During the last few days before the elections, the opinion polls showed that the race was going to be close. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were both going at their own pace and strategy. The presidential campaign of Clinton did not shy away from spending on media, including TV ads. Clinton spent about $117 million by November, while Trump had spent $700,000.
This $117 million was just a fraction of the whopping $1 billion spent by her and her supporters on her campaign.
A Whooping $1B Election War Chest
This $117 million was just a fraction of the whopping $1 billion spent by her and her supporters on her campaign. By June itself Clinton had spent $181.6 million, and Trump had spent $56.5 million. It is enough to show how Clinton outspent Trump on almost all aspects of the campaign. It is important to note that Clinton brought in $185.5 million through fundraising; Trump was only able to get $13.8 million. To make up for this Trump invested his wealth, about $43.4 million in his campaign.
When talking about the money spent on media, the massive difference between Clinton and Trump is mainly due to the difference in their ideology. In one of the campaigns, Trump asked his supporters if ads worked anymore. While Trump was skeptical in spending money on TV ads and other media, Clinton went all out.
$428 Million in Facebook Ads
Clinton employed more than a 100 people to manage her digital campaign. Her primary focus was to reach out to the youths about the age of 20, who were more active on Facebook and other social media. She used Facebook as one of the mediums. The total payout to Facebook for the 2016 presidential election campaigns was estimated to be about $428 million. Evidently, her strategy did not work, and experts say maybe she would have been well off if she had taken a more traditional approach in the states she lost. She had spent $74.8 million by August and about $72 million in the last few weeks alone on her digital and media campaigns, which shows how much emphasis she put into TV ad campaigns. She also spent an additional $16 million in the last few weeks on ads on the internet.
Now the question to be answered is where did this money come. Clinton has an extensive campaign strategy and a group of donors who wrote several checks worth hundreds of dollars. Nineteen percent of her campaign’s money came from four PACs: American Bridge 21st Century, Priorities USA Action, Ready PAC and Correct the Record. The Democratic National Committee and her fundraising committees raised another $750.6 million. Some of the top donors to Clinton’s campaigns were S. Donald Sussman, Haim Saban, and George Soros, to name a few.
$21 Million Spent in Advertising in Just Eight States by July
Now let’s look into her buying efforts. Clinton and her supporters, by July, had spent $21 million in advertising in eight states. The money came partly from her campaign, and the rest was from her major super PAC, Priorities USA Action. In the first week, she and her allies ran about 4000 spots on national TV and broadcast. She outspent her opponents entirely regarding media expenditure.
In spite of spending so much, her failure to lure in voters can be attributed to the fact that most of her ad campaigns were not based on policies. Instead, they were busy slandering Trump or contained something else. Common studies show that ads or campaigns with negative contents did not go down well with the people. She made the fatal mistake of portraying her hatred of her opponents on social media and TV ad campaigns. Her media team created a comic named ‘Trump’s America’, which made a satire of Trump’s policies. Even her campaign managers have commented that the spending that was done was not exactly right and some investments were wrongfully made. If she had not underestimated the power of the traditional medium and if she had focused a bit more on introducing her policies to the voters, then there was a possibility that she would have been able to turn the tables and make her expenditure worth it. By the end of the election, she had only $839,000 left with her.
Clinton had an advantage over Trump with regards to the money that was available to her.
Clinton had an advantage over Trump with regards to the money that was available to her. Her fund raisings were efficient, and she had strong backings. It enabled her to spend more than double of what Trump spent on her presidential campaigns.