The 2024 general election in Wyoming revealed a familiar political trend—spending money can be an effective way to influence election outcomes, but it doesn’t always guarantee success, Cowboy State Daily reports.
In particular, while candidates and groups who spent significant amounts had success in many races, others found that more money didn’t always translate into victory.
One example of the complexities of campaign spending comes from the Democratic National Committee (DNC), which invested over $550,000 in Wyoming’s election cycle to support the state party’s get-out-the-vote efforts. Despite this sizable expenditure, the DNC saw limited gains, securing just one seat in the Wyoming Legislature. Democrats were not competitive in either of Wyoming’s two congressional races, further highlighting the challenges in a predominantly conservative state.
In contrast, former President Donald Trump’s campaign was highly successful, spending approximately $1.4 million in Wyoming since 2023. Trump, who won the state by a margin of 46 percentage points, secured 71% of the vote, marking his third consecutive overwhelming victory in the Cowboy State. His spending amounted to about $7.27 per vote, a figure that reflects a successful, well-funded campaign strategy. However, Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris, who spent no money directly in Wyoming, only received 25% of the vote, underscoring the challenges for Democrats in a state that leans heavily Republican.
On the state legislative level, the Wyoming Freedom Caucus made significant strides, clinching control of the Wyoming House by gaining approximately nine seats, with only one loss. However, the cost-effectiveness of individual campaigns varied widely. State Rep. Jon Conrad, R-Mountain View, who ran as a write-in candidate, spent the most money on his campaign—$32,231—but received just 918 votes, equating to $35.11 per vote. By contrast, his opponent, Republican Joe Webb, who won the race, spent only $10,558, translating to $5.95 per vote.
In another race, Democrat Sara Burlingame spent $26,735 on advertising, only to lose to Republican Jacob Wasserburger by 293 votes. Burlingame’s expenditure of $18.05 per vote was significantly higher than Wasserburger’s $5.95 per vote, which was attributed to his more efficient use of funds.
Some individual races also highlighted how smaller spending amounts can still produce strong outcomes. In Cheyenne, Republican Gary Brown outspent his Democratic opponent Jen Solis by about $7,000, but spent just $8.87 per vote, winning with 2,039 votes. Solis, by contrast, spent $13.92 per vote, despite raising significant funds from PACs.
Fremont County Democrat Ivan Posey was the lone Democrat to gain a seat in the Legislature, spending $20,534 in his race, or $12.25 per vote. His opponent, Rep. Sarah Penn, R-Fort Washakie, spent $22.03 per vote but lost by a margin of 465 votes, demonstrating that heavy spending doesn’t always guarantee a win, particularly in close races.
In Albany County, Democrats managed to maintain control of the state legislative seats despite being outspent in some races. Rep. Karlee Provenza, D-Laramie, won her race despite being outspent nearly 2-to-1 by Republican challenger Paul Crouch, who spent $10.96 per vote. Provenza, however, spent just $3.59 per vote, effectively proving that targeted and strategic spending can be just as impactful as large expenditures.
Wyoming’s two congressional races also illustrated the limits of spending. US Senator John Barrasso, who secured a resounding victory over Democratic challenger Scott Morrow, spent $20.25 per vote, while Morrow spent a significantly smaller $0.24 per vote. Similarly, in the US House race, Rep. Harriet Hageman’s victory was bolstered by spending $12.23 per vote, compared to her opponent Kyle Cameron’s $1.53 per vote.
