By Adam Pagnucco.
Part One discussed issues with campaign finance data from the State Board of Elections (SBE). Part Two described differences between the traditional financing system used by Council Member Andrew Friedson and the public financing system used by Council Members Evan Glass and Will Jawando. Part Three reported receipts, expenditures and cash balance. Part Four looked at donor type. Now let’s examine geography.
Few things are more important than geography in analyzing MoCo politics. Our county is too big to be regarded as one jurisdiction – it’s more like a bunch of small and mid-size communities sharing a common governmental boundary. That’s reflected in the kinds of candidates who win elections here. True-blue progressives tend to come from the Democratic Crescent, the areas inside and near the Beltway that elected Jamie Raskin to Congress ten years ago. Upcounty areas tend to vote for moderate Democrats. The areas in between produce all sorts of folks. It has been that way for as long as I have lived here (and probably much longer).
The three leading candidates for executive have different starting geographies.
Friedson represents District 1, which is anchored by Bethesda, Chevy Chase and Potomac. These are the wealthiest places in MoCo and (with the exception of Leisure World) generally have the highest turnout rates. If you are running for countywide office and come from a district, this is the one to come from.
In my profile of Jawando’s performance in the 2022 Democratic primary, I identified his best areas as Takoma Park, Silver Spring Downtown, Silver Spring East County and Burtonsville. (Check my methodology post for geographic definitions.) Takoma Park and Silver Spring Downtown are politically progressive and have higher than average turnout rates. Silver Spring East County and Burtonsville have significant concentrations of Black Democrats, who play critical roles in our primaries. This is a strong base to have.
Glass was the top vote-getter in the 2022 at-large primary and finished first almost everywhere that Jawando did not. His 2022 performance was one of the best we have seen in recent years by an at-large candidate. Glass starts with the widest support of any candidate but its relative intensity compared to his competitors is an open question.
With that in mind, here is the distribution of contribution amounts each candidate received from in-county residents. For definitions of regions and towns see here. (We reported the totals in Part Four.)
Friedson
By Region
Democratic Crescent: 53%
Upcounty: 12%
Rest of County: 35%
Top Five Towns
Bethesda: 38%
Potomac: 21%
Rockville: 10%
Chevy Chase: 9%
Kensington: 4%
Glass
By Region
Democratic Crescent: 55%
Upcounty: 14%
Rest of County: 31%
Top Five Towns
Bethesda: 21%
Silver Spring Downtown: 18%
Rockville: 11%
Chevy Chase: 9%
Potomac: 8%
Jawando
By Region
Democratic Crescent: 41%
Upcounty: 17%
Rest of County: 41%
Top Five Towns
Bethesda: 14%
Silver Spring Downtown: 13%
Silver Spring East County: 11%
Potomac: 11%
Chevy Chase: 10%
A few comments.
First, wealthy areas dominate fundraising. That was one of the main findings in my series about public financing. Everyone goes to Bethesda, Chevy Chase and Potomac to raise money because there is plenty of it to be found there.
Second, Friedson has raised more than two-thirds of his in-county individual contributions from his own district. It’s good to be the District 1 council member.
Third, inner Silver Spring (defined here as zip codes 20901 and 20910) is a major epicenter of MoCo politics. Here is the percentage of each candidate’s in-county individual contributions coming from there. Glass: 18%. Jawando: 13%. Friedson: 2%. Winning inner Silver Spring has to be a major priority for both Glass and Jawando. This is a good data point for Glass.
Finally, Jawando leads in receipts from Silver Spring East County (defined here as zip codes 20903, 20904 and 20905). This is the traditional home of MoCo’s Black Democrats. This is a good data point for Jawando.
Next: Expenditures and burn rates.