conservative vote at a time when the party was seen as distinctly rural. ‘Orpington man’ was a precursor to ‘Essex man’, named after the sort of middle class voter disenchanted with the Macmillan government, who helped the Liberals storm to victory in the famous 1962 by-election.

One of the most archetypal political stereotypes both here and in the USA, however, is that of the ‘champagne socialist’ (or ‘latte liberal’, if you’re Californian). In the UK, these voters came to the fore in the aftermath of the Iraq War, as previously solid Labour voters switched to the Liberal Democrats in order to voice their indignation with Tony Blair’s foreign policy. Seats with previously solid majorities, such as Hornsey and Wood Green and Islington South saw the Labour vote crumble, though rarely with the loss of a seat.

And where have these voters gone now? We have a stereotype of the sort of Liberal Democrat voter who has moved over to Labour as being from the Liverpools or Newcastles of this world, but it would seem that those affluent left-wing voters who shifted away from Labour post-Iraq have now come back in droves. ‘Muesli belt’ council by-elections in the last year in Islington’s St Peters ward (Angel) and Camden’s Kentish Town have seen big swings to Labour.

Is there any polling to back this up? Possibly. Earlier this week, YouGov polled how much people expected a good bottle of wine to cost in an off licence or supermarket. On average, respondents thought a bottle should be £7.61.

What is interesting however, is the different price expected by respondents who voted for a particular party in 2010 against those planning on supporting that party now. As can be seen below, people who voted Liberal Democrat in 2010 think a bottle of wine should cost £8.15, whereas those still with the party would price it at just £7.88 (still slightly ahead of any other party’s voters). People who voted Labour last year, however, were only willing to pay £7.09 – while those now planning on voting for the party would pay £7.37

As in previous surveys, the number of current Liberal Democrats in the sample is now so small that we shouldn't read too much into the precise figures, but the trend is clear.

The voters who have moved to Labour and away from the Liberal Democrats since the 2010 election appreciate their wine. What better way to show the shift in Champagne Socialists?