2020 Presidential Fundraising — Contribution Size
The 2020 Democratic candidates for president recently submitted their fundraising reports for the first quarter of 2019 — for most, the first glimpse we have into their fundraising operation.
In this article, we’re taking a closer look at the direct contributions campaign raised this quarter, and dig a little deeper on the question of contribution size.
How Small is Small?
In these reports, the best long-term indicator of a campaign’s fundraising success is how they did raising money from donors in that quarter. When considering those contributions, a lot of attention is being paid to the amount of “small donations” that are being made to buoy the finances of the 2020 presidential candidates. But what exactly does that mean?
First, most reports of “small donations” are looking at the total amount of money each campaign raised from people who have not yet contributed $200 or more. Those are “unitemized” — that is, they are reported as one giant lump by each campaign, rather than listed as separate transactions for each donor/donation. By this measure, the top “small donation” performers are Senator Bernie Sanders, former Congressman Beto O’Rourke, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Senator Kamala Harris, and Senator Elizabeth Warren — with Sanders bringing nearly three times as much money in these unitemized contributions as next-place small-dollar raiser O’Rourke.
But despite the current frenzy about small-dollar donations, most campaigns will need a healthy stream of revenue from all-sized contributions in order to stay competitive over the next ~15 months of the primary. Only Sanders has so far demonstrated the capacity to lean near-exclusively on small-dollar donations.
So What About Medium and Large Donations?
Taking a closer look at contribution size for those that have donated $200 or more, we can get a sense of which candidates have so far developed a good balance across contribution size, and which are lopsided.
Having a balance is important because different-sized contributions can all help the campaign reach its financial goals in slightly different ways. Below is a review of each “band” of donation size, and a visualization of where each candidate stands with each:
- “Small donations” (less than $200) are great because just about anyone has the capacity to give at this level, so every supporter can be a prospective donor in this band. Some will give multiple times, but there actually tends to be a good deal of variation in the depth of commitment of a small-dollar donor — some are die-hards, but others are more “impulse” buyers, who responded to a good ad or email solicitation.
- “Medium donations” ($200-$999) are good for multiple donations. An early donor at this level is very committed, and, with the right engagement, will likely give again at a similar level, potentially several times.
- “Large donations” ($1,000-$1,999) are the most attractive prospects for multiple donations, because most who give this much to a candidate this early on are capable of “maxing out” and will ultimately do so if the campaign continues to do well and keep them engaged.
- “Max-outs” ($2,000-$2,800) have given or have nearly given the maximum amount they can in the primary. Their contributions really help move the needle, but they can’t/won’t do any more financially than they are already have.
- “Bundlers” (>$2,800) have already given the maximum they can to the primary, but have also given some or all they can to a candidate to save and use if/when he/she get into the general election. They are the best prospects to serve as “bundlers” or to help raise additional dollars for the campaign in their own networks.
When looked at this way, some trends start to emerge:
- Kamala Harris has a very strong, diverse fundraising base. She dominates in just about every category, suggesting she has real growing potential.
- Pete Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar, and Beto O’Rourke all consistently perform in the top half of the field across contribution sizes, which also likely means they have a lot of room to grow at every contribution size. That said, Buttigieg holds a significant advantage here, as a relatively small portion of his funds come from those that have already give $2,800 or more. In fact, over $1.2 million of Klobuchar’s funds are earmarked for the general election, should she advance to it — that’s over two-thirds of all the donations she brought in this quarter. That could be a real threat to her fundraising growth, unless she fully leverages those supporters to bundle new money for her.
- Elizabeth Warren’s fundraising is concerning. She has publicly eschewed raising anything but small-dollars, and it shows: she performs in the bottom half of the field for every contribution size. The same could be said of Bernie Sanders, but he more than makes up for it in small dollar contributions, where he dominates. Warren, on the other hand, raised the fifth-largest sum from small donations, behind O’Rourke, Buttigieg, and Harris — and three times less than Sanders.
- Cory Booker and Kristen Gillibrand appear to be facing similar challenges — neither has really cracked small dollar fundraising, and while their fundraising relies heavily on large/max donations, they aren’t doing well enough there, yet, to compensate for underperformance elsewhere. Both moved significant funds over from their senate campaigns this quarter, but that well is now dry. Their Q2 performance could prove decisive in their ability to stay competitive into 2020.
- Of those with the weakest Q1 fundraising numbers, the one that may qualify as “one to watch” is former Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper. While his small and medium donations underperformed relative to the field, his performance in the large and max-out categories improve his standing considerably. If he’s able to continue to do well there, and grow his small-dollar operation over time, he could continue to put up a credible fight.
