Current Events > there are more female democrats because democratic donors want to elect women

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://niskanencenter.org/blog/episode-2-republican-women-dont-run-office-matters-gender-gap-voting/

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1065912917698044

Recent scholarship rejects campaign finance as a cause of womens underrepresentation in Congress because women raise as much money as men running in similar races. We argue that campaign finance still impacts which women can make a run for office because candidates have to build their own donor networks. Using a unique dataset that includes primary and general election candidates for the U.S. House in 2010 and 2012, we examine the gender composition of candidates donor networks. We find that candidates ideological views are very important to contributors. Donors, particularly Democrats, also exhibit a gender affinity effect in which men give more to male candidates and women favor female candidates. Furthermore, female Democratic donors seem to value the election of women, especially liberal Democratic women, over other traditional predictors of giving, such as incumbency and competitiveness. Meanwhile, Republican male and female donors do not focus on candidate gender, and female Republican donors prefer conservative candidates. Thus, the existing partisan donor pools are friendlier to the emergence of liberal female Democrats than Republican women.

It's interesting because if you heard that, "Democratic women make up three times the share of their congressional caucus than Republican women" without context you would probably assume GOP donor sexism was the cause. But actually, Democratic donors are more influenced by gender than GOP donors -- Democratic men are more likely to give to men, and Democratic women especially are much more likely to give money to liberal democratic women. Republican donors are more influenced by traditional markers of a candidacy (like ideology or incumbency) than gender.
---

Balrog0 posted...

Republican donors are more influenced by traditional markers of a candidacy (like ideology or incumbency) than gender.

Simple progressive/conservative dichotomy in action, really. Progress for the sake of progress, conservation for the sake of conservation.