Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Report: Trump Leads the Pack in Large-Dollar Contributions From Suburban Women

Report: Trump Leads the Pack in Large-Dollar Contributions From Suburban Women

A new report suggests President Trump’s “suburban women problem” may not be much of a problem at all.

https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1194660405907464194

On any given day, Democrats and the mainstream media are quick to tell people about how poorly President Trump is supposedly doing with women voters, especially those in the suburbs.

Here’s just a quick sampling of some headlines from stories written about this alleged issue:

Those are just a few of many stories you’ll find via Google search on this topic.

But a new report suggests Trump’s “suburban women problem” may not be much of a problem at all.

The Center for Responsive Politics published a report last week detailing the political contributions of suburban women who they say “could decide 2020.” Among the findings was that President Trump led all Democratic candidates for president in large-dollar contributions from suburban women:

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.

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/reports/suburban-women-donors

Also according to the report, when it comes to itemized contributions by gender, Trump is in fifth place among women with $15 million, which puts him behind Sanders, Warren, Mayor Pete, and Harris – but there’s a caveat:

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.

Overall, Trump’s itemized contributions from women jumped from 28% in 2016 to 35% for the 2020 election cycle:

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/reports/suburban-women-donors

And as to those polls that show Trump’s support among women is dropping, there may be a legitimate explanation for that:

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.

In other words, perhaps there’s a Trump version of the “Bradley effect” in play when it comes to women voters polled regarding their opinions about the President.

So why would the Trump campaign launch a “coast to coast” campaign focusing on suburban women if his standing among them was so much better than the MSM portrayed?

As the CRP notes, “no presidential candidate is carrying the suburban woman base thus far,” which means there will be a serious fight to the finish among all significant presidential campaigns, including Trump’s to win them over.

Stay tuned.

— Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via Twitter. —

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Problem is that the totals for Biden, Harris, and Bootygig would probably all vote against Trump. I don’t think these data totally debunk that narrative.

The numbers would be a lot more significant if he were running as a Democrat – but trailing the opposite party by almost 3-1 doesn’t strike me as that great.

Must be those damn men who force their wives how to vote… isn’t that what Hillary claimed?

Do any of the articles proclaiming Trump is losing the suburban wine mom vote have actual poll numbers (that aren’t skewed)?

And, no, this isn’t “Ohhh, Trump has the suburban wine mom vote locked up!” But it certainly helps to put some real information against the “Nobody loves Trump” bandwagon the media has been pushing since about August 2016.

I predicted that the mysterious “women’s vote” would put DJT over the top in 2016.

My prediction for 2020—that demographic will go in even stronger for him next time around.

He’ll kill it among white men (all locations) and suburban women (all races); the D’rats shouldn’t even bother to waste any money on those demos.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to tom_swift. | November 15, 2019 at 2:24 am

    With all of the walk-away and blexit and Jexit talk, what will those demographics actually do in the voting booth?

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend