Now Jonathan V. Last elaborates with A Nation of Singles in the Weekly Standard:
President Barack Obama’s victory over Mitt Romney pointed to two ineluctable demographic truths. The first was expected: that the growth of the Hispanic-American cohort is irresistible and will radically transform our country’s ethnic future. The second caught people by surprise: that the proportion of unmarried Americans was suddenly at an all-time high. ...He's right. Obama got the votes of various ethnic groups, but the real election story is how Mitt Romney got the nuclear family vote and Obama got the single voters. His typical voter was Sandra Fluke who vocally demands her sexual freedom and govt-mandated benefits, but has no obvious interest in marriage or family.
Properly understood, there is far less of a “gender” gap in American politics than people think. Yes, President Obama won “women” by 11 points (55 percent to 44 percent). But Mitt Romney won married women by the exact same margin. To get a sense of how powerful the marriage effect is, not just for women but for men, too, look at the exit polls by marital status. Among nonmarried voters — people who are single and have never married, are living with a partner, or are divorced — Obama beat Romney 62-35. Among married voters Romney won the vote handily, 56-42.
Far more significant than the gender gap is the marriage gap. ...
Singles broke decisively for Obama. Though his margins with them were lower than they were in 2008, he still won them handily: Obama was +16 among single men and +36 with single women. But the real news wasn’t how singles broke — it was that their share of the total vote increased by a whopping 6 percentage points. To put this in some perspective, the wave of Hispanic voters we’ve heard so much about increased its share of the total vote from 2008 to 2012 by a single point, roughly 1.27 million voters. Meanwhile, that 6 percentage point increase meant 7.6 million more single voters than in 2008. They provided Obama with a margin of 2.9 million votes, about two-thirds of his margin of victory.
Laura Wood adds an extreme suggestion:
Preaching hasn’t worked for the black family and it won’t work for the white family either (except for those at the top). As long as our government sustains single mothers, as long as family courts continue to strip spouses of their assets and children when they have done no wrong, preaching is an exercise in fatuous denial. Republicans are not likely to address those fundamental issues. Why? Because it will lose them the single vote.Those unmarried voters are completely essential to the future of the Democrat Party, and you can be sure that Democrats will continue to support anti-family policies.
In a just democracy, those who are unmarried would not have the right to vote.