Since Labor Day, when President Donald Trump opened up his war chest for the midterms, Republicans have pumped half a billion dollars into competitive House and Senate races.
A month later, the polls haven’t moved in their direction.
High-quality public surveys show Democratic Senate candidates tied or leading in Alaska, Georgia, Maine, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas — the same as before Labor Day. Democrats’ lead on the generic congressional ballot has slightly widened since, from about six points to roughly nine, according to analyst Nate Silver’s polling average.
Notably, the surge of attack ads has not sunk the Democrats at the center of some of the most expensive races. More voters hold a favorable than unfavorable view of Texas Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico, according to a late September New York Times/Siena poll — despite more than $115 million spent attacking him. Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed’s favorability actually increased by five points since August, to 47 percent, Fox News surveys show, despite $76.2 million in attacks.
One factor: Republicans’ advantage looks bigger in dollars than in actual airtime, thanks in part to the timing of their purchases. In Senate battlegrounds, the GOP spent 26 percent more than Democrats did to secure just 7 percent more broadcast ads, according to AdImpact.
Republicans say the attacks are steadily eroding Democratic support and keeping the races competitive. Democrats counter that the GOP is stuck spending heavily just to contain their expanding ambitions in states Trump won handily in 2024 — the equivalent of Republicans fielding competitive challenges in Rhode Island, Washington state or Maryland.
“They should be getting more for what they’re spending, and they’re not,” said Lauren French, a spokeswoman for the pro-Democratic Senate Majority PAC. “Can they spend their way out of a bad economy, a bad president, a bad candidate, and a bad message in Texas and Kansas?”
In a cycle with so many advantages for Democrats — an unpopular president, an unpopular war, inflation, the usual pattern of midterm swings — money was supposed to be the GOP’s ace. In particular, Republicans were counting on the more than $400 million in Trump’s super PAC, plus a similar amount he says is held in a related nonprofit, to come to their rescue. Trump has said he will spend $400 to $500 million on the midterms and save some for 2028. So far, his super PACs have reserved more than $194 million in advertising, according to media tracker AdImpact.
But the super PACs didn’t turn on the money until Labor Day, so they faced higher prices for scarcer airtime compared with groups that reserved their ads earlier. In addition, super PACs pay full freight for TV ads, while campaigns pay discounted rates; that has benefited Democrats whose candidates have been better fundraisers in high-profile contests, whereas Republicans have relied more heavily on party committees and super PACs under Trump’s control.
In Texas, the discrepancy is especially pronounced as the expensive Senate, House and governor’s races drive up prices for limited inventory. Last week in the Dallas media market, Talarico’s campaign paid $950,000 for the average viewer to see its ads 10 times, according to a Democratic media buyer. By comparison, Paxton allies spent $4.65 million for the average viewer to see their ads 13 times — five times the money for just 30 percent more impact.
R money advantage not what it appears to be on surface https://t.co/xTd0x8NHyz
— Senator John Cornyn (@JohnCornyn) October 5, 2026
The cost of running TV ads in Texas has gone up so much that Paxton allies started running spots nationwide during sporting events hoping that people in Texas would see them, because that cost less than buying the same airtime in all the state’s local markets.
The campaigns’ cost advantage over super PACs does not extend to digital advertising, which both parties are increasingly emphasizing as consumer habits change. More than 80 percent of the electorate is now reachable on YouTube, compared with closer to 50 percent on traditional TV, the Democratic media buyer said.
Democrats anticipated that they would be outspent and took advantage of the Republicans’ delay. In focus groups, the Talarico campaign found that if he established and defined himself with voters first, he could withstand the expected attacks — but not if the attacks got there first, a person familiar with the research said.
Republicans struggled to point to an example of a race where the recent influx of money fundamentally changed the dynamic. One GOP strategist working on Senate races compared the incremental changes to World War I trench warfare.
“Our spending has enabled us to stay competitive,” said an operative working for Trump’s political team, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk publicly.
In some races, Republican groups have begun cutting their losses. The main Senate GOP super PAC canceled its remaining ads in North Carolina, where former Republican National Committee chairman Michael Whatley trailed former governor Roy Cooper (D) by 11 points in a YouGov survey last month. The GOP House super PAC similarly cut reservations in Omaha, where Democrat Denise Powell is leading Republican Brinker Harding in the race for the seat being vacated by Rep. Don Bacon (R-Nebraska).
The post Half a billion dollars in GOP spending does little to move polls appeared first on Washington Post.
