The Moat & The Monster
Let’s stipulate that getting elected is hard, and the decision to run for office today befuddles most rational people. For those few that do decide to charge the castle, there are two key barriers to entry that make defeating a career politician even harder than maybe it should be.
1. The Moat: Establishing a Meaningful Digital Footprint
While it's relatively simple to purchase a domain name, choose a website template, and set up social media accounts, building a meaningful online presence is a different story. Mastering search engine optimization (SEO), generating consistent and engaging content, and effectively managing these digital platforms require significant time and expertise that is not particularly relevant to the day-to-day duties of an elected official. Now imagine if you were trying to balance your online presence with canvassing and the myriad responsibilities that candidates balance while seeking office.
In nearly every political race, there are candidates who face digital shortcomings such as:
No website;
A social media account with a handful of followers;
A website with broken links to social or donation pages; or
A website with no substantive content about the candidate regarding positions on key issues or relevant achievements.
Many candidates do find a way to scale the moat and effectively reach voters digitally. But there are also many candidates with much to offer that struggle or ultimately fail in this area. Rather than fragment candidates’ online presence through campaign websites, Facebook, X, Instagram, TikTok, and other platforms, we should fill in the moat and make it easier for prospective candidates to reach their constituents digitally.
2. The Monster: Career Politicians with Piles of Cash
Career politicians have a significant advantage due to the substantial cash reserves in their campaign funds, which serve as a major deterrent to prospective challengers. Current State Representatives and Senators for Suffolk, Middlesex, and Norfolk county began 2024 with a median campaign cash balance of $38,500. Over 40% of candidates began the year with a cash balance exceeding $50,000, and 20 candidates had cash balances exceeding $100,000.
Additionally, candidates can sometimes repurpose their campaign funds when seeking different offices, providing a financial safety net and further discouraging new challengers. So not only is the campaign fund a deterrent for winners, but it’s also a safety net for candidates that are faced with prospective or actual defeat. The candidate doesn’t have to spend the money in the election cycle that the donor contributed in. In fact, the donor can use the contribution to fund themselves in a different race. This seems potentially unfair to the donor. Maybe the candidate lost the donor’s support. Or worse, maybe the voter ends up inadvertently funding multiple candidates in the same race.
Whereas the digital footprint moat is an inconvenience, the career politician funding advantage is a monster that kills many campaigns before inception. The top universities in our country receive lots of scrutiny for only spending down small percentages of their massive endowments. Should politicians receive similar scrutiny for a similar reason? America prides itself on competition. If we want more competitive elections, maybe this is where we should look to innovate first.
