Premium Sponsor

Featured Sponsor

Our Sponsors

Google Ads

Ad Networks

Buy an ad on all of the top liberal blogs with just one click.

Site Stats

Who Lost the Money Game But Won the Race?

by: Crisitunity

Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 8:47 PM EST

The Center for Responsive Politics has an extremely interesting post today about how many victors in congressional races outspent the losers. The answer, in case you didn't guess, is almost all of them (93% in the House).

There were 28 House races where the candidate who spent less money still won the race. (This appears to discount the role of third party expenditures, as you'll see in the case of LA-06, where the role of Cassidy was to spend little while outside parties poured in the cash. Perhaps a project for a future day will be to add IEs to these numbers and re-order them.) All of the races you will recognize from our competitive House Ratings list. If you want to see the list in its entirety, please click through to their story... but I thought I'd add a wrinkle and rate the races not according to how much was spent but according to the winner/loser ratio. In other words, which victorious candidates won most efficiently? Here are the top 10:

District	Winner	$$$	Loser	$$$	Ratio
GA-13	Scott (D)	$842K	Honeycutt (R)	$4,406K	19.1%
LA-06	Cassidy (R)	$620K	Cazayoux (D)	$2,279K	27.2%
PA-03	Dahlkemper (D)	$712K	English (R)	$1,905K	37.4%
FL-16	Rooney (R)	$1,021K	Mahoney (D)	$2,418K	42.2%
SC-01	Brown (R)	$702K	Ketner (D)	$1,641K	42.8%
NC-08	Kissell (D)	$1,100K	Hayes (R)	$2,509K	43.8%
AL-02	Bright (D)	$850K	Love (R)	$1,929K	44.1%
OR-05	Schrader (D)	$1,030K	Erickson (R)	$2,308K	44.7%
NJ-07	Lance (R)	$942K	Stender (D)	$2,092K	45.0%
VA-02	Nye (D)	$733K	Drake (R)	$1,372K	53.4%

In the Senate, there were only two races where the more frugal candidate won: North Carolina and New Hampshire. New Hampshire was very close (99%), but Kay Hagan won this one on the cheap: $6,014K to Dole's $15,716K, or 38% (although, again, you should factor in the millions dumped into NC by the DSCC).

One other lesson from this story: self-funding doesn't work. 49 Congressional candidates spend $500,000 of their own money, and of them, only 6 House candidates and 1 Senate candidate won. Perhaps the saddest case of this was Sandy Treadwell, who ran against Kirsten Gillibrand in NY-20. Treadwell poured in at least $5.9 million of his own money. (Gillibrand spent $3.6 million, but only $250 of that was her own money.) The return on Treadwell's investment: priceless. If by 'priceless,' you mean losing to Gillibrand by a 23-point margin.

Crisitunity :: Who Lost the Money Game But Won the Race?

Tags: 2008 Election, Election results, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

Who Lost the Money Game But Won the Race? | 29 comments

Interesting numbers

However those Cazayoux numbers, I believe, also include the amount he spent on the special election. (Indeed, his reports seem to have "reset the clock" sometime after the special election, and his final pre-general report indicates that he had only spent $955K on his re-election campaign through October 15th.)

by: James L. @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 19:58:06 PM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Thanks, that makes it

a much closer race, though still with the advantage to Cazayoux. 620K/925K = 67%. Add in all the independent expenditures (which were $1,324K from the DCCC and friends, and $916K from the NRCC, that Grigsby jerk, and the Ophthalmologists) and it's $1,536K/$2,249K, or 68%, so Cazayoux still got spanked despite the money advantage.

by: Crisitunity @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 20:10:04 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Treadwell's filthy

rich, like 200 million dollar rich. He could afford. But wow, has Gillenbrand proved herself. I never thought she would have managed to become so entrenched in this district, especially after she only beat Sweeney because it came out two weeks before the election he had got taken to jail for beating his wife a year or so earlier.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 20:24:56 PM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Gillibrand won easily despite the cash difference

Yet Arcuri barely survived against a crappy opponent with little cash. Money ain't everything I suppose.

by: ChadInFL @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 20:27:29 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Money Isn't Everything

Yes, money isn't everything. Otherwise we'd have seen several self-funded senators from California by now (including Mr. Huffington).

Money is a necessary but not sufficient condition for winning.

by: dsimon @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 21:36:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

not to mention

Representative Jim Harlan and Senator Bruce Lunsford.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 11:23:57 AM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

I'd give some props to Jim Harlan.

He came out and fought a viable campaign in a district with a PVI of R+18. I definitely appreciate his willingness to spend his own money on what would appear to be an impossible task.

Overall, I'm under the impression that if Democrats cannot produce a candidate who might possibly win a seat, the best alternative is to find one who can self-fund. Self-funding allows a race to become at least a bit competitive regardless of the involvement of the DSCC or D-trip. I find it hard to imagine that Greg Fischer (who lost in the primary) would have come as close as Lunsford without a huge dump from the DSCC. I'm glad the DSCC was available to get involved in other races such as NC, and didn't have to counter McConnell's $8 million without Lunsford.

by: nrimmer @ Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:12:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

How much of McConnell's warchest did we burn?

How much does he have left now?

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:16:29 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

And as I noted downthread...

Linda Stender had a sh*tload more $$$$ in New Jersey's 7th District... Only to lose by an even BIGGER margin this year! Obviously, money isn't everything. For some reason, Kirsten Gillibrand was able to overcome an uber-wealthy self-funding GOP candidate in New York state while Linda Stender couldn't even win a seat in New Jersey with all the millions she raised.

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!

23, gay male, Democrat, NV-03

by: atdleft @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 22:06:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

she was a bad candidate

and the State house is not very popular right now. Plus she hedged her bets and ran for reelection in the State House in 2007, while already announcing her intention to run for congress afterwards, therefore started the race late, and many people criticized for this. Reasons why I can't stand New Jersey politicians and politics, with all its anti-Democrat party-machine backroom politics and corruption.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 22:15:05 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Noticed that earlier.

How the hell did Gillibrand win 62-38, while Arcuri wins 51-49???

Is this differences in the candidate, the district, or the details of the race? Does anyone remember the circumstances from which the two incumbents were recruited last cycle? That might tell something also.

I don't think anyone here would have predicted anything like those two sets of numbers. Maybe not even the Albany Project people. Any insight out there?

by: texas dem @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 23:16:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Hmm...

Somebody got Mumpower'd.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 16:24:52 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

who was the senate candidate

who self-funded to the degree of one million? Mark Warner?

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 21:11:06 PM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Bruce Lunsford

by: MichiganLiberal @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 21:14:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

he didn't win,

it said of the Successful senate elections, only one self-funded.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 21:22:24 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Lautenberg

by: James L. @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 21:30:37 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

oh, thanks.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 21:33:31 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Ugh, NJ-07...

I still don't quite understand what happened. I hear Linda Stender didn't run a good campaign. So really, what the hell did all that money pay for??!! And was Leonard Lance that much of a superior candidate?

Is there just a hex over Democrats in NJ-07? Or will we some day find someone who can actually win this seat?

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!

23, gay male, Democrat, NV-03

by: atdleft @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 22:01:20 PM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

ran a campaign

like Lois Murphy against Jim Gerlach.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 22:15:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

The local blog has a good rundown on why

http://www.bluejersey.com/show...

Basically she ran a good people-powered campaign in 06 and nearly won so she got the interest of DC big dogs who made her run a cookie cutter crap campaign.

Pretty sad.

by: Populista @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 23:57:18 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

2006 results including IEs

I went through the House data for every Republican held seat in the House in 2006 including independent expenditures. It took three or four days although I might be able to do it in less than half the time this cycle. There are a lot more resources available. In that case, 17 candidates were outspent but still won: 16 Democrats and 1 Republican. Only one candidate won while spending less than 60% of his/her opponent's expenditures: Carol Shea-Porter at under 30%.

There did seem to be a declining utility to expenditures. When the Republican spent say $4.5 million a challenger spending a million less was not at much of a disadvantage.

The creepiest overexpenditure to victory that year was Vern Buchanan who won a very contested election while spending $8 million (counting everything). Most of it was courtesy of Vern.

Two very big recipients of outside money in 2006 were Nancy Boyda who went from a huige deficit to a very small edge in an election where each side spent $1.3 million (Boyda was up about $50 K counting $700 K from the DCCC). Her decision to forego the advertising this time around because it pisssed of Republicans was unfortunate. The othe was CA-11 where the enironmental groups spent over a million in sinking Richard Pombo.

Overall, the successful Democratic challengers spent 82.5% (including outside money) of what the Republicans spent.

by: David Kowalski @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 22:31:31 PM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

The Declining Utility Of More Money

"There did seem to be a declining utility to expenditures."

And that makes sense. Once you have enough money to get your message out, having even more is still helpful but not as helpful as the first batch.

Getting outspent $1,500,000 to $500,000 is tough. But getting outspent $3,000,000 to $2,000,000 isn't too bad and likely isn't determinative of the outcome, even though the difference is the same, since $2 million is plenty of money to run a House campaign just about anywhere. And I'd say that's true on a proportional basis too: $3 million to $1 million would be a better prospect for the low-figure candidate than $1.5 million to $0.5 million, though both are still 3:1.

by: dsimon @ Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 23:14:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

So money probably matters less and less

there more of it that you have.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 11:22:20 AM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Yup, It Matters Less

That goes for income too and explains in part why there are some extremely wealthy liberals. If I've got a lot of money but want tons of money, then I'm very concerned about my tax rate. But if I've got more than I could possibly need for myself and my family, if I'm really ultra-wealthy, then raising my marginal tax rate doesn't affect my life in the slightest (see, e.g., Bill Gates and Warren Buffet).

I think the marginal value of money is itself a justification for a progressive income tax.

by: dsimon @ Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:04:31 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

"I think the marginal value of money is itself a justification for a progressive income tax."

I think you've just summed up the best argument in favor of it.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:10:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here: