Why President Trump and the Republican Party’s billion-dollar midterm campaign won’t work

The $1 billion war chest was supposed to be a major tiebreaker for Republicans heading into a bleak midterm election environment defined by economic frustration, President Donald Trump’s unpopularity and the fallout from the Iran war.

So far, it hasn’t worked.

From Labor Day to Oct. 14, Republican groups poured more than $740 million into congressional races for control of Congress, according to a CNBC analysis of AdImpact data. This includes at least $220 million in spending from groups associated with Trump. Elon Musk has donated another $276 million to Republican groups since July, helping propel the Republican Senate Leadership Fund super PAC to a record quarter.

But with less than three weeks until Election Day on Nov. 3, the spending onslaught has barely moved the map. In the nine most competitive Senate districts (Alaska, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, and Texas), the average Fifty-Plus-One poll shows Democrats leading, almost unchanged from before the Republican spending spree. Minnesota is expected to be decidedly blue, and the close race is a concern for Democrats.

And Republican political operatives and independent election observers interviewed by CNBC said the money hasn’t had the expected impact on voter sentiment.

Meanwhile, the broader battleground for Republicans continues to deteriorate. According to the Cook Political Report, written by Amy Walter, Democrats have an advantage in flipping the House and remaining competitive in the Senate, forcing Republicans to spend millions defending once-safe seats while abandoning previous gains.

“Money is an amplifier, not a magic wand,” said Neil Newhouse, a partner at Republican polling firm Public Opinion Strategies. “You can buy all the airtime in the world, but when the political climate is blowing at 30 miles an hour, you can’t change the weather just by advertising.”

The Republican Party entered the final stages of the midterm elections with unusually deep pockets.

MAGA Inc. had about $416 million on hand at the end of August, according to Federal Election Commission filings. The funding available to major Republican organizations across the broader ecosystem is about $1 billion, more than the $579 million available to comparable Democratic organizations, according to a CNBC analysis of Federal Election Commission filings.

And then there was Musk, who said he would not have much involvement in this year’s election. of tesla and space x The CEO has donated more than $276 million to Republican groups since July, including more than $158 million to the Senate Leadership Fund’s Republican-boosting super PAC and more than $76 million to his own America PAC, according to figures confirmed to CNBC by an America PAC spokesperson. Musk’s contributions to federal politics this election cycle now total about $366 million, making him the largest known midterm campaign donor.

And Musk is far from alone. Nine of the top 10 individual and family donor organizations this year support Republicans, accounting for 86 cents of every dollar donated by the top 10 organizations, according to a CNBC analysis of FEC records.

“This election cycle has seen an unprecedented concentration and scale of political influence and wealth,” said Hilary Blaseth, executive director of OpenSecrets, a nonprofit, nonpartisan group that tracks campaign spending.

AdImpact predicts political advertising will reach $11.6 billion in the 2025-2026 cycle, more than both the 2022 midterm elections and the 2024 presidential election.

But the size of Republicans’ financial advantage may overstate the amount of advertising they can actually buy with that money.

That’s because much of the Republican money, especially by groups aligned with Mr. Trump, is delayed and arrives via super PACs that can pay far more for airtime than candidates. Federal law gives candidates the right to receive minimum bids for their stations during the final 60 days before a general election. External groups receive no such protection.

This is an advantage for Democrats, who field candidates that generally outperform Republican candidates.

In Dallas, for example, Democrat James Talarico’s campaign spent about $2.4 million on local broadcast ads from Oct. 1 to Oct. 14, enough for the average viewer to see his ad about 48 times, according to a CNBC AdImpact data analysis. The pro-Ken Paxton Texas PAC spent about $7.8 million on about 81 views per viewer, according to the analysis. That’s more than three times the amount spent for only about a 70% increase in exposure.

Airtime has become so expensive that Paxton’s allies have begun buying ads during national sporting events, calculating that reaching enough Texans through national broadcasts is cheaper than buying across the state’s local TV market, according to the Associated Press.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who lost to Paxton in the primary, posted on X on October 5, “R-Money’s advantage is not what it seems on the surface.”

As of Oct. 1, Republicans led broadcast television spending in seven of the nine key Senate battlegrounds identified by the Cook Political Report, outspending Democrats by 26 percent overall through Sept. 30, but with only a 7 percent increase in broadcasts.

To be sure, super PACs don’t face the same pricing disadvantage in digital advertising, where campaigns and outside groups compete on a more level playing field. However, broadcast television still accounts for the majority of political spending, with AdImpact predicting it will account for 48% of the 2026 cycle total.

But the results of such spending are harder to see in political polls.

Despite more than $113 million spent on negative ads targeting Talarico since the Texas primary, a Siena College poll released Tuesday showed Talarico leading Paxton 48% to 44%, just down from a 6-point lead in September, according to CNBC’s AdImpact data analysis.

After a more than $87 million attack on Democrat Abdul El-Sayed this year in Michigan, a late September Fox News poll found that El-Sayed’s favorability rating among registered voters had increased by 5 points from an early August poll, while Republican Mike Rogers had fallen by 4 points, according to an analysis of CNBC’s AdImpact data.

One challenge is that advertising revenue declines as Election Day approaches. Political advertising experts told CNBC that as campaigns repeatedly target the same small number of persuasive voters, each additional dollar makes it less likely that the message will reach someone who hasn’t already heard it.

“If undecided voters have already seen 20 negative ads today, the 21st ad won’t persuade them. They’ll just be ignored,” said Michael Beckel, director of Money in Politics Reform at Issue One. “Their eyes are glazed over.” Issue One works to reduce the influence of money in politics, and its board includes former Democratic and Republican elected officials.

Still, some Republicans counter that the top-line movement in polls is a false barometer. They argue that the influx of funds in September helped vulnerable candidates remain competitive amid a deteriorating political environment.

In Texas, Republicans spent $121.5 million in September’s Senate elections, up from just $5.5 million in the previous three months, while Musk’s America PAC added direct mail and recruiting efforts, according to a CNBC analysis of AdImpact data. Republican lawmakers involved in the campaign said the situation could have been much worse without that support.

“The spending didn’t give Mr. Paxton an advantage, but it avoided a chaotic campaign and one in which a flawed candidate could not win,” said a Republican operative involved in the Texas Senate race who spoke candidly about the state of the race on condition of anonymity.

Maine is proposing a different test. Republicans have poured more than $50 million into the state to support incumbent Sen. Susan Collins, nearly twice as much as Democratic spending, according to a CNBC analysis of FEC filings. Since early September, the Fifty Plus One polling average has been slowly shrinking, going from a roughly 3-point lead to Democrat Troy Jackson in early September to around 2 points now.

But the clearest sign that the Republican financial advantage is slipping is where the money is going.

In April, the Senate Leadership Fund announced a record $342 million advertising program across eight states aimed at protecting the Republican majority and expanding the map. Texas, Kansas, and Nebraska were not included as states.

Since Sept. 1, SLF and its affiliates have spent or pledged about $180 million in those three states, all of which President Trump spent in double-digit amounts in 2024, according to a CNBC analysis of AdImpact data.

“Last-minute pickup opportunities are cash-starved as outside groups funnel millions of dollars into red-hot territory to build defensive moats,” Becker told CNBC.

But these emergency defenses have come at a cost, diverting money from races that Republicans once hoped to win and forcing national groups to narrow their influence in other areas.

In North Carolina, the Senate Leadership Fund initially pledged $71 million to support Republican Michael Whatley. But on Oct. 2, after spending about $32.8 million, the group withdrew most of its remaining ad bookings as Democrat Roy Cooper continued to maintain a double-digit lead in Fifty Plus One’s polling average, according to an analysis of CNBC’s AdImpact data.

This is a stunning setback in a battleground state where Republicans have won every presidential and Senate election since 2008.

The same triage is unfolding in the House of Commons.

The Congressional Leadership Fund this week cut spending to vulnerable Republicans Rep. Thomas Kean Jr. of New Jersey and Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks of Iowa after a tough internal poll. The group also shelved an effort to flip the seat held by Democrats, represented by Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivett of Michigan and Rep. Greg Landsman of Ohio. The change in spending was first reported by The New York Times.

Those four campaigns have already absorbed about $13.7 million in Congressional Leadership Fund spending through Oct. 14, according to a CNBC analysis of AdImpact data. CLF is directing about $10 million from these races to 16 other districts, according to the Times.

The new spending includes a South Texas seat held by Republican Rep. Monica Dela Cruz, where Trump has an 18-point lead in 2024. Dela Cruz himself won re-election in 2024 with a margin of about 14 points.