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.


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:


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. —


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.