The gathering storm at your dinner table

From: POLITICO Nightly - Saturday Feb 17,2024 12:03 am
Tomorrow’s conversation, tonight. Know where the news is going next.
Feb 16, 2024 View in browser
 
POLITICO Nightly logo

By Calder McHugh

Gracie Aube (left) is given a sticker at a campaign stop for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump in Concord, N.H.

Gracie Aube (left) is given a sticker at a campaign stop for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump in Concord, N.H. on Jan. 18, 2016. | John Minchillo/AP

FAMILY FEUD — New research suggests a fascinating trend with implications for politics — and family dinners: Daughters from conservative families are voting for Democrats at levels much higher than sons.

According to an extensive 2023 survey of over 5,000 Americans from the Survey Center on American Life, most children with politically engaged parents end up with similar political beliefs. But daughters of Republicans have become a notable exception.

Only 44 percent of young women raised in Republican households continued to identify as a Republican, compared to 67 percent of young men. The results inspire a natural question — how come Republican parents are raising Democratic daughters?

Pollster Daniel Cox — the director of the Survey Center on American life, a nonpartisan organization dedicated to studying changes in American cultural and political life — has come up with some theories. So we asked him about his findings and conclusions. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

In writing about your findings, you mention four reasons why daughters of Republican parents might turn liberal — LGBTQ identity, abortion, higher education and Donald Trump’s Republican Party. Can you explain how you landed on those? And does one of those in particular stand out above the others to you?

This wasn’t an attempt to be exhaustive. But I looked at what the issues are that are most salient during formative years, when young women are making sense of the political world and looking at the political parties to sort of see where their views align.

Our surveys found that after the overturn of Roe, there was a huge increase in concern about abortion among young women. In our pre-election survey in 2022, we found that no issue is more important to young women than abortion — far more than the general public. So that is something that I think will continue to be an important issue and an important dividing line between young women — a largely pro-choice group — and where the GOP is. I don’t see that changing in the near future.

Given that research, are young women who grew up in Republican households growing up to be Democrats a more modern problem for the GOP?

In some ways, at least in American society, young people tend to be more left-leaning than older folks. So parents tend to be a little bit more conservative than their children. And that’s largely due to the fact that overall, research suggests that we’re moving to the left on a whole host of different issues, from marijuana legalization to same sex marriage to views about racial inequality, gender inequality.

So, I think that is part of it; we are seeing this significant generation gap. But for women in particular on the issue of abortion, it’s not just that it’s more salient, surveys show that actually young people are more supportive of legal abortion than they were a generation ago. Gen-Z is far, far more supportive of legal abortion than previous generations, and young women are leading the way there in terms of expressing the highest levels of support.

So then what do you feel like these numbers suggest about future partisan lean among women? 

It suggests a widening gap between young men and young women. If in conservative households daughters are becoming more independent or Democratic and sons are maintaining their parents’ political affinities, if that continues on then we could see the political divide between young men and young women increase. I’ve seen that in my own research.

But that’s just sort of one piece of the puzzle. Young women are also about twice as likely to identify as LGBTQ than men. So, many young women are not [just] more supportive of rights for transgender people and same sex marriage, they identify that way, or they have close friends who do. That has a really powerful impact on how they understand their political beliefs.

I’ve seen some back and forth between political scientists as to whether the partisan gap between men and women is increasing. 

On balance, I think the evidence is pretty strongly showing that young women are becoming more liberal. But it’s not as clear what’s happening with young men. I chalk some of this up to feelings of apathy among young men. When we looked at a whole number of issues, including ones that are supposed to be very salient for young people — so gun violence, climate change, cost of education — young women tend to care more about those issues than young men.

Are there any kind of specific predictors as to when somebody is more likely to abandon their parents’ political beliefs?

When parents are consistently either voting or espousing one type of beliefs, whether they’re conservative or liberal, their children are much more likely to adopt those views. To the extent that politics is something that the family talks about, and discusses regularly, children are more likely to share their parents’ political views.

Conversely, in households where adults express political ambivalence or apathy, it’s much more likely for the child to not have corresponding political beliefs. And if the quality of the child-parent relationship is poor, say in an abusive household, those ties also won’t be as strong. There’s also plenty of other examples of lived experience mattering — say you’re a gay or lesbian young adult and you were raised in a conservative Christian household, your experience may well be at odds with your parents’ perspectives and political beliefs. All those things matter.

Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas at nightly@politico.com. Or contact tonight’s author at cmchugh@politico.com or on X (formerly known as Twitter) at @calder_mchugh. Programming Note: We’ll be off on Monday for President’s Day, but we’ll be back in your inboxes on Tuesday, Feb. 20.

 

YOUR VIP PASS TO THE MUNICH SECURITY CONFERENCE: Dive into the heart of global security with POLITICO's Global Playbook at the 2024 Munich Security Conference. Gain exclusive insights and in-depth analysis as author Suzanne Lynch navigates the crucial discussions, key players and emerging trends that will shape the international security landscape. Subscribe now to Global Playbook and stay informed.

 
 
What'd I Miss?

— Trump ordered to pay over $350M for business fraud: The judge overseeing Donald Trump’s civil fraud trial issued him a $354.8 million penalty today and barred him from running a business in New York for three years, finding that for years Trump orchestrated massive business fraud by falsely inflating his net worth to obtain favorable rates from banks and insurers. The verdict, laid out in a 92-page ruling, strikes at the heart of an aspect of Trump’s identity that he harnessed in his 2016 presidential run: his personal wealth and his success as a businessman.

— Willis opts not to retake witness stand in disqualification hearing: Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis declined to retake the witness stand today amid her effort to fend off a bid by Donald Trump and several co-defendants to remove her from leading the Georgia election interference case. Willis faced several hours of questioning Thursday from defense lawyers who have accused her of a conflict of interest stemming from her romantic relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade, whom Willis hired to help run the case. The defense lawyers say Wade and Willis took luxury trips together using income from Wade’s contract with Fulton County.

— Lawmakers nearing deal on nutrition funding in spending talks: Lawmakers are nearing a major deal that could unlock a key piece of the funding logjam on Capitol Hill ahead of the looming partial shutdown March 2. Negotiators are considering a deal to approve a pilot program restricting some choices for SNAP beneficiaries in exchange for a boost in funding for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children and several other nutrition programs as they try to hammer out a spending deal. The possible deal involves adding what’s known as the SNAP-choice pilot program to the Ag-FDA spending bill, as well as an undisclosed amount of extra funding for WIC, the nutrition program that helps feed millions of low-income mothers and babies, which is facing a funding cliff.

— Outside groups urge ouster of House Intelligence chair after public threat warning: Outside groups are urging House Intelligence Committee Chair Mike Turner to step down from the high-profile role over his vague public warning about a national security threat — or urging Speaker Mike Johnson to replace him. Four organizations sent Turner a letter today demanding his resignation, arguing his actions “undermined your credibility, your committee, and national security.” If Turner doesn’t voluntarily cede the Intelligence chairmanship — something he’s given no indication he’s considering — they are urging Johnson to remove him from the spot.

Nightly Road to 2024

ON THE SIDELINES — Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said today he will not mount a third-party presidential bid, a relief to Democrats who spent months worrying about his refusal to shut down the possibility of challenging President Joe Biden.

“I will not be seeking a third-party run. I will not be involved in a presidential run,” Manchin said at an event at West Virginia University.

16-WEEK BAN — Former President Donald J. Trump has told advisers and allies that he likes the idea of a 16-week national abortion ban with three exceptions, in cases of rape or incest, or to save the life of the mother, reports the New York Times.

Trump has studiously avoided taking a clear position on restrictions to abortion since Roe v. Wade was overturned in the middle of 2022, galvanizing Democrats ahead of the midterm elections that year. He has said in private that he wants to wait until the Republican presidential primary contest is over to publicly discuss his views, because he doesn’t want to risk alienating social conservatives before he has secured the nomination.

AROUND THE WORLD

A portrait of Alexei Navalny, candles and flowers are left at a memorial

A portrait of Alexei Navalny, candles and flowers are left at a memorial in Paris today after the announcement that the Kremlin's most prominent critic had died in an Arctic prison. | Ian Langsdon/AFP via Getty Images

‘PUTIN IS RESPONSIBLE’ — President Joe Biden squarely blamed Vladimir Putin for Russian dissident Alexei Navalny’s reported death today and vowed that there would be consequences for the Kremlin, POLITICO reports.

Speaking from the White House, Biden invoked Navalny’s demise as the latest reason to stand up to Putin’s violent reign, again urging lawmakers to pass a massive aid package that would help Ukraine repel Moscow’s ongoing invasion.

“Like millions of people around the world, I’m not surprised and outraged by the news,” said Biden. “Make no mistake: Putin is responsible for Navalny’s death. What has happened to Navalny is more proof of Putin’s brutality.”

Biden also praised Navalny’s bravery, saying that “even in prison, he was a powerful voice for the truth.” He savaged Putin for targeting citizens of other countries while also inflicting “terrible crimes on his own people.”

Navalny, 47, Putin’s longtime political opponent, died in prison today, according to Russia’s federal prison service. While the prison service said he collapsed during a walk, there was immediate speculation that Putin had a hand in his death. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, whose country has been fighting off Russia’s invasion for nearly two years, said “it’s obvious” that Putin killed him.

 

YOUR GUIDE TO EMPIRE STATE POLITICS: From the newsroom that doesn’t sleep, POLITICO's New York Playbook is the ultimate guide for power players navigating the intricate landscape of Empire State politics. Stay ahead of the curve with the latest and most important stories from Albany, New York City and around the state, with in-depth, original reporting to stay ahead of policy trends and political developments. Subscribe now to keep up with the daily hustle and bustle of NY politics. 

 
 
Nightly Number

$66.3 billion

The amount of money for military aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan that’s included in a new House proposal unveiled by a bipartisan group of eight lawmakers today. It’s part of an effort to break the House logjam on the issue before Kyiv’s war effort sputters.

RADAR SWEEP

DEEPFAKES FOR TRUTH — “Deepfakes,” or artificial images and videos that look similar to the genuine article, have proliferated online, leading to all kinds of fears about the future — and present concerns that include lawsuits. But a small band of people is using deepfake technology for what they consider to be “good” or at the very least “interesting.” Monica Arés, executive director of the Innovation, Digital Education, and Analytics Lab at Imperial College Business School in London, has created deepfakes of professors that she hopes can supplement students’ learning. Will deepfakes, used with the best of intentions, become part of our regular life? Will Knight reports for WIRED.

Parting Image

On this date in 1964: Crowds in Philadelphia's Chinatown celebrate the start of the Year of the Dragon and the year 4662.

On this date in 1964: Crowds in Philadelphia's Chinatown celebrate the start of the Year of the Dragon and the year 4662. | Bill Ingraham/AP

Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here.

 

Follow us on Twitter

Charlie Mahtesian @PoliticoCharlie

Calder McHugh @calder_mchugh

Mia McCarthy @Reporter_Mia

 

Follow us

Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Instagram Listen on Apple Podcast
 

To change your alert settings, please log in at https://www.politico.com/_login?base=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.com/settings

This email was sent to by: POLITICO, LLC 1000 Wilson Blvd. Arlington, VA, 22209, USA

| Privacy Policy | Terms of Service

More emails from POLITICO Nightly

Feb 15,2024 12:07 am - Thursday

Nikki Haley’s long shadow

Feb 14,2024 12:05 am - Wednesday

The showdown in the suburbs

Feb 13,2024 12:09 am - Tuesday

What It Takes, 2024 edition

Feb 10,2024 12:27 am - Saturday

The ever-evolving Senate map

Feb 08,2024 12:19 am - Thursday

Nikki Haley’s hard ceiling

Feb 07,2024 12:21 am - Wednesday

Trump suffers a major legal setback