(Also at Let's Talk Nevada. Check us out & join the conversation.)
Ever since the election, we’ve been scouring every nook and cranny to figure out how and why a “giant Republican Wave” crashed down upon Nevada. Politicians and pundits have been spinning the results all sorts of ways. And various high-level Democrats have offered various excuses as to why their party lost so badly.
One argument we keep hearing about is money. Who had it? And who had none? Today, we’ll be touring the exciting world of campaign contribution and expense (C&E) reports to get a better sense of where the money went.
For some Nevada Republicans, money certainly wasn’t a problem. Brian Sandoval, Michael Roberson, and the No on 3 campaign were all raking it in as the “bid’ness interests” were making it rain on all their preferred candidates. But then again, that isn’t new in Nevada.
But then again, it wasn’t as if all Nevada Democrats were running broke. Rather, the Nevada State Democratic Party (NSDP) raised over $2.1 million this year. State Assembly Democrats by and large outraised their Republican counterparts. State Senate Democrats kept pace with their Republican counterparts in fundraising. And in NV-04, Steven Horsford outraised Cresent Hardy by over $1.1 million.
So where was the money going? So far, we’re noticing quite a few high-priced Washington, DC, based consultants on these C&E forms. Rep. Horsford’s campaign spent over $100,000 on just one DC based consultant: Chris Bohner (aka Radish LLP). The campaign spent over $250,000 on GMMB, another DC based political consulting shop. And those aren’t the only DC consulting shops that were paid good money by Horsford’s campaign.
Meanwhile at NSDP, the party spent almost $390,000 on “Old Towne Media”. But wait, who or what is “Old Towne Media”? It’s actually a front for Canal Partners Media, a high-priced DC based media consultant shop. And remember, the party only paid for some pro-Ross Miller ads this year.
And then, there’s the Assembly Democratic Caucus. Most of the Assembly Democratic candidates were continually pouring money into The Pivot Group. The Pivot Group is… Wait for it, another DC based consulting outfit. This company designs campaign mail and provides advice on microtargeting. And apparently, The Pivot Group advised these candidates on their voter communication strategy, which was to wait until October and start with generic, milquetoast mail drops.
Before anyone starts calling me “naive” about “how campaigns work”, let’s clear this up. I’ve seen what happens inside campaigns for nearly a decade. I understand that consultants are often necessary for campaigns these days. The days of “the kitchen cabinet” are long gone.
Yet with that being said, how much must one spend on consultants? When does one start to realize that certain high dollar DC consultants may not be delivering their money’s worth? And why lose sight of the basic fundamentals of winning an election: crafting a compelling message to win over voters and have in place a strong field effort to turn them out?
As I was wondering what happened in Nevada this year and why, I remembered a classic aphorism: Follow the money. So I did. And it didn’t take me long to realize what had occurred.
In Part 1 of this series, we identified Nevada Democrats’ failure to develop a cohesive message to unite all the candidates and excite the base. We also identified their failure to put in place a proper field operation to turn those voters out. Now we have a better sense of where the money went. Sadly for them, it doesn’t look like it was money well spent.