Gender remains a significant indicator for political preference. While the 'gender vote gap' isn't new, recent polling data on the US election indicates the gap in voting preference between men and women seems to be widening. But why? And how significant is it?
Has there always been a gender vote gap?
Gender has long been a powerful indicator for voting choice. Not since Bush Snr in 1988 have more women voted for a Republican candidate than for a Democrat. In the last two elections, polling company Edison found that women were 15% more likely to vote for Joe Biden and 13% more likely to vote for Hillary Clinton than for Donald Trump. Only twice since 1988 have men turned out more for a Democrat than a Republican - Bill Clinton in 1992 and Barack Obama in 2008. Men were 8% and 11% more likely to vote for Trump in 2020 and 2016 respectively. Unsurprisingly, considering electoral history, a recent study found that men are 18% more likely to vote for Trump, whilst women are 7% more likely to support Kamala Harris.
This 25% cumulative gender gap is the largest since 1984 and worryingly seems to show a growing disconnect. Over the past 25 years the partisan gap between young men and women has risen dramatically - Gen Z women are the most progressive group in American history, but Gen Z men are increasingly conservative. Polling of swing states by the New York Times found that whilst young men preferred Trump by 13 points, young women favoured Harris by 38 points - a staggering 51% gender gap amongst young Americans, by far the largest of any age group.
Why is there a gender vote gap?
So what is going on? One explanation for the rise in the gender gap can be found in the identity of the two candidates and their policy positions, most clearly on abortion rights. While an overall majority of Americans (57%) opposed the overturning of Roe vs Wade, men are more likely to describe themselves as pro-life than pro-choice (49% vs 45%). In contrast, women are far more likely to be pro-choice (63% vs 33%). Kamala Harris and Tim Walz have made protecting reproductive rights a core policy, whereas Donald Trump has claimed “there should be some form of punishment” for those who access abortion services. The gulf between these two positions manifests in a partisanship chasm - 70% of Republicans supported the decision to repeal Roe vs Wade whilst 82% of Democrats opposed it.
How are Harris and Trump trying to close the gender vote gap?
In an attempt to boost his appeal to women, Donald Trump recently claimed to be “the Father of IVF” during a town hall debate in the swing state of Georgia. During the event, Trump promised to introduce a policy that would mandate insurance companies or the government pay for the medical procedure. Harris has criticised the comments as “bizarre”.
Meanwhile, Kamala Harris is placing adverts on DraftKings (a sports betting site) and Fandom (a video game platform) in an attempt to win back some of the newly christened ‘bro’ vote from Trump. Harris has also recently focused on winning back black male voters, who are more supportive of Trump than of any other Republican candidate since 1960, by promising to introduce an ‘opportunity agenda’ designed to give them "tools to achieve financial freedom, lower costs to better provide for themselves and their families, and protect their rights".
Why does the gender vote gap matter?
It is no exaggeration to say that this election could be decided by a handful of votes in one of a few swing states. Consequently, both Republicans and Democrats are laser-focused on maximising voter turnout amongst their coalitions. New face of the alt-right Elon Musk is offering $1 million each day to a random registered voter in a key battleground state who has signed his ‘pro-US Constitution’ petition. The move, which Pennsylvanian Governor Josh Shaprio stated was ‘deeply concerning’, could be illegal according to election law experts.
Republicans are especially keen to raise their supporters' turnout rates because of the extent of the gender gap. More women have voted in every American election than men since 1964. In 2020, 9.7 million more women voted than men - a number large enough to be the 11th most populous American state. The increased rate at which women vote, combined with their likelihood to vote for Harris, has led to some interesting analysis of polling data. Take Pennsylvania - whilst the latest polls have Trump leading by 0.2%, Elaine Karmark, political scientist from Brookings Institute, found that if gendered turnouts remain at 2020 levels, and gendered preferences remain similar to recent polling, then Harris will win Pennsylvania by 1.69%.
With so much riding on this election for the direction of American and global politics over the next four years, turnout - especially amongst women - could prove crucial for Kamala Harris’ hopes of winning the keys to the White House.