Can a $1 million budget be effective? Convincing major donors (even minor donors) that it is may be crucial. Here's one attempt to make that case.
Meek & Crist lost in 2010 but their campaigns certainly didn't go unnoticed. On average they raised about $10 mil. How much of that actually reached voters? Some went into salaries. Some went into consultants. Some went into travel. Some went into polling. It should be possible to find out an approximate figure, but it's possible that not more than $5 mil went into actual voter outreach (i.e., tv, radio, web, direct mail).
Given my 'crowd-source' model, my $1 mi budget may mean $900G of out-reach. Furthermore, my encouragement and guidance and simplicity of independent expenditure can mean my own expenditures are matched or even exceeded by voter outreach expenditures by my supporters. Actual effective expenditures may be more like $2 mil.
The most money doesn't always win; the actual requirement is to avoid being 'de minimus'. At $2 mil versus $5 mil, I think it can be argued that I'll not be invisible. And that may be enough.
Also consider that there are 11.2 million registered voters in FL. Say 6 million will participate by voting. Say 2 million of them might be persuaded to vote for me. Say only 2% of those might be persuaded to contribute (that's 40,000). Say the average contribution is $100. That's $4 million. And factoring in the independent expenditure effect above, actual outreach could be more like $8 million. Not saying those numbers will play out, but they're not impossible.
