This is the first Presidential election after the "Citizens United" decision, which determined that money was speech. Yet, look at the money, and where it came from, during this campaign!
Republican outside, "Citizen United" type money, outspent the Democrats by a little more than 3 to 1.
Democratic Outside Spending: $128,020,533
Republican Outside Spending: $407,889,381
How could the Democrats make up such a sizable disadvantage from Super PACS? The answer is the only answer possible: from PEOPLE.
Obama, large and small, had more contributions from individual citizens. More people decided to send money to the Obama campaign than to the Romney campaign. By a lot. Small donations to Obama outnumbered small donations to Romney by, well, coincidentally, a little more than 3 to 1. Each small donor is a committed voter.
Obama, Small Individual Contributions: $214,314,215
Romney, Small Individual Contributions: $ 70,851,796
Obama, Large Individual Contributions: $423,360,831
Romney ,Large Individual Contributions: $316,212,124
Obama, Total Individual Contributions: $631,650,564
Romney, Total Individual Contributions: $384,901,892
Obama even received more in donations from individuals who made large contributions. Since those are also capped, unlike PAC money, it stands to reason that Obama had more individuals contributing more large contributions as well as small contributions. They, too, are committed voters.
In the end, committed money from committed donors, who become committed voters, narrowly yet decisively was able to overcome the hundreds of millions which came from a committed few.
In the end, when you think about it, this sort of campaign, of committed voters, is not new. In the end, we took the road MOST traveled on. And THAT made all the difference....