Suburban women could decide 2020: Who are they giving to?


— by Grace Haley, November 6, 2019

Note on Methodology: The analyses below only use fundraising information made public by the Federal Election Commission. Campaigns are not required to itemize donations that total $200 or less, however, the Democratic online fund-raising platform ActBlue itemizes all donations raised through their platform. This gives us access to donor demographic information of Democratic small-dollar contributions given through ActBlue as of June 30. All of the candidates’ large-dollar contributions are from donors whose aggregate totals have surpassed $200 this calendar year as of September 30. We do not have donor demographic information for Republican small-dollar contributions, as they don’t bring in the bulk of their contributions from a similar online fundraising service. More on Methodology here.

Women are becoming politically engaged at an earlier point than ever before. More than 1 million women have donated to 2020 presidential candidates thus far, following the rise of fundraising participation by women in the wake of President Donald Trump’s election.

But women are not a monolithic fundraising or voting bloc, and there are key differences in fundraising patterns from women in different pockets of the country. Suburban women, who power a significant electoral battleground, are a key demographic for 2020.

Fundraising support among suburban women varies for presidential candidates depending on the geographic region and contribution size. No presidential candidate is carrying the suburban woman base thus far, a demographic crucial to Trump’s 2020 strategy.

Who are women giving to?

Of the dozen Democratic candidates on October’s debate stage, Sen. Bernie Sanders has raised the most money from women since he announced his presidential campaign, with at least $17.1 million — about 40 percent of his funds — coming from women. This number includes large-dollar contributions and small-dollar contributions itemized through ActBlue.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who along with Sanders are top-tier fundraisers, have both raised more than $15 million from women this year. Sen. Kamala Harris, whose fundraising has fallen in recent months, has also raised at least $15 million from women. Both Harris and Warren are getting more cash from women than men.

CHART: Presidential candidates’ itemized contributions by gender in 2019

{:chart=>{:caption=>””, :showplotborder=>”0″, :divlinecolor=>”CCCCCC”, :showZeroPlane=>”0″, :showBorder=>”0″, :imageSave=>”1″, :bgcolor=>”FFFFFF”, :showalternatehgridcolor=>”0″, :showvalues=>”0″, :plotgradientcolor=>””, :palettecolors=>”ADD8E6″, :fillColor=>”c9c9c9″, :borderColor=>”ffffff”, :alternateVGridColor=>”ffffff”, :canvasBorderColor=>”ffffff”, :labeldisplay=>”ROTATE”, :slantlabels=>”1″, :legendBorderColor=>”ffffff”, :legendShadow=>0, :numberPrefix=>”$”}, :categories=>[{:category=>[{:label=>”Bernie Sanders”}, {:label=>”Elizabeth Warren”}, {:label=>”Pete Buttigieg”}, {:label=>”Kamala Harris”}, {:label=>”Donald Trump*”}, {:label=>”Joe Biden”}, {:label=>”Beto O’Rourke”}, {:label=>”Cory Booker”}, {:label=>”Amy Klobuchar”}, {:label=>”Julian Castro”}, {:label=>”Andrew Yang”}, {:label=>”Tulsi Gabbard”}]}], :dataset=>[{:seriesname=>”From Women”, :color=>”72579d”, :data=>[{:value=>”17104087″}, {:value=>”15841068″}, {:value=>”15476644″}, {:value=>”15370754″}, {:value=>”15172997″}, {:value=>”13356083″}, {:value=>”7281827″}, {:value=>”6056866″}, {:value=>”5174175″}, {:value=>”2730379″}, {:value=>”2025213″}, {:value=>”1052112″}]}, {:seriesname=>”From Men”, :color=>”bbacd1″, :data=>[{:value=>”25907574″}, {:value=>”15177247″}, {:value=>”23766640″}, {:value=>”13716143″}, {:value=>”28193509″}, {:value=>”17645259″}, {:value=>”6156817″}, {:value=>”7735225″}, {:value=>”5483200″}, {:value=>”2058188″}, {:value=>”4933821″}, {:value=>”3380925″}]}]}

For every itemized dollar going to a presidential candidate, about 57 cents came from a man and 43 cents from a woman. Men have donated $173 million to the 2020 elections and women have donated $131 million, numbers that will continue to dramatically rise as caucuses, conventions and primaries draw near.

Women donors contributed a fair amount of money to former Vice President Joe Biden and Sens. Cory Booker, and Amy Klobuchar. And though they have not reached gender parity in their contributions, they are receiving a higher amount of money from women on average than presidential candidates in previous cycles.

Although women donors have increased their political giving during the Democratic primaries, not all candidates are receiving the benefits. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard receives the least money from women, has the smallest number of women donors and the lowest percent of contributions coming from women so far this year. Only 24 percent of her funds come from women. Democratic candidate Andrew Yang similarly has low levels of fundraising support from women.

Trump has received more itemized large-dollar contributions from women than a majority of the Democratic candidates — $15 million since he started fundraising the day after his inauguration. However, only one-third of his itemized contributions come from women.

Campaigns are not required to itemize donations of $200 or less, so we do not have demographic information about Trump’s small donors giving to his joint fundraising committees with the Republican National Committee, Trump Victory and the Trump Make America Great Again Committee. An estimated 59 percent of Trump’s donations are from small-donors, so Trump’s contributions from women are most certainly higher than $15 million. Trump’s totals are underestimated more than the other candidates. Because Democrats are relying on ActBlue and the Republicans are not relying on the Republican equivalent WinRed as significantly, we only have most (not all) donor demographic data for Democratic small-dollar donors.

Women in Suburban Districts

Sanders is doing the best among women donors in the suburbs, but the success of all the candidates varies widely when broken down by contribution type and geographic region. Harris, Trump, Biden and Buttigieg have pockets of strong support from suburban women across the country, especially women who contribute sizeable donations.In addition to playing an active role in electoral outcomes and a rising role in fundraising, women are part of America’s changing political landscape in which suburbs are now election battlegrounds. Suburban women — whose racial, ethnic and socioeconomic identities are varying and diverse but are often assumed to be educated, upper-middle-class, white women — are the target of millions in campaign spending during elections.

The suburbs are more important as the political divide between Republicans and Democrats grows starker. Election outcomes are increasingly correlated with population density — the more neighbors a voter has, the more likely they are to vote Democrat.

Suburban women who give large-dollar donors favor Trump, Harris and Biden. Since Trump’s inauguration, more than 7,000 women in suburban districts have given large-dollar contributions to his campaign. That totals $8 million, the most of all candidates, according to an OpenSecrets analysis of Federal Election Commission data on large itemized donations (more than $200) to all major presidential candidates and using CityLab’s Congressional Density Index.

CHART: Presidential candidates’ large-dollar contributions from suburban women

Candidate

Party

TrumpDonald Trump*

10,534

$8,293,135

Republican

HarrisKamala Harris

7,755

$7,834,238

Democrat

BidenJoe Biden

5,970

$7,495,998

Democrat

ButtigiegPete Buttigieg

7,886

$7,293,882

Democrat

BookerCory Booker

3,330

$4,075,397

Democrat

WarrenElizabeth Warren

6,173

$3,908,721

Democrat

KlobucharAmy Klobuchar

2,603

$2,974,800

Democrat

O’RourkeBeto O’Rourke

2,282

$2,176,028

Democrat

SandersBernie Sanders

3,089

$2,043,623

Democrat

YangAndrew Yang

1,085

$847,458

Democrat

CastroJulian Castro

757

$811,952

Democrat

GabbardTulsi Gabbard

329

$441,882

Democrat

Democrat
Republican

Biden, Harris and Buttigieg have all raised more than $7 million from suburban women making large-dollar contributions since they started their campaigns earlier this year.

Wealth levels vary within suburban districts. The majority of Americans live in the suburbs, with more people with lower incomes living in the suburbs than in cities, and many suburban districts are areas where the 2008 economic crisis hit especially hard. Thus, it’s pivotal to examine where small-dollar donations are flowing by examining contributions given through the Democratic online fundraising platform ActBlue.

Sanders receives the most money from from suburban women giving small-dollar contributions, totaling $13.1 million. Warren follows with $10.8 million, then Buttigieg, Harris and Biden.

CHART: Presidential candidates’ small-dollar contributions from suburban women

Candidate

Party

SandersBernie Sanders

279,194

$13,318,366

Democrat

WarrenElizabeth Warren

210,009

$10,721,902

Democrat

ButtigiegPete Buttigieg

159,262

$6,828,243

Democrat

HarrisKamala Harris

141,855

$6,225,005

Democrat

BidenJoe Biden

133,423

$4,881,551

Democrat

O’RourkeBeto O’Rourke

96,154

$4,723,812

Democrat

KlobucharAmy Klobuchar

39,442

$1,883,730

Democrat

CastroJulian Castro

64,860

$1,758,610

Democrat

BookerCory Booker

56,647

$1,479,994

Democrat

YangAndrew Yang

28,434

$1,041,105

Democrat

GabbardTulsi Gabbard

19,789

$525,036

Democrat

Democrat

Combining both large-dollar and small-dollar donations, Sanders has raised the most from women in suburban or suburban-like districts — $15 million — with the largest number of suburban women donors. Warren, Buttigieg and Harris have raised more than $14 million, and Biden follows with over $12 million.

The suburban bloc is diversified and fluid — there is not a sole fundraising pattern or voting preference for women, including suburban women. A myriad of identities exist within the suburbs, especially majority-minority districts that have grown more racially and economically diverse over the past few decades.

Looking at suburban districts that are racially and ethnically diverse (using the U.S. Census’ designation of majority-minority districts), Sanders and Warren are favored by suburban women in diverse suburbs giving small-dollar contributions, but Harris, Buttigieg, Biden and Trump are favored by women giving large-dollar contributions in these areas.

While Harris has raised $5.8 million large-dollar contributions from women in majority-minority districts, Buttigieg, Biden and Trump have raised more than $4 million each.

In majority-minority suburbs in California, Harris is outraising all other candidates in total with itemized women donors. She has the most money in large-dollar contributions from women donors compared to the other candidates, and trails Sanders’ and Warren’s small-dollar fundraising feats in Californian majority-minority suburbs.

Orange County, which houses some of the most competitive majority-minority suburban districts in California, is one of the most densely populated counties in the state with large Hispanic/Latinx, Asian-American and white populations. The county was once known for its “Goldwater-Reagan voters, white-collar, conservative activists,” according to Matthew Lassiter, a University of Michigan historian speaking to the New York Times. However, the county’s rapidly changing demographics contributed to a 2018 midterm election in which no Orange County Republicans were elected to Congress for the first time since 1940.

On the eastern side of the Sun Belt, Trump, Biden and Harris share fundraising success with women in Southern minority-majority suburbs — Trump and Biden with the most from women making large-dollar contributions and the most in total. Trump’s totals are likely higher and he probably has a sizeable amount of money coming from suburban women giving small-dollar contributions, but that information is not available. Sanders and Warren, while not raising as much from suburban women with large-dollar contributions, receive the most small-dollar money from women in these Southern districts.

Although Trump has raised more than $2 million from suburban women in majority-minority suburban districts in the South, Trump’s approval rating is falling among suburban women. Around 57 percent of suburban women disapprove of his performance in office as of this summer.

Texas suburbs show the transformation between “traditional suburbs” and those with increasingly diverse racial, ethnic, wealth and education demographics. Trump has deep Republican pockets and significant fundraising by suburban women in Texan majority-minority suburbs. But in suburbs with sizeable black, Hispanic/Latinx and white populations, a Democratic presence growing. Most areas in Texas remain Republican, but majority-minority suburbs like those outside Dallas are becoming political battlegrounds.

Farther north, women in minority-majority districts in Midwestern suburbs favor Buttigieg and Biden with large-dollar donations and Sanders and Warren with small-dollar donations. Buttigieg has the best total fundraising among women in these districts, with Sanders and Warren trailing. Trump’s fundraising among Midwestern suburban women in majority-minority districts falls in the middle of the pack when it comes to his large-dollar donations.

The President’s Popularity Among Suburban Women

Trump’s campaign is boosting its efforts to court suburban women in battleground states and districts, focusing on Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, Texas, Pennsylvania, Colorado, North Carolina, Virginia, Ohio, Minnesota and Florida. In attempts to rebrand Trump’s relationship to women voters after falling polls and Democratic 2018 victories, the campaign’s Women for Trump coalition has set out to mobilize women, particularly those from the suburbs.

The cross-country events — which coincide with the 99th anniversary of the ratification of the 19th Amendment — showcase Trump’s economic, immigration and healthcare records in an attempt to move attention away from the rhetoric he uses to talk about women and his history of divorce and sexual harassment allegations.

A member of the Women for Trump advisory board speaks at each event. The list of women on the advisory board includes Diamond and Silk, conservative vloggers and Fox Nation hosts; Kimberly Guilfoyle, former Fox News host and current girlfriend of Donald Trump Jr.; Kellyanne Conway, counselor to the White House; former Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer; and other notable conservative women (and men) in politics and the entertainment industry. Lara Trump, Trump’s daughter-in-law, was the kick-off speaker at Women for Trump’s first event.

Many of the Women for Trump events are held in suburban areas that contributed to the Democrats gaining a majority in the House in 2018, including white suburban areas of Pennsylvania and Minnesota.

The GOP is targeting 31 House districts that President Trump carried in 2016 but are held by Democrats. These areas are in the Upper Midwest, a part of the country that played a crucial role in Trump’s victory in 2016, as well as in the Mid-Atlantic and a few districts in the Sun Belt. All of the targeted areas are majority-white districts.

Biden and Buttigieg have raised the most from large-dollar women donors in these districts — each reporting more than $2 million from women. Both Biden and Buttigieg have fared well with large-dollar donors and have not acquired as much from small-dollar donors as Trump, Sanders and Warren. Buttigieg has the most large-dollar women donors in these districts (more than 2,000), followed by Harris (1,805) and Warren (1,701). Trump has raised almost $1.5 million from women in these districts this cycle with 1,805 women donors contributing large-dollar donations.

28%
of Trump’s itemized contributions were from women in 2016

35%
of Trump’s itemized contributions are from women in 2020

Trump is heavily relying on white women, especially independents and those who live in the suburbs, to bring him to victory in 2020 as they did in 2016. Although there is declining support for Trump from women shown in some polls, Trump campaign aides and officials argue the polling data does not account for suburban women who favor Trump but do not feel comfortable publicly saying so.

While there is not yet evidence to back this claim, this sentiment ties in with the advisory board’s mission for Women for Trump: to increase a positive public image for women who support Trump but are reluctant to declare their politics.

Tana Goertz, a former “Apprentice” contestant and current member of the advisory board of Women for Trump, told Politico, “We just kind of want to empower them to express their passion and approval of our president and not be afraid.”

Methodology: OpenSecrets identifies gender demographic data by applying an algorithm based on donor name and title for itemized contributions reported to the Federal Election Commission. For the most part, donations are itemized once a donor has contributed more than $200 to a presidential candidate’s campaign committee. However, ActBlue, the online fundraising platform used by Democrats, progressive groups and nonprofits to raise money online, itemizes small-dollar donations for Democrats. We have large-dollar itemized donations for both Republican and Democratic candidates reported through Sept. 30, 2019. Itemized donations list a person’s name, title, address and employer, thus giving us demographic information to work with. Because we cannot pull out information from donors whose donations are unitemized, we can only understand the gender demographics of itemized donations. Discrepancies between what campaigns report and what we report may arise because there is not publicly available data on unitemized contributions. We used CityLab’s Congressional Density Index to incorporate suburban district data into OpenSecrets’ FEC fundraising data, using U.S. Census data to match zip codes and congressional districts. We recognize in our margin of error that not all zip codes map cleanly onto district lines, and we’ve excluded Pennsylvania and North Carolina from these analysis due to this issue. Majority-minority districts are determined using U.S. Census data.

Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the
Center for Responsive Politics. For permission to reprint for commercial uses,
such as textbooks, contact the Center: info[at]crp.org



Source link

Permanent link to this article: https://worldstarim.com/suburban-women-could-decide-2020-who-are-they-giving-to/


Important This site makes use of cookies which may contain tracking information about visitors. By continuing to browse this site you agree to our use of cookies.