The unintended consequences of Republican campaign funding
|This, times three|
But, as recently reported in The Washington Post, that may no longer be true.
“There could be as many as a dozen candidates that have a threshold amount of money in their campaigns and super PACs to compete vigorously in the early states,” said Phil Cox, a Republican strategist who runs America Leads, a super PAC supporting New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie that has the backing of at least two billionaires.
[. . .]
Never have so many candidates entered a White House contest boosted by such huge sums. The financial arms race could fuel a protracted primary season similar to the one in 2012 — exactly what party leaders were hoping to avoid.
If raising money is not the problem it used to be, at least for a number of candidates, more of them will stick around hoping, perhaps, that the improbable happens.
Though I doubt lower tier candidates like Cruz or Paul stand a chance, the longer A-listers have to fend off their attacks, the more damaged they will be, and the more likely they will be to say things that will not help them in the general election.
These could be the kinds of things that alienate moderate voters if they go too far to the right or that demotivate far right voters if they push back against extremist views.