The Economist

The EconomistJuly 21 st 2018 United States 21

2 ing deletingor switchingin 2016.

Voter lists are not so well protected.

Even without foul play simple clerical er-

rors in state and city databases of voters’

names and addresses caused long delays

at polling places in California in 2 01 8 and

North Carolina in 2016  for example. In

Palm Beach County Florida similar mis-

takes caused2000 properlyregistered vot-

ers to be turned away in the presidential

primaries of 2016. And unlike the ma-

chines that tally up votes the computers

that house this information are connected

to the internet and often lack robust de-

fences against intrusion. In 2016 Russian

hackers gained access to the state elections

server in Illinois proving they could pene-

trate even a fairly well-secured system.

If hackers were able to alter the record-

ed addresses of a few thousand voters

with African-American family names for

example they could disenfranchise these

voters whose identification documents

would no longer match their listed ad-

dresses. Congressmen should spend a bit

less time bloviating about Russians on Fa-

cebookand more time preventingthat. 7

M

ENhavelongtendedtofavourRepub-

lican candidates; women have voted

more for the “mommy party” than men in

every election since 1992. Yet the gap now

looks like a chasm. In 1992 women and

mendisagreedoverwhichpartytheyiden-

tified with by 11 points. The margin has

since widened to 23 points (see chart). For

comparison Donald Trump won white

voters by 21 points in 2016 and lost Hispan-

ics by 36 points.

It is no mystery why so many women

are abandoning the Republican Party. Lots

of the party’s elected officials have vowed

to defund Planned Parenthood which in

addition to its other activities provides

abortions. They often have bossy views

about what kind of contraception com-

pany health plans should offer their em-

ployees. Democrats often use these exam-

ples of party policy to motivate women to

vote against Republicans. “Any woman

who voted against Hillary Clinton voted

against their own voice” Michelle Obama

said in 2017. Add in a Republican president

with a taste for younger wives and pneu-

matic paramours—a man who according

to a biography of the first family by Emily

Jane Fox once suggested to his teenage

daughter that her modelling career would

be enhanced if she had breast implants—

and youhave a powerful mixture.

The gender gap in American politics

cannot solely be explained by what wom-

en want however. If it could there would

not be much of a contest ahead in Novem-

ber’s mid-terms. Instead men are sticking

with the Republicans as women move

away buttressing the party when it would

otherwise be fallingover.

Why should this be? Political psycholo-

gists argue that men are experiencing “sta-

tus threat” from women just as many

white voters feel a status threat from non-

whites. The most prominent proponent of

the idea that status threats motivate voting

is Diana Mutz ofthe University ofPennsyl-

vania. Ms Mutz argues that there was little

relationshipbetweenachangeinvoters’ fi-

nancial circumstances and their support

for Mr Trump in 2016. Her analysis finds

that feelings about America’s waningposi-

tion in the world and the increased promi-

nence of non-whites in the country were

farbetter predictors of Trump-voting.

A different kind of status threat occurs

as women climb the ranks of Fortune 500

companies and shatter glass ceilings:

many men worry about cutting their feet

on the shards left lying on the floor. The

American National Election Studies

(ANES) from 2016 found that those who

thinkthings were better when a man went

out to work and a woman stayed at home

were overwhelmingly more likely to vote

Republican. That view though shared by a

considerableminorityofwomenisunsur-

prisingly more widespread among men.

The ANESpilot studyfoundthat 40 % ofRe-

publican men thought they faced “a great

deal” or “a lot” of discrimination on ac-

count oftheir sex.

Social-science experiments have found

that when men are prompted to think

about changinggender roles their political

opinions shift measurablytotheright. One

test along these lines was conducted with

voters in New Jersey in 2016. Half of the

households in the study were simply

asked whom they would vote for. The oth-

er halfwere told that in an increasing num-

ber of families women earn more than

men and were then asked about their vot-

ing intentions. The first group ofmen who

received no prompt favoured Hillary Clin-

ton by 16 points (New Jersey is heavily

Democratic in presidential elections). By

contrast the men who received the prompt

favoured Mrs Clinton byeight points

Such attitudes might be dismissed as

the grumblings of old men but they are

not. The Pew Research Centre found that

the gender gap is 20 points wider among

voters younger than 35 than it is among

those aged 35 to 49. One explanation is that

young men are more likely to encounter

the women’s-rights movement on social

media than older men are. Or perhaps

men find women more threatening before

they settle down with one. Whatever the

cause with bindersfull ofwomen running

for the Democrats this year it is hard to see

men abandoningthe party of Trump. 7

Male voters

Sometimes it’s

hard

Menaresticking with the Republicans

wideningthegendergapinpolitics

Stand by your clan

United States gap in party identification

By sex % identifying as Democrat minus Republican

1994 98 2002 06 10 14 17

Men

Women

Source: Pew Research Centre

DEM

REP

+

10

15

0

10

5

5

20

15

25

Not an incel in sight