Biden’s Wins Show What Money Can't Buy

Joe Biden defeated two better-funded opponents on Super Tuesday because he had advantages that cash can’t buy.

Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden speaks at a primary election night campaign rally, March 3, 2020, in Los Angeles with his wife Jill Biden, left, and his sister Valerie.

A FUNNY THING HAPPENED on Super Tuesday: A billionaire spending his own money and a democratic socialist spending other people's money were handily beaten by a candidate who had hardly any money.

And now that former Vice President Joe Biden has shown he can collect delegates with just a little money, he's likely to get more money – and a lot of that may well come from the very billionaire who dropped out of the race Wednesday morning to endorse him: Michael Bloomberg.

But Biden's shoestring success is something of an anomaly, experts say, because the veteran lawmaker already had the things money can buy. Unlike newbie candidates who need to convince voters and the media that they should be taken seriously, Biden was guaranteed attention – even when he fell to fifth place in the New Hampshire primary. Pundits might have been predicting his political death, but at least they were talking about him.

"Biden has name recognition and is a known quantity," says Suzanne Robbins, a political science professor at the University of Florida and an expert on campaign finance. "Money is often used to increase name recognition and credibility, as well as make the race competitive."

The former vice president also benefited from timing and a series of events that got him what campaigns called "earned media" – in other words, lots of TV coverage that costs the candidate nothing but serves as a rough campaign ad.

A strong debate performance in South Carolina on Feb. 25, followed by a solid appearance in a CNN town hall the following night, had cable news pundits talking about whether the then-lagging Biden could make a comeback. When he won South Carolina last Saturday by a stunning margin of nearly 30 percentage points, the narrative grew – and $10 million in donations came in as well.

An avalanche of high-profile endorsements followed, and television stations carried live the statement of former primary competitor Pete Buttigieg, the former South Bend, Indiana, mayor, along with the public endorsements of Sen.Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and former Rep. Beto O'Rourke of Texas. Another $5 million came to the Biden campaign after that.

Biden managed to win 10 of 14 Super Tuesday states, pulling ahead in the delegate count less than a week after being well behind his competitors, despite having little or no physical campaign office presence or TV ads in some of them. As of the end of February, Biden had also raised the least of any of the other three major contenders he bested Tuesday night.

Bloomberg, the former New York City mayor, spent nearly a half billion dollars of his own $60 billion fortune on his campaign, including TV ads that ran on cable news even as Super Tuesday results were coming in showing him losing. Sen.Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who has bragged about his small-dollar donations and independence from wealthy donors, has raised more than any other candidate. Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts has outraised and outspent Biden but has performed so poorly at the polls that she is reevaluating her presence in the campaign.

But that cash did not buy any of the better-funded candidates' success Tuesday night. Bloomberg, who hired a top-notch staff and glutted the airwaves with professional and well-produced ads, mounted a Super Tuesday strategy for the nomination that fell flat. He ended up with just one win – American Samoa – and 12 delegates, not having finished above third place in any U.S. state.

Self-funded candidates may appear to have an edge, but it's limited, experts say. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, 41 federal candidates self-financed their campaigns in 2018. Nine of them won.

"As the costs of running for office have escalated, more and more candidates are jumping into politics using their personal fortune, rather than trying to raise all those funds from other people. Though they don't lack for money, self-funded candidates typically lose at the polls," said a summation by the group, which is nonpartisan and analyzes campaign spending.

Analysts hypothesize that self-funded candidates often fail for two reasons: Voters might be turned off by the idea of someone "buying" an election, and a lack of outside donations may also translate into lost votes. Once a voter has made a donation – even $5 in a smartphone text – that person is literally invested in the race and presumably more likely to actually go out and vote, the theory goes.

But even raising money takes money. Sanders, for example, has spent more than $10 million – nearly 9% of his total expenditures – on fundraising, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Warren has spent $6.6 million, 7% of expenditures, while Biden's campaign has spent $3.5 million – less than 6% – on fundraising.

Sanders on Wednesday cast himself as the cleanest candidate, when it comes to fundraising.

"This campaign is different. We have received 8.7 million contributions from over 1.9 million donors," Sanders said in a tweet. "We don't hold high-dollar fundraisers. We don't have a super PAC spending millions of dollars on TV ads. We don't have a single billionaire donor. We have the people."

He'll need more of them, however, to secure the nomination.