Democrats’ Fortunes Are Expanding Into Red Territory. Their Cash Can’t Keep Up.

Democrats’ eyes may be bigger than their wallets.

Democrats across a slate of deep-red states are clamoring for more cash to fight for Senate seats that suddenly seem within reach, with polling showing them competitive across a swath of normally impregnable territory from Kansas to Florida and South Carolina to Mississippi prompting a sudden bump in late-stage spending from outside groups. The party’s main campaign groups have already begun spending in Texas, another state they once downplayed that’s come seriously into play.

But those same groups say they don’t have enough cash to protect the core battleground and also make significant investments beyond it — setting up Democrats for a series of difficult choices in the closing weeks of the midterms.

“It’s very clear in the polling: If we get our message out, we're going to win. We're also not an expensive state to advertise in,” said Scott Colom, the Mississippi Democratic Senate nominee. “When it comes to Mississippi, we've been ignored for far too long.”

Some Democrats see a generational opportunity to win seats in red states, driven by voters’ frustration with the economy that has hit rural and poorer red states particularly hard. And they’re starting to play around the edges.

American Bridge PAC has pumped $2.1 million into Mississippi, where it is running ads targeting GOP Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith. The state’s population is poor and mostly rural — two groups that have been particularly squeezed by high gas prices. Democrats have long dreamed it could become competitive, and Hyde-Smith didn’t reach 55% of the vote in her two previous Senate wins.

The PAC also on Wednesday put $2.5 million into Florida, $630,000 into South Carolina and over $410,000 into Kansas as part of a $22.7 million investment on 6,000 billboards focused on higher costs spanning roughly 80 House and Senate races, the group said.

“We are very aware that a durable majority means we are going to have to compete in totally new places, in states where we haven’t competed before,” American Bridge 21st Century President Pat Dennis told POLITICO on Wednesday. “And we also know that those changes don’t happen all at once, they’re investments over years.”

But Democrats, despite polling well, are being massively outspent on the airwaves across the core battleground states. They’re already heavily investing in a swath of states President Donald Trump won in 2024 by double-digit margins — Alaska, Iowa, and Ohio and, most recently, Texas. And they’re wary of spending big in states where major money chasing good polls have yielded very little in past elections.

“Across the board, this is belt-tightening time and campaigns and committees need to make sure the money is being spent on seats to secure a majority,” said one senior Democratic operative working on Senate races, granted anonymity to candidly discuss spending strategy. “The stark reality is there aren’t the funds at the national level to invest in the next ring of states without putting the genuine tossups at risk.”

That comes after a new group affiliated with former Vice President Kamala Harris’ super PAC dropped nearly $700,000 into Kansas last week to benefit Democrat Adam Hamilton, on top of nearly $5 million in recent spending from an outside group backed by a local attorney.

A group that backs Democratic doctors and scientists running for office, 314 Action, has bundled roughly $3.6 million for Annie Andrews in South Carolina. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) recently transferred $250,000 toward Angie Nixon in Florida, an expensive former swing state.

Those aren’t huge investments; Democrats have spent or reserved over $100 million in Ohio alone since Labor Day, according to data from tracking firm AdImpact.

But Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has included both Kansas and Mississippi in his pitches to donors and hosted a fundraiser for Colom over the summer. He told reporters last week “we’re going to do everything we can in as many states as we can.” Senate Majority PAC recently told POLITICO it is “actively thinking” about whether to wade into Kansas — even as the group, which posted a record third-quarter fundraising haul, warned last week in a memo to donors that “the resources we have now” are not enough to “expand into new opportunities.”

Republicans are legitimately concerned about Kansas, where high diesel and fertilizer prices driven by the war with Iran are hitting farmers and ranchers hard — outside groups have poured in more than $10 million into the state in recent days. Public and private polls show Hamilton tied or in the lead.

Danedri Herbert, the Kansas GOP chair, said she was confident Republican Sen. Roger Marshall will win reelection but is relieved national groups are now paying attention.

“I wouldn't want to leave it to chance,” Herbert said. “We're glad they're here and taking it seriously.”

In a statement, Hamilton spokesperson Tyson Brody said Washington Republicans are “panicking” and “sending in millions to try to distract from Marshall’s record.”

Some Democrats see good reason to spend more in some of the smaller long-shot states. Their money can go a lot further in Kansas, South Carolina and Mississippi — the same rationale they had when they invested in Alaska early this cycle but held off in Texas.

"It's not a huge amount of money in these states. A little money goes a long way,” said Jaime Harrison, former Democratic National Committee chair and former Senate candidate in South Carolina.

Democrats have been burned before by chasing these states. When Harrison ran for Senate in 2020, he raised $109 million. Polls showed a tight race before Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) beat him by 10 points.

Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) told POLITICO late last month that “we should be adding Mississippi onto that roster.”

“It’s also an issue of optimizing of money, right? Mississippi is a smaller market. So you might be able to invest and actually have great turnout,” Gallego said.

Gallego also said he hopes to campaign with Nixon in Florida, who’s a “really good candidate” facing a “very expensive” media market.

But most Democrats aren’t opening their wallets widely for Nixon, who joined the Democratic Socialists of America in June before her upset against well-funded establishment pick Alex Vindman in the primary. Nixon’s campaign has spent $64,000 on streaming ads so far, while Vindman spent $2 million on TV ads in the primary.

Nixon met with Schumer last week and “had a really great conversation,” said her campaign manager, Eunic Epstein-Ortiz. She also said DSCC leadership has been “very supportive of the race.” Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), who chairs the campaign arm, held a virtual fundraiser for Nixon.

In South Carolina, Andrews has posted healthy fundraising over a year into her campaign, which has helped her to blanket local broadcasts with ads for months against recently appointed GOP Sen. Darline Graham. Polls have found a close race.

Republicans are bearing down as well, putting $5 million for Graham in recent days.

In a statement, a spokesperson for Andrews said the campaign has “the resources we need to share our message about lowering costs.”

Kimberly Leonard and Lauren Fedor contributed to this report.