The 2024 election will be here in a hurry. And Trump better hope he can cling on to as much momentum as possible.
But this frightening election report from the Harris campaign is the last thing Donald Trump wanted to see.
In just the first month since Vice President Kamala Harris replaced President Joe Biden as the Democratic nominee, her campaign has dramatically outpaced former President Donald Trump’s in terms of digital ad spending.
Harris has already invested at least $47 million more than Trump on digital platforms and over $20 million more on streaming services, signaling a major financial push to secure her place in the 2024 race.
According to a recent analysis by The Daily Wire, between July 25 and August 23, the Harris Victory Fund and Harris for President campaign allocated about $27.4 million on Meta ads, compared to the Trump National Committee Campaign’s roughly $2.6 million. The aggressive spending, particularly on digital platforms like Meta, is indicative of the Harris campaign’s strategy to dominate the online space and reach a wide array of voters.
The two campaigns are also focusing on different geographical areas. Harris has centered her efforts on battleground states such as Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Georgia.
Trump, on the other hand, has targeted Pennsylvania, including key regions like Wilkes-Barre and Harrisburg, while also focusing on Atlanta, Georgia, and Bozeman, Montana.
A similar pattern emerges on YouTube, where Harris has spent about $11.3 million, focusing on major states like California, New York, Texas, Florida, and Washington. In contrast, Trump’s YouTube spending sits at around $5.4 million, targeting battlegrounds such as Michigan, North Carolina, Arizona, Georgia, and Pennsylvania.
While Trump’s strategy is more focused on competitive states, Harris’ investment in solid blue states like California, New York, and Washington may bolster her popular vote count, although it’s unlikely to have a major impact on her electoral college prospects.
This strategy raises questions about the Harris campaign’s focus. While her team spends millions in reliably blue states, critics argue this money could have been better spent in battleground regions. However, her focus on states like California could also be a way to increase fundraising efforts and secure a popular vote victory, which could prove useful in framing the narrative if she loses the presidency due to the electoral college. Democrats have frequently criticized the electoral college as an outdated system that undermines the voice of larger states like California and Texas.
Harris’ campaign has also outspent Trump in Google ads, with $18,933,100 million compared to Trump’s $2,197,800 million. Once again, the Harris campaign is heavily investing in blue states like California, New York, and Washington, while Trump has targeted a mix of states, including Texas, Florida, and Georgia.
Further complicating matters, the Harris campaign has benefitted from alleged “bugs” in Google’s search suggestions. During July and August, Google’s auto-complete function failed to provide relevant information when users searched for news on an attempted assassination of Trump, instead offering results about Harris. Google attributed this issue to a “bug,” a claim that has raised eyebrows among Republicans. Additionally, the Harris campaign was accused of altering headlines in Google search results to make them appear more favorable to her.
The financial advantage Harris holds extends beyond digital platforms. After Biden’s withdrawal from the race, Republicans initially aired more ads than Democrats in certain states, notably Michigan and Wisconsin. However, this trend quickly shifted as Harris’ campaign began to outspend Trump significantly on digital streaming services like Netflix, Hulu, and Peacock, as well as on connected TV platforms such as Roku. According to the Financial Times, the Harris campaign has already spent $56 million on these platforms, while Trump’s campaign has spent $30 million.
Looking ahead, the Harris campaign has reserved an additional $370 million for ad spending post-Labor Day, with $170 million earmarked for television ads and over $200 million for digital streaming.
In contrast, the Trump campaign has only locked in ad buys in Pennsylvania and Georgia for the same period.
One of the factors limiting Trump’s spending capacity is the drain on his campaign funds due to fees stemming from ongoing legal battles.
Even before Biden stepped down, reports from POLITICO indicated that Trump was being outspent by Biden’s campaign. Despite this, Trump has relied heavily on earned media through his numerous rally appearances across the country, energizing his base without the need for massive ad buys.
While it’s likely that Trump’s campaign will ramp up its spending in the coming months, especially as election day approaches, the current gap in ad spending has raised concerns among Republicans.
With Harris clearly outspending Trump in key areas, Republicans hoping for a return to the White House have reason to worry about the long-term implications of this financial disparity.
Stay tuned to The Federalist Wire.
