This WSJ article confirms what I have been saying for a while now (see also here), that small donors tend to fuel the more ideological wings of the parties. That’s all the more true for out of state (or out of district) small donors. There’s nothing wrong with that. The policy issue is whether public financing of elections should be based on the preferences of small donors, such as in proposals to provide public matching funds in proportion to the amount of small donations a candidate raises.
From the WSJ piece:
The contrast between the two women highlights how Democratic small-dollar donors, an increasingly important group as more fundraising moves online, often are biased in their support of ideological favorites rather than focusing on just those in competitive races.
Among the 10 incumbent Democrats who raised the most from individual donors this year, six are members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, a Wall Street Journal analysis of campaign finance disclosures shows. Three of the top four are progressives, with the exception of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.).
The financial strength among progressives presents a challenge to party leaders trying to nudge the Democratic message closer to the middle, where they might stand a better chance of winning over independent voters who decide close elections….
John Lapp, executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2006 when the party won control of the House, said it is often the case that “more provocative stars in the Democratic Party” raise the most money….
Like AOC, Mamdani is a study in the power of small-dollar donations. While his average contribution has been the smallest of any of the mayoral candidates, according to New York City Campaign Finance Board data, he has still managed to be competitive in fundraising because he has had so many more donors than others.
In a sign of Mamdani’s growing national prominence among progressives, roughly half of the dollars he raised during the period came from outside New York City. His campaign had roughly $2.5 million on hand as of July 11….
The fundraising success for progressive candidates comes as traditional depositories for dollars in the party are struggling with their fundraising.
The Republican National Committee, benefiting from GOP control of Washington, had almost $81 million in cash reserves as it started July, compared with $15 million for the Democratic National Committee. Overall, the DNC raised roughly 20% less than it did in the first six months of 2021, a comparable period in the election cycle, and has in the bank a quarter of what it did four years ago….
Some Democratic committees are working to try to keep small-dollar donors focused on the races that matter the most.