Why the Republicans’ $1 billion election war chest is failing to translate into US votes in the midterms | Explained | Today’s news

The Republican war chest of nearly $1 billion was expected to help the party weather a difficult political environment ahead of the US election. But despite the massive spending spree, poll trends have barely changed, forcing the party to divert funds from potential wins to defending vulnerable seats.

Republican groups spent more than $740 million on congressional races between Labor Day and Oct. 14, including at least $220 million from groups connected to President Donald Trump, according to an analysis of CNBC’s AdImpact data. Billionaire Elon Musk has personally donated more than $276 million to Republican groups since July.

Still, Democrats continue to lead in several competitive Senate races, while the Cook Policy Report with Amy Walter favors Democrats to flip the House and remain competitive in the Senate.

“Money is an amplifier, not a magic wand,” said Neil Newhouse, a partner at Republican firm Public Opinion Strategies. “You can buy all the airtime in the world, but if the political climate is blowing 50 mph in your face, ad volume alone won’t change the weather.”

Musk’s money can’t provide a decisive advantage

Republican groups entered the final phase with about $1 billion available, compared with $579 million for comparable Democratic groups, according to a CNBC analysis of Federal Election Commission records.

Read also | US midterm results: Why the political influence of Indian-American voters faces a key test

Musk has contributed more than $276 million to Republican groups since July, including $158 million to the Senate Leadership Fund super PAC and more than $76 million to his America PAC. His known federal political contributions during this election cycle total roughly $366 million.

The spending comes amid an unprecedented expansion of political advertising.

But Republican groups struggled to translate their financial advantage into commensurate advertising exposure. In nine key Senate battlegrounds, Republicans outspent Democrats in television airing by 26% through Sept. 30, but only secured 7% more ad airing, according to a CNBC analysis.

Hilary Braseth, executive director of OpenSecrets, a nonprofit that tracks campaign spending, said, “In this election cycle, we’re seeing an unprecedented concentration and scale of political influence and wealth.”

Why political advertising is losing steam

Late spending and higher advertising costs have limited the effectiveness of the Republican cash advantage. Candidates receive broadcasters’ lowest unit rates during the last 60 days before the general election, while outside groups such as super PACs do not enjoy the same protections.

In Texas, Democrat James Talarico continued to lead Republican Ken Paxton, despite more than $113 million in negative advertising targeting Talarico since the primary.

Repeated exposure to political advertising can also produce diminishing returns as campaigns target the same group of undecided voters.

“If an undecided voter has already seen 20 negative ads today, the 21st ad won’t convince them. They’ll just tune out,” said Michael Beckel, director of money reform in politics at Issue One. “Their eyes are shining.

But Republicans say the spending has helped prevent vulnerable candidates from falling further behind. In Texas, the party spent $121.5 million on Senate races in September, compared with just $5.5 million in the previous three months.

“The spending didn’t put Paxton ahead, but it kept a messy race and a flawed candidate from becoming unwinnable,” said a Republican operative involved in the Texas Senate race who requested anonymity.

From expanding the map to defending safe places

The clearest indication of the Republicans’ problems is the shift to defense spending. Since Sept. 1, the Senate Leadership Fund and affiliated groups — according to an analysis of CNBC’s AdImpact data — have spent or pledged roughly $180 million in those three states, all of which were in double digits for Trump in 2024.

Michael Beckel said outside groups “are funneling millions into deep red territory to build defensive moats, so last-leg pickup opportunities are starved of cash.”

Read also | Trump rules out military action against Iran before the November midterms

In North Carolina, the Senate Leadership Fund initially pledged $71 million to support Republican Michael Whatley. But on Oct. 2, the group pulled most of its remaining ad bookings after spending about $32.8 million as Democrat Roy Cooper continued to hold a double-digit lead in the FiftyPlusOne polling average.

The same strategy is playing out in the House, where the Congressional Leadership Fund has withdrawn support for two vulnerable Republican incumbents and delayed efforts to flip two Democratic-held seats.

The redistricting points to a central problem facing Republicans: a financial advantage that once promised to expand their electoral opportunities is now being used to limit potential losses.