Friday, March 22, 2024

Is it money that matters? -- More Data Points

Remember what we've been saying about range of data?

To the extent that political scientists understand the effect of money on elections, it's an understanding limited to the precedented (or at least its general neighborhood). That's how predictive modeling works, at least the kind of modeling we're talking about here. When you find yourself deep in the unprecedented, you can no longer assume that the relationships behind your model will still hold. [Blogger recognizes the spelling of "unprecedented" but not of "precedented." Go figure.]

With that in mind, think about 2024. In particular, think about the role money or the lack of it might play.

How much experience do we have with fund raising imbalances that look like this?


 

How much experience do we have with candidates facing this level of financial crises?


 

"Five, ten, or even twenty-five dollars..."

 

 

And how often has a candidate's money problems had this kind of impact on their party?


"Adav Noti, the executive director of the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center in Washington, said that is a break from fundraising norms. Usually, Noti said, candidates prioritize raising cash that can be spent directly on campaign activity. Save America, on the other hand, is structured as a "leadership PAC" and thus barred from spending directly on Trump's own campaign activities. The group devoted 84% of its spending to Trump's legal costs as of February."

 

 


I never thought I'd be favorably quoting Scaramucci, but this aged well.




  

p.s. And now this...

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)