Amid the avalanche of analysis and finger-pointing over the debacle of Democrat Terry McAuliffe’s campaign for governor of Virginia, one number has slipped through the cracks with little discussion: $57 million. That’s roughly the amount that McAuliffe and his opponent, Glenn Youngkin, both raised in 2021.
In recent years, nearly every single election cycle has been the most expensive of its type in history, with candidates shattering fundraising records that were established only one or two years earlier. In 2021, statewide races in Virginia cost nearly double that of the 2017 cycle, with some $149 million reported by mid-October. Around the same time, Democratic and Republican war chests for 2022 house and senate races stood at a combined $128 million. It should go without saying that next year’s midterms are on track to—yes, yet again—be the most expensive in history.
The limits of money
Whether all that money is making much of a difference, however, is hard to determine. Considering the massive fundraising hauls and political earthquakes of the last few years, elections have had surprisingly predictable results, particularly at the national level. For instance, unless an incumbent is exceedingly popular, presidents have rarely picked up House seats in midterm elections; 2018 was no exception. Likewise, in 2020, President Donald Trump was facing low approval ratings, a raging pandemic and an economic downturn. Any one of these factors alone could have doomed his re-election bid. At the same time, Democrats only took narrow control of the Senate, whose structure favors Republicans even during wave elections. While voter turnout has surged, it has not done so in a way that significantly advantages either party.
Following this logic, Democrats are essentially toast in 2022, likely to lose the House and possibly the Senate. They may be able to limit the bleeding, but Republicans are campaigning on an incredibly favorable map, and Democrats can do little to save themselves from bad conditions next fall. Enacting even the most popular parts of their agenda might make a small difference, but it could still lead to enough backlash from Republicans to lose both the House and Senate. Further, a huge chunk of the money being raised for 2022 will likely be wasted on doomed candidates, well-connected consulting firms and ineffective ads.
Play the long game
Progressive and Democratic donors need to stop asking themselves how they can win elections that are often determined by larger, structural forces, and begin strategizing on how to change the structures themselves. For donors, this means that starting in 2022, they should no longer be giving as much money to national-level campaigns. Instead, they must invest heavily in the kind of long-term political infrastructure needed to make real change.
Many left-of-center donors have likely agreed with this sentiment for years, but their giving has said otherwise. Year-round grassroots organizing and state and local campaigns continue to be hugely underfunded, yet doomed Senate candidates like Amy McGrath and Jaimie Harrison managed to pull in tens of millions of dollars in small donations. The amount of cash flowing to losing Democratic House and Senate campaigns alone could power an effective grassroots group like LUCHA in Arizona for years, while a fraction of that money could flip a state legislature in the right cycle.
Giving to local groups and campaigns is also a far better investment for donors long-term, as even their work during election cycles is more likely to focus on connecting with constituents and building communities. Money spent on political ads in national campaigns is useful for one election cycle, if at all. But even in a losing effort, grassroots organizing is building a foundation that could actually alter the electorate down the road.
When those efforts are successful, progressives in power at the state level can expand voting access, unrig gerrymandered congressional maps and enact policies like Medicaid expansion that improve the lives of their constituents in a visceral way. At the municipal level, leaders can direct bloated police budgets and subsidies for luxury real estate development into more effective public safety initiatives, affordable housing and mass transit systems. That kind of change, even in just a handful of states and key localities, could significantly alter the structure of the electorate in favor of progressives.
But that kind of change doesn’t happen without serious buy-in, and serious money. Donors who want real progress need to ignore the pileup of deceptive Democratic fundraising emails as the midterms approach, pledge to stop rage giving to juicy but hopeless campaigns, and shift their dollars to the grassroots and local groups in desperate need of funding. Starting in 2022, progressives must start accepting some of the things they cannot change. Otherwise, they will never be in a position to change the things they cannot accept.