## DataLab

Democrats are banking on their incumbents’ fundraising prowess to help hold the majority in the Senate this fall. Sens. Kay Hagan in North Carolina and Mark Begich in Alaska, for example, lead their opponents in fundraising and are no doubt hoping that advantage will help them squeak out wins in competitive races.

But if history is any guide, raising the most money can be a poor indicator of re-election success.

Simply put, challengers don’t need to raise and spend as much money as incumbents; they just need enough cash to be viable. Since 2002, just 18 percent (three of 17) successful Senate challengers have outspent the incumbents they defeated. Going back even further to 1994, slightly less than a third of challengers (nine of 28) outspent losing incumbents.

How much money does a challenger need to raise? The 17 successful Senate challengers over the last dozen years raised and spent 79 percent, on average, of the money spent by the incumbent senators they defeated.

All Politics

### Senate Forecast: Landrieu Headed Toward Historic Defeat In Louisiana RunoffDec 5, 2014

All 2014 Midterms