What we learned from the final 2020 fundraising reports

Below, a few key takeaways:

The Washington Post’s Michelle Ye Hee Lee and Anu Narayanswamy have the full download on Trump’s report, which shows a post-election fundraising surge as Trump pushed baseless claims of voter fraud and pleaded for money to keep up the fight.

Trump raised more than $200 million in the three weeks between Election Day and Nov. 23, which is a record. The period included nearly 500 fundraising emails replete with baseless, incorrect and misleading claims.

But one thing Trump hasn’t spent much money on thus far? Actual legal fees. That is expected to rise in his next report, but this one reinforces the very real monetary value of his continuing to press his baseless case — outside of contesting the 2020 election:

Since late October, the Trump campaign spent $8.8 million on bringing legal challenges to election results in key states, including recounts. Of that amount, $30,000 in legal consulting fees went to Jenna Ellis, one of the most prominent lawyers on Trump’s post-election legal team, according to federal filings made public Thursday night. More legal fees are expected to be reported in upcoming filings.

Most of the money raised can be diverted for other political purposes, which the Trump campaign had to disclose even as its fundraising missives were premised on the legal fight. Currently, 75 percent goes to a Trump political action committee, and 25 percent goes to the Republican Party. Donors need to give more than $6,000 before those funds start going to Trump’s specific effort to contest vote counts.

We’ll have to see in the next report just how many donors’ dollars went to the stated purpose.

One person who hasn’t ponied up for the effort? Trump himself.

In September, Trump said that he would fund his own campaign — as he did in 2016 to some extent — if need be. “If I have to, I will,” Trump said. “Whatever it takes, we have to win.”

But despite his narrow loss in the decisive states and his plea for cash to overturn the results, Trump hasn’t put his money where his mouth was — or is. Trump made no contributions down the stretch or after the election, leaving his total personal investment in his 2020 effort at about $8,000.

It’s not clear what amount of money might have changed the result, if any, but Trump lost by 0.6 percent or less in the three decisive states, meaning this was a competitive race as far as the electoral college goes.

The numbers in these reports generally tell us about the portion of the election that’s over. But there’s one big part of it that’s ongoing: the two Georgia Senate runoffs that will determine control of the Senate. Democrats need to win both to get to 50-50 in the Senate and have Vice President-elect Kamala D. Harris break ties.

So far it’s a bit of a mixed bag for Democrats, particularly when it comes to outside groups.

The Democratic-aligned Senate Majority PAC, for example, had about $2 million cash on hand as of Nov. 24. The GOP-aligned Senate Leadership Fund raised more than $70 million after Election Day and had more than $60 million left. The latter group, which is affiliated with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), and allied groups have already spent significantly more in Georgia than their Democratic counterparts.

One thing the Democrats’ Senate Majority PAC did spend money on? The Lincoln Project, run by anti-Trump Republicans, to which it gave $550,000.

The Republican National Committee also continued its usual dominance over the Democratic National Committee, with a $59 million-to-$24 million edge in cash on hand.

Some of the gap, though, could be made up by former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams’s Fair Fight, which raised nearly $35 million over the entire fundraising period and could be a significant player in the runoffs. We’ll have to see where each candidate’s fundraising is.

After every election cycle, each party seeks to reflect upon where its resources were well-spent and where it could have been more strategic. But donors are often the opposite of strategic, tossing gobs of money at unwinnable races because they really dislike the incumbent.

That was the case in 2020 — to a massive extent.

Democrats flooded the coffers of Kentucky Senate candidate Amy McGrath, for example, with more than $93 million, in the hope of unseating Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). But the race was never a top target for the party, and McGrath lost by about 20 points.

The other attempt at unseating a much-derided GOP senator came in South Carolina, where Jaime Harrison raised about $130 million against Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.). This one was considered potentially competitive, but Harrison lost by 10 points.

That’s more than $220 million for two campaigns that didn’t wind up being close.

Not to be outdone, Republicans tossed tens of millions of dollars at even less-winnable House races. They gave about $42 million combined to candidates running against Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) and to a Baltimore candidate, Kimberly Klacik, whose message deriding the Democratic leaders of urban cities was frequently promoted by Trump. None of them got even 30 percent of the vote. Klacik went from 25 percent in a special election earlier this year to 28 percent.

Michelle Ye Hee Lee contributed to this report.