Black Women in Politics

As part of CAWP's Research Inventory on Gender & Politics, this overview focuses on current and past research, with particular emphasis on the latest findings, related to Black women in politics. This overview captures the state of knowledge to increase understanding of current political realities, support research-based interventions, and generate future research questions and agendas.

Black Women in Politics with hub image

As Nadia Brown, Christopher Clark, and Anna Mitchell Mahoney conclude in their review of Black women members of Congress: “Black women are trailblazers. They are advocates. They are voices for the marginalized. They are alike in many ways but are not identical. Despite sharing the same race and gender identities, Black women may respond differently to the realities of racism and sexism inherent in political institutions.”1

The 2024 elections were historic in many ways. According to CAWP’s Black Women in American Politics 2025 report, produced in partnership with Higher Heights Leadership Fund, key highlights include:  

  • For the first time in U.S. history, a Black woman ran at the top of a major-party presidential ticket;
  • Black women reached a record high in state legislative representation in 2025, signaling progress in down-ballot representation;
  • In the 2024 general election, 63% of Black women congressional nominees won their contests — outpacing the win rates of women candidates (48.9%) and men candidates (53.3%) across race/ethnicity. Among nonincumbents, Black women congressional nominees won at higher rates (19%) than both women (13.2%) and men (17.5%) candidates overall;
  • Black women also made gains in executive municipal leadership in 2024: Cherelle Parker (D) was elected mayor of Philadelphia, PA – one of the largest cities in the country – and Sharon Tucker (D) was appointed mayor of Fort Wayne, IN. In 2025, Barbara Lee (D) was elected mayor of Oakland, CA.

This builds on a decade of progress for Black women. Scholarship on Black women in politics helps to illuminate both hurdles and contributors to this progress, focusing on paths to office, the role of stereotypes in candidacies and elections, Black women officeholders’ symbolic and substantive impact legislating at the intersection of gender and race, and the influence of Black women as voters, activists, and donors. 

Candidate Emergence 

Jennifer Lawless and Richard Fox have long documented the persistent gender gap in political ambition, with women regardless of race around 17 percentage points less likely than men to consider running for office.2 In their 2021 survey, they found that Black women they identify as potential candidates (including those employed as lawyers, business leaders, educators, and political activists) are more likely than Latinas and Asian women but less likely than Black men to consider candidacy. They find similar rates of ambition among Black and white women respondents. Through focus groups and survey experiments, Amanda Clayton, Diana O’Brien, and Jennifer Piscopo found that Black women are particularly motivated to run for office by seeing women's political underrepresentation.3

Pearl Ford Dowe’s theory of Black women’s “ambition on the margins” challenges a race-blind understanding of gender and political ambition and calls for a wider lens for identifying the sites that might spur political ambition and engagement, moving beyond industries or institutions most tied to candidate recruitment and emergence for white women.4 She documents the strong relationship between political ambition and community-centered goals for Black women. Moreover, Dowe describes Black women’s “radical imagination” as reflecting not merely aspiration for traditional political office, but a reimagining of political possibility itself, rooted in Black women's historical exclusion from formal political spaces and their creative resistance to intersecting systems of oppression. Julia Jordan-Zachary and Nikol Alexander-Floyd similarly examine the appropriation of Black women’s physical, emotional, and political labor, as well as Black women’s self-directed cultivation of what they describe as their own intellectual, political, and communal “landscapes.”5 Their edited volume centers the experiences of Black women in politics and argues for renewed commitments to a social justice framework as a way to understand Black women’s representation. Black women's political ambition thus emerges from a fundamentally different context than that of their white counterparts.

Black women’s emergence as candidates is not solely dependent on ambition, however. Christian Dyogi Phillips’ “intersectional model of electoral opportunity” accounts for the ways in which race and gender create different conditions for potential candidates to emerge and succeed,6 and other studies have found disparate predictors of women candidate emergence for Black, Latina, Asian, and white women candidates.7

Structural inequalities also create hurdles to candidacy for Black women. Lawless and Fox found that Black women are less likely than white women, white men, and Black men to report being recruited to run for office.8 In fact, CAWP’s research found that Black women state legislators were more likely than non-Hispanic white women to be discouraged from running for office.9 Racial disparities also persist in the availability and control of support infrastructures for women in politics, with a dearth of programs and organizations created to serve Black women specifically.10 Multiple studies have demonstrated that fundraising is also influenced by gender and race, with racial biases having a particularly negative effect on giving to Black women’s campaigns.11 Persistent concerns about Black women’s electability, especially outside of majority-minority electorates, also pose a challenge to recruitment and support at the earliest stages of candidacy.12

Candidate Evaluation and Election to Office 

Black women seeking political office are evaluated in distinct ways rooted in the intersection of racial and gender biases. Research documents both penalties and advantages in how voters perceive them. On the negative side, Jessica Carew’s analysis of 2011 survey data finds that elite Black women were viewed as more bossy and emotional than elite men.13 Other research has found that Black women in politics are often penalized as angry and/or aggressive.14 At the same time, Carew finds that Black women were viewed more favorably than some comparison groups; her research concludes they are seen as more trustworthy and compassionate than elite whites, more ethical than elite white men, and more hard-working than elite white women. Other studies complicate this picture further, finding no discernable differences in positive feminine or masculine stereotypical traits voters attribute to Latina, Black, and Asian women candidates,15 and that Black women suffer no notable penalty against their opponents in voter evaluations.16

Black women candidates are also often viewed as the most liberal candidates compared to those at other race-gender identities.17 While a strong association with liberalism should benefit Black women in Democratic primaries, Philip Chen and Ashley Sorenson document an “ideology-electability paradox” confronting Black women candidates.18 Their two experiments show that Democratic primary voters may personally support Black women candidates and agree with their policy positions, yet withhold support based on beliefs about how other voters (particularly general election swing voters) will respond. This creates a self-fulfilling prophecy in which Black women are seen as less electable, receive less support in primaries, and therefore have fewer opportunities to demonstrate electability in general elections. 

Other characteristics of Black women candidates can influence how voters evaluate them. Jennie Sweet-Cushman and Nichole Bauer examined how intersectional motherhood shapes candidate evaluations, revealing that Black mothers running for office navigate particularly complex stereotypes about their fitness for leadership and their family responsibilities in ways that differ from both white mothers and Black men.19 Nadia Brown and Danielle Casarez Lemi push scholars and practitioners alike to consider the influence of skin tone and hair style on both the experience and evaluations of Black women in U.S. politics, including evaluations by Black voters specifically.20 Another study found that skin color plays a distinct role for Afro-Latina/o candidates, creating hierarchies that shape electoral opportunities and political experiences.21

Celeste Montoya and her colleagues found that Black respondents were most likely to believe their interests would be best represented by candidates who share both their race/ethnicity and gender, followed by shared race alone, then shared gender alone, then no shared identities.22 The same authors also found that feelings of minority linked fate, defined as perceptions that “what happens generally to racial and ethnic minorities in this country will have something to do with what happens in your life,” were more influential to Black and Latina women’s perceptions of representation than to the perceptions of their male counterparts.23 They conclude: “Minority linked fate may work with Black women’s strong sense of racial and gender identity to facilitate more of a perceived connection with those with whom they share at least one of those identities, but not with the candidate with whom they share neither.”24 This research reveals that shared identity operates differently across groups, and that gender matters less than race for some groups while being more significant for others.

Together, the evidence suggests Black women candidates are evaluated in ways rooted in racial and gender expectations and biases, and that the intersection of these forces shapes how voters perceive them. But what does the evidence show about Black women’s actual electoral success? Paru Shah, Jamil Scott, and Eric Gonzalez Juenke’s analysis of state legislative elections in 2014 and 2016 found that women of color candidates fared better than their white counterparts, including in open-seat and competitive elections.25 Black women have historically been more likely to win in majority-minority districts, though the increased success of Black women in majority-white districts challenges doubts about their electability outside of majority-minority electorates.26 CAWP’s most recent report with Higher Heights on the status of Black women in U.S. politics notes that the number of Black congresswomen in majority-white districts has increased since 2014, representing one-third of all Black women in the U.S. House in 2025.27 The same report found that Black women congressional nominees won their contests at rates higher than women and men candidates across race/ethnicity, including among only non-incumbents. The dearth of Black women’s representation at the statewide level appears to be related more to where Black women run for office than their ability to win these contests.28

Symbolic Effects 

Black women candidates and officeholders can also have symbolic effects. For example, in their book See Jane Run, David Campbell and Christina Wolbrecht found that Black girls expressed higher levels of both political participation and ambition when exposed to Black women candidates.29 Other research has documented how groundbreaking candidacies of Black women can activate political participation among those in shared race and/or gender communities.30 Jennifer Wolak and Eric Gonzalez Juenke found that co-racial/co-ethnic representation also facilitates improved political knowledge. Specifically, Black respondents were much more likely to correctly identify their member of Congress when the member was Black.31 Another study found that perceptions of Black representation in legislatures is related to increased external efficacy – or the feeling that contacting their legislator would make a difference in shaping policy – among a mixed-race sample of voters, and perceptions of women’s representation is associated with increased trust in government.32 The authors conclude, “Americans who believe more Blacks serve in their legislature also believe their legislature is more responsive.”33

Policy Impact and Leadership

There is evidence that once Black women reach office, they govern differently. In Race, Gender, and Political Representation, Beth Reingold, Kerry Haynie, and Kirsten Widner provide an in-depth investigation into the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation in state legislatures at intersections of race and gender.34 Consistent with earlier studies, they find that Black women state legislators are especially active in bill sponsorship and policy leadership that responds to multiple and intersecting group interests.35 In interviews with CAWP researchers, Black congresswomen further affirmed that while their primary commitment was to representing their districts or states, representing Black communities was an important component of their jobs.36 A recent study that examined the relationship between descriptive representation by gender and race and legislative innovation, as measured by the likelihood of adopting new policies, found that state legislatures with higher levels of women’s and Black representation adopted more novel policy solutions.37

Nadia Brown’s “representational identity theory” explains how Black women state legislators’ identities shape their legislative experiences and decision-making.38 Drawing on in-depth interviews with Black women in the Maryland General Assembly, Brown showed the variance in representational influence of identities among Black women legislators across spaces and phases in the legislative process. Her findings also contribute to research challenging singular conceptions of “women’s issues,” demonstrating how issues that are of greatest concern for and impact on women vary by other factors such as race/ethnicity, class, and generation.39

Recent scholarship challenges other conventional measures of legislative productivity and effectiveness such as bill sponsorship and passage rates, revealing that they systematically obscure the work of Black women legislators who employ different legislative strategies and communication styles. Multiple studies demonstrate that traditional metrics may not fully capture the collaborative and constituent-focused approaches that women and legislators of color often employ.40 For example, in their detailed look into legislative effectiveness in Congress, Mandi Eatough and Jessica Preece demonstrate that using a wider variety of less conventional measures of legislative effectiveness is necessary to prevent systematically undercounting women's and Black members' success.41 Further, Nadia Brown and colleagues found that Black congresswomen use caucuses as vehicles for pursuing intersectional legislation, framing their lived experiences as women of color as sources of policy expertise and advocacy authority that inform their legislative priorities.42 Together, these scholars argue that understanding legislative productivity through these refined measures allows for more accurate assessment of how Black women legislators navigate institutional barriers while advancing their policy agendas.

Black women’s modes of communication and styles of presentation also vary from other legislators. For example, multiple studies found that Black women officeholders were more active on Twitter than their male counterparts and that they were more likely to prioritize racial issues in those communications.43 Other research has examined how Black women politicians strategically deploy their physical presentation and aesthetic choices as forms of political communication and resistance.44

The combination of distinctive communication styles, collaborative legislative approaches, and innovative policy perspectives positions Black women legislators as crucial actors in democratizing both the process and substance of American lawmaking.

Political Participation

In addition to their roles in formal political institutions, Black women have historically served in and continue to play critical roles in activism, mobilization, and political participation. Extensive research has demonstrated the influence of Black women in major social movements including women’s suffrage, civil rights, voting rights, and Black Lives Matter, among many others.45 This and other research has interrogated topics of gender and/or racial solidarity, including perceptions of linked fate along lines of identity. 

Black women’s activism throughout U.S. history has often been driven by the cause of promoting the franchise via multiracial coalitions.46 The concept of intersectional solidarity provides a crucial framework for understanding coalition-building among and support for Black women in politics. Chaya Crowder theorizes intersectional solidarity as a basis for cross-group policy support, examining how shared experiences of marginalization can create bonds between different communities and translate into electoral backing for candidates who embody multiple marginalized identities.47 Multiple studies have found that Black women are the most likely among Black, Latina, and Asian American/Pacific Islander women to identify as “women of color.”48 Black women also report higher levels of linked fate with other women of color, with significant impact on political interests and policy support that can create opportunities for cross-racial coalitions.49

The strategic deployment of “women of color” as a political identity category reveals complex dynamics of inclusion, boundary-making, and voter behavior. In addition to measuring identification with the label of "woman of color," Yalidy Matos, Stacey Greene, and Kira Sanbonmatsu have found that Black women express the greatest support – among Black, Latina, white, and other women – for having more women of color in Congress.50 They also found that Black women voters place more value in candidates being women of color than Latina or white women voters, which has implications for candidate strategy.51 These studies collectively reveal that "women of color" operates as both a meaningful coalitional identity and a contested political label, with implications for how Black women candidates position themselves and are perceived by diverse voter groups, as well as how Black women behave as voters and advocates. The effectiveness of this identity frame depends on whether it successfully mobilizes intersectional solidarity or whether it obscures important differences in experiences and interests among diverse groups.

Wendy Smooth describes the “paradox of participation” for Black women, arguing that “African American women have consistently participated in American politics despite formidable barriers to their participation in formal electoral roles as voters and candidates.”52 As those barriers to formal participation have weakened, in large part due to the activism of Black women, Black women have emerged as some of the most reliable voters across all race and gender groups. They consistently turn out to vote at rates higher than Black men, as well as Latinas/os and Asian American women and men.53 Using survey data, Christine Slaughter, Chaya Crowder, and Christina Greer found that civic duty is a better explanation for Black women’s decisions to vote compared with the decisions of Black men or white women.54

Black women also vote overwhelmingly for Democrats.55 While this is true of Black men as well, a gender gap in vote choice – with Black women even more likely than Black men to back Democrats – persists.56 Slaughter, Crowder, and Greer found that Black women were more likely than Black men to identify as “strong Democrats” and conclude that “Black women demonstrate a unique dedication to the Democratic Party.”57 Jane Junn and Natalie Masuoka make the connection between Black women’s support for Democrats with their perceptions of discrimination against Black people and women; of the 88% of Black women who reported “a lot” of discrimination exists against Blacks in the U.S. in 2020, nearly all (95%) voted for the Democratic candidate that year.58

While a large majority of Black women have backed Democrats for decades, Black women voters are not a monolithic group. Scholars have demonstrated the importance of recognizing, interrogating, and addressing the diversity among Black women voters by age, generation, religiosity, ethnicity, class, geography, and ideology, among other factors.59 This scholarship challenges simplified narratives about "the women's vote" or "the Black vote," with implications for candidate strategy broadly as well as coalition-building through intersectional solidarity for Black and/or women candidates. 

Voters’ assessments of their ideal representatives can depend on their own characteristics and correspondence to candidates’ identities.60 For example, Tasha Philpot and Hanes Walton found that Black women are the strongest supporters of Black women candidates.61 There was evidence of this support in the 2024 election, when Kamala Harris became the first Black and South Asian woman major-party nominee for president. Not only did 92% of Black women vote for Kamala Harris in 2024, consistent with their support for Democrats in previous presidential elections, but exit polls showed that Black women voters were the most likely voters (at 34%) among all race-gender groups to say that their “desire to elect a woman president” was the single most important factor for their vote.62 

Black women also mobilized as advocates and donors for the Harris campaign from its launch. Contrary to studies finding that Black, Latina, and Asian American women have been much less likely to contribute to congressional candidates than other groups,63 Black women raised more than $1.6 million for Harris on a single Zoom call held the day that she announced her bid.64 Still, Sanbonmatsu’s study of Black women and Latinas revealed that they perceive the act of charitable giving to be more valued by society than political giving, creating a hurdle to increasing political voice through campaign donations.65

Christine Slaughter draws lessons from Black women's resilience following the 2024 election, examining how Black women political actors, organizers, and voters responded to electoral outcomes and continued their political work despite setbacks.66 This emphasis on resilience connects to broader themes in scholarship on Black women's politics: their persistent political engagement despite systemic exclusion, their creative reimagining of political possibility when formal channels prove inadequate, and their role as both symbolic and substantive representatives who carry unique burdens and expectations.

Together, the scholarship reviewed here collectively reveals Black women as central, dynamic actors in American political life. As voters, they turn out at high rates, anchor the Democratic coalition, and carry strong commitments to civic duty and descriptive representation, while remaining a more diverse group than popular narratives suggest. Their history of activism across major social movements and their ongoing role in building cross-racial coalitions through intersectional solidarity underscore that Black women's political influence extends well beyond the ballot box. 

Experiences in Office 

Research on Black women's underrepresentation in politics has traditionally focused on barriers to entry — factors that prevent diverse candidates from seeking and winning office. However, a growing body of scholarship examines what happens after election, documenting the violence, hostility, and challenges to legitimacy that women and people of color face once in office. 

For example, recent empirical research demonstrates that intersectional violence and hostility constitute qualitatively distinct experiences that cannot be understood by examining gender and race separately. Rebekah Herrick and Sue Thomas surveyed mayors across the U.S. and provide compelling evidence that “women of color and non-Hispanic white women faced higher rates of threats, gendered, and sexualized violence than men, and women of color were the only mayors to report heightened levels of gendered and raced violence.”67 Taneisha Means extends this analysis to the judiciary, finding that half of Black women state judges reported experiencing disrespect at some point, measured as being spoken to or treated aggressively, inappropriately, or threateningly; having their legitimacy and authority questioned; and not having their proper name or title used.68 CAWP’s most recent study on state political ecosystems draws on interviews with women officeholders, activists, and political leaders to show that Asian, Black, Latina, and Native American women experience stress and engage in emotional labor in ways heightened due to their intersectional identities.69 Their stories serve as reminders of the progress left to make to address the persistence of gender, racial, and intersectional biases within U.S. political institutions.

Suggested Citation: Dittmar, Kelly, Kira Sanbonmatsu, and Paru Shah. 2026. CAWP Research Inventory on Gender & Politics. Center for American Women and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ.

Endnotes

1 Brown, Nadia E, Christopher J. Clark, and Anna Mahoney. 2022. “The Black Women of the US Congress: Learning from Descriptive Data.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 43 (3): 343.

2 Lawless, Jennifer L., and Richard L. Fox. 2025. It Takes More Than a Candidate: Why Women Don’t Run for Office. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 

3 Dowe, Pearl K. Ford. 2023. The Radical Imagination of Black Women: Ambition, Politics, and Power. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

4 Dowe 2023

5 Clayton, Amanda, Diana Z. O’Brien, and Jennifer M. Piscopo. 2023. “Women Grab Back: Exclusion, Policy Threat, and Women’s Political Ambition.” American Political Science Review 117 (4): 1465–85.

6 Phillips, Christian Dyogi. 2021. Nowhere to Run: Race, Gender, and Immigration in American Elections. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

7 Clark, Jennifer Hayes, and Gathoni Kimondo. 2025. “When Women Run: Explaining the Emergence of Women State Legislative Candidates.” The Journal of Legislative Studies 31 (4): 1061–76; Silva, Andrea, and Carrie Skulley. 2019. “Always Running: Candidate Emergence among Women of Color over Time.” Political Research Quarterly 72 (2): 342–59.

8 Lawless and Fox 2025

9 Carroll, Susan J., and Kira Sanbonmatsu. 2013. More Women Can Run: Gender and Pathways to the State Legislatures. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

10 Dittmar, Kelly. 2023. Rethinking Women’s Political Power. Center for American Women and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. https://rethinkingpower.rutgers.edu/; Sorensen, Ashley, and Philip Chen. 2022. "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): 738–53.

11 Sorensen and Chen 2022; Sorensen, Ashley, and Philip Chen. 2024. “She Works Hard for the Money: Explaining Racial and Gender Disparities in Candidate Success in Primary Elections.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 12 (4): 806–25.

12 Doherty, David, Conor M. Dowling, and Michael G. Miller. 2019. “Do Local Party Chairs Think Women and Minority Candidates Can Win? Evidence from a Conjoint Experiment.” The Journal of Politics 81 (4): 1282–97.

13 Carew, Jessica Denyse Johnson. 2016. “Stereotyping of Black Women in Elections.” In Distinct Identities: Minority Women in U.S. Politics, eds. Nadia E. Brown and Sarah Allen Gershon, 95–115. New York, NY: Routledge. 

14 Carr, Sydney L. 2025. “Race, Gender, and Public Opinion toward Black Female Political Elites.” The Journal of Politics (Online); Harris-Perry, Melissa V. 2011. Sister Citizen: Shame, Stereotypes, and Black Women in America. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

15 Gonzalez, Sylvia, and Nichole Bauer. 2024. “Strong and Caring? The Stereotypic Traits of Women of Color in Politics.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 12 (1): 124–41.

16 Gershon, Sarah Allen, and Jessica Lavariega Monforti. 2021. "Intersecting Campaigns: Candidate Race, Ethnicity, Gender and Voter Evaluations." Politics, Groups, and Identities 9 (3): 439–63.

17 Chen, Philip, and Ashley Sorensen. 2025. "Raced-Gendered Electability: Support, Donations, and Democratic Double Standards for Black Women Candidates." Political Research Quarterly 78 (3): 942–56; Carew 2016

18 Chen and Sorenson 2025; see also Doherty, Dowling, and Miller 2019

19 Sweet-Cushman, Jennie, and Nichole M. Bauer. 2024. “Intersectional Motherhood and Candidate Evaluations in the United States.” Politics & Gender 20 (3): 598–619.

20 Brown, Nadia E., and Danielle Casarez Lemi. 2021. Sister Style: The Politics of Appearance for Black Women Political Elites. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

21 Mallard, Israel G. 2022. The Politics of Being Afro-Latino/Latina: Ethnicity, Colorism, and Political Representation in Washington, D.C. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

22 Montoya, Celeste M., Christina Bejarano, Nadia E. Brown, and Sarah Allen Gershon. 2022. "The Intersectional Dynamics of Descriptive Representation." Politics & Gender 18 (2): 483–512.

23 Bejarano, Christina, Nadia E. Brown, Sarah Allen Gershon, and Celeste Montoya. 2021. "Shared Identities: Intersectionality, Linked Fate, and Perceptions of Political Candidates." Political Research Quarterly 74 (4): 975.

24 Bejarano et al. 2021, 981

25 Shah, Paru, Jamil Scott, and Eric Gonzalez Juenke. 2019. “Women of Color Candidates: Examining Emergence and Success in State Legislative Elections.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 7 (2): 429–43. 

26 Hardy-Fanta, Carol, Pei-te Lien, Dianne M. Pinderhughes, and Christine M. Sierra. 2006. “Gender, Race, and Descriptive Representation in the United States: Findings from the Gender and Multicultural Leadership Project.” Journal of Women Politics & Policy 28 (3-4): 7–41; Juenke, Eric Gonzalez, and Paru Shah. 2016. “Demand and Supply: Racial and Ethnic Minority Candidates in White Districts.” Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics 1: 60–90; Swain, Katie E. O., and Pei-te Lien. 2017. “Structural and Contextual Factors Regarding the Accessibility of Elective Office for Women of Color at the Local Level.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 38 (2): 128–50.

27 Hill, Chelsea. 2025. Black Women in American Politics 2025. A Report for the Higher Heights Leadership Fund by the Center for American Women and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. https://cawp.rutgers.edu/research-and-scholarship/black-women-american-politics-2025

28 Hill 2025

29 Campbell, David E., and Christina Wolbrecht. 2025. See Jane Run: How Women Politicians Matter for Young People. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

30 Simien, Evelyn M. 2022. "The 2018 Congressional Midterms, Symbolic Empowerment, and Ayanna Pressley’s Mobilizing Effect: A Case Study for Future Analysis of Historic Firsts." Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 43 (3): 279–96.

31 Wolak, Jennifer, and Eric Gonzalez Juenke. 2021. “Descriptive Representation and Political Knowledge.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 9 (1): 129–50.

32 Clark, Christopher J., and Steven Rogers. 2025. “Public Perceptions of Minority Inclusion and Feelings of Political Efficacy: A Replication, Validation, and Extension.” American Political Science Review 119 (4): 2019–26. 

33 Clark and Rogers 2025, 6

34 Reingold, Beth, Kerry L. Haynie, and Kirsten Widner. 2020. Race, Gender, and Political Representation: Toward a More Intersectional Approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 

35 See also Bratton, Kathleen A., and Kerry L. Haynie. 1999. “Agenda Setting and Legislative Success in State Legislatures: The Effects of Gender and Race.” The Journal of Politics 61 (3): 658–79; Bratton, Kathleen A., Kerry L. Haynie, and Beth Reingold. 2006. “Agenda Setting and African American Women in State Legislatures.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 28 (3–4): 71–96.

36 Dittmar, Kelly, Kira Sanbonmatsu, Susan J. Carroll, Debbie Walsh, and Catherine Wineinger. 2017. Representation Matters: Women in the U.S. Congress. Center for American Women and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. https://cawp.rutgers.edu/sites/default/files/resources/representationmatters.pdf

37 Nickelson, Jack, and Joshua M. Jansa. 2023. “Descriptive Representation and Innovation in American Legislatures.” Political Research Quarterly 76 (4): 2018–35.

38 Brown, Nadia E. 2014. Sisters in the Statehouse: Black Women and Legislative Decision Making. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

39 Brown 2014; Crowder-Meyer, Melody. 2022. "How Gender, Race, Ethnicity, and Their Intersections Shape Americans’ Issue Priorities." Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 43 (2): 169–83; Smooth, Wendy G. 2013. “Intersectionality from Theoretical Framework to Policy Intervention.” In Situating Intersectionality: Politics, Policy, and Power, ed. Angelia R. Wilson, 11–41. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

40 Brown, Nadia E., Christopher J. Clark, Anna Mitchell Mahoney, and Michael Strawbridge. 2023. "Sister Space: Collective Descriptive Representation and Black Women in Legislative Caucuses." Politics & Gender 19 (4): 1234–8; Eatough, Mandi, and Jessica R. Preece. 2025. "Crediting Invisible Work: Congress and the Lawmaking Productivity Metric (LawProM)." American Political Science Review 119 (2): 566–84; Matthews, Abigail A., Tracy Osborn, Emily U. Schilling, and Rebecca Kreitzer. 2025. "Legislative Success and Collaboration in the Texas State House." Politics, Groups, and Identities 13 (1): 159–81.

41 Eatough and Preece 2025

42 Brown et al. 2023

43 Butler, Daniel M., Thad Kousser, and Stan Oklobdzija. 2023. "Do Male and Female Legislators Have Different Twitter Communication Styles?" State Politics & Policy Quarterly 23 (2): 117–39; Tillery, Alvin B. 2021. "Tweeting Racial Representation: How the Congressional Black Caucus Used Twitter in the 113th Congress." Politics, Groups, and Identities 9 (2): 219–38.

44 Brown and Lemi 2021

45 Giddings, Paula J. 1984. When and Where I Enter: The Impact of Black Women on Race and Sex in America. New York, NY: Perennial; Jackson, Jenn M. 2024. Black Women Taught Us: An Intimate History of Black Feminism. New York, NY: Random House; Jones, Martha S. 2020. Vanguard: How Black Women Broke Barriers, Won the Vote, and Insisted on Equality for All. New York, NY: Basic Books; Montoya, Celeste. 2026. “Gendered Mobilization and Elections: The Intersectional Politics of Protest.” In Gender and Elections: Shaping the Future of American Politics, 6th edition, eds. Richard L. Fox, Kelly Dittmar, and Susan J. Carroll, 86–117. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; Terborg-Penn, Rosalyn. 1998. African American Women in the Struggle for the Vote, 1850-1920. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

46 Greer, Christina M. 2024. How to Build a Democracy: From Fannie Lou Hamer and Barbara Jordan to Stacey Abrams. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

47 Crowder, Chaya Y. 2023. “Doing More than Thanking Black Women: The Influence of Intersectional Solidarity on Public Support for Policies.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 44 (2): 186–205; Crowder, Chaya Y. 2025. Intersectional Solidarity: Black Women and the Politics of Group Consciousness. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

48 Carey, Jr., Tony E., and Mary-Kate Lizotte. 2023. “Black Lives Matter at the Intersection.” In Distinct Identities: Minority Women in U.S. Politics, 2nd Edition, eds. Nadia E. Brown and Sarah Allen Gershon. New York, NY: Routledge; Matos, Yalidy, Stacey Greene, and Kira Sanbonmatsu. 2023. “The Politics of ‘Women of Color:’ a Group Identity Worth Investigating.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 11 (3): 549–70.

49 Carey and Lizotte 2023

50 Matos, Yalidy, Stacey Greene, and Kira Sanbonmatsu. 2021. "Do Women Seek ‘Women of Color’ for Public Office? Exploring Women's Support for Electing Women of Color." Political Research Quarterly 74 (2): 259–73.

51 Greene, Stacey, Yalidy Matos, and Kira Sanbonmatsu. 2022. “Women Voters and the Utility of Campaigning as ‘Women of Color.’” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 43 (1): 25–41.

52 Smooth, Wendy. 2021. “Elevating African American Women's Political Leadership Amid Pandemic Politics.” In Gender and Elections: Shaping the Future of American Politics, 5th edition, eds. Susan J. Carroll, Richard L. Fox, and Kelly Dittmar, 192–222. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 

53 CAWP (Center for American Women and Politics). “Gender Differences in Voter Registration and Turnout.” https://cawp.rutgers.edu/data/voters/gender-differences-voter-registration-and-turnout 

54 Slaughter, Christine, Chaya Crowder, and Christina Greer. 2024. "Black Women: Keepers of Democracy, the Democratic Process, and the Democratic Party." Politics & Gender 20 (1): 162–81.

55 CAWP (Center for American Women and Politics). “Gender Gaps in Vote Choice and Party Identification.” https://cawp.rutgers.edu/data/voters/gender-gaps-vote-choice-and-party-identification; Junn, Jane, and Natalie Masuoka. 2024. Women Voters: Race, Gender, and Dynamism in American Elections. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; White, Ismail K., and Chryl Nicole Laird. 2020. Steadfast Democrats: How Social Forces Shape Black Political Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

56 CAWP (Center for American Women and Politics). “Gender Gaps in Vote Choice and Party Identification.” https://cawp.rutgers.edu/data/voters/gender-gaps-vote-choice-and-party-identification

57 Slaughter et al. 2024, 168

58 Junn and Masuoka 2024

59 Cisneros, Angel Saavedra, Tony E. Carey Jr., Darrin L. Rogers, and Joshua M. Johnson. 2023. “One Size Does Not Fit All: Core Political Values and Principles Across Race, Ethnicity, and Gender.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 11 (4): 793–812; Junn and Masuoka 2024; Kim, Chaerim, and Jane Junn. 2024. “Whitewashing Women Voters: Intersectionality and Partisan Vote Choice in the 2020 US Presidential Election.” Politics & Gender 20 (3): 701–26; Scott, Jamil. 2026. “Black Women and Electoral Politics: Examining Trends and Putting Black Women’s Behavior in Context.” In Gender and Elections: Shaping the Future of American Politics, 6th edition, eds. Richard L. Fox, Kelly Dittmar, and Susan J. Carroll, 118–40. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 

60 Bejarano et al. 2021

61 Philpot, Tasha S., and Hanes Walton. 2007. "One of Our Own: Black Female Candidates and the Voters Who Support Them." American Journal of Political Science 51 (1): 49–62.

62 Associated Press. 2024. “AP VoteCast: How America Voted in 2024.” https://apnews.com/projects/election-results-2024/votecast/

63 CAWP (Center for American Women and Politics). 2024. “Men Vastly Outgiving Women in 2024 Congressional Elections,” September 16. https://cawp.rutgers.edu/news-media/press-releases/men-vastly-outgiving-women-2024-congressional-elections; Grumbach, Jacob M., Alexander Sahn, and Sarah Staszak. 2022. "Gender, Race, and Intersectionality in Campaign Finance." Political Behavior 44 (1): 319–40.

64 Haines, Errin, and Jennifer Gerson. 2024. “Four Hours, 44,000 Black Women and One Zoom Call,” The 19th News, July 23. https://19thnews.org/2024/07/win-with-black-women-zoom-call-harris-organizers/

65 Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2025. "Understanding Black Women’s and Latinas’ Perspectives about Political Giving." PS: Political Science & Politics 58 (1): 31–6.

66  Slaughter, Christine M. 2025. "Lessons Learned from Black Women's Resilience and the 2024 Election." Politics & Gender 21 (2): 361–8.

67 Herrick, Rebekah, and Sue Thomas. 2023. "An Intersectional Exploration of Psychological Violence, Threats, and Physical Violence of Mayors in 2021." American Politics Research 52 (3): 264–78, 264.

68 Means, Taneisha N. 2022. “Her Honor: Black Women Judges’ Experiences with Disrespect and Recusal Requests in the American Judiciary.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 43 (3): 310–27.

69 Dittmar 2023

  • 1

    Brown, Nadia E, Christopher J. Clark, and Anna Mahoney. 2022. “The Black Women of the US Congress: Learning from Descriptive Data.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 43 (3): 343.

  • 2

    Lawless, Jennifer L., and Richard L. Fox. 2025. It Takes More Than a Candidate: Why Women Don’t Run for Office. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 

  • 3

    Clayton, Amanda, Diana Z. O’Brien, and Jennifer M. Piscopo. 2023. “Women Grab Back: Exclusion, Policy Threat, and Women’s Political Ambition.” American Political Science Review 117 (4): 1465–85.

  • 4

    Dowe, Pearl K. Ford. 2023. The Radical Imagination of Black Women: Ambition, Politics, and Power. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

  • 5

    Jordan-Zachery, Julia S., and Nikol G. Alexander-Floyd, eds. 2018. Black Women in Politics: Demanding Citizenship, Challenging Power, and Seeking Justice. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

  • 6

    Phillips, Christian Dyogi. 2021. Nowhere to Run: Race, Gender, and Immigration in American Elections. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

  • 7

    Clark, Jennifer Hayes, and Gathoni Kimondo. 2025. “When Women Run: Explaining the Emergence of Women State Legislative Candidates.” The Journal of Legislative Studies 31 (4): 1061–76; Silva, Andrea, and Carrie Skulley. 2019. “Always Running: Candidate Emergence among Women of Color over Time.” Political Research Quarterly 72 (2): 342–59.

  • 8

    Lawless and Fox 2025

  • 9

    Carroll, Susan J., and Kira Sanbonmatsu. 2013. More Women Can Run: Gender and Pathways to the State Legislatures. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

  • 10

    Dittmar, Kelly. 2023. Rethinking Women’s Political Power. Center for American Women and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. https://rethinkingpower.rutgers.edu/; Sorensen, Ashley, and Philip Chen. 2022. "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): 738–53.

  • 11

    Sorensen and Chen 2022; Sorensen, Ashley, and Philip Chen. 2024. “She Works Hard for the Money: Explaining Racial and Gender Disparities in Candidate Success in Primary Elections.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 12 (4): 806–25.

  • 12

    Doherty, David, Conor M. Dowling, and Michael G. Miller. 2019. “Do Local Party Chairs Think Women and Minority Candidates Can Win? Evidence from a Conjoint Experiment.” The Journal of Politics 81 (4): 1282–97.

  • 13

    Carew, Jessica Denyse Johnson. 2016. “Stereotyping of Black Women in Elections.” In Distinct Identities: Minority Women in U.S. Politics, eds. Nadia E. Brown and Sarah Allen Gershon, 95–115. New York, NY: Routledge. 

  • 14

    Carr, Sydney L. 2025. “Race, Gender, and Public Opinion toward Black Female Political Elites.” The Journal of Politics (Online); Harris-Perry, Melissa V. 2011. Sister Citizen: Shame, Stereotypes, and Black Women in America. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

  • 15

    Gonzalez, Sylvia, and Nichole Bauer. 2024. “Strong and Caring? The Stereotypic Traits of Women of Color in Politics.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 12 (1): 124–41.

  • 16

    Gershon, Sarah Allen, and Jessica Lavariega Monforti. 2021. "Intersecting Campaigns: Candidate Race, Ethnicity, Gender and Voter Evaluations." Politics, Groups, and Identities 9 (3): 439–63.

  • 17

    Chen, Philip, and Ashley Sorensen. 2025. "Raced-Gendered Electability: Support, Donations, and Democratic Double Standards for Black Women Candidates." Political Research Quarterly 78 (3): 942–56; Carew 2016

  • 18

    Chen and Sorenson 2025; see also Doherty, Dowling, and Miller 2019

  • 19

    Sweet-Cushman, Jennie, and Nichole M. Bauer. 2024. “Intersectional Motherhood and Candidate Evaluations in the United States.” Politics & Gender 20 (3): 598–619.

  • 20

    Brown, Nadia E., and Danielle Casarez Lemi. 2021. Sister Style: The Politics of Appearance for Black Women Political Elites. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

  • 21

    Mallard, Israel G. 2022. The Politics of Being Afro-Latino/Latina: Ethnicity, Colorism, and Political Representation in Washington, D.C. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

  • 22

    Montoya, Celeste M., Christina Bejarano, Nadia E. Brown, and Sarah Allen Gershon. 2022. "The Intersectional Dynamics of Descriptive Representation." Politics & Gender 18 (2): 483–512.

  • 23

    Bejarano, Christina, Nadia E. Brown, Sarah Allen Gershon, and Celeste Montoya. 2021. "Shared Identities: Intersectionality, Linked Fate, and Perceptions of Political Candidates." Political Research Quarterly 74 (4): 975.

  • 24

    Bejarano et al. 2021, 981

  • 25

    Shah, Paru, Jamil Scott, and Eric Gonzalez Juenke. 2019. “Women of Color Candidates: Examining Emergence and Success in State Legislative Elections.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 7 (2): 429–43.

  • 26

    Hardy-Fanta, Carol, Pei-te Lien, Dianne M. Pinderhughes, and Christine M. Sierra. 2006. “Gender, Race, and Descriptive Representation in the United States: Findings from the Gender and Multicultural Leadership Project.” Journal of Women Politics & Policy 28 (3-4): 7–41; Juenke, Eric Gonzalez, and Paru Shah. 2016. “Demand and Supply: Racial and Ethnic Minority Candidates in White Districts.” Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics 1: 60–90; Swain, Katie E. O., and Pei-te Lien. 2017. “Structural and Contextual Factors Regarding the Accessibility of Elective Office for Women of Color at the Local Level.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 38 (2): 128–50.

  • 27

    Hill, Chelsea. 2025. Black Women in American Politics 2025. A Report for the Higher Heights Leadership Fund by the Center for American Women and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. https://cawp.rutgers.edu/research-and-scholarship/black-women-american-politics-2025

  • 28

    Hill 2025

  • 29

    Campbell, David E., and Christina Wolbrecht. 2025. See Jane Run: How Women Politicians Matter for Young People. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

  • 30

    Simien, Evelyn M. 2022. "The 2018 Congressional Midterms, Symbolic Empowerment, and Ayanna Pressley’s Mobilizing Effect: A Case Study for Future Analysis of Historic Firsts." Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 43 (3): 279–96.

  • 31

    Wolak, Jennifer, and Eric Gonzalez Juenke. 2021. “Descriptive Representation and Political Knowledge.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 9 (1): 129–50.

  • 32

    Clark, Christopher J., and Steven Rogers. 2025. “Public Perceptions of Minority Inclusion and Feelings of Political Efficacy: A Replication, Validation, and Extension.” American Political Science Review 119 (4): 2019–26.

  • 33

    Clark and Rogers 2025, 6

  • 34

    Reingold, Beth, Kerry L. Haynie, and Kirsten Widner. 2020. Race, Gender, and Political Representation: Toward a More Intersectional Approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

  • 35

    See also Bratton, Kathleen A., and Kerry L. Haynie. 1999. “Agenda Setting and Legislative Success in State Legislatures: The Effects of Gender and Race.” The Journal of Politics 61 (3): 658–79; Bratton, Kathleen A., Kerry L. Haynie, and Beth Reingold. 2006. “Agenda Setting and African American Women in State Legislatures.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 28 (3–4): 71–96.

  • 36

    Dittmar, Kelly, Kira Sanbonmatsu, Susan J. Carroll, Debbie Walsh, and Catherine Wineinger. 2017. Representation Matters: Women in the U.S. Congress. Center for American Women and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. https://cawp.rutgers.edu/sites/default/files/resources/representationmatters.pdf

  • 37

    Nickelson, Jack, and Joshua M. Jansa. 2023. “Descriptive Representation and Innovation in American Legislatures.” Political Research Quarterly 76 (4): 2018–35.

  • 38

    Brown, Nadia E. 2014. Sisters in the Statehouse: Black Women and Legislative Decision Making. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

  • 39

    Brown 2014; Crowder-Meyer, Melody. 2022. "How Gender, Race, Ethnicity, and Their Intersections Shape Americans’ Issue Priorities." Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 43 (2): 169–83; Smooth, Wendy G. 2013. “Intersectionality from Theoretical Framework to Policy Intervention.” In Situating Intersectionality: Politics, Policy, and Power, ed. Angelia R. Wilson, 11–41. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • 40

    Brown, Nadia E., Christopher J. Clark, Anna Mitchell Mahoney, and Michael Strawbridge. 2023. "Sister Space: Collective Descriptive Representation and Black Women in Legislative Caucuses." Politics & Gender 19 (4): 1234–8; Eatough, Mandi, and Jessica R. Preece. 2025. "Crediting Invisible Work: Congress and the Lawmaking Productivity Metric (LawProM)." American Political Science Review 119 (2): 566–84; Matthews, Abigail A., Tracy Osborn, Emily U. Schilling, and Rebecca Kreitzer. 2025. "Legislative Success and Collaboration in the Texas State House." Politics, Groups, and Identities 13 (1): 159–81.

  • 41

    Eatough and Preece 2025

  • 42

    Brown et al. 2023

  • 43

    Butler, Daniel M., Thad Kousser, and Stan Oklobdzija. 2023. "Do Male and Female Legislators Have Different Twitter Communication Styles?" State Politics & Policy Quarterly 23 (2): 117–39; Tillery, Alvin B. 2021. "Tweeting Racial Representation: How the Congressional Black Caucus Used Twitter in the 113th Congress." Politics, Groups, and Identities 9 (2): 219–38.

  • 44

    Brown and Lemi 2021

  • 45

    Giddings, Paula J. 1984. When and Where I Enter: The Impact of Black Women on Race and Sex in America. New York, NY: Perennial; Jackson, Jenn M. 2024. Black Women Taught Us: An Intimate History of Black Feminism. New York, NY: Random House; Jones, Martha S. 2020. Vanguard: How Black Women Broke Barriers, Won the Vote, and Insisted on Equality for All. New York, NY: Basic Books; Montoya, Celeste. 2026. “Gendered Mobilization and Elections: The Intersectional Politics of Protest.” In Gender and Elections: Shaping the Future of American Politics, 6th edition, eds. Richard L. Fox, Kelly Dittmar, and Susan J. Carroll, 86–117. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; Terborg-Penn, Rosalyn. 1998. African American Women in the Struggle for the Vote, 1850-1920. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

  • 46

    Greer, Christina M. 2024. How to Build a Democracy: From Fannie Lou Hamer and Barbara Jordan to Stacey Abrams. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

  • 47

    Crowder, Chaya Y. 2023. “Doing More than Thanking Black Women: The Influence of Intersectional Solidarity on Public Support for Policies.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 44 (2): 186–205; Crowder, Chaya Y. 2025. Intersectional Solidarity: Black Women and the Politics of Group Consciousness. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

  • 48

    Carey, Jr., Tony E., and Mary-Kate Lizotte. 2023. “Black Lives Matter at the Intersection.” In Distinct Identities: Minority Women in U.S. Politics, 2nd Edition, eds. Nadia E. Brown and Sarah Allen Gershon. New York, NY: Routledge; Matos, Yalidy, Stacey Greene, and Kira Sanbonmatsu. 2023. “The Politics of ‘Women of Color:’ a Group Identity Worth Investigating.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 11 (3): 549–70.

  • 49

    Carey and Lizotte 2023

  • 50

    Matos, Yalidy, Stacey Greene, and Kira Sanbonmatsu. 2021. "Do Women Seek ‘Women of Color’ for Public Office? Exploring Women's Support for Electing Women of Color." Political Research Quarterly 74 (2): 259–73.

  • 51

    Greene, Stacey, Yalidy Matos, and Kira Sanbonmatsu. 2022. “Women Voters and the Utility of Campaigning as ‘Women of Color.’” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 43 (1): 25–41.

  • 52

    Smooth, Wendy. 2021. “Elevating African American Women's Political Leadership Amid Pandemic Politics.” In Gender and Elections: Shaping the Future of American Politics, 5th edition, eds. Susan J. Carroll, Richard L. Fox, and Kelly Dittmar, 192–222. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 

  • 53

    CAWP (Center for American Women and Politics). “Gender Differences in Voter Registration and Turnout.” https://cawp.rutgers.edu/data/voters/gender-differences-voter-registration-and-turnout

  • 54

    Slaughter, Christine, Chaya Crowder, and Christina Greer. 2024. "Black Women: Keepers of Democracy, the Democratic Process, and the Democratic Party." Politics & Gender 20 (1): 162–81.

  • 55

    CAWP (Center for American Women and Politics). “Gender Gaps in Vote Choice and Party Identification.” https://cawp.rutgers.edu/data/voters/gender-gaps-vote-choice-and-party-identification; Junn, Jane, and Natalie Masuoka. 2024. Women Voters: Race, Gender, and Dynamism in American Elections. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; White, Ismail K., and Chryl Nicole Laird. 2020. Steadfast Democrats: How Social Forces Shape Black Political Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

  • 56

    CAWP (Center for American Women and Politics). “Gender Gaps in Vote Choice and Party Identification.” https://cawp.rutgers.edu/data/voters/gender-gaps-vote-choice-and-party-identification

  • 57

    Slaughter et al. 2024, 168

  • 58

    Junn and Masuoka 2024

  • 59

    Cisneros, Angel Saavedra, Tony E. Carey Jr., Darrin L. Rogers, and Joshua M. Johnson. 2023. “One Size Does Not Fit All: Core Political Values and Principles Across Race, Ethnicity, and Gender.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 11 (4): 793–812; Junn and Masuoka 2024; Kim, Chaerim, and Jane Junn. 2024. “Whitewashing Women Voters: Intersectionality and Partisan Vote Choice in the 2020 US Presidential Election.” Politics & Gender 20 (3): 701–26; Scott, Jamil. 2026. “Black Women and Electoral Politics: Examining Trends and Putting Black Women’s Behavior in Context.” In Gender and Elections: Shaping the Future of American Politics, 6th edition, eds. Richard L. Fox, Kelly Dittmar, and Susan J. Carroll, 118–40. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 

  • 60

    Bejarano et al. 2021

  • 61

    Philpot, Tasha S., and Hanes Walton. 2007. "One of Our Own: Black Female Candidates and the Voters Who Support Them." American Journal of Political Science 51 (1): 49–62.

  • 62

    Associated Press. 2024. “AP VoteCast: How America Voted in 2024.” https://apnews.com/projects/election-results-2024/votecast/

  • 63

    CAWP (Center for American Women and Politics). 2024. “Men Vastly Outgiving Women in 2024 Congressional Elections,” September 16. https://cawp.rutgers.edu/news-media/press-releases/men-vastly-outgiving-women-2024-congressional-elections; Grumbach, Jacob M., Alexander Sahn, and Sarah Staszak. 2022. "Gender, Race, and Intersectionality in Campaign Finance." Political Behavior 44 (1): 319–40.

  • 64

    Haines, Errin, and Jennifer Gerson. 2024. “Four Hours, 44,000 Black Women and One Zoom Call,” The 19th News, July 23. https://19thnews.org/2024/07/win-with-black-women-zoom-call-harris-organizers/

  • 65

    Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2025. "Understanding Black Women’s and Latinas’ Perspectives about Political Giving." PS: Political Science & Politics 58 (1): 31–6.

  • 66

    Slaughter, Christine M. 2025. "Lessons Learned from Black Women's Resilience and the 2024 Election." Politics & Gender 21 (2): 361–8.

  • 67

    Herrick, Rebekah, and Sue Thomas. 2023. "An Intersectional Exploration of Psychological Violence, Threats, and Physical Violence of Mayors in 2021." American Politics Research 52 (3): 264–78, 264.

  • 68

    Means, Taneisha N. 2022. “Her Honor: Black Women Judges’ Experiences with Disrespect and Recusal Requests in the American Judiciary.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 43 (3): 310–27.

  • 69

    Dittmar 2023