I've often written about the anti-natalism of the left. With good reason, too. If you think about the issues the left gets most passionate about, many of them turn out to focus on the effort to suppress the number of children who are born.
Abortion, of course, is at the top of the list. If there is a third rail in left-wing politics, opposing abortion is it. If a candidate does not support abortion until birth, their chances of becoming endorsed or winning as a Democrat asymptotically approach zero.
What about alphabet issues? Almost by definition, the effort to normalize all deviant sexual activity results in childlessness, and it is now common for liberals to support sterilizing children as young as humanly possible while promoting childless sex at all ages.
The "DINK" movement, which is relentlessly promoted with what amounts to PSAs promoting childlessness for heterosexual couples, is part of this effort. Population control used to be all the rage, but it was replaced by the climate alarmists who talk about children as CO2 producers, or as unwilling victims of the coming apocalypse.
the negative correlation exists for all racial/ethnic groups, though ns for Pacific Islanders. pic.twitter.com/yDaYDcViA1
— Smirkley (@Smirkley) July 22, 2026
There's a pitch against children aimed at every demographic; materialist strivers are told to be DINKs (Dual Income No Kids), while the mentally ill and terminally anxious are given the life mission to save the Earth by refraining from having children. Children are told that they will commit suicide if they remain fertile, and women are told that having a child will ruin their lives, so they must kill a baby in the womb to save their future.
So it's no surprise that the correlation between motherhood and voting preference is strong. So strong, in fact, that about 85% of the variance in voting patterns between younger mothers and women who choose to have children later in life is explained by this one fact. At least among white women.
"Young," in this case, is not teen pregnancy. It's having children in your early 20s, as used to be quite common, but which now is relatively rare, as women have been convinced that true life fulfillment comes from having a "career," which in many cases amounts to becoming a middle manager. (By definition, relatively few people of either sex reach real leadership positions.)
Think about that. In the social sciences, there are very few correlations that are that strong. Race is a stronger predictor of voting patterns, but not by that much. Self-described political ideology is too, but even 7% of liberals voted for Trump.
Still, if you look at that chart, the correlation between having children earlier in life and voting for Donald Trump is basically 1-1.
That's startling, but only because we live and breathe a culture where the prevailing attitude in the cultural elite is that children are a burden, and having them is a betrayal of our duty to the environment.
Women who choose to have children, especially multiple children, would naturally gravitate to Trump and his countercultural message that the elites are wrong about everything. Implicitly, at least, they believe that too.
Antinatalism is perverse, and the ideology that promotes it also promotes perversity in all things. It is a core principle that basic human instincts and even biology are to be rebelled against.
Liberals may talk as if they do things "for the children," but the facts are clear: if you love kids, chances are you are a Republican.
Editor's Note: President Trump is fighting to ensure America's kids get the education they deserve.
Help us fight back against Big Government waste and restore power to the states. Join HotAir VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member