Kari Lake promising donors extravagant matches for campaign contributions. Does it happen?
Political donors' inboxes are overflowed with fundraising pleas: breathlessly worded solicitations for money from candidates promising huge matches or "impact" multipliers for campaign contributions and pointing to urgent deadlines that require immediate action.
The emails begging for money are common as are the claims of matched donations.
Republican U.S. Senate contender Kari Lake is part of a group of candidates who this year are making promises of donation-matching that are even more sensational than the industry norm, and likely aren’t materializing, according to people who work in the political fundraising industry and an Arizona Republic review of relevant records.
Lake is one of several candidates tied to a Virginia-based fundraising firm whose campaigns have leaned on digitally delivered claims that they will boost a donation’s “impact” by massive multipliers.
“This link automatically activates 30X IMPACT!!!” reads one text message, captioning a smiling headshot of Lake. “Yes, that is a 3,000% IMPACT FOR A LIMITED TIME.”
Another advertises an “80X IMPACT ON YOUR DONATION.”
Lake’s opponent, Democratic Rep. Ruben Gallego, frequently made similar though smaller-scale promises while seeking reelection to the U.S. House but has disavowed the tactic in his current Senate run.
Among the operatives who raise money for the nation’s political candidates, the promises are widely understood to be dubious. One of Lake’s own advisers, Caroline Wren, has criticized the tactic as “crap.” Wren has been a close adviser to Lake’s 2022 gubernatorial and 2024 Senate campaigns and previously worked as a top fundraiser for former President Donald Trump.
But the multipliers that Lake and several other campaigns have offered are far greater than what is typical for the industry. They far exceed what political campaigns usually pledge, often by an order of magnitude. That makes it all the more suspect whether the donation-matching scheme is being executed at all, in light of contribution limits built into campaign finance law.
In response to queries, Lake’s campaign wrote in a social media post that the tactic of donation-matching is a “well-known & deployed tactic used in fundraising.” Wren argued it would be unfair to single out Lake in media coverage, highlighting dozens of examples of donation-matching offers.
Lake’s team repeatedly declined opportunities to deny or contest the allegation that the campaign's donation-matching claims are untrue.
Misleading donors in order to raise money could open a campaign up to legal liability, one expert said.
The candidates’ fundraising has national stakes, as the race's outcome could make or break either party’s majority in the U.S. Senate during the upcoming term.
Lake campaign using tactic her adviser has scoffed at
It is something of an open secret within the political fundraising industry that those kinds of promises often do not materialize, according to people familiar with the industry.
Federal laws limit individuals to donating a total of $6,600 to an official campaign committee per election cycle. With the multipliers promoted in Lake's text messages, even a small donation would quickly trigger a match that runs into that limit.
The multipliers Lake has advertised are two- to tenfold greater than what political campaigns commonly promote, according to an Arizona Republic review of dozens of such campaign solicitations, which were executed by a range of digital fundraising firms.
The Lake adviser, Wren, previously has criticized the use of that tactic and doubted its legitimacy, scoffing at promises of a “triple, five hundred-X match” in an interview with conservative strategist Steve Bannon.
“Who actually thinks that that’s happening? No one’s buying this crap,” Wren said.
“It’s a problem within these Republican digital firms that are just so unimaginative, they have no message whatsoever, and they are completely overwhelming the Republican donor base.”
Ruben Gallego has used similar tactics in the past
While campaigning for the U.S. House during the 2020 and 2022 election cycles, her now-rival, Gallego, frequently wrote in fundraising emails that a group of donors or Gallego himself would match donations with a contribution of their own.
“Generous donors just agreed to MATCH gifts — but ONLY for these final 8 hours,” one email reads.
Another told readers that Gallego was “personally matching all gifts to this email.”
Gallego’s tone pivoted as he mounted his bid for U.S. Senate. In fundraising emails sent last year, he told recipients with mock secrecy that donation matching promises “aren’t real.” After using the tactics just two years earlier, he now pointed to them to fundraise.
“A lot of campaigns use shady tactics to get you to donate. Big matches with huge multipliers, fake deadlines, all that stuff. Not us,” reads one email sent in February.
An aide to Gallego did not return a request for comment.
While Gallego has distanced himself from the practice, it is widespread among other Democrats.
Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., as well as the Democratic Party’s House and Senate campaign arms, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, are some of the groups who are using them this cycle.
Other campaigns promising big multipliers: Here's what connects them
While Lake’s donation multipliers are unusually large, they are not unique. The firm that Lake hires for digital fundraising, northern Virginia-based TAG Strategies LLC, is hired by several other campaigns who are doing the same.
During the current election cycle, at least six of TAG’s campaign clients have sent out fundraising solicitations implying they will match individuals’ donations with unusually large multipliers.
“I gave an update to our generous donor that there were only 53 people who accepted his generous 1500% match,” says a text sent on behalf of Sen. John Kennedy, R-La. “RUSH $35 → $525 IMPACT.”
“Your support will be multiplied by conservative donors during our 8500% RED WAVE SURGE,” Republican Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota alerted recipients, warning of a “LAST CHANCE opportunity” expiring at midnight.
Sen. Ted Budd, R-N.C., dangled a “4700% MATCH” via text; Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., promised a “50X Impact to stop Border Czar Kamala”; and Pennsylvania House candidate Rob Bresnahan promoted a “10,000% MAGA IMPACT ACTIVATED.”
None of TAG’s campaign clients responded to requests for information that could confirm or deny whether their matching promises are legitimate, such as how the supposed donation-matching scheme is organized, how much money the campaign has raised through those donations and the associated matches, or what exactly the campaigns were promising in their text messages if not a donation match.
Jon Adams, TAG’s founder and CEO, declined to comment.
It’s not the first time the firm has drawn skepticism over its tactics. The conservative activist Laura Loomer previously accused TAG of luring possible donors under false pretenses. She argued that a text message sent on behalf of Budd’s campaign was “clearly written with the intent to dupe donors” and “likely constitutes fraud, but I’ll leave that to others to determine.”
The firm is operating at a high level within the industry. Its list of high-profile clients has included Ohio Sen. and GOP vice presidential nominee JD Vance’s Senate campaign; Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin; Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas; the National Republican Senatorial Committee, and the super-PAC that supported Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ presidential bid, Never Back Down Inc.
Facing waning small-dollar donations, some in the GOP, including Wren, have argued that flashy tactics contribute to donor fatigue.
“Every time I look at my phone, I get a text message saying, ‘give right now or we’ll shoot your dog and light your house on fire,’” Wren said in a conversation with Bannon. “It’s like, how is that motivating someone to donate?”
Misleading tactics could create liability: Expert
Kory Langhofer, a lawyer with expertise in the area, agreed to review the language in some of Lake’s text messages without knowing the identity of the campaign. He said, speaking generally, that if a campaign isn’t matching donations, the practice might not only be misleading but could be illegal.
“When you’re trying to get money from someone, you can’t lie to them about what it’s for, or the basis for their expenditure,” he said.
Langhofer said if he were advising a campaign, he would push to add a disclaimer that clarifies what the campaign means by “match” or “impact,” or that otherwise explains the circumstances of the donation, to shield themselves from legal liability.
“If the authorities were to conclude that this was, in fact, saying there would be an 8000% match, and there’s not a match, then that could be the basis for liability,” he said, referencing one of the text messages.
“I would say, you should be careful about sending texts or emails like this at all. And if you do it, you damn well better make sure the landing page gives people the full story.”
The landing pages linked in Lake’s text messages reiterated the suggestion of boosted “impact” and contained no language clarifying the terms of the donation match. Vertically-stacked buttons let users select a donation size, often bookended by a label with that day's multiplier: “-> 24X impact.”
Laura Gersony covers national politics for the Arizona Republic. Contact her at [email protected] or 480-372-0389.
This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Arizona Senate candidate Kari Lake's fundraising tactic under scrutiny