Contact The Editor
Articles By This Author
Republicans' fundraising advantage remains undiminished, especially among committees and super PACs, and the party has taken full advantage of the recent Supreme Court decision that made it easier for certain groups to coordinate spending with campaigns.
The key question for Republicans, however, is whether that money will be enough to stave off what could be a wave election for Democrats.
Mike Marinella, a spokesperson for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said the GOP's aggressive ad spending this month was putting Democrats on the defensive.
"Republicans are turning our historic financial advantage into an early airwave offensive across the country," he said.
Let's take a look at the details of this Republican advantage:
— The National Republican Senatorial Committee - despite a widening Democratic Senate map that has Democrats viable in red states like Iowa, Texas and Alaska - plans to spend $46.5 million in eight states, Axios reported. That's a significant haul that could shore up a few Republican candidates facing this difficult environment.
— In total, Republicans are set to spend around $140 million more on ads than Democrats are in the nine most competitive Senate races in the final weeks of the campaign, according to ad tracking firm AdImpact. The disparity is especially yawning in the Senate contest in Texas, where Republicans have reserved $39.6 million in ads and Democrats have reserved just $5.1 million.
— On the House side, House Republicans' campaign arm plans to run coordinated ads in 39 districts, with the committee reserving more than $24 million. House Democrats' campaign committee, by comparison, plans to run coordinated ads in 14 districts.
— Money from MAGA Inc., Trump's super PAC, is helping Republicans in key House races. The group has spent or reserved more than $75 million in House contests, according to the National Republican Congressional Committee.
— The cash disparity between the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee - a consistent issue for Democrats - remains so. At the end of July, the Democratic committee had about $16 million of cash on hand - with $17.9 million in debts - compared to the Republican National Committee's $130 million in cash and no debt.
Some of this money is forcing Democrats to respond. After attack ads from Republican groups hit candidates like Joanna Mendoza in Arizona, Randy Villegas in California and Marcy Kaptur in Ohio, all three campaigns ran ads specifically hitting back at the attack ads. Find them here, here and here.
"We're stuck in another unnecessary war and inflation is making everything worse, but my opponent won't talk about all that. He'd rather lie about my record," Kaptur says in a straight-to-camera ad.
Democrats aren't entirely without help. In addition to a number of candidates outraising their Democratic opponents, a spokesperson for House Majority PAC (HMP), Democrats' outside group focused on House races, said they have already publicly reserved over $200 million for broadcast television over the last six weeks leading up to Election Day. The group has so far run ads or sent mail in 29 districts.
"Republicans are spending millions to defend districts deep into Trump territory, and HMP is going to spend whatever it takes to build the largest possible Democratic Majority," said CJ Warnke, the group's spokesperson.
So all of that money certainly matters, but it also needs to be seen in the context of the atmosphere it is being spent in.
Poll after poll is showing Trump and Republicans in a bleak political environment, largely of the president's own making. Just look at this new polling from NBC News: A majority of voters (55 percent) said they think Trump's policies have hurt the economy, 56 percent disapprove of Trump's job performance and 42 percent of voters said they are less likely to support a candidate who backs Trump's signature tax and spending legislation, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
My colleagues Natalie Allison and Isaac Arnsdorf also reported that Trump himself is, at least privately, acknowledging his decisions on the Iran war "have contributed to the especially poor political environment his party faces."
And while money matters, plenty of elections show it's not a cure-all. Look at 2016: Trump was massively outspent - his campaign raised $333,127,164 compared to Hillary Clinton's $563,756,928 - and won the election. The same happened in 2024, when Kamala Harris's campaign raised a staggering $1.1 billion but lost to Trump, who raised $463,662,725 but benefited from considerable outside spending.
What has been striking is how Republicans have more recently acknowledged the difficult environment. Beyond the party's Iowa Senate candidate not campaigning alongside Vice President JD Vance and a congressional candidate who once cheered Trump airing ads that hit the president's immigration record, more established Republican lawmakers have acknowledged how upset people are with the current economic moment.
"We always look for ways to put more money in people's pockets," Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyoming) said on "Meet the Press." "And I hear it in Wyoming all the time - at the grocery store, at the gas station - people are paying more and we need to do more."
(COMMENT, BELOW)
Previously:
• The midterms are over. Sort of
• Working-class Americans aren't running for office. It's changing our politics
• Why this popular Dem is running like he is behind
• The divide between Trump and Vance on Iran
• The bipartisan rise of Flock cameras as a political issue
• Are data centers enough to flip a key House race?
• Voters want fighters. But where is the limit?
• Is the midterm cake baked?
• Is the midterm cake baked?
• For the DNC, no money, more problems