As Sen. Elizabeth Warren pledges not to hold any events open only to large donors during her primary campaign, she’s acting cool toward a group that was a powerful force in the 2016 Democratic presidential primary — but it didn’t necessarily dominate the money game.

In large part, the Massachusetts Democrat is putting pressure on opponents who are viewed as more mainstream and more likely to attract the largest donors. Potential 2020 contenders like former Vice President Joe Biden, who stands to the right of Warren on many issues, might end up facing criticism if they don’t make similar promises to avoid big-ticket fundraising dinners.

Individual donors who gave the maximum $2,700 amount allowed during the 2016 Democratic primary accounted for just 24% of contributions. Meanwhile, people who gave $200 or less provided more — 33% of donations.

But the top-tier donors who gave $2,700 played a bigger role in establishment candidate Hillary Clinton’s fundraising, providing 40% of her donations, while progressive firebrand Bernie Sanders drew just 4% of his contributions from that set.

There is likely to be a difference along those lines again in the 2020 race, and that helps explain Warren’s Monday announcement that blasted “fancy receptions or big money fundraisers only with people who can write the big checks.”

“This is a real departure from the way things have been done,” said Michael Beckel, manager of research, investigations and policy analysis at Issue One, a nonprofit organization in Washington, D.C., that aims to reduce the role of money in politics. “Traditionally, candidates have tried to maximize money from small-dollar donors and larger-dollar donors in tandem.”

The figures above come from a report from the Campaign Finance Institute, which is part of the National Institute on Money in Politics, a nonpartisan organization that tracks campaign financing. The max allowed amount, which gets adjusted for inflation, is now $2,800.

“This decision isn’t going to prohibit a supporter who wants to write her a large check from cutting her a check,” Beckel added. “What it’s doing is saying how she’s trying to prioritize her time — trying to drum up more and more support from smaller-dollar donors.”

Warren is sticking with her core donor group. Her 2018 Senate re-election campaign showed evidence of resonating more with grass-roots supporters than big money. Out of the $25.8 million raised in 2017 and 2018, 68% came from people who gave $200 or less, according to Federal Election Commission data. Those who contributed $2,000 or more provided only 16% of that total.

If she becomes the Democratic Party’s nominee for president, her campaign manager Roger Lau reportedly has said she would switch back to “traditional” fundraising mechanisms and “do what is necessary to stay competitive with Donald Trump and the Republicans.” The traditional mechanisms can mean events with a hefty per-person price tag, such as the $100,000-per-person event that then-President Barack Obama held for the Hillary Victory Fund in October 2016.

Meanwhile, President Trump already has raised an unprecedented amount of money for his 2020 re-election campaign, pulling in more than $100 million, noted a recent report from OpenSecrets.org, a website tracking money in politics that’s run by a nonpartisan research group, the Center for Responsive Politics.

This report was first published on Feb. 25, 2019.