As my regular reader (Hi, Jeff!) will recall, when I ran for the United States House of Representatives back in 2008, in a relatively short campaign (April to November) I raised roughly a quarter-of-a-million dollars in donations. A recent Colorado Politics story reminded me of those seemingly endless hours of picking up the phone and calling strangers in hopes they might consider donating to my campaign.

I had a success rate (that is, a person agreed to donate something) of roughly 2% to 3%, which was pretty typical of the national average. Talk to any serious candidate for higher office and they will no doubt have their own stories about the misery of dialing for dollars. You hear every possible combination of voicemail messages, including dozens of reply messages by little kids, that may seem quite darling in small doses, but I can assure you after the 37th “cute-kid” voicemail of the day, one can be quite tired of them.

In a campaign, it is vital the members of the campaign team have specific and non-overlapping duties. And by far, the very best person to do the fundraising is the candidate him or herself. So, I tried to call 100 people per day (sometimes I made that, often I didn’t) and ultimately raised the aforementioned $250,000.

So, what do you spend it on? Well, that varies, but for most national and statewide races, it is going to be media, and in 2008 that meant television. These days, smart campaigns have a strong social media presence, but back in my race, that only meant having my son set up a Facebook page for the campaign, as well as a Myspace page.

But a simple fact is the amount of money you raise, in and of itself, is an important factor in how you run your campaign. Donors prefer to donate to those whom they feel are “serious” candidates with a chance to win. In my case, in the first quarter we were running I raised a bit more than $100,000. That was an amount of money that got quite a bit of media attention, as it showed me to be a serious candidate who might, just might, be able to create a serious campaign that threatened the GOP incumbent (spoiler: not so much).

Money has only gotten to be more important in political campaigns since my day. That’s a shame, of course, but it is also a grim reality. Enough money in your campaign war chest and you might even scare off potential challengers who see your cash pile to be enough to get you the attention you need to win.

And so, as the CoPo story notes, four candidates had really good fundraising quarters.

Perhaps most impressive was the fundraising of first-time candidate Eileen Laubacher, who is a retired Navy rear admiral (that’s a big deal, folks) and a former member of the National Security Council team under the Biden administration. I twice served on the NSC staff during summer academic breaks at the Air Force Academy, and the NSC is an amazing place to work and only the best thrive there.

Admiral Laubacher is the latest Democrat hoping to send our national embarrassment, U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert, packing her carpet bag and out of Washington. As you surely know, Boebert was quite worried Adam Frisch had her dialed in back in the last election cycle in Congressional District 3, so Boebert just moved across the state to the deepest red part, CD-4, and got herself elected there.

Does Laubacher have a chance in 2026? We’ll see, but raising a massive $1.9 million last quarter is tremendously impressive. Obviously, as a career military officer myself, I’m delighted to see another veteran run against the wholly unqualified Boebert. The admiral raised more than 13 times as much as Boebert. The quarter ended with Boebert having about $170,000 in the bank, while Laubacher has more than a million.

The obvious question, of course, is whether even that amount of money (and the differential between candidates) is enough to make a Democratic a winning candidate? Her military career certainly helps, especially when compared to the “career” of Boebert. But can the admiral win in such a red area?

After my quixotic campaign ended, I had some discussions with some really smart campaign experts. I asked the question, is there any amount of money that, had I had it, would have let me squeak through and win the election? A few said something between $2 million and $5 million would have done it, while another said there was no amount that would make me electable, the district is just too red.

The campaign in CD-4 may help us understand if there is a path to Democratic victory, and I sure hope so.

Stay tuned.

Hal Bidlack is a retired professor of political science and a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel who taught more than 17 years at the U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs.