On Wednesday, Donald Trump reiterated a previous pledge: that he would spend $100 million of his own money on the 2016 election.

That's particularly notable since he’s only spent $56 million with less than two weeks to go, according to the most recent campaign finance filings. In other words, it’s highly, highly questionable whether he’ll even be able to spend that much unless he literally burns it in a big, beautiful, luxurious bonfire.

AD

AD

But it’s also worth noting that the amount he’s spent thus far is actually pretty unremarkable in context — and especially given Trump’s emphasis on his personal wealth and his non-reliance on donors. If you look at U.S. elections over the past quarter-century, Trump’s self-funding total falls short of several others, even less-wealthy candidates for governor and Senate who were appealing to much smaller electorates.

In fact, the amount Trump — whose net worth is $8 billion if you believe him and $3.7 billion if you believe Forbes magazine — has self-funded thus far is less than two candidates for governor and basically on par with two recent candidates for president and Senate.

In the 1992 presidential campaign, independent candidate Ross Perot spent $64 million. Adjusted for inflation, that's about $110 million in today's dollars — about twice what Trump has spent.

AD

AD

Four years later, businessman Steve Forbes spent $37.4 million trying to win the GOP nomination. That's $57.5 million in today's dollars — slightly more than what Trump has spent.

Trump has also been outspent by Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) and California GOP gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman in their 2010 campaigns. Whitman spent $144.2 million on her losing campaign, while Scott spent $60.3 million on his winning campaign.

Similar to Trump, Mitt Romney's 2008 presidential campaign and both of wrestling magnate Linda McMahon's two campaigns for the U.S. Senate in 2010 and 2012 in Connecticut spent between $50 and $56 million of their candidates' fortunes in inflation-adjusted dollars.

AD

Trump's lack of self-funding is even more notable when you compare it to his overall wealth. Even using the lower estimate of his net worth, he has spent less than 2 percent of it on winning the presidency.

AD

By contrast, Whitman spent about 11 percent of her estimated $1.3 billion fortune on her unsuccessful 2010 campaign. Across the country, Scott was spending a whopping 28 percent of his estimated $220 million that year. McMahon spent about one-tenth and one-fifth of her reported net worth in 2010 and 2012, respectively (not factoring in husband Vince McMahon's net worth).

Even among presidential candidates, Trump has been outpaced. Romney in 2008 spent about 18 percent of his net worth on his failed GOP primary campaign. Forbes in 1996 spent about 9 percent. And Perot in 1992 spent about 3 percent of his then-estimated $2.4 billion on his independent candidacy.

AD

Given Trump's deficit in the polls and the fact that he's been getting pummeled on the airwaves for weeks — in the CNN interview he even mentioned getting outspent in Florida 50-to-1 — it's striking that he hasn't chosen to dig deeper into his own pockets.