Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
My evidence is that Hillary outspent Trump 2 to 1 with no measurable effect on the outcome, and Democratic challengers and open seat candidates outspent Republicans by more than 2 to 1 with no measurable effect on the outcome.
Could just be a 2016 thing, I welcome more evidence.
|
We have no real way of saying what the outcome of that election would have been had those amounts of money not been spent. To what extent massive spending by one side may have served to ameliorate a drop in support
All we have are statistical curves and election on election polling and voting data and if there's anything we all should have learned by now it's that polling and voting patterns are not nearly good enough predictors of major political shifts.
It wasn't as if Trump won by a landslide, sweeping up both the electoral college vote and the popular vote. Maybe the Democrats should take from this that they could have spent that bit more and maybe tipped the election in their favour.
Maybe the Republicans can consider what a close shave they had by not spending as much.
I don't think that's the message they should take but it's as rationale as next message.