By Jason Hopkins
She defeated Democrat Jon Ossoff in the special election to replace former Rep. Tom Price after he vacated the seat to become secretary of Health and Human Services.
Before the polls had closed, the ambitious 30-year-old made some ironic statements to NPR.
“The role of money in politics is a major problem and particularly the role of unchecked anonymous money,” Ossoff stated. “There have been super PACs in Washington who have been putting up tens of millions of dollars of attack ads in air for months now.”
Ossoff continued on in the interview and expressed the need for campaign finance reform.
These statements are quite perplexing (and reek of hypocrisy) when you consider the money raised and spent by his team. Liberals across the country (mostly from California and New York) poured money into Ossoff’s campaign under the impression he’d actually win. The former Hill staffer raised more than $24 million — compared to just $4.5 million raised by Handel’s team.
That’s almost six times more than Handel.
Near the end stretch of the campaign, Ossoff netted nearly nine times as many donors from California than from his home state. Between March 29 and May 31, his campaign reported $456,296.03 from California — only $228,474.44 from Georgia.
Who benefited more from “money in politics?”
Those on the left have countered that Handel benefited more from outside spending. This is true — $18.2 million in outside spending went towards helping Handel. Democrat’s were assisted with $8 million from outside groups. However, when you consider all money combined (official campaign fundraising and outside spending), Ossoff still clearly came out ahead with millions more.
All in all, Ossoff’s team spent $25 million in Georgia’s 6th District and still finished worse than Hillary Clinton’s performance there in 2016.