and I want to be clear - this means no aid to Ukraine either. We are broke as it is.

  • isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    6 days ago

    Honestly, I think this is overblown at this point. We’re seeing now that giant ad budgets, while helpful, are not some silver bullet. El-Sayed was massively outspent by Stevens.

    What people miss is that there is a certain saturation point for ad dollars. The parties love to spend as much money as possible, as the consultant class takes a cut of everything. But we’re seeing now that mass TV ad spend just isn’t what it used to be. You can persuade some people that way, but once everyone knows your name and general message, each dollar you spend is less and less effective.

    The point is that in these big races, we can probably get 90% of the effect with 20% of the budget. This allows candidates to fund their campaigns mostly with small-dollar donations. You only need to take oligarch money if you want to have the massive ad spend.

    And taking oligarch money has electoral consequences. We can’t run populist left candidates. We have to run extremely unpopular centrist corporate candidates. They have to carefully choose all their policies to not offend their wealthy donors. The only hope this type of candidate has is through massive ad spending. But if we simply run more popular candidates, the need for ads is low enough that campaigns can be funded by small dollar donors and mass boots-on-the-ground voter outreach. Unpopular candidates also have trouble getting people passionate enough to volunteer their time for the ground game.