Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

3 charts that show money can’t stop Donald Trump

Last night was a devastating defeat for Marco Rubio, whose big losses in the Super Tuesday II primaries caused him to drop out of the Republican race. But the scale of the disaster is even bigger when we look at the amount of money Rubio and the Republican establishment spent in the past weeks to try to stop Trump.

It shows that Trump is winning while spending incredibly little on any sort of advertising. Other candidates, like Rubio, went aggressive on advertising, only to have their efforts rebuffed by voters.

According to ad-buying data from SMG Delta, posted by Mark Murray of NBC News, Rubio’s Super PAC and campaign spent a massive amount of money in several of the March 15 primary states.

For instance, in his home state of Florida Rubio spent $8.2 million, far more than the rest of candidates combined. But he only received 636,450 votes. That means he spent nearly $13 per vote.

Compare that with Donald Trump, who barely spent anything on advertising on the path to his Florida victory.

It wasn’t just Rubio advertising against Trump. Several Super PACs including American Future Fund, Club for Growth, and Our Principles PAC poured another $7.4 million in anti-Trump ads. Despite all the attacks, Trump was able to claim the victory spending only $2.05 per vote.

Illinois was even worse for Rubio: He spent far more than any other Republican in the state, but he finished last with less than 9 percent of the vote. And despite $4.3 million worth of negative ads, Trump was able to win easily. He spent less than a quarter per vote in the state.

Ad spending per vote in Illinois

Last but not least, Missouri shows a similar (if less dramatic) story. There, Rubio spent $384,000 and earned a paltry 6 percent of the vote. The anti-Trump groups did not invest much there, leaving to Cruz the task of stopping Trump’s juggernaut. But again, Trump spent less than his competitors and gained more votes.

These figures aren’t quite as dramatic as some early election cycle figures, which showed Jeb Bush spending an absurd $5,000 per vote. But they do show there are limits to how much advertising can do to sway voters — and, for Rubio, those limitations were quite serious.

WATCH: Donald Trump’s ideology of violence

More in Politics

Podcasts
The Supreme Court abortion pills case, explainedThe Supreme Court abortion pills case, explained
Podcast
Podcasts

How Louisiana brought mifepristone back to SCOTUS.

By Peter Balonon-Rosen and Sean Rameswaram
Politics
Trump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expectedTrump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expected
Politics

As Trump heads to China, attention and resources are being shifted from Asia to yet another war in the Middle East.

By Joshua Keating
Politics
Are far-right politics just the new normal?Are far-right politics just the new normal?
Politics

Liberals are preparing for a longer war with right-wing populists than they once expected.

By Zack Beauchamp
The Logoff
Flavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA headFlavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA head
The Logoff

Why Marty Makary is out at the FDA, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters
Politics
Virginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymanderVirginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymander
Politics

Democrats just handed the Supreme Court’s Republicans a loaded weapon.

By Ian Millhiser
The Logoff
Can Trump lower gas prices?Can Trump lower gas prices?
The Logoff

What suspending the gas tax would mean for you, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters