CE Week #2: “Single women politically engaged”
Froma Harrop
January 30, 2008
Single women were supposed to be the Democrats’ guest of honor on Election Day. Excuse me, unmarried women. The party has studied unmarried women so much it knows they don’t like to be called single women.
But something wild is happening. Unmarried women are crashing the party early. In Iowa, they were 28 percent of Democratic caucusgoers. In New Hampshire, they were 22 percent of the party’s primary voters, and in South Carolina, 30 percent. Those are big numbers – for them.
“It’s exceptional given past history,” Sarah Johnson of the Democratic-aligned group “Women’s Voices. Women Vote” told me.
That history shows single women voting in dismal numbers. Only 59 percent turned out for the 2004 presidential election, compared with 71 percent of married women. For midterm elections, their participation nearly falls off the map. They normally sleep through the early political contests – the caucuses and primaries. Until now.
Democrats have huge stakes in awakening this demographic. Unmarried women make up nearly a quarter of the electorate – a bigger share than blacks, Latinos and Jews combined. And when they do participate, their vote is overwhelmingly Democratic.
In 2004, single women preferred Democrat John Kerry by 25 percentage points. By contrast, married women gave Republican George W. Bush an 11-point margin. The Democratic Party’s big hope is that an activated single sisterhood will do for them in 2008 what white evangelicals did for Republicans in 2004.
The category, of course, covers a lot of territory. Unmarried women can be impoverished young mothers, hotshot professionals, elderly widows or college students. But these subgroups all go to the polls less often than their married counterparts. Single blacks, three-quarters of black women, come closest to matching their married sisters’ voting records.
Unmarried women certainly haven’t shown unity of preference in the Democratic caucuses and primaries. Young educated whites pushed Barack Obama to victory in Iowa. Older women drove Hillary Clinton’s triumph in New Hampshire, and Hispanics helped her take Nevada. And in South Carolina, black women propelled Obama to his major win.
What accounts for this burst of civic interest? One explanation is that the campaigns are aggressively recruiting single women.
Another says it’s the times. The economic insecurities haunting many struggling Americans are even darker for single women. If wages are flat, theirs are flatter. Unmarried women are more likely to lack health coverage than the population at large. A study by “Women’s Voices. Women Vote” found unmarried women less happy with the country’s direction than any other major voting bloc.
The storyline in South Carolina focused on whether black women would favor a fellow woman, Hillary Clinton, or fellow black, Barack Obama. (Over half of the Democratic primary voters in South Carolina were back.) That these women might have considered factors other than race and gender – health care, for example – got little play.)
Whatever. Obama’s sizable margin of victory wasn’t the most interesting statistic here. It was the turnout numbers. More than 500,000 people had voted, an 80 percent increase from the 2004 Democratic primary.
A Democrat will eventually be anointed, and the angry dust will settle. While single women may now be splitting their affections among the Democratic candidates, they haven’t shown a similar divide between Democrat and Republican.
If the turnout by unmarried women on Nov. 4 follows the trajectory of these early contests, this group may very well elect the next president. Democrats will no doubt target single women in an energetic get-out-the vote campaign, but they may not have to send engraved invitations
Call them single. Call them unmarried. But don’t call them politically disengaged. Not this year.
The article itself fails to note that not only single women are turning out in record numbers this election but, that pretty much any demographic is turning out in record number. I really think that this election could set all kinds of records. I can’t think of one of my friends who are able to vote in 2008 that don’t plan on it.
The article states that the turnout for “unmarried women” in the Democratic primaries/caucuses “Iowa, 28 percent In New Hampshire, 22 percent, and in South Carolina, 30 percent.” This would mean a lot except that none of the votes are really favoring one candidate or another. I guess what it really means is that unmarried women will vote and they will vote Democrat.
A study by “Women’s Voices. Women Vote” found unmarried women less happy with the country’s direction than any other major voting bloc.
Now lets stereotype why single women would be more Democratic then whites. Conservatism is about less government because you don’t need support. Women unfairly are paid less then men for the same jobs, they are financially more needy then single men…they are alone and in a way maybe they look to government as there husband. Single women are sexually active but not seeking children far longer then women who are married. So abortion becomes a real possibility to them far more likely then married women. Can anyone else think of some more stereotypes why single women would like the Democrats?
It’s great that single or “unmarried” women are coming out to vote in record numbers. I do find it a little hard to justify why that group would be getting so involved. With a female candidate, Clinton, perhaps women feel that they should get involved or maybe they just feel that Obama or any of the other candidates might bring a voice to them. The article said that campaigns are aggressively recruiting single women and that is obviously a factor. Campaigns may be recruiting, but women would not get involved for a candidate that reminds them of all the others. There is definitely something different with the candidates in this election that is pulling the unmarried women in. Whatever the reason, unmarried women are deciding to show up and vote.
Derrick is right in the fact that there are many demographics turning out. I think that the reason for all of these groups getting involved is because of the candidates we have this election. There were and still are candidates representing a whole spectrum of people-Hispanic, white, black, male, and female.
I do doubt that single women look to the government as their husband. Single women, like all people, want the government to lean in their direction on their stances. All people, in some way, want a government that agrees with them. If single women go for the most abortions, then it makes sense that they would want a government that allows them to have an abortion if they want one. People always look out for their best interest and their political views reflect that.
Yeah women, you get out there and vote! I love hearing that women, especially single women, are taking their role in society and letting their voices be heard. I strongly believe in women voting, because they have come so far in their rights and their status in our society that it seems only right to keep voting for what women need and keep their voices heard. I don’t find it strange at all that single women seem to be the biggest voting turn out this year. I think over even just the past couple years, women have become more and more aware of their place in our country and that it is easy for their voice to be heard. Single women have to be more dependent on themselves, which I think is a big reason for the huge voter turn out. With a woman who is married, she may depend on her husband to stay up late and watch late night news to get caught up with the politics which would of course lead to her being depended on him to vote as well. Single women on the other hand, are forced to get educated on politics themselves which would lead to them wanting to go out and vote because they know what is going on. We have learned that men tend to vote more Republican while women tend to vote more Democratic. This could lead to married women being persuaded by their husbands to vote Republican while single women can lead on their own opinions and vote Democratic.
I was obviously attracted to this article at first because it obtains to me. I knew that the single woman voting rate has been low in the past, but I didn’t know it was that bad! But, the little beacon of hope is that it’s improving. To be honest, it makes me really mad that married women have a way better voter turnout then single. They have the jobs, the babies, the housework, and yet they still are able to make it to the polls. On the other hand though, their votes are often overshadowed by their husbands, which is definitely a negative aspect of our society. I know this paradox exists in my family. My mom always votes for who my dad does, with the exception of the time she voted for Al Gore because she thought he was cute, but I don’t think that counts! It’s great that single women are choosing to stand up for themselves in this election. The author is right, the odds are staking up against single women, especially economically. Maybe, this could be the election that it is not the farmer, the youth, nor the baby boomers that determine the election, but single women.
I completely agree with Derrick, although I do think that the numbers in not just single women but all women has gone up. I think this is because for the first time there is a female candidate. There are so many candidate especially on the Democratic side (to answer Derricks question) that are of different ethicizes. Richardson, Obama and Hillary are break through candidate driving the African American, women, and Latino votes.
So many people have such strong opinions about what’s going on, people don’t have to know about the candidates, if they remember the Clinton years, or McCain who has been claimed to bring back the Reagan Era. People know what it was like and depending on what their economic status was they will either vote democratic or republican.
I also agree with Brittany when she says that women don’t look to the government as their husband. Single women are most often the women who are independent and ready to fight for what they want and believe in. Single women’s wants tend to line up liberally with the Democratic party, as Derrick gives in his example, abortion, single women out of everyone have the most abortions, so they would naturally vote to keep abortion legal and vote Democratic.
Ok so when I first started reading Derrick’s article I was impressed that for once he actually wrote something that I agreed with. This might have been just because his post started out with his assertion that not only single women are turning out in record numbers, and that all demographics are. I definitely feel like he is right about this. On Barack Obama’s website he has a whole section dedicated to showing how his campaign has been appealing to the youth and that the younger voters seem to be more involved because of his campaign. As Derrick goes on, he does not address this issue any further (maybe because it has nothing to do with the article and he wouldn’t get points if he did…) but he talks about how unmarried women are turning out more, but not necessarily all behind any one candidate. Personally I think this might just be the deciding factor when it comes to November. From what I’ve heard and seen, most women either love Hillary or absolutely detest her. For this reason, women are coming out in record numbers to vote. Does anyone else think that this is NOT THE REASON WOMEN SHOULD BE VOTING??? Seriously. As we come to the end of Derrick’s post he makes the most ridiculous speculation that I have ever heard. He says, “They are alone and in a way maybe they look to government as there husband.” What? I don’t think that any single women I know look to the government as their husband… But whatever I guess that wasn’t his point. Hopefully Hillary Clinton doesn’t get the nomination so that we don’t turn a lot of independent or even moderately liberal women over to the republican side just because of their detest of Hillary.