New Data Shows the Persistent Skepticism and Challenges Facing Female Candidates in the U.S.
By: Cindy Mays, Melanie Phillips, and Grayson Wormser
Vice President Harris’s presence at the top of the ticket marks a historic moment, as she is the first woman of color to secure a major party nomination. However, whether American voters are ready for such a historic move remains unclear. This fall, Citizen Data sought to better understand Americans’ willingness to vote for female candidates at the federal and state level, and the barriers that female candidates face running for office.
While this election has been anything but predictable, one constant remains: women are still underrepresented at all levels of government in the United States. Despite women comprising over 50% of the population, they only hold under one-third of all elected positions, according to RepresentWomen.
While Harris’s campaign is inspiring new discussions, our data suggests that real progress toward equality will demand both groundbreaking candidacies and a lasting shift in perceptions, as many are still hesitant to support a female president.
As of August 2024, our data show that 85% of voters are willing to vote for a woman at the federal level. Yet, when we asked how willing they thought their neighbors were to vote for a female candidate at the federal level, this number dropped significantly to only 61%. When just looking at respondents who say they or their neighbors would be “very willing” to vote for a female candidate, the gap is even more dramatic. While 68% of voters are very willing to vote for a woman at the federal level, this number dropped by over half to 32% who say their neighbors would be as enthusiastic.
This perception gap–-the difference between how willing an individual is to vote for a female candidate versus how willing they think their neighbor is to do the same— likely provides a more accurate reflection of the true sentiment, as we know that social desirability bias (i.e., individuals wanting to say the “right” thing) plays a significant role in how we respond to questions on surveys. This discrepancy highlights the general skepticism surrounding prominent women politicians competing in the current American political arena.
Since Vice President Harris has become the nominee, this skepticism has continued to play out in real-time. Over the last couple of months, she has consistently faced sexist-coded remarks that question her qualifications and ability to serve as the first woman president of the United States. These comments include key Republicans referring to her as a ‘DEI vice president’ and vice-presidential candidate J.D. Vance labeling her and her supporters as ‘Childless Cat Ladies.’
Our findings support research that has long shown that individuals who belong to an out-group (i.e., not part of the majority, like the presence of women of color running for president) are more likely to be perceived as less qualified, face greater criticism, and overall be less welcomed by those in the in-group (like men, especially white men, in political office). Consequently, research also shows that the women who do stand for election end up being overqualified.
Through a survey experiment conducted where we varied the level of political office (state level vs. presidential for a hypothetical female candidate whose profile was designed to represent a highly qualified politician – having been a U.S Senator who graduated from a prestigious law school and was a successful business owner, among other qualifications – we still found that only half of voters would support her at the presidential level, with only 14% being very willing. At the state level, this is only marginally higher with 16% of voters being very willing to vote for her. This finding highlights a stark decline in support when comparing general approval for voting for a woman (68%).
Looking closer at the over one-third of voters who were neutral on whether they would vote for our hypothetical candidate, we observed interesting differences between those considering a state-level versus a presidential-level candidate. At the state level, the top reason for those unsure of whether or not they’d support a highly qualified hypothetical female candidate was that they’d “prioritize other aspects of a candidate’s background” (31%). Notably, this hypothetical candidate was strong on reducing inflation (typically the number one concern among our survey population). Nevertheless, this could be attributed to several other characteristics a voter may prioritize. At the presidential level, however, most voters were ‘skeptical about her ability to win’ (28%). This difference underscores the level of skepticism American voters hold, potentially after Clinton’s defeat in 2016, towards a qualified female candidate winning at the presidential level.
While Harris faces a challenging path in convincing skeptical voters of her qualifications and winnability, her presence at the top of the ticket has likely already impacted American democracy. Our August 2024 survey shows that 60% of American voters believe Harris’s campaign will have a positive effect on Americans’ willingness to vote for female candidates in other elected offices. Additionally, over half of voters – 51% – believe that Americans will be somewhat more willing to support female candidates in future elections if she wins.
Moreover, her presence on the ticket is also likely to increase turnout. When asked in August, 24% of voters stated that the changes in the Democratic ticket (Kamala Harris replacing Joe Biden as the nominee and Tim Walz becoming the VP pick) make them more likely to vote.
The road ahead for Vice President Harris and other women in politics remains steep and fraught with challenges. Our findings show that while there is a large segment of voters who support women candidates, significant skepticism persists, particularly at the highest levels of government. The disparity between how voters view their own willingness to support a female candidate and how they perceive their neighbors’ willingness highlights the enduring influence of perceived gender biases. Additionally, beliefs around “winnability” continue to cast a long shadow over female candidates, with many voters still doubting whether even the most qualified women can break through at the national level.
However, Harris’s candidacy has already begun to shift the conversation. While not all voters are convinced, the presence of a woman of color at the top of the ticket is sparking new discussions and may slowly erode the barriers that have kept women from achieving the highest offices. Yet, this shift will be incremental, and the path to true equality remains long. The data suggest that for many, the idea of a female president is still seen as an exception rather than a norm. If there is to be real progress, it will require not just groundbreaking candidacies like Harris’s but a broader, sustained effort to challenge and change the deep-seated perceptions that continue to hold women back. The 2024 election, regardless of its outcome, will be a measure of how far we’ve come—and how far we still have to go.
Share this report
As we approach the final days of voting in the 2024 elections and false and misleading information continues to spread, we wanted to gather a baseline understanding of Americans’ experiences with misinformation.