I did a double take when I saw the fundraising totals for the midterm elections in Politico. Republican party committees and super PACs have raised $657 million for the midterms, now just four and a half months away. That's nearly double the $337 million the Democrats have raised.
And it gets worse for the Democrats. The largest single financial entity raising money for the midterms, MAGA, Inc., reports $400 million in cash as of June 30.
That billion-dollar-plus war chest is three times as much as the Democrats' cash entering the final months of the campaign.
Money isn't quite the dominant force it used to be in politics. Kamala Harris raised more than $1.2 billion in 2024 and lost to Trump's $800 million. But if you ask a candidate if they would rather have more money than their opponent, the answer would be "yes." Trump made up that shortfall by tapping super PACs that supported him. But the PACs cannot coordinate with the campaign over targeting and dividing resources. This is a disadvantage, but not a large one. Trump obviously managed just fine.
Still, what the massive discrepancy shows is dysfunction in the Democrats' administrative departments. And it has the potential to cost them if Republicans are smart about where they put all that cash.
“What is putting the House majority and the Senate majority, nationally, in danger is the Republicans’ massive stockpile of resources that they’re putting together to push back,” said Morgan Jackson, a longtime North Carolina Democratic strategist and an adviser to former Gov. Roy Cooper, who is running for Senate.
“If you get outspent five to six to eight to one, that can alleviate the environmental advantage that Democrats have this cycle of poor leadership from the White House, a dysfunctional Congress, a bad economy that they own,” he added. “There’s a lot of concern to that.”
Republicans have a massive cash advantage among official party committees: The Republican National Committee has $128 million in the bank compared to just $16 million for the Democratic National Committee, which is actually in the red because it has $18 million in debt. And in the fight for control of Congress, both the National Republican Senatorial Committee and National Republican Congressional Committee have larger war chests than their Democratic counterparts — the NRSC has $55.9 million to the DSCC’s $41 million and the NRCC has $92.7 million to the DCCC’s $79 million.
A June 30 Supreme Court decision allowed closer cooperation between party committees and campaigns. Under the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), party committees were permitted to work side-by-side with candidates on strategy, advertising, and messaging, but their coordinated spending was subject to specific dollar limits termed "Coordinated Party Expenditures." The Supreme Court struck down these spending limits, allowing political party committees to spend unlimited amounts in direct coordination with candidates.
The Republican National Committee has $129 million in cash on hand. The Democrats are still $2 million in debt. That bespeaks an organization that's floundering, unable to raise money to pay what it owes.
The outlook is dismal, but Democrats are pretending "all is well."
The super PAC disparity is different than in previous cycles: At this time in 2024, SMP had slightly more cash on hand than SLF, while CLF’s advantage over HMP was only $22 million. But Republican fundraising has taken off since Trump’s return to the White House, while Democratic super PAC funding has held more steady.
Democratic super PACs dismiss the Republican cash advantage. Lauren French, spokesperson for SMP, said the GOP’s fundraising reflected “pay-to-play” with large donors rather than momentum.
“Republicans can crow all they want about getting massive checks from donors and businesses and billionaires, but we’re going to win because we have the actual support from people who are voting,” she said.
Oh, I forgot. The Democrats are the party of the "little guy." They have plenty of their own billionaires and major corporations supporting them. That "little guy" bit may have worked with Obama but modern Democrats are just as besotted with big-money contributions as the GOP.
It's a different story at the candidate level where the enthusiasm of the far left is most keenly felt. "In Georgia, Sen. Jon Ossoff has $40 million more in the bank than his GOP challenger, Rep. Mike Collins, according to recent FEC filings," according to Politico. "In Texas, James Talarico has nearly $20 million more than Attorney General Ken Paxton, and in North Carolina, Cooper has $17 million more than former RNC Chair Michael Whatley."
“Too many people think that fragmentation of media meant more efficiency and spending less. Wrong — it means you have to spend more,” said Jesse Ferguson, a longtime Democratic strategist. With so many media options, “you have to be everywhere they are to get the reach and frequency to make a point," he says.
So maybe the Democrats' paucity of resources may make the difference in November anyway.
Editor’s Note: Every single day, here at PJ Media, we will stand up and FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT against the radical Left and deliver the conservative reporting our readers deserve.
Help us continue to tell the truth about the Trump administration and its successes. Join PJ Media VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member