The Married Parent Gap.

[DKW 86 7,439]

Married Parent Gap

The Progressive Policy Institute, a centrist Democratic think tank, has a new paper out called Closing the Parent Gap. Author Barbara Dafoe Whitehead notes that according to last year's exit polls, married parents favored President Bush over John Kerry "by nearly 20 percentage points--59 percent to 40 percent." But she says Democrats can do better:

Democrats were successful in competing for married parents in the very recent past. Bill Clinton only narrowly lost them in 1992, and then narrowly won them in 1996. Bush opened up a 15-point married parent gap over Al Gore in the 2000 election (winning the group 56 percent to 41 percent). But Clinton's success shows that Democrats should be able to compete for married parents again in the future--or even win them.

Whitehead exaggerates somewhat the recent widening of the gap. If Bill Clinton "narrowly lost" married parents in 1992, it means there was still a gap of slightly over 5.5 percentage points, the plurality by which Clinton beat George Bush père. If he "narrowly won" in 1996, it means the gap was just under 8.5 percentage points, the Clinton margin that year. Whitehead's numbers do show the gap growing, to 15.5 points in 2000 (since Bush beat Gore by minus 0.5%) and 16.5 points in 2004 (19 minus Bush's overall margin of 2.5).

Whitehead identifies one reason for the gap:

Democrats will not do better with married parents until they recognize one simple truth: Parents have a beef with popular culture. As they see it, the culture is getting ever more violent, materialistic, and misogynistic, and they are losing their ability to protect their kids from morally corrosive images and messages. To be credible, Democrats must acknowledge the legitimacy of parents' beef and make it unmistakably clear that they are on parents' side.

Our sense is that Whitehead's argument is right as far as it goes, but it doesn't go as far as she seems to think. Democrats would be well advised not to flaunt their association with Hollywood vulgarians, as John Kerry disastrously did. But persuading said vulgarians to keep their own counsel is doubtless a fool's errand, and given how much money they donate to the Dems, why should they keep quiet?

And there are other reasons why married parents might tend to vote Republican. One is economic. Married people with children are in or approaching their peak earning years, and they need all the money they can get, for raising children is expensive. The Republican message of lower taxes is all the more compelling to a voter with mouths to feed.

On broader cultural and social issues--religion, abortion, gay rights, etc.--married people with children are likely to be more conservative than the average voter because cultural conservatives are more likely to marry and have children in the first place. Maggie Gallagher makes this point more specifically in a column on Pope John Paul II:

In the largest recent poll on Catholic opinion I could find (a Zogby poll of 1,500 Catholics in 2001), 36 percent of all Catholics support the church's teachings on contraception. . . . Think of it! Right now there are 25 million American Catholics who accept the church's teaching on sexuality. . . .

If each one of these faithful Catholics had, on average, three children and could find Catholic schools and communities that help them transmit the Catholic faith to their children, it wouldn't take long for a second sexual revolution to get under way.

Who knows? Maybe it already has.

This, of course, is what we call the Roe effect, and it isn't limited to Catholics. Demographics are on the side of the "religious right," and that's why Whitehead's advice to Democrats, while possibly worthwhile, is unlikely to be sufficient.

[Auburn85 432]

Married Parent Gap

The Progressive Policy Institute, a centrist Democratic think tank, has a new paper out called Closing the Parent Gap. Author Barbara Dafoe Whitehead notes that according to last year's exit polls, married parents favored President Bush over John Kerry "by nearly 20 percentage points--59 percent to 40 percent." But she says Democrats can do better:

Democrats were successful in competing for married parents in the very recent past. Bill Clinton only narrowly lost them in 1992, and then narrowly won them in 1996. Bush opened up a 15-point married parent gap over Al Gore in the 2000 election (winning the group 56 percent to 41 percent). But Clinton's success shows that Democrats should be able to compete for married parents again in the future--or even win them.

Whitehead exaggerates somewhat the recent widening of the gap. If Bill Clinton "narrowly lost" married parents in 1992, it means there was still a gap of slightly over 5.5 percentage points, the plurality by which Clinton beat George Bush père. If he "narrowly won" in 1996, it means the gap was just under 8.5 percentage points, the Clinton margin that year. Whitehead's numbers do show the gap growing, to 15.5 points in 2000 (since Bush beat Gore by minus 0.5%) and 16.5 points in 2004 (19 minus Bush's overall margin of 2.5).

Whitehead identifies one reason for the gap:

Democrats will not do better with married parents until they recognize one simple truth: Parents have a beef with popular culture. As they see it, the culture is getting ever more violent, materialistic, and misogynistic, and they are losing their ability to protect their kids from morally corrosive images and messages. To be credible, Democrats must acknowledge the legitimacy of parents' beef and make it unmistakably clear that they are on parents' side.

Our sense is that Whitehead's argument is right as far as it goes, but it doesn't go as far as she seems to think. Democrats would be well advised not to flaunt their association with Hollywood vulgarians, as John Kerry disastrously did. But persuading said vulgarians to keep their own counsel is doubtless a fool's errand, and given how much money they donate to the Dems, why should they keep quiet?

And there are other reasons why married parents might tend to vote Republican. One is economic. Married people with children are in or approaching their peak earning years, and they need all the money they can get, for raising children is expensive. The Republican message of lower taxes is all the more compelling to a voter with mouths to feed.

On broader cultural and social issues--religion, abortion, gay rights, etc.--married people with children are likely to be more conservative than the average voter because cultural conservatives are more likely to marry and have children in the first place. Maggie Gallagher makes this point more specifically in a column on Pope John Paul II:

In the largest recent poll on Catholic opinion I could find (a Zogby poll of 1,500 Catholics in 2001), 36 percent of all Catholics support the church's teachings on contraception. . . . Think of it! Right now there are 25 million American Catholics who accept the church's teaching on sexuality. . . .

If each one of these faithful Catholics had, on average, three children and could find Catholic schools and communities that help them transmit the Catholic faith to their children, it wouldn't take long for a second sexual revolution to get under way.

Who knows? Maybe it already has.

This, of course, is what we call the Roe effect, and it isn't limited to Catholics. Demographics are on the side of the "religious right," and that's why Whitehead's advice to Democrats, while possibly worthwhile, is unlikely to be sufficient.

154889[/snapback]

Yes, it's very hard for parents to raise and protect their children if the dems are ok with the ACLU convincing the judges that parents can't eavesdrop on their child's phone conversation to make sure that they aren't up to no good.

Also, it hard for a parent if their 12 year old daughter gets pregnant and the dems are ok if she can have an abortion without parental consent.

And if dems want reps to change their political affiliation, it's best they tell Dean to shut his mouth "I hate Republicans and everything they stand for". Tough to get them to come over to your side if you hate them.