As we noted in our tweet reax, his fundraising advantage was massive:
Sean Sullivan marvels at the spending gap:
$4.9 million: Cantor spent about $4.9 million on operating expenditures this election cycle, according to campaign finance records. He still had more than $3.7 million on on hand late last month.
$123,000: Brat spent just under $123,000 on operating expenditures. So yeah, to say he was outspent doesn’t even begin to the tell the story.
Brett Logiurato is amazed Brat won despite being outspent “by more than 25-to-1”:
How big was the spending disparity between the two candidates? Cantor’s campaign spent more at steakhouses than his challenger, economics professor Dave Brat, spent on his entire campaign, a mind-blogging stat that was first noted by the New York Times.
It also helps explain why Cantor lost. The Rooted Cosmopolitan blogger, who has “managed two winning campaigns against incumbent Republican Congressmen in New England,” point outs that in “2013 Cantor spent roughly twice as much at Bobby Van’s [steakhouse] as he did on polling”:
[Cantor] spent about $400,000 airing television ads, but that’s probably less than he spent on airfare. He appears to have done no significant direct mail or digital advertising. There are few disbursements that look like field-related expenses. He paid for no opposition research. And his staff costs appear only marginally higher than they were in 2013, which suggests he never really ramped up for the election, but instead maintained his focus on traveling the country on behalf of other Republicans, and while on the road raising enough money to pay for his expenses (which include few nights in modest lodging but plenty of nights at some of the most expensive hotels in the country). …
Cantor spent money as if the only election that mattered was the House Republican Conference leadership votes. But in spending his time and money on that election, he made himself vulnerable to humiliation at home.
It’s reassuring that, much like Huckabee’s routing of Romney in the Iowa caucuses despite a 15-1 spending advantage, big money doesn’t always prevail. And such defeats take the edge off all the angst over Citizens United. In many cases, raising a ton of money can actually be a liability if it reinforces a reputation of cronyism. Update from a reader:
The huge spending disparity is misleading, since most of the money went to helping other Republicans. Sounds like he was beat because of his arrogance; Cantor believed all he had to do was run a few ads and show up.
The Dish 