Despite the GOP holding a major financial edge over Democrats heading into the final midterm stretch, Republicans “struggled” to name a single instance where the cash advantage “fundamentally changed the dynamic” of a race, The Washington Post reported Wednesday.
President Donald Trump has long touted the massive $400 million war chest his super PACs had amassed over the years, but as recently as July, it had gone largely unspent in support of GOP candidates, with Republicans “counting” on the money to ultimately “come to their rescue,” the Post noted.
“But the super PACs didn’t turn on the money until Labor Day, so they faced higher prices for scarcer airtime compared with groups that reserved their ads earlier,” the Post’s report reads.
“In addition, super PACs pay full freight for TV ads, while campaigns pay discounted rates; that has benefited Democrats whose candidates have been better fundraisers in high-profile contests, whereas Republicans have relied more heavily on party committees and super PACs under Trump’s control.”
Trump has said he plans to spend $400 to $500 million in support of GOP candidates for the midterms, but as of Wednesday, had reserved more than $194 million in ad buys, per the Post. The late timing of the purchases had also degraded the ad buys’ effectiveness.
“In Texas, the discrepancy is especially pronounced as the expensive Senate, House and governor’s races drive up prices for limited inventory,” the Post’s report reads.
“Last week in the Dallas media market, [Texas Democratic Senate nominee James] Talarico’s campaign paid $950,000 for the average viewer to see its ads 10 times, according to a Democratic media buyer. By comparison, [Texas GOP Senate nominee Ken] Paxton allies spent $4.65 million for the average viewer to see their ads 13 times — five times the money for just 30 percent more impact.”
One GOP strategist who spoke with the Post on the condition of anonymity said that despite the significant funding advantage, Republican gains from ad purchases were comparable with “the incremental changes” seen in “World War I trench warfare,” the Post reported.
