In today’s edition … Families are no longer off limits in politics … You provide your views on religious candidates … but first …
Do Democrats have the money to deliver?
Democrats seem to have the wind at their back. Polls show them ahead in many races and tied in some GOP strongholds. And the party’s target list in its quest to take back the House has expanded in recent weeks.
But one hang-up remains as the election nears: money.
In some House districts — many of them big reaches for Democrats this cycle, but ones the party says are in play — the Republican candidate has entered the final weeks of the campaign with a cash advantage of well over $1 million.
For example, Democrats have grown more excited about Blake Gendebien, a dairy farmer in Upstate New York, looking to flip the seat currently held by retiring Rep. Elise Stefanik. But Gendebien entered September with just over $469,000 in the bank, compared with just over $4.1 million for Republican candidate Anthony Constantino, who loaned his campaign a staggering $17 million.
The same is true in coastal North Carolina, where Democrats have expressed hope that a major wave election could sweep Republican Rep. Greg Murphy out of office. But Murphy has $2.4 million in the bank, compared with just $81,000 from Raymond Smith, the Democrat challenging him.
In Oklahoma, Democrats have suggested a big night could see Rep. Stephanie Bice pushed out of her seat around Oklahoma City. But Bice reported $1.6 million in the bank at the end of the third quarter, compared with just $83,000 for Democrat Jena Nelson.
And in Southern New Jersey, Democrats are eager to oust Democrat-turned-Republican Rep. Jeff Van Drew, and some think they can. But Van Drew has a roughly $1 million cash advantage over Zack Mullock, with the Republican reporting $1.1 million to the Democrat’s $117,000.
A few caveats: This trend doesn’t hold for all reach races; in some contests the Democratic challenger has actually surpassed their Republican opponent. Take the House district that sweeps across Eastern Colorado — where Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert reported having just $235,000 cash in the bank compared with Democrat Eileen Laubacher’s staggering $3.3 million.
Money isn’t everything in politics. We’ve documented at The Washington Post and in this newsletter that the money Republicans have poured into ads nationwide has done little to move their poll numbers.
But in these final weeks of the campaign, Democrats’ ability to win races in districts that a few months ago would have been labeled absurdly audacious will hinge on each candidate’s ability to get their message out. And that takes money.
“Democrats drew a map they can’t pay for,” said Mike Marinella, spokesperson for the National Republican Congressional Committee. “Every dollar they burn chasing fantasy seats is a dollar their vulnerable incumbents won’t get, and they’re going to find out the hard way.”
Democrats have acknowledged this issue. In a memo earlier this month to “interested parties” — read: donors — the head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee raised the possibility of Democrats ceding winnable races, including in Florida, Nevada, South Carolina and New York, because of money.
“Given the Republican cash advantage, we now find ourselves in a situation where we could be leaving winnable races on the table without further investment from the DCCC,” wrote Julie Merz, asking donors to pitch in $17 million between the release of the memo and today “to take advantage of the opportunities we have.”
Merz told me in a statement last night that the committee has raised over $13 million of its $17 million goal and has “already invested in multiple of the districts highlighted in the note.”
Democrats feel this money gap most acutely in the reddest districts on the map. Democratic House candidates in the most competitive races have maintained a cash advantage over Republicans throughout the cycle, and by the end of the third quarter this year, the committee said the average candidate on their “Red to Blue” list (of seats the committee hopes to flip) outraised their opponents by about $2 million over the three-month period.
“The political floor is falling out from under House Republicans, and the truth is not even their Lex Luthor level of money will save them from a resounding rejection from voters,” said Viet Shelton, a spokesperson for the Democratic committee. “Turns out making everyone’s life wildly unaffordable is a bad political strategy everywhere.”
This dynamic is shaping up to be a real test of how much money can help Democrats take advantage of an abysmal national environment for Republicans — and how much money can shore up Republicans who, in any normal cycle, wouldn’t be seen as vulnerable at all.
Want this in your inbox?
Start your day with The Washington Post’s flagship political newsletter. Sign up here.
From across the newsroom
- Democrats’ campaign ads increasingly hit Trump construction projects, from Dan Diamond and Luke Connors.
- Hakeem Jeffries is poised to make history. His leadership style faces a test, from Anna Liss-Roy.
- The biggest wealth giveaway in modern history aims to transform the world, from Gerrit De Vynck and Nitasha Tiku.
- White House takes new swipes at press, blocking a reporter and threatening an outlet, from Scott Nover and Miriam Waldvogel.
- Nancy Pelosi goes all in on helping elect an underdog as her successor, from Alexei Koseff.
- Trump officials ask Supreme Court to let border security project resume in national park, from Justin Jouvenal.
- Meta ordered to pay $25B in New Mexico for misleading users on privacy, from Ian Duncan.
What I’m watching
Families are no longer off limits in American politics.
That is the takeaway from my report yesterday afternoon about the proliferation of attack ads referencing candidates’ families. The most notable example is in Ohio, where Republican gubernatorial nominee Vivek Ramaswamy has spent $4 million on an attack ad against Democrat Amy Acton that features Acton’s long-estranged mother calling her daughter “a liar.”
The ad has drawn widespread bipartisan condemnation because Acton and her brother were removed from their mother’s home after Acton’s stepfather was indicted on a charge of raping her. Some Republicans, like Vice President JD Vance, have embraced it, however.
“Seriously?” former New Jersey governor Chris Christie told me in response to Vance’s defense of the ad. ”For the last decade, our party has been infected by a corrupted moral center. Vance’s acceptance of this campaign ad only breathes life into the disease that we should be seeking to cure.”
In Maine, Republicans have embarked on a campaign to cast Democratic Senate candidate Troy Jackson as “weird” because his longtime partner and mother of his two children, Lana Pelletier, is his second cousin. The Senate Leadership Fund, the top Republican super PAC focused on holding the Senate, is running a radio ad containing bleeped profanity where a country-style performer sings, “Troy Jackson is weird. If he’ll [bleep] his own family, he’ll [bleep] yours, too.” Republican Susan Collins’s campaign has distanced itself from the ad.
While some of the most audacious familial attacks have come from Republicans, who polls show are trailing in key races, Democrats have engaged in some of it, too.
In a recent debate, Jackson accused Collins and her husband, Thomas A. Daffron, of making money off the Iran war. “She could use her leverage to stop this war, but instead, they’re making money,” he said, and his campaign later cited the couple’s oil and gas holdings. Collins called the attack “absolutely outrageous” and demanded an apology from Jackson, who did not provide one.
And in Iowa, Democratic Senate nominee Josh Turek accused Republican Sen. Ashley Hinson of contributing to a “corruption crisis” in Washington and called her husband a “shadow lobbyist,” a claim fact-checkers have deemed misleading.
You can read my full report here — which includes a walk down memory lane on how both John McCain and Barack Obama stopped family attacks in their 2008 presidential race.
In your local paper
Magnolia Tribune: Trump is headed to Mississippi to campaign for Republican Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith in her tougher-than-expected race against Democrat Scott Colom.
Idaho Capital Sun: Tobacco and nicotine manufacturers donated more than $20,000 each to the campaigns of Republican Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador and Gov. Brad Little after the state struck a deal “to essentially not fight in court about a pool of settlement payments that tobacco manufacturers tend to dispute.”
Maine Morning Star: Ranked-choice voting may keep the outcome of Maine’s Senate race unknown for days or weeks. “We think there’s a huge likelihood that it’s going to happen,” Secretary of State Shenna Bellows told the publication.
ABC 10: Thousands of California state employees are on strike, which is their first in the public employee union’s 44-year history. The strike is being dubbed the largest in state history.
From you
Most of you said you do not consider a candidate’s religion when deciding who to vote for.
“Whether a person practices a particular religion or faith does not enter into my voting decision,” wrote Donna Cunningham. “I want to see practical, demonstrated experience for the role the candidate is campaigning for.”
“A candidate’s faith plays absolutely no role in my decision to vote or not to vote for them,” added Jim Kramper. “There is a reason why we have the separation of church and state in this country.”
And Morgan Thompson added: “A candidate’s religious affiliation or freedom from such does not matter to me as much as their personal values and beliefs. All religions have a bright and a dark side. Those who believe in universal human rights and have genuine empathy for others will have my support.”
A few of you said you want your candidate to have some religious beliefs.
“I trust candidates who strive to live by ANY religious code, as opposed to candidates who live unchecked, serving their own interests, without a higher guiding code of morality,” wrote Linda Johnson.
And Geoffrey Stine says he doesn’t “vote for overtly religious candidates.”
“I have absolutely no problem with religious perspectives, except when they appear to be a restriction on possibilities, because the religious perspective is absolute on a topic,” Stine wrote.
Send a reply
The World Series starts on Friday. And this newsletter is unabashedly pro-baseball. So I have a simple one today: Who is going to win? And why? Bonus question: Will there be a lockout in baseball next year? Let me and your fellow Early Brief readers know at [email protected].
Thanks for reading. You can follow me on X at @merica.
The post Democrats are expanding their House map. Do they have the money to deliver? appeared first on Washington Post.
