During a recent discussion on local politics, a political candidate who failed to win a seat in the 2007 general election opined that he “overestimated the intelligence of voters” in explaining his defeat. In other words, voters were stupid not to have voted for him. Voter attributes — their concerns, sensitivities and demographics — will largely determine voting patterns but one cannot dismiss the critical importance of critical events.One of the great predictors of how people will vote is rooted in ideology, where two views dominate Bermuda’s political landscape: a conservative and a liberal vision. Bermuda tends not to have political extremes. Conservatives generally supported the old oligarchy, they supported the United Bermuda Party and, in all likelihood, they will support the One Bermuda Alliance. Conservatives believe in less government, greater private enterprise and more individual self-reliance to achieve success. Liberals start from the premise that the state must be used to create a fairer and more just society to minimise the inequality created by capitalism. In the Bermuda context they are reformers; and the PLP emerged out of and has come to embody this reformist movement.A key marker of our lack of progress over 50 years of democracy is that race continues to contour voting patterns in significant ways. Despite the class stratification within the white community, whites have generally voted in unison for the conservative party. Part of this is a result of the party of reform, the PLP, pursing black progress in tandem with workers’ progress in the 1960s, but there was no appreciable increase in white support when the party eschewed racial politics altogether in the 1990s. For its part, black voters have historically split their vote along class lines, with wealthy blacks more likely to support the conservative party and the larger number standing behind the party of reform. This has been a constant characteristic of local politics.Unlike proportional representation, our first past the post electoral system gives greater weight to individual candidates. This provides voters another level of influence rather than simply voting for a party on a list. This has allowed an independent to be elected (Stuart Hayward); and gives voters the balance of power in marginals. Depending on how voters react to a candidate, what was once seen as a “safe seat” can be turned into a marginal overnight, and possibly even a loss: witness what transpired in Devonshire East in 2007 when Bob Richards replaced Michael Dunkley as the UBP candidate. The moral of this story is that one should never take the sensibilities of the voter for granted.A final critical factor shaping the minds and voting decisions of people are current issues: jobs, crime, governance, opportunities, the economy. Their assessment of government performance and promises, their assessment of promises and capabilities of other parties will also factor into who they cast their vote for.While many are firmly entrenched in how they will vote, for any number of these reasons, there is always that critical mass of “floating voters” perhaps as high as 20 percent of the electorate who will make assessments based on all of the above and tick the box where they think their interests can best be advanced.In the end, we will have a result and we should all respect the decision by the voters — if, of course, we embrace democratic principles. Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, commenting on the election of Salvador Allende, a Marxist, as President of Chile in 1970, said: “We are not going to allow a leader to come to power because of the irresponsibility of its citizens.” Three years later Allende was dead and Chile would suffer under two decades of fascist dictatorship. People have a number of reasons for voting the way they do. In this sense, the voters are never wrong.l Walton Brown is a social and political commentator and a Progressive Labour Party candidate. Follow his blog on www.respicefinem1.blogspot.com. He can be contacted at walton@researchmix.com