Republicans pumped about $900 million into advertising during the last six weeks before the US midterm elections, in a bet that record spending might compensate for a political climate that has clearly turned against them, according to a report by Agence France-Presse.
The midterm elections, which are held in the middle of the four-year presidential term, determine control of Congress and a large number of state governorships, and may largely determine the ability of US President Donald Trump to pass his program during the last two years of his term.
From now until polling day on November 3, Republicans and their allies have booked about $888 million in ads, compared to about $666 million for Democrats, according to Ad Impact, a company that specializes in tracking political spending.
But Trump's popularity has declined to levels of approximately 30 percent, while Republicans, who control the House of Representatives and the Senate, lag behind by a large margin in congressional opinion polls.
This produced an unusual landscape in the final phase of the campaign: one party benefiting from a favorable political climate, and another with much greater financial means.
“Money matters, and Democrats should not underestimate the difference of more than $200 million in ad spending,” said Caroline Wells, a political consultant who worked for seven years at the Democratic National Committee.
She added: “But money does not reset the political climate, especially at this late stage of the elections.”
Unlimited amounts
The numbers seem huge even by American standards. Ad Impact and Kinetic Political Insights expect a total spending of about $12 billion on advertising during the 2025-2026 election cycle, a number greater than any previous US election, including the 2024 presidential election.
This is partly because US law imposes limited restrictions on independent groups as long as they do not coordinate directly with candidates.
The largest of these groups, known as “super bucks,” can raise unlimited sums from wealthy individuals and corporations.
The California gubernatorial race reflects the amount of spending, as about $330 million was spent in the primaries alone, that is, in the first round of selecting candidates.
This is more than two and a half times greater than the total spending in the British general election in 2024, in a country with a population about twice that of California.
A large portion of the Republicans' financial advantage comes from "super PACs." The MAGA Inc. group, Trump's most prominent supporter, entered September with about $416 million.
The gap also appears at the two-party level. The Republican National Committee had about $126 million at the end of August, while its Democratic counterpart had about $17 million in cash, with debts slightly exceeding this amount.
Republicans also have a larger advertising budget in eight of the nine most competitive Senate races, according to Ad Impact.
The gap is most evident in Texas, where Republicans are expected to spend up to $200 million against James Tallarico.
The Democratic candidate leads the average opinion polls in a state that Trump won by about 14 points in 2024, but he faces Republican spending that is about five times greater than his spending, according to the Texas Tribune newspaper.
"Republicans control the airwaves, and House Democrats don't have the financial capacity to fight back," said Mike Marinella, spokesman for the House Republican Campaign Committee.
Money versus the public mood
US rules require broadcast stations to give candidates the lowest prices available for advertising during the period leading up to the elections, a price concession that does not benefit from “super PACs” groups that spend independently of the candidates’ campaigns.
Since Republican candidates typically rely more on outside groups and raise less direct donations than their competitors, a Democratic dollar can sometimes buy significantly more ad time.
The size of Republican spending also reflects the difficult political environment facing the party.
Voter anger over the cost of living and a prolonged war with Iran has prompted Republicans to spend big in states like Texas, Iowa and Ohio that they normally expected to hold easily.
With early voting already underway in some states, late spending is less likely to change voters' minds, according to Wells.
She pointed out that the Republican National Committees outperformed their Democratic counterparts in raising money in 2006 and 2018, but the Democrats won 31 seats in the House of Representatives in the first election, and 41 seats in the second.
However, Democrats fear being overwhelmed by Republicans' fiscal superiority.
Political strategist Mike Fahey said that this advantage may be more influential in close races in which voters do not know much about any of the candidates.
He added: “The national mood may create an opportunity, but the House and Senate races are ultimately decided, candidate by candidate, market by market.”
