The Real Majority
Ben J. Wattenberg
 The authors argued that while the Democratic Party "owned" "the Economic Issue" (a broad category encompassing such issues as Social Security and employment), the Republicans likewise "owned" "the Social Issue" (crime, drugs, and morality). They argued that whichever party could exploit their own strengths, and neutralize their opponent's, would prevail. The authors traced the dichotomy in part to voter concerns about "law and order" in the 1960s. The concern grew as disorder became associated with racial tension, activism and college radicalism; and the people associated with those issues generally had liberal attitudes on sexual behavior and drug use. The authors argued that the electorate at the time did not share this kind of liberalism. The authors noticed many Democrats took a liberal stance on what they called issues of law and order and permissiveness, and said that this could be potentially disastrous. They intended the book to be a warning to Democrats about the danger. They argued that the "real majority" was still economically liberal, but socially conservative. They advised Democrats that Republicans would increasingly garner votes based on "the Social Issue". The Real Majority is often compared and contrasted with The Emerging Republican Majority, a book by Republican strategist Kevin Phillips which was released at the same time. Phillips concluded that the majority was inevitable, a conclusion Wattenberg and Scammon reject.