(EXERCISE 6)THE IMPACT OF
ATTITUDES TOWARD GAY MARRIAGEON 2004 PRESIDENTIAL VOTE CHOICE
CONTROLLING FOR PARTY IDENTIFICATION
Roger C. LoweryPLS 401, Senior Seminar
Department of Public & International AffairsUNC Wilmington
April 20, 2023 1
• Theory: – Immediately prior to Election Day 2004, the nationwide trial-heat margin between Bush and Kerry was too close to call.
• H1: Neither Bush nor Kerry was a consensus choice among pre-election voters in 2004.
Univariate Hypothesis
April 20, 2023 2
Table 1:
April 20, 2023 3
V002
Presidential vote choice
Text of this Question or Item Whom did you vote for in the presidential election? (Nonvoters are recorded as NA).
% Valid
% All
N
Value
Label 50.1
38.6
412
1
Bush
48.5
37.4
399
2
Kerry 1.5
1.1
12
3
Other
22.8
243
9
NA
100.0
100.0
1,066
Total
Univariate Findings
• H1 (neither Bush nor Kerry was a consensus choice in 2004) is supported by the sample data in Table 1 because:
1. The pattern predicted by H1 is observed in the sample data.
There is very little difference (less than 2%) between Bush and Kerry support in the sample.
2. The differences in Bush/Kerry support that are observed in the sample are too small to be statistically significant.
The random-sampling error margin for the sample results in Table 1 (3.0 %)* is larger than the vote-choice margin between Bush and Kerry supporters (1.6 %).
* http://www.custominsight.com/articles/random-sample-calculator.asp
April 20, 2023 4
Bivariate Hypothesis• Theory:
– Bush supported a constitutional ban on gay marriage and Kerry opposed.*
*http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/13/eveningnews/main629360.shtml
• H2: Voters who opposed gay marriage were more likely to support Bush in 2004 than voters who supported gay marriage.
April 20, 2023 5
Table 2:
April 20, 2023 6
2004 Presidential Vote Choice by Attitude toward Gay Marriage
Cells contain:-Column percent-Weighted N
V125 Attitude toward Gay Marriage(Should same-sex couples be allowed to marry?)
1Yes
2No but permit
unions
3No
ROWTOTAL
V002RCL:
2004 Presidential Vote Choice
1: Bush25.463
61.013
63.5301
50.7376
2: Kerry74.6184
39.08
36.5173
49.3365
COL TOTAL100.0247
100.022
100.0473
100.0742
Summary Statistics
Tau-b = -.35Chi-square probability =
0.00
Bivariate Findings• H2 (voters who opposed gay marriage were more likely
to support Bush in 2004 than voters who supported gay marriage) is supported by the sample data in Table 2 because:
1. The pattern predicted by H2 is observed in the sample data. Taub = 0.35, which indicates that gay-marriage attitudes were a strong predictor of vote choice.
2. This sample finding is statistically significant. The chi-squared probability of random-sampling error is less than 0.05 (χ2 = 0.00).
April 20, 2023 7
Multivariate Hypothesis• Theory:
– Because some (but not all) gay-rights supporters have gravitated to the Democratic Party and some (but not all) gay-rights opponents have moved to the Republican Party; therefore, there is less conflict within each party than between the two parties on the issues of gay rights.
• H3: the impact of attitudes toward gay marriage on 2004 presidential vote choice will be weaker within partisans than in the total population. [Party identification will be a confounding variable.]
April 20, 2023 8
Table 3a
April 20, 2023 9
2004 Presidential Vote Choice by Attitude toward Gay MarriageControlling for Party Identification
(Democrats)
Cells contain:-Column percent-Weighted N
V125RCL Attitude toward Gay Marriage(Should same-sex couples be allowed to marry?)
1Yes
2No or civil
unions only
ROWTOTAL
V002RCL:
2004 Presidenti
al Vote Choice
1: Bush3.76
15.727
9.733
2: Kerry96.3164
84.3146
90.3311
COL TOTAL100.0171
100.0174
100.0344
Summary Statistics
Tau-b = -.20Chi-square probability =
0.00
Table 3b
April 20, 2023 10
2004 Presidential Vote Choice by Attitude toward Gay Marriage Controlling for Party Identification
(Independents)
Cells contain:-Column percent-Weighted N
V125RCL Attitude toward Gay Marriage(Should same-sex couples be allowed to marry?)
1Yes
2No or civil
unions only
ROWTOTAL
V002RCL:
2004 Presidenti
al Vote Choice
1: Bush36.6
444.413
42.317
2: Kerry63.4
755.616
57.723
COL TOTAL100.011
100.030
100.040
Summary Statistics
Tau-b = -.07Chi-square probability =
(p= 0.65)
Table 3c
April 20, 2023 11
2004 Presidential Vote Choice by Attitude toward Gay Marriage Controlling for Party Identification
(Republicans)
Cells contain:-Column percent-Weighted N
V125RCL Attitude toward Gay Marriage(Should same-sex couples be allowed to marry?)
1Yes
2No or civil
unions only
ROWTOTAL
V002RCL:
2004 Presidenti
al Vote Choice
1: Bush83.051
93.6269
91.7320
2: Kerry17.011
6.418
8.329
COL TOTAL100.062
100.0287
100.0349
Summary Statistics
Tau-b = -.15Chi-square probability =
0.01
Multivariate Findings• H3 (the impact of attitudes toward gay marriage on 2004
presidential vote choice will be weaker within partisans than in the total population) is supported by the sample data. Party identification is a confounding variable in this analysis.
1. The strength of the bivariate relationship did weaken as predicted in the partisan subgroups. [The taub for Democrats (0.20) and Republicans (0.15) was less than in the total sample (0.35).
2. The impact of gay marriage on vote choice (although weakened) was still statistically significant within Democratic (χ2 = 0.00) and Republican (χ2 = 0.01) subgroups.
April 20, 2023 12
Substantive Implications• The Democratic Party is more internally divided on the issue of
gay marriage than is the Republican Party.• However, party identification out-weighed the impact of gay-
marriage attitudes in presidential vote choice in 2004.– even if the electorate had been limited to only Democratic
identifiers who opposed gay marriage, then Kerry would still have easily defeated Bush.
– even if the electorate had been limited to only Republican identifiers who supported gay marriage, then Bush would still have easily defeated Kerry.
– There were relatively few single-issue gay-rights voters in 2004 who voted against their party’s candidate.
April 20, 2023 13
Methodological Implications• Why is gay marriage is more of a “wedge issue” for the
Democratic Party than the Republican Party?• What important demographic groups are most likely to oppose
their party’s stand on gay marriage; and, therefore, more likely to defect?
• Do other gay-rights issues (adoption, employment, hate crimes) align with or cross-cut the gay-marriage issue cleavage?
• Do other group cleavages (age, gender, race, ethnicity, religion, etc.) align with or cross-cut the gay-rights issue cleavage?
• Do other public morality issues (public-school prayer, sex education in public schools, abortion, torture, etc.) align with or cross-cut the gay-rights issue cleavage?
April 20, 2023 14