Both Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump have been on a fundraising blitz in recent weeks.
As President Joe Biden announced his decision to withdraw as the Democratic nominee, Harris raised Over $310 million For his campaign, 66 percent of donations came from first-time contributors. Democratic super PAC Future Forward also said it had received it $150 million commitment Within the first 24 hours of Biden ending his campaign. And by 5 p.m. on Tuesday, the Democrats raised Over $24 million Minnesota Governor Tim Walz will be her running mate after Harris announced through their ActBlue PAC. Big-money donors, such as co-founders Reid Hoffman and billionaire entrepreneur Mark Cubancame out to support his pick, suggesting they could write more checks to his campaign
All of which essentially erased Republicans’ fundraising advantage.
Trump was Beating Biden Before dropping out of the presidential race. In June (the month after he pleaded guilty to 34 felonies), his campaign took home a $111.8 million halt, and the Republican National Committee had its strongest fundraising month of the year, bringing in $66 million. In the wake of both an assassination attempt against him and a surprise Republican National Convention, Trump bested his June totals, according to reports. $137 million In July.
But how much does any of that money actually affect the outcome?
Running for president is more expensive than ever
Presidential campaigns have long been expensive, but the money needed to run a successful presidential campaign has ballooned since the Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The decision allows corporations and outside groups to spend unlimited money on elections, often through super PACs that run independent campaigns. Mark 2020 The most expensive presidential election in US history.
“Presidential elections are incredibly expensive — at this point, a billion-dollar undertaking,” said Dan Weiner, director of elections and government programs at the Brennan Center for Justice. “You need enough money to mount an effective campaign.”
This money goes towards support staff and field offices across the country; advertising across television, newspapers, radio, and social platforms; polling and research; As well as reaching out to voters through rallies, door knocking and more.
Both grassroots support and big donors are critical to financing presidential campaigns. Citizens United Wealthy donors have outsized influence. But grassroots donations are a sign of enthusiasm: They don’t necessarily translate into 1-to-1 votes, but they serve as a signal to big donors that the candidates are the most viable.
Both Harris and Trump need to keep the money flowing, said Brendan Glavin, deputy director of research at OpenSecrets. Although it’s not early in the cycle — Trump has been campaigning since November 2022 — the most intense weeks of the election are yet to come. Now that’s when candidates usually travel more often to battleground states, hold more rallies, fine-tune their strategies with more frequent polling, and embark on a campaign of advertising and polling.
While recent events have boosted voter enthusiasm among both parties, previous campaigns indicate that the most profitable days may lie ahead. There are still 13 weeks until Election Day, and Biden has brought in nearly 60 percent of his overall fundraising 10 weeks before the 2020 election.
Large fundraising is necessary – but not sufficient – to win
Money, however, is not everything. While the winner of a presidential race often has the edge in fundraising, this is not always the case. Piles of cash ultimately cannot compensate for poor spending decisions or bad candidates.
Biden outperforms Trump in 2020. But Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of state and the 2016 Democratic nominee, still lost the election even though Trump was far outscored. His campaign spent heavily in states he didn’t need to win, including Arizona, but neglected Rust Belt states ultimately cost him the election.
And then there are the well-funded campaigns that never really got off the ground because of a weak candidate.
“Put lipstick on a pig, it’s still not going to be a good candidate,” said Ray La Raza, associate director of UMass Polls and professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. “No amount of money is going to make a bad candidate really good.”
Take former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s four-month Democratic primary campaign in 2020 that cost him $1 billion On his own money. “Ultimately, primary voters didn’t respond to him,” Glavin said. “He had money. He got his name there. But he didn’t get a response.”
Campaigns like Clinton’s and Bloomberg’s show that money is only one piece of the puzzle. Research suggests that challengers More profitable than campaign spending than incumbents, and for any candidate, Early spending is more effective than late spending. Incumbents don’t benefit as much from campaign spending because voters often already know who they are and have little room to change their minds on the matter. Research suggests that more responsible spenders, They are more likely to lose – The cost itself is usually a signal that they are in hot water.
Harris has some advantages as an incumbent in that he has Biden’s campaign machinery behind him, but on the other hand, he fits the profile of a challenger.
“That marginal dollar is worth more to a challenger. And he’s more in that role, because let’s face it: Most people don’t know what a vice president does,” La Raza said.
Harris is still introducing himself — and Walz as his new running mate – to the American public. He is newly in the spotlight and has a window to shape his image in a way that a normal candidate might not. His campaign is therefore spending heavily on advertising right now, dropping out $50 million in paid media Before the Democratic National Convention in August.
“It’s a well-known dynamic in presidential races that you try to define your opponent early on,” Weiner said. “I have no doubt that what the Harris campaign wants to do — and why it’s been so critical that they raise money so quickly — is to define Trump before the campaign defines him.”
Americans may have somewhat forgotten what the Trump presidency was like, but as a former president, Trump is already fairly well defined by voters and fits the profile of an incumbent more easily than a challenger. As a result, his strategy is to gain established recognition – and to commit crimes against Harris Slate of attack ads.
But ad spending is shrinking, since the media gives so much free coverage to presidential candidates. Trump may not have spent as much as Clinton in 2016, but he certainly benefited from the media limelight that year — and so did the media, which “Trump’s push“Between viewers and readers. This year, Trump successfully raised funds from major media events like his conviction or assassination attempt. So, after Biden dropped out, so did Harris.
Their fundraising – and electoral – success will likely depend on whether that momentum is sustained. Also, at a certain point, “financial returns are declining,” Weiner said. There are many ads a candidate can buy, knock on doors, and rally to present their best cause to voters. Once a candidate and their position is well understood, they can only hope that voters will like them.
“If you’ve raised enough money, raising more money won’t help you much,” he said.
