If campaign spending and fund raising is any indication of election outcomes, the candidates for the 10th district of Illinois have done so relentlessly. As candidates from one of the wealthiest districts in the nation, both Dan Seals and Bob Dold have had few problems keeping up with the others’ campaign finances. In fact, this district is apparently the only district in Illinois where the candidates raised the same, or even close to the same amount of money for their own campaigns.
As reported October 13th, the candidates were neck-and-neck, each raised approximately $2.5 million however Seals spent about $2.2 million while Dold had spent about $1.7 million. History shows that winning candidates by and large outspend the losing candidate. The closeness of this race as suggested by the polls is also indicated by the dollar signs.
The most recent FiveThirtyEight Forecast says that Seals has a 59.4% chance of winning the seat but not by much. The same source predicted that Seals will win by 1.9% of the votes. These numbers are so close that despite political conventional wisdom and margin of error set aside, this election is not one that I would be able to place a confident bet on. Nonetheless, these projections are parallel to Seals’ narrow lead in campaign finance.
Additionally, OpenSecrets.com revealed that Seals raised roughly $200,000 more from local contributors than Dold. On a national level, Dold’s contributors were more widespread than that of Seals. Which of these leads is favorable to winning a congressional election you ask? Local contributions. The contributions made at local levels are an arguably accurate display of local support for one candidate over another. While money from contributors in New York and Washington, D.C. is useful, local support is essential in a congressional election. Overall, the widespread support for Republican Congressional candidates is irrelevant and meaningless if local support favors the Democratic candidate.
The money raised by both candidates amount to impressing numbers both in size and proportion to each other. Historical trends hint that the bigger spender is more often than not the winner. Election Day is one week away and the most recent projections are lined up with these historical implications; Seals holds a narrow but persistent lead over Dold. The rest is up to the voters.
At this point, the results of this election are more likely to be altered by a bad storm, a huge sale at the local mall, or traffic than anything else.
Do you think raising similar amounts of money could have a real outcome on the winner, especially since predicted victory margin is so close already?
ReplyDeleteThis should be very interesting to look at after the election, since so often you see one candidate who raises much more than the other. I would like to see if the closeness of this election has anything to do with the even funding and money each campaign has raised. I'm looking forward to seeing the outcome of this election next week because the candidates really seem to be neck and neck, in both support and monetary funds.
ReplyDelete