Which cities give the most to Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton?

Before you go, we thought you'd like these...
Before you go close icon

As of Sept. 31, presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have raised nearly $700 million combined for their campaigns. While that figure reveals the magnitude of fundraising in this election cycle, it doesn't explain how those contributions are distributed geographically.

To help answer that question, InsideGov, a political research site powered by Graphiq, found the cities that have donated the most to the Clinton and Trump campaigns. Overall, Democratic nominee Clinton's top cities are located on the East and West Coast, while Republican nominee Trump has stronger support in cities in the South.

*Note: The fundraising figures here only include contributions to each candidate's official campaign committee and consider contributions of $200 or more. Campaigns are not required to disclose donor information for small contributions under $200. Because these are absolute totals, as opposed to per capita, the most populous cities are favored.

Clinton campaign contributions by city

17 PHOTOS
Hillary Clinton campaign contributions by city
See Gallery
Hillary Clinton campaign contributions by city
Hillary Clinton (Reuters)

15. Denver, Colorado - $2.4M

14. Arlington, Virginia - $2.41M

13. Boston, Massachusetts - $2.72M

11. Bethesda, Maryland - $2.97M

11. Austin, Texas - $2.97M

10. Atlanta, Georgia - $3M

9. Dallas, Texas - $3.08M

8. Houston, Texas - $3.97M

7. Seattle, Washington - $4.36M

6. Brooklyn, New York - $5.36M

5. Chicago, Illinois - $6.4M

4. San Francisco, California - $9.96M

3. Los Angeles, California - $10.2M

2. Washington, D.C. - $14.3M

1. New York, New York - $30.8M

of
SEE ALL
BACK TO SLIDE
SHOW CAPTION +
HIDE CAPTION

As expected, Clinton posts strong fundraising numbers in predominantly liberal coastal cities like New York, San Francisco and Seattle. She also shows strong support in her home communities: Clinton is from Illinois, represented New York as a senator and lived in Washington, D.C., for a number of years.

Perhaps most surprising here is the inclusion of Houston and Dallas, Texas, in the top 10. In the last 10 elections, Texas has only voted Democrat once, in 1976. Even though Texas hasn't gone blue in a while, the state does tend to give a fair amount to Democrats. Also worth noting is the presence of Atlanta, Georgia. While Georgia has traditionally been a strong red state, it's shaping up to be one of the most competitive swings states in 2016.

Unlike Clinton, Trump's top cities are concentrated in the South, with three cities from Texas making the top five. The only cities from the East Coast to make the top 10 are Trump's native New York City and Naples, Florida, which is in the predominantly Republican Collier County.

Trump campaign contributions by city

17 PHOTOS
Donald Trump campaign contributions by city
See Gallery
Donald Trump campaign contributions by city
Donald Trump (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File)

15. Charlotte, North Carolina - $268k

14. Indianapolis, Indiana - $268k

13. San Diego, California - $308k

12. Fort Worth, Texas - $312k

11. Phoenix, Arizona - $318k

10. Los Angeles, California - $404k

9. Scottsdale, Arizona - $424k

8. Naples, Florida - $474k

7. Austin, Texas - $501k

6. Las Vegas, Nevada - $508k

5. San Antonio, Texas - $661k

4. Atlanta, Georgia - $691k

3. New York, NY - $900k

2. Dallas, Texas - $1.13M

1. Houston, Texas - $1.5M

of
SEE ALL
BACK TO SLIDE
SHOW CAPTION +
HIDE CAPTION

While Trump may post stronger figures in southern cities, his overall contribution numbers are significantly lower than Clinton's. This could be attributed to two reasons. First, many of Trump's supporters are spread across rural areas with low population densities. Second, Trump's campaign relies more on grassroots support and small donations under $200. Only 36 percent of Trump's campaign committee contributions have come from large individual donations, compared to 75 percent for the Clinton campaign. Overall, though, Trump's fundraising totals trail Clinton's.

Campaign finances don't necessarily make or break a campaign, especially in cases where the candidate can loan his own campaign large sums of money. But Trump's $230 million-plus deficit here is not an encouraging sign for the campaign. To compare, Gov. Mitt Romney trailed President Obama by $130 million in the 2012 election. Regardless, it's clear that the 2016 presidential election is shaping up to be one of the most expensive in U.S. history.

Learn More About the 2016 Candidates on InsideGov

Read Full Story

Sign up for Breaking News by AOL to get the latest breaking news alerts and updates delivered straight to your inbox.

Subscribe to our other newsletters

Emails may offer personalized content or ads. Learn more. You may unsubscribe any time.

From Our Partners