The race for California was never close. The state has gone blue in every presidential election since 1992, and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton never polled beneath a two-digit lead over Republican rival Donald Trump.
However, a review of the Clinton Campaign’s spending reveals that she spent more in the race for California than all the Midwestern states she lost combined.
According to The Middle American, the Clinton Campaign spent $35.7 million in California, while her combined total for Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin were $32.5 million. Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin were all competitive states for Clinton.
Broken down by electoral vote, Clinton spent $650,000 for each of California’s “safe” 55 Electoral College votes. In all the Midwestern states, including the two, Illinois and Minnesota Clinton spent $388,000 per each electoral vote.
“They believed they were more experienced, which they were,” Donnie Fowler, a political consultant for the Democrats, told Politico of the Clinton camp. “They believed they were smarter, which they weren’t. They believed they had better information, which they didn’t.”
“In the three industrial states that are considered to have cost Clinton the election, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, Clinton lost by a combined margin of about 107,000 votes,” Merven McIntyre writes for Middle American, adding that Clinton’s margin of Victory in California was 4.3 million votes. “Adding Florida, the other ‘surprise’ Trump win, brings the margin to about 227,000, still far below her winning margin in California.”
Clinton spent $18.3 million on these four states combined – averaging out to $200,000 per each of the combined 75 electoral votes. Beyond money, Clinton neglected to visit the Upper Midwest states – she didn't stop through Wisconsin a single time after winning the Democratic primaries.