I read a Facebook post recently which claimed, "Dollars can't vote in elections. Only people can vote."
This carries some literal truth to it but aside from that I think it's basically wrong. Let's look at the 2012 election.
According to the New York Times, total spending by candidates and the SuperPACs that supported them was $1.25 billion (Romney and supporters) and $1.05 billion (Obama and supporters).
The number of votes in this race was about 127 million, with 66 million to Obama and 61 million to Romney.
A simple calculation shows that Romney and his supporters spent about $20.50 for every vote Romney received, while Obama and his supporters spent about $15.90 for every vote they received. Swing states are where most of the spending takes place though, because a small number of votes in these states could change the result of the national election. In Ohio, Obama & allies spent about $24 for every vote received while Romney & allies spent about $30 for every vote received. (Calculated from these sources: Votes / Spending )
This is not how much it costs to buy a vote, though. A useful vote is much more expensive. In a "swing state," the actual election results can be really lopsided. But in swing states, each side is almost guaranteed to get at least 40% of the votes. So in a swing state, the percentage of voters who are "persuadable" could be 20% (this is pretty speculative -- it could be smaller or larger, but a swing state in a lopsided election, such as Ohio or California in 1980 (both were swing states) favors one side over the other by less than 20 percent of total votes cast.
The number of votes in this race was about 127 million, with 66 million to Obama and 61 million to Romney.
A simple calculation shows that Romney and his supporters spent about $20.50 for every vote Romney received, while Obama and his supporters spent about $15.90 for every vote they received. Swing states are where most of the spending takes place though, because a small number of votes in these states could change the result of the national election. In Ohio, Obama & allies spent about $24 for every vote received while Romney & allies spent about $30 for every vote received. (Calculated from these sources: Votes / Spending )
This is not how much it costs to buy a vote, though. A useful vote is much more expensive. In a "swing state," the actual election results can be really lopsided. But in swing states, each side is almost guaranteed to get at least 40% of the votes. So in a swing state, the percentage of voters who are "persuadable" could be 20% (this is pretty speculative -- it could be smaller or larger, but a swing state in a lopsided election, such as Ohio or California in 1980 (both were swing states) favors one side over the other by less than 20 percent of total votes cast.
If we assumed that all of Obama's and Romney's 2012 spending in Ohio was aimed at 20% of Ohio voters, they (with their allies) collectively spent $146 million wooing 1.1 million voters, or $133 per vote.
