Contributor: Dr. Leo Kivijarv, EVP/Research, PQ Media
In April, RAB posted two guest blogs I wrote about political media buying during the 2024 elections. At the time, I postulated that this election was unlike any previous election cycle because there were 20 “Great Unknowns,” including whether Trump would step down as a candidate before the Republican National Convention if convicted, and subsequently jailed, in any of the various court cases against him.
We now know that did not happen. Trump received the Republican endorsement at the national convention to be their presidential candidate, despite being found guilty of fraud in New York State, which includes a $434 million payment, as well as 34 counts of falsified business accounts in federal court, although sentencing has been delayed due to a new Great Unknown, to be discussed below. Two or the three other court cases originally scheduled to be prosecuted before the 2024 elections have been delayed until after the election, aided by a conservative-leaning justice system he built during his presidency. The third case was dismissed, but it is currently on appeal, which is a second new Great Unknown.
In addition to the two new legal Great Unknowns, three other Great Unknowns occurred, bringing the total of Great Unknowns to 25, unprecedented in modern day election cycles. What’s impressive is that these five new Great Unknowns occurred within a short 24-day time frame.
Four of the five new Great Unknowns are unprecedented. For example, no former president has ever been charged in court with multiple offenses, let alone one running for the office again, which led to two of the Great Unknowns. The anomaly is the assassination attempt, as that has occurred four times before: Teddy Roosevelt in 1912, Robert Kennedy in 1968, George Wallace in 1972, and Ted Kennedy in 1979.
It should be noted that if the Great Unknown #25 had not happened, this update blog entry would not have been written. The other four Great Unknowns didn’t significantly change PQ Media’s estimate for political media buying that was made in April.
Great Unknown #21: The Biden-Trump Debate (June 27)
Before the debate, there were two major themes being discussed in the media and among political operatives of both parties. The first theme was about Trump’s performance, given the limitations of the venue, particularly that his microphone would be shut off when he wasn’t speaking, thus no interruptions like the 2020 debate. Trump was his usual self, not answering questions posed to him, but misdirecting answers about the 2020 election and comparisons between the Trump and Biden administrations. After the debate, many of his comments were largely ignored due to how poorly Biden performed.
The second theme was about Biden’s performance, and which type of speaker he would be. Most Democrats hoped he would be the fiery candidate from the State of Union address that helped drive a rise in campaign donations. Most Republicans hoped he would be the feeble candidate that matched their narrative that Biden was too old to serve another term. Unfortunately, it was the latter in spades, which led to the Great Unknown #21 – the unexpected and unprecedented reactions afterwards.
There have been poor performances in debates before, such as Trump’s performance in the first debate with Clinton in 2016, as well as controversy over a particular statement made during the debate, such as Ford’s mistaken announcement during the 1976 debate with Carter that Eastern European countries were free rather than under Soviet Russian domination. However, there has never been such an uproar as seen after the Biden performance. His performance was so bad that many Democratic politicians called for him to drop out of the race, starting five days later when Representative Lloyd Doggett of Texas became the first of many to publicly shame the president’s performance. Hollywood and financial supporters, particularly George Clooney who had hosted a major fundraiser just weeks earlier, soon joined the chorus of detractors. Despite the extremely negative feedback, Biden swore to continue his Democratic bid for the presidency at rallies and during rapidly arranged television interviews. In the meantime, the next three Great Unknowns occurred.
Great Unknown #22: Supreme Court Grants Trump Partial Immunity (July 1)
Exactly 11 months after Trump was indicted on federal charges for undertaking a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election, the 22nd Great Unknown occurred when the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) provided Trump with the best outcome possible. This was after all other attempts by the Trump legal team to delay the trial until after the election had been rebuked by the U.S. Appeals Court time and time again. Most legal scholars were surprised that SCOTUS agreed to hear arguments, who became further frustrated when SCOTUS pushed back the ruling by months, rather than delivering the opinion within days, such as was seen during Watergate. The legal scholars were shocked by the ruling, as it overturned precedent set during the Watergate hearings and allowed the President to be above the law in some instances. Many groups, like MoveOn, showed their displeasure with the ruling by developing marketing messages citing Justice Sotomayor’s comment about the ruling, “with fear for our democracy, I dissent.”
Although the federal case for was not dismissed as a result of the ruling, it put into question many of the charges against Trump, given that they occurred while he was still in office. As stated so eloquently by the U.S. Appeals Court before the immunity clause was appealed to SCOTUS, a positive ruling would allow a current president to order a military SWAT team to kill an opponent in an upcoming election if he/she was able to justify the act as a threat to the country. Due to this ruling, it is believed this federal case will not be tried before the November elections, although it still might occur before the January 2025 inauguration, as Judge Tanya Chutkan of the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., was “fast tracking” the case before the SCOTUS appeal, publicly stating she hoped to try the case before the election. As this blog is being posted, new stories have circulated that Chutkan wants to begin the process immediately. Additionally, there is the possibility that the American public might still hear the overwhelming evidence against Trump in a public forum before the elections because Chutkan might decide instead to hold a public hearing so that U.S. Prosecutor Jack Smith could present his overwhelming evidence on each count so that Chutkan can decide which counts meet, or don’t meet, the immunity clause, and then hold the trial after the November election based on her ruling as to which counts are still prosecutable.
Great Unknown #23: Trump Assassination Attempt (July 13)
During a rally held just before the Republican National Convention in Bethel, Pennsylvania, a young man attempted to assassinate Trump, with a bullet narrowly missing Trump’s head and grazing his ear. As stated earlier, this was unexpected as it had happened only four previous times, thus becoming the Great Unknown #23. Bloodied by the attempt that unfortunately killed a rally attendee, Trump seized on the moment to strengthen his persona by raising his fist in defiance as he was led off the stage. Within days, that image was plastered on t-shirts, mugs and other promotional products hawked on social media, as well as used in Trump e-mail and direct mail fundraising outreaches that raised millions of dollars.
At the convention, Trump continued to control the narrative, by appearing every single day, rather than only on the final two days like most previous candidates, wearing a bandage over the damaged ear, including during his lengthy acceptance speech. This prompted many delegates to show their support by wearing a bandage over their ears during the convention that was part of the free earned media campaign. In normal election cycles, images such as these help to raise a candidate’s profile with independent and swing voters, driving an increase in poll results. Unfortunately for Trump, the rise in the polls was short-lived, although the next Great Unknown continued his streak of favorable events for his campaign.
Great Unknown #24: Florida Judge Dismisses Mar-a-Lago Documents Case (July 15)
Two days after the Trump assassination attempt, Judge Aileen Cannon of the U.S. District Court in Florida, dismissed dozens of felony charges in the Mar-a-Lago documents case. This case had been ongoing for more than year, starting before the January 6 insurrection case. However, it had been delayed multiple times when Trump’s legal team appealed certain aspects of the case. The delays were elongated, aided by Judge Cannon’s decision to not rule immediately on most delays, rather leaving most in limbo for months. Similar to the immunity appeal, her ruling on this appeal shocked most legal scholars, particularly after she heard three days of arguments, mostly from entities not associated with the trial, which was unprecedented, a term I seem to be using often in this update blog entry.
As this blog is being posted, Smith and the U.S. Department of Justice have appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta. In previous appeals brought by Smith and the Justice Department, the 11th Circuit has overwhelmingly supported his positions and strongly admonished Judge Cannon. Smith is expected to win the latest appeal, according to many legal scholars. Additionally, there have been numerous requests for Cannon to recuse herself, given her numerous rulings that favored Trump and were overturned on appeal. She has resisted those efforts, including two made by her superiors before the case began.
Great Unknown #25: Biden Drops Out, Endorses Harris (July 21)
As a result of the previous four Great Unknowns, Trump was rising rapidly in many national and state polls throughout July, particularly in the battleground states. As such, the Trump team began thinking of revising its media-buying strategies by considering an option to spend slightly less than expected in select battleground states in which he was beginning to win handily, such as Arizona, and relying more heavily on free earned media. However, in preparing the original April estimate, PQ Media factored in his high reliance of free earned media that he receives after statements made at a rally or on Truth Social that become fodder in the news coverage of the campaign that day. For example, about a week before this blog was posted, he unexpectedly appeared at the National Association of Black Journalists Convention, and during questioning by reporters became “belligerent and spewing misinformation,” which was the lead story on a number of cable news networks that evening. It helped stem the tide of Harris generating free earned media and Trump being ignored by the press.
For weeks, Biden was steadfast in his efforts to remain in the race during this period. As such, his campaign began spending more money on advertising and marketing after the disastrous debate in those battleground states where his poll numbers were plummeting. Many of the new ads were targeted against the ultra-conservative Heritage Foundation publication, “Project 2025,” a conservative manifesto that would consolidate the executive powers of the president, as well as limit social programs for people of color. While Trump denied reading the report, many of the contributors listed in the report were former Trump officials and espoused policies backed by Trump during his presidency. Thus, when factoring in fewer media buys for Trump against an increase in Biden’s spending, the overall spend on the presidential election remained almost unchanged in July after the first four Great Unknowns.
Then the Great Unknown #25 happened. Ironically, the announcement that Biden was dropping out of the race and endorsing Harris came on the social media platform X, owned by Trump supporter Elon Musk, who pledged $45 million per month two days earlier for the remainder of the campaign. Within a week, so many things happened that PQ Media found it necessary to update its political media-buying estimate.
- With Biden dropping out, many within the Democratic party wondered whether legally that the party had to convene an “Open” Democratic National Convention (DNC), in which multiple candidates would be placed into nomination to replace Biden. However, within 24 hours that became unnecessary because most of the opposing candidates, including many on the short list to serve as Harris’ vice president candidate, threw their support behind her, such as Buttigieg, Kelly and Shapiro, among others. Within 48 hours, holdouts for the open convention, such as Schumer and Jeffries, lent their support to Harris after she quickly received the support of all the state delegations, and she gained the necessary votes to win at the Chicago convention. Once former President Obama was assured there wouldn’t be an open convention, he gave his support to Harris a few days later.
- The new Harris-for-President campaign received almost $75 million in donations within 24 hours, and as I write this, it’s increased to $200 million in eight days. Most importantly, the Harris campaign announced that approximately two thirds of the donations came from people who had yet donated in 2024, many of whom had been considered independents or swing voters when Biden was the candidate. In addition to the donations, the Harris campaign got commitments from over 170,000 volunteers, which will increase the monies spent on direct mail, telemarketing and other marketing media platforms associated with grassroots campaigning.
- Most importantly, the polls have tightened, particularly in battleground states. According to a Fox poll taken a week after the change, Harris had tied Trump in Pennsylvania and Michigan, while being only one point behind in Wisconsin. Mathematically, based on the most current projections by leading prognosticators like Cook’s Political Report, if Harris wins in those three states (as well as those the Democrats are currently favored), she also wins the electoral college 270 to 268. Furthermore, CNN predicted when reporting on the Fox polls, that the Harris path to victory doesn’t include just those three states, as they did for Biden. She could lose one of those states, but polls show her narrowing Trump’s lead in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada and North Carolina. With less than 100 days to the election, she could cut deeper into Trump’s lead and overcome him by November.
- As referenced earlier, just as telling was that Trump’s attempts to use earned media were failing. Three days after the Biden/Harris announcement, reports stated that Trump was frustrated that he wasn’t controlling the news cycle anymore, particularly so soon after the Republican National Convention that historically gives a candidate a bump in the polls until the opposing party’s convention. That didn’t happen this year, as the Biden announcement took away all his thunder. His attempts to attack Harris at rallies, and by his allies elsewhere, have been perceived negatively by many in the media as sexist and racist, such as his comments that she once was considered an Asian American, but is now considered an African American. Not helping are comments made by his vice president choice, J.D. Vance, such as his “childless cat ladies” references, as well as Trump allies who are calling Harris the DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) candidate.
- Meanwhile, Harris rallies are receiving much more airplay than most Biden rallies had before he dropped out. Many reporters at the events have noticed a high energy level among the attendees that hasn’t been seen since the 2008 Obama campaign. Additionally, PACs have come forward to support Harris from normally Republican strongholds, such as “Vets Against Trump” and “Haley Voters for Harris.” New Democratic PACs have also been formed, such as “White Dudes for Harris,” that have broken records for Zoom participants, and behind the record fundraising referenced earlier. Younger voters are also embracing Harris, such as a Gen Z poll that showed a 60-40 margin in her favor, compared to a previous poll showing Biden with only a six-point lead over Trump in this demographic. Harris is expected to spend more on social media and influencer marketing than Biden had earmarked to reach this audience, such as the use of the coconut tree meme.
- As a result of Harris’ meteoric rise in the polls, the Trump team has had to reverse its strategy that I discussed earlier. Trump can no longer cut traditional media buying and rely more heavily on free earned media in some battleground states, as he is no longer winning in those states by five percentage points or more. Additionally, Trump was considering diverting some funds to previous Democratic strongholds, like Minnesota and Virgina, where the polls had narrowed after Biden’s poor showing in the debate. That is no longer going to happen as Harris has increased the leads to pre-debate levels, if not higher. Concurrently, Harris has been aggressive in posting television ads in battleground states before the DNC, which is unprecedented for a candidate, so that undecided and swing voters become more familiar with her. She is also spending significantly on streaming video on national fundraising ads, as well as increasing marketing spend on categories like promotional products (bumper stickers, t-shirts with her image), influencer marketing and marketing research. Soon after her vice-president is chosen, out-of-home will see a bump as Biden-Harris lawn signs are replaced by Harris-New VP signs.
Revised Political Media Buying Projection
In April, PQ Media announced that total political media buying would reach $14.64 billion in 2024, a 44% increase over 2020. We have revised are estimates upward, taking into account the additional fundraising that Harris accomplished in a short time period, combined with Trump relying less on earned media and more on traditional media buying. Our revised estimate is $15.02 billion, an increase of slightly less than $400 million, representing a slightly higher gain of 48% compared with 2020 spending. We have not revised any other races, such as the Senate. There is a chance in the upcoming weeks that spending in certain races will tighten that are currently leaning or are likely Republican candidates, but conversely current toss-up races might swing to leaning or are likely Democratic candidates, such as seen in Pennsylvania last week.
Television, including broadcast, cable and streaming, will see approximately 60% of the nearly $400 million. For example, streaming video’s growth rate (2024 versus 2020) has been revised upward to 512% compared with 488% in April. We also think that Harris will schedule more rallies than Biden, leading experiential marketing to climb 278% compared with 263% in April. As a reminder, most experiential marketing was cancelled during the 2020 elections due to the pandemic.
Where does radio fit in? Audio was revised only slightly, as presidential candidates do not use the medium as much as local candidates, like House members and governors. As such, the 2024 estimate was revised to $779 million, a 37% increase, compared with $769 million, a 35% gain, predicted in April.