In the final stretch of the US presidential race, Kamala Harris’ campaign spent almost three times as much as Donald Trump’s in August, leveraging her financial advantage ahead of the November 5 election, according to financial disclosures.
Harris, who launched her presidential bid in July after President Joe Biden ended his own re-election campaign and endorsed her, reported spending $174 million last month. By contrast, Trump’s campaign, seeking a return to the White House, disclosed $61 million in expenditures to the Federal Election Commission.
The significant spending difference highlights Harris’ advantage in fundraising, allowing her to saturate key battleground states with television ads. However, historical precedent shows that a financial edge doesn’t guarantee victory. In the 2016 election, Trump defeated Hillary Clinton despite raising less money than his Democratic opponent.
Both candidates reported that most of their August spending went toward advertising, with additional funds allocated for campaign rallies, travel, and staff salaries. Harris also made a notable $75,000 donation to the Detroit Unity Fund, a nonprofit aimed at increasing Black voter turnout in Michigan, a critical battleground state.
Harris’ campaign has enjoyed a surge in donations, particularly after Biden’s underwhelming debate performance against Trump. This financial boost left her campaign with a war chest of $235 million by the end of August, slightly above its starting balance for the month.
In contrast, Trump’s campaign saw its balance decrease to $135 million, around $17 million less than at the beginning of August, as it drew heavily on its funds to fuel campaign efforts.
Fundraising has been a key factor for both campaigns. Harris reported raising $190 million in August, compared to $45 million raised by Trump during the same period. Both campaigns had previously revealed fundraising totals that included their respective political parties’ accounts.
As the race intensifies, the financial gap could influence the final outcome, especially in the swing states that are likely to decide the election. Despite the spending disparity, recent polls show Harris and Trump locked in a tight race, with both candidates vying for crucial electoral votes.