
Meg Whitman during visit to her Victory 2010 Headquarters in Temecula, Monday, Nov. 1, 2010. Photo by Eric Draper/Meg Whitman for Governor 2010. Used with gratitude via a Creative Commons license.
Despite big gains for Republicans at
Meg Whitman during visit to her Victory 2010 Headquarters in Temecula, Monday, Nov. 1, 2010. Photo by Eric Draper/Meg Whitman for Governor 2010. Used with gratitude via a Creative Commons license.
Despite big gains for Republicans at
Don’t cry for Whitman, she’s still a billionaire and won’t be searching her attic for potential auction items to make ends meet.
But Whitman did outspend once-and-future governor Jerry Brown six-to-one. Despite that she now joins the ranks of some pretty wealthy people, many with zero political cred, who couldn’t paper over inexperience and an imperious CEO manner with glossy TV ads. Which, by the way, she bought about $107 million worth alone, according to California Watch, airing nothing nearly as memorable as the “Demon Sheep” spot that Carly Fiorina put on YouTube for free.
Whitman may be Queen of the Hill in personally-funded futility, but she was hardly alone. Former professional wrestling entrepreneur Linda McMahon spent $47 million of her own money losing to Richard Blumenthal in the Connecticut Senate race. Another techie, former Microsoft VP Suzan DelBene, spent $2.28 million on a losing bid for the House seat in Washington’s 8th District. In all, some $500 million was spent by 58 candidates who contributed at least $500,000 to their own campaigns, Bloomberg reports, and 30 lost or dropped out.
Fiorina doled out “only” $5.5 million in her losing bid to unseat Sen. Barbara Boxer. But the former Hewlett-Packard CEO was up against a popular incumbent, while Whitman’s loss was for an open seat. And in Brown her opponent was a candidate who, though he is the state’s current attorney general, is best known as an ultra-liberal former California governor whose heyday was in the 1970s. He’s not-always-fondly referred to as “Gov. Moonbeam” and he didn’t even have enough money to run TV ads until September.
So Whitman’s loss has to hurt, just a little. While we’d never be so crass as to suggest that she was trying to buy the election, maybe Whitman’s wondering what she might have spent that $160 million on instead.
Wired.com is here to help. Here are a five back-of-the-envelope ideas:
Got your own ideas? Leave us a comment.
Follow us for disruptive tech news: John C. Abell and Epicenter on Twitter.
See Also:
Authors: John C Abell