Why Big Donors Abandoned Trump in the 2020 Election Campaign

As the 2020 election grew closer, a noticeable shift in donor support became apparent. While Republican former President Donald Trump's campaign struggled to maintain financial momentum, Democratic nominee Joe Biden benefited from a wave of both small and large donations. This article explores the reasons behind this shift, focusing on the actions of big donors and the financial pressures facing both campaigns.

The Financial Looming Shadows: Why Big Donors Abandoned Trump

The wealth and influence of big donors play a crucial role in political campaigns. In the case of Trump, his 2016 victory was made possible by significant donations from affluent supporters. However, by 2020, the situation had changed drastically. The New York Times reported that Trump's campaign faced a significant cash crunch midway through the election season, despite his early financial advantages.

Key Financial Points:

Trump raised approximately $1.1 billion from the beginning of 2019 to July 2020, with $800 million already spent. His campaign had to make strategic cuts, pulling back on expensive advertisements and reallocating resources to survival mode. Democrats under Joe Biden, on the other hand, raised over $364 million in August alone.

The Challenge of Big Donor Relations

Big donors, who are often viewed as the lifeline of political campaigns, began to distance themselves from Trump. Several high-profile incidents and decisions contributed to this shift:

Influential Donors Like Sheldon Adelson:

Sheldon Adelson, a major financier of Republican candidates, had a falling out with Trump. In a heated phone call, Adelson criticized Trump for not doing enough to support his campaign. After this, Adelson cut off financial support, significantly damaging Trump's fundraising efforts. This action was seen by many top donors as a warning against similar missteps in the future.

Negative Consequences:

Fitness company magnate Stephen Ross faced backlash and was boycotted by fitness companies for hosting a fundraiser for Trump's campaign. These incidents, coupled with Biden’s aggressive fundraising efforts, made it clear that supporting Trump could come at a personal or financial cost.

The Correlation Between Wealth and Political Alignment

Financial support in American politics is deeply intertwined with political alignment. Rich donors often have a keen understanding of the electoral process and the importance of maintaining connections for future opportunities. This realization made it more difficult for Trump to retain his crucial donor base.

Key Points:

Big donors who have made their fortunes, regardless of the size of their wealth, had ample time to assess their alignment with Trump. Supporting Trump four years ago was seen as a mistake by many. Even if some gained financially under Trump, the dangers posed by his leadership became too significant to ignore.

The Shift in Strategic Focus

The shift in donor support was not just about individual contributions. It reflected a broader strategic change in how both campaigns were managed:

Trump's Campaign Adjustments:

The campaign had to focus more on conservative strongholds rather than direct voter outreach. Strategic decisions like suspending television ad campaigns and using presidential powers during the Republican National Convention became necessary survival tactics.

Biden's Campaign Advantages:

Biden's month of August saw record-breaking fundraising, largely due to small donations and infusions from Wall Street and Silicon Valley. These funds allowed Biden to have a more aggressive outreach strategy and greater resources to counter Trump's messaging.

As the election day approached, the significance of these financial shifts became increasingly clear, with Trump's campaign struggling to keep pace and Big Donors continuing to distance themselves.

Conclusion

The shift in big donor support reflects a broader trend of dissatisfaction with Trump's leadership and a more thorough assessment of political risks. While Trump still had financial resources, the lack of broad financial backing and the strategic advantages of a more united Democratic effort gave Biden the upper hand in the latter stages of the election.