# Should the $$$ worry me? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [September 4, 2024, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720 "2024-09-04T05:13:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2024, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/21 "2024-09-06T01:21:49Z")
I’m not sure if I understand the OP question. Worried about what? That the Harris campaign not funneling millions into charities reflects poorly on her? That not doing so reduces her chances of being elected? Neither strikes me as particularly likely. ---
**Author:** ![Beckdawrek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beckdawrek/32/3647_2.png) [@Beckdawrek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beckdawrek)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2024, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/22 "2024-09-06T01:28:27Z")
No, not at all. I think it’s a giant waste of money. For what. Are there any stats or proof 5000 text messages caused one person to change their mind? Or 2 ads an hour, on TV change a vote? Or 1000s of billboards? I’m not sure about the on the ground campaign places are all the necessary. Organizing can be done electronically now. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2024, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/23 "2024-09-06T01:33:02Z")
Fine, but I don’t see how that’s _worrisome_, unless you think wasting money inherently negatively impacts the Harris campaign (in which case, you should look at her opponent’s books) or you’re the type to find it tragic when someone accidentally spills some champagne. Or maybe it’s a “what about the starving kids in Africa” thing? ---
**Author:** ![Beckdawrek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beckdawrek/32/3647_2.png) [@Beckdawrek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beckdawrek)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2024, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/24 "2024-09-06T02:11:38Z")
None of that. I just think it’s not necessary. I don’t make the rules, tho’. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2024, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/25 "2024-09-06T02:14:29Z")
It’s apparent that candidates with far more campaign money than their opponents can use it effectively with advertising and ground campaigns. It’s not a sure fire means of winning but it works often enough. How much more money is needed? What difference does it make in close races? Those matters are difficult to quantify but it doesn’t change the need to keep up with the opponent in available funds because it makes a difference when the other side has significantly more money than you do. ---
**Author:** ![Beckdawrek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beckdawrek/32/3647_2.png) [@Beckdawrek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beckdawrek)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2024, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/26 "2024-09-06T02:19:11Z")
I never said the amount was the problem, if it means one campaign has $10 the other has $5, ok the the $10 guy can buy more poster board. I’m saying the sum total is a crying shame. In a hotly contested race if neither spends a dime both will be covered by the press, probably equally. I just don’t get how the amount got so expensive. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2024, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/27 "2024-09-06T02:19:36Z")
If money in politics didn’t matter, then there would have been no reason for the Supreme Court to rule in _Citizens United_ and _McCutcheon_ as they did. They wanted it to matter, so now it matters. And until those abominable rulings are undone, then everyone must play by the rules that money in politics matters. It sucks, but we didn’t do anything about it when we could have, and now we must live with that consequence. ---
**Author:** ![TeroSunbear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terosunbear/32/14748_2.png) [@TeroSunbear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TeroSunbear)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2024, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/28 "2024-09-06T02:24:25Z")
If they did not spend those millions on ads, how would the low information voter know anything about the election? Instagram? TikTok? ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2024, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/29 "2024-09-06T02:28:34Z")
Okay, then I’d say you have nothing to worry about, because the thing you’re thinking about is vanishingly unlikely to lead to substantial negative consequences. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2024, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/30 "2024-09-06T02:40:02Z")
“They gave away other people’s money to their own causes without asking, instead of using it to win the election!!” It is just that simple. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2024, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/31 "2024-09-06T13:58:17Z")
> [@Beckdawrek](#): > > I’m saying the sum total is a crying shame. > > In a hotly contested race if neither spends a dime both will be covered by the press, probably equally. > > I just don’t get how the amount got so expensive. It got so expensive because TV ads work and are expensive. The amount is the result of that race to keep from falling behind. Nobody is voluntarily going abstain from spending on TV ads so the press treating all sides equally if one side has a spending advantage. And it is the TV advertising. It’s way more expensive than billboards and newspaper ads. Without television they’d be spending 10% of what they do now. ---
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2024, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/32 "2024-09-06T21:09:41Z")
The best use of the money (and I think Harris is using it that way) is for voter registration drives and get out the vote activities. I agree that wall-to-wall TV ads are useless and so are direct mailings. Another thing will be the army of lawyers and other people around to fight the inevitable court challenges and to fight voter intimidation. The Repugs know that if everyone votes they don’t stand a chance. I note that Texas is trying to prevent voter registration drives. ---
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2024, 10:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/33 "2024-09-07T10:46:34Z")
While we have a lot of conventional political science wisdom about the effectiveness of TV ads (they’re pretty marginal), I will point out that this comes with a massive asterisk that we’re in a completely unprecedented election where the candidate was replaced extremely late with a relative unknown where a large swathe of the country is unfamiliar with the character and direction of the candidate. In this context, TV ads could actually be orders of magnitudes more impactful. ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2024, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/34 "2024-09-07T14:15:02Z")
It might for an interesting last minute play though. Think about it, on the eve of the election Kamala steps forward and acknowledges how so much money, yada, yada, yada,…’ We’ll be donating today x percent of our war chest we set aside, to…numerous veterans, the poor, disadvantaged children, etc, because we share the taxpayers opinion, ‘It SHOULDN’T be all about the money, so we’re making the change we’d like to see starting today! Right now!’ I can’t say for sure, but if I was appalled by both to some extent, unhappy with the choice or just undecided, it would go a long way to swaying me. She’s got a good lead, and a big war chest. And those undecided few MIGHT just swing things. ---
**Author:** ![Beckdawrek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beckdawrek/32/3647_2.png) [@Beckdawrek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beckdawrek)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2024, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/35 "2024-09-07T18:59:52Z")
I like that! ---
**Author:** ![thorny\_locust](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thorny_locust/32/431_2.png) [@thorny\_locust](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thorny_locust)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2024, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/36 "2024-09-07T19:07:34Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > t might for an interesting last minute play though. Think about it, on the eve of the election Kamala steps forward and acknowledges how so much money, yada, yada, yada,…’ We’ll be donating today x percent of our war chest we set aside, to… Would it be legal, though? The money was donated for a specific purpose. I believe there are rules for what can be done with any of it that’s left after a specific campaign. – there are indeed rules on spending it, anyway: here: > **[Making disbursements - FEC.gov](https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/making-disbursements/)** > > While campaigns have wide discretion in deciding how to spend their funds, the Federal Election Campaign Act places certain restrictions on the use of campaign funds. > An expenditure is a purchase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit or gift... I don’t know whether your proposed donations might come under “supporting tax-exempt organizations”. That site gives a pretty short version; I’m sure a lot of this has been argued in greater detail by now but don’t know whether any campaign has actually tried to give significant amounts of campaign funds to non-campaign issues. ---
**Author:** ![nelliebly](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nelliebly/32/5422_2.png) [@nelliebly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nelliebly)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2024, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720/37 "2024-09-08T02:49:33Z")
> [@Shalmanese](#): > > While we have a lot of conventional political science wisdom about the effectiveness of TV ads (they’re pretty marginal), [Not so fast.](https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/how-much-do-campaign-ads-matter) > …if ads don’t affect voters much, that would mean that campaigns are wasting billions of dollars on every election cycle. But political teams clearly believe that these commercials are worthwhile. So if some academic studies suggest that TV ads aren’t influential, “are we wrong or are they wrong?” Gordon asks. > > To find out, Gordon collaborated with James Reeder at Purdue University and Mitchell J. Lovett and Bowen Luo at Northeastern University. The researchers obtained data from Kantar Media’s Campaign Media Analysis Group (CMAG) on presidential campaign TV ads in 75 designated market areas from September to November of 2000 and 2004. > … > > They found that ads affected overall turnout in different ways. If a candidate increased their positive advertising by 1 percent, voter turnout rose by 0.03 percent. If they increased negative ads by the same amount, voter turnout dropped, but only by 0.007 percent. > > “Positive ads have a much larger and significant turnout stimulation effect,” Gordon says. > > Conversely, **negative commercials had a bigger effect on vote shar** e. Increasing such ads by 1 percent boosted the percentage of people voting for the sponsoring candidate by 0.025 percent. Positive commercials were linked to a more modest bump of 0.016 percent. So positive ads get out more people to vote, but negative ads affect who they vote for. Do we want more voters to turn out if it means they’ll vote for Trump? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-worry-me/1006720.md?page=1)