Money doesn’t win US elections, but it often helps. In bids for the Senate, the candidate who spends the most is typically the victor. That pattern held this year: In 21 of 33 Senate races, the candidate who spent the most on advertising—generally the major expenditure for a campaign—was the winner.
The link between spending and winning has always been weaker in presidential contests. In the eight weeks through Election Day, Democrats poured almost $1 billion into advertising across TV, radio and digital platforms, outspending Republicans by more than $300 million. Yet Kamala Harris lost decisively, picking up ...
