She works hard for the money: explaining racial and gender disparities in candidate success in primary elections

Abstract

ABSTRACT In 2020, voters and party leaders came to the consensus that a white moderate man would be the most likely candidate to defeat Trump (Masket. 2020. Learning from Loss: The Democrats 2016-2020. Cambridge University Press). Yet, the logic behind the “viability consensus” lacks empirical support and has rendered numerous challenges for marginalized candidates. We focus on a couple of challenges in particular – the social and psychological mechanisms behind racial/gender disparities in candidate success in primary elections. Scholarship on campaign finance and congressional elections has shown gender, race, and partisanship interact to shape candidates' contribution totals and vote shares (Sorensen and Chen. 2021. “Identity in Campaign Finance and Elections: The Impact of Gender and Race on Money Raised in 2010-2018 U.S.” House Elections. Political Research Quarterly 75 (3): 738–753). It has yet to examine, however, how voters' social identities and attitudes about social groups contribute to disparities in candidate success and how the relationship between social identity and voter support, fundraising, and electability varies by electoral environment. In this paper, we assess the interaction of candidate and voter characteristics on campaign fundraising, voter support, and perceived candidate viability in primary elections. We uncover potential explanations for why candidates from marginalized groups find it more difficult to raise campaign funds and gain electoral support compared to other candidate demographic groups. The results of our conjoint experiment reveal that Black women in particular struggle to find support among white voters and donors.