{"id":43716,"date":"2026-08-14T06:13:03","date_gmt":"2026-08-14T01:13:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/usnews-14267fa.ingress-comporellon.ewp.live\/?p=43716"},"modified":"2026-08-14T06:13:03","modified_gmt":"2026-08-14T01:13:03","slug":"how-election-money-works-now-in-the-midterms","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/usnews-14267fa.ingress-comporellon.ewp.live\/?p=43716","title":{"rendered":"How election money works now in the midterms"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><script>\r\n  atOptions = {\r\n    'key' : '644b717812d811d6a1c1fc5b6ccd6fa6',\r\n    'format' : 'iframe',\r\n    'height' : 90,\r\n    'width' : 728,\r\n    'params' : {}\r\n  };\r\n<\/script>\r\n<script src=\"https:\/\/www.highperformanceformat.com\/644b717812d811d6a1c1fc5b6ccd6fa6\/invoke.js\"><\/script>\r\n<br \/>\n<\/p>\n<div id=\"zephr-anchor\">\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">The 2026 midterm cycle is projected to be the most expensive election cycle in US history, with candidates across the board raising money at a record pace. And voters are taking notice: Big-donor groups tied to issues like Israel policy, AI, and crypto have become major flashpoints in primary races in both parties.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">Campaign spending alone doesn\u2019t determine elections. The recent <a href=\"https:\/\/www.vox.com\/politics\/498002\/abdul-el-sayed-wins-michigan-bernie-sanders\">Democratic Senate primary in Michigan<\/a> was the most expensive Democratic congressional primary in terms of outside spending \u2014 but ended with Abdul El-Sayed overcoming a major financial disadvantage <a href=\"https:\/\/www.vox.com\/politics\/498273\/michigan-arab-muslim-abdul-el-sayed-win-dearborn-abdullah-hammoud-voters\">to win<\/a> the nomination. In California, billionaire Tom Steyer spent <a href=\"https:\/\/calmatters.org\/politics\/2026\/06\/california-rich-candidates-funding-elections\/\">over $200 million<\/a> of his own money on his <a href=\"https:\/\/www.vox.com\/politics\/487199\/tom-steyer-interview-arrest-stephen-miller\">bid for governor<\/a>, but lost.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">But the ever-rising tide of cash helped fuel voter concerns about corruption and the campaign finance landscape is only getting more confusing: In June, the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.vox.com\/politics\/494282\/supreme-court-illegible\">Supreme Court struck down limits<\/a> on how much political parties can spend in coordination with their own candidates, further blurring the line between what candidates raise directly and what parties can spend on their behalf.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">How can voters follow the money? How much difference does outside spending actually make in the outcomes of these races? And how much can candidates rely on grassroots donors to push back?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\"><a href=\"https:\/\/daniellethomsen.com\/\">Danielle M. Thomsen<\/a>, a professor of political science at the University of California Irvine and author of the 2025 book, <a href=\"https:\/\/press.uchicago.edu\/ucp\/books\/book\/chicago\/M\/bo248155369.html\"><em>The Money Signal: How Fundraising Matters in American Politics<\/em><\/a>, has spent years studying these questions. The conversation has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\"><strong>Let\u2019s start with a race like the recent Michigan Senate Democratic primary. Abdul El-Sayed was massively outspent by outside interest groups like AIPAC and still won. Does that change how you think about money\u2019s role in politics, or is it generally consistent with what we know?<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">The bulk of my research is looking at US House primaries, and I think you could probably draw similar conclusions for Senate primaries, except that in most cases, Senate primaries have way more information. So in the case of Michigan, I think people knew largely what the choices were. And after you get to that stage, largely through money and advertising and voter outreach, and campaigning, after that point, money might matter less because voters become more familiar with choices. But this is a really steep hurdle in most congressional primaries.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">I think that people forget how low information these contests usually are. Many primary voters really don\u2019t know much about candidates. I think in the Michigan Senate example, that was less true. Money isn\u2019t irrelevant, but when you have other pieces of information, that can override money. And furthermore, in that case, both of the candidates were spending millions of dollars in the primary. I mean, this is just so unique in a lot of ways.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\"><strong>Is there a minimum level of money congressional candidates need to be viable? Do we know?<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">The average for non-incumbent successful candidates in open seat primaries is about three to $400,000 in the first quarter. And if you look at incumbents who lost or struggled, well, their challengers for the most part, are not, you know, broke jokes. They\u2019re raising $200,000 to $300,000 in their first quarter, which resembles what quote unquote \u201copen seat candidates\u201d are raising too in many districts. Maybe not your super wealthy districts like in New York or in California, but in many districts, $300,000 in your first quarter is a really good showing. So I would say money is money, and early money in particular is a prerequisite.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">And that\u2019s not going to mean that if you raise a lot of money, you definitely will win. That\u2019s never been the case and that\u2019s still not the case. But it does matter for you, it matters for who is seen to be seriously in the mix, who is perceived to be relevant. And in this cycle, just like in most cycles, virtually all contenders who are either successful or are seen as successful show support through early fundraising.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\"><strong>Your view is that fundraising works largely as a signal of viability and strength \u2014 to the public, party leaders, media, everyone. Is that the consensus view in political science, or are there competing frameworks?<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">In many ways the argument of my book is not very groundbreaking if you talk to practitioners, but it hasn\u2019t been empirically documented in the ways that I did. Some other people in political science call attention to endorsements. The other theory is that money matters not as a signal of viability but for material goods \u2014 so to buy advertisements, office infrastructure, hiring staff, and consultants.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--block-placement _13j8zv42 _13j8zv40 duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-pullquote _1jt1ljb0\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup _1jt1ljb2 pn04iq9\">\u201cAmong those who run, rich candidates are also more likely to win.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\"><strong>Within a candidate\u2019s total haul, does it matter <\/strong><strong><em>where<\/em><\/strong><strong> the money comes from, like a broad base of small donors, a candidate self-funding, or a super PAC backed by a few wealthy people?<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">I\u2019ve recently begun to look at this. With a graduate student of mine, Ryan Mundy, we collected data and <a href=\"https:\/\/daniellethomsen.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/mundythomsen_wealth_v5.pdf\">wrote a paper<\/a> on why wealthy candidates are likely to win. Because it\u2019s not just the case that rich candidates are more likely to run, which most people know and prior research has shown, but among those who run, rich candidates are also more likely to win.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">And what we show is that rich candidates are more likely to raise early money. In particular, they\u2019re more likely to raise large-dollar donations, which then have a greater return in subsequent quarters.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\"><strong>What do we know about candidates who fully self-fund?<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">So I\u2019ve learned that fully self-funded candidates, meaning those who don\u2019t supplement with financial support from others, typically lose. Self-funding on its own is not as valuable as getting money from others, and in particular large-dollar donations from others.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">However, many, many candidates supplement with their own money. Something like 40 percent of non-incumbent general election winners self-fund at least $10,000. I think people don\u2019t really understand the prevalence of self-funding as a supplement, and how that keeps some people disadvantaged, particularly those who can\u2019t self-fund at all.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">For some self-funders, I think some of them just don\u2019t want to raise money. It can be pretty unpleasant! And while self-funding with no supplemental money from others is overwhelmingly a bad strategy, there are a couple handful of people who have done this and won out of our sample that looked at 2014 to 2024. There were 407 non-incumbent general election winners in that period. And 17 of them did bankroll at least 90 percent of their first-quarter dollars and won. So not very many, but there are a handful of exceptions who do it and win, and they are all rich. So funding is complicated.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\"><strong>And on the \u201cfriends and family\u201d side of early money, who\u2019s actually writing those first checks?<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">Almost all early money comes from individual contributors. Most of that is itemized, so contributors over $200. Most of our elections are driven by the upper class. On average non-incumbent general election winners are getting like 50 percent of their early money from max-out donors, meaning people who pay the maximum of $6,600. Who can afford to pay that? Not normal Americans. It\u2019s basically politically engaged, politically connected upper-middle class people who know people who run for office.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">And the other thing is most of them are not repeat donors! Most of them don\u2019t even give to more than one candidate. Because they\u2019re probably just giving to the one rich person they know who is running for office that year. That\u2019s why in political circles the first quarter is called the \u201cfriends and family quarter\u201d \u2014 that\u2019s when political consultants tell candidates to open up their Rolodex and call everybody they know from when they started kindergarten to who their coworkers are now.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\"><strong>Is there a point, empirically, where more spending stops helping or even backfires? I\u2019m thinking of a case like <a href=\"https:\/\/www.vox.com\/politics\/488638\/progressive-billionaire-candidates-steyer-pritzker-khanna-chakrabarti\">Tom Steyer in California<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">So the assumption has always been that money has diminishing returns. That goes back to Gary Jacobson\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.researchgate.net\/publication\/228128629_The_Effects_of_Campaign_Spending_in_Congressional_Elections\">work from forever ago<\/a>. But nobody in political science puts a number on it. What they do is they say things like,<em> Oh, the relationship is positive until at some point it goes down.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\"><strong>When outside groups pour money into a race, like AIPAC now, or the charter school lobby and the NRA in earlier cycles, can that spending become politically useful to the candidate it\u2019s targeting, from backlash or otherwise?<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--block-placement _13j8zv42 _13j8zv40 duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-pullquote _1jt1ljb0\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup _1jt1ljb2 pn04iq9\">\u201cMost candidates are raising the bulk of their money from itemized donors. And most money is still from large donors.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">Yeah, so I don\u2019t think there\u2019s actually good research on this. I don\u2019t think there\u2019s enough information. But I think in general most people don\u2019t know where money comes from. So the backlash is minimal. I\u2019ve asked candidates who raised a lot of money from self-funding, \u201cDid your self-funding ever come up?\u201d And they\u2019d say, \u201cNo, it never came up. I thought it would either help me, to show that I wasn\u2019t beholden to special interests, or it would hurt me because I didn\u2019t have the support that having fundraising money from others would demonstrate. But it didn\u2019t come up.\u201d Another candidate who raised a lot of money out of state told me that while it was raised a few times by people on Twitter, no one in person ever asked him about it.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">Many people don\u2019t know their own members of Congress. So you can imagine why there wouldn\u2019t be a backlash, because people don\u2019t know enough for there to be one \u2014 except in these cases where it does become an issue, like the recent Michigan Senate Democratic primary. It\u2019s certainly part of the narrative for candidates like Elizabeth Warren, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.vox.com\/policy-and-politics\/2019\/2\/26\/18241314\/elizabeth-warren-donate-campaign-2020\">her stance against big money<\/a> is a big part of her persona, same with Bernie Sanders and AOC. But those are real celebrity candidates.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\"><strong>In the 2010s, small-dollar fundraising was talked about as a democratizing counterweight to big money, but I remember reading <\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2023\/08\/30\/opinion\/campaign-finance-small-donors.html?eafs_enabled=false\"><strong>that research found it<\/strong><\/a><strong> could also make politics more polarized. Where did that political science literature land, and has the rise of small donors changed anything as Super PACs and mega-donors have grown more powerful?<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">So I would say the research is exactly how you describe it. There are so many studies that have shown that small-dollar donors tend to be more liberal Democrats and more conservative Republicans. So they are coming from the ideological edges of the spectrum. And there\u2019s a lot of evidence of that. So that\u2019s the finding, that\u2019s the literature.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">If you look at how candidates raise money by and large today, it\u2019s not coming from small donations or unitemized donations. Most candidates are raising the bulk of their money from itemized donors. And most money is still from large donors.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\"><strong>So your read is that, despite all the attention on small-dollar fundraising, the underlying picture hasn\u2019t shifted much either direction?<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph _10sa9omi itxwjq1 itxwjq0 pn04iq1\">There\u2019s a tendency to look at the cases that don\u2019t conform to the rule rather than the rule. Like Eric Cantor <a href=\"https:\/\/www.vox.com\/2014\/6\/10\/5798604\/Eric-Cantor-David-Brat-loss-VA-politics\">[who lost in 2014]<\/a> and AOC <a href=\"https:\/\/www.vox.com\/2018\/11\/6\/18070704\/election-results-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-wins\">[who won in 2018<\/a>]. In some cases, the losers <a href=\"https:\/\/www.politico.com\/news\/2020\/10\/11\/jaime-harrison-shatters-senate-fundraising-record-for-south-carolina-race-428541\">raised way more<\/a> than the partisanship of the district in those cases would predict, and then you have candidates who <a href=\"https:\/\/www.nbcnews.com\/politics\/2026-election\/candidate-dropped-beats-trumps-pick-battleground-gop-house-primary-rcna590905\">raised no money and unpredictably won<\/a>. So there\u2019s always this tendency to prop up the exceptions to the rule. In political science, though, we like to look at the rule.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<script async=\"async\" data-cfasync=\"false\" src=\"https:\/\/pl30214220.effectivecpmnetwork.com\/9ab3d4df8a7e1a6171e16ddbf732cc19\/invoke.js\"><\/script>\r\n<div id=\"container-9ab3d4df8a7e1a6171e16ddbf732cc19\"><\/div>\r\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The 2026 midterm cycle is projected to be the most expensive election cycle in US history, with candidates across the board raising money at a record pace. And voters are taking notice: Big-donor groups tied to issues like Israel policy, AI, and crypto have become major flashpoints in primary races in both parties. Campaign spending&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":43717,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/platform.vox.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2026\/08\/gettyimages-2288707164.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&crop=0%2C11.465146509513%2C100%2C77.069706980974&w=1200","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-43716","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-political-news"],"brizy_media":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/usnews-14267fa.ingress-comporellon.ewp.live\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43716","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/usnews-14267fa.ingress-comporellon.ewp.live\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/usnews-14267fa.ingress-comporellon.ewp.live\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usnews-14267fa.ingress-comporellon.ewp.live\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usnews-14267fa.ingress-comporellon.ewp.live\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=43716"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/usnews-14267fa.ingress-comporellon.ewp.live\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43716\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usnews-14267fa.ingress-comporellon.ewp.live\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/43717"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/usnews-14267fa.ingress-comporellon.ewp.live\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=43716"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usnews-14267fa.ingress-comporellon.ewp.live\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=43716"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usnews-14267fa.ingress-comporellon.ewp.live\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=43716"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}