With just 50 days until the election, Donald Trump is facing a staggering — and perhaps historic — organizational disadvantage.

According to a POLITICO review of campaign spending, Hillary Clinton has invested seven times the amount of money on TV commercials as her Republican rival and has established twice as many field offices in many of the states that will decide who wins the presidency. In many battlegrounds, she has dozens more organizers than Trump.


While Trump, a first-time politician who has surrounded himself with advisers who are new to the rigors of presidential campaigns, has made serious headway in a number of battlegrounds in recent days, his on-the-ground and in-the-air deficits could be what stands between him and 270 electoral votes.

“We’re in completely untested waters,” said David Kochel, an Iowa-based Republican operative who is leading a study group at the Harvard Institute of Politics contrasting the traditional campaign approach adopted by Clinton with the non-traditional one being used by Trump. “There has never been such a wide disparity in resource allocation as we're seeing in 2016.”

The question, though, may be whether Trump’s lack of infrastructure matters in an election cycle that has so far rewarded a low-budget approach built on free media and mass rallies rather than TV ads and door-knocking.

Last week, Smart Media Group, a media buying firm that works with the Republican National Committee, sent an email to a group of top Trump advisers, including campaign manager Kellyanne Conway, TV ad maker Larry Weitzner, and senior communications adviser Jason Miller, briefing them on the latest in commercial spending.

The numbers were startling. As of Sept. 12, the email noted, Trump had spent $17 million on TV ads, a small fraction of the $126 million Clinton had invested. When outside groups were added to the mix, Trump’s deficit was even greater -- $33 million to Clinton’s $244 million.

Trump aides say the figures reflect a simple reality: Their funds are limited. Through the end of July, Clinton and her outside group allies had raised a combined $435 million to Trump’s $160 million – a difference of more than two-to-one, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Unlike Clinton, a powerful fundraiser, Trump has struggled to attract the support of deep-pocketed donors, many of whom have been repelled by his candidacy.

Those working for pro-Trump super PACs are racing to find a solution. Advisers to one of the groups, Rebuilding America Now, are openly discussing the possibility that Rick Scott, the wealthy Florida governor who is chairing the super PAC, may soon provide it with a contribution.

Clinton has used her TV barrage to cast her Republican opponent as a dangerous, unpredictable figure who’s ill-suited suited to occupy the Oval Office. Last week, while Trump aired commercials in just four states, Clinton had spots running in nine battlegrounds. One Clinton ad that went into heavy rotation, titled “Sacrifice,” spotlighted critical comments Trump made about Arizona Sen. John McCain’s war record.

Strategists from both parties say they cannot recall the last time a presidential nominee has been so dominated on the TV airwaves. The seven-to-one ratio confronting Trump far eclipses the five-to-four margin President Barack Obama faced in 2012 and the two-to-one ratio McCain encountered in 2008.

With early voting in some battlegrounds opening in just days, the race is entering its most intense phase yet. And while Clinton has established formidable operations in many key states, Trump has far fewer full-time staffers to get out the vote, according to figures provided by campaign aides, national party officials, and swing-state operatives.

In must-win Ohio, where early voting begins on Oct. 12, Clinton has around 250 organizers and 50 offices. Trump, meanwhile, has roughly 110 staffers and 30 offices.

Republicans say Gov. John Kasich’s persistent refusal to endorse Trump has hurt the nominee, depriving him of man-power. Many of Kasich’s longest-serving aides, including Jeffrey Polesovsky and Jai Chabria, have decided to sit on the sidelines.

Chabria, a former Kasich senior adviser, said Trump was behind in a state where appealing to low-propensity voters was a weeks-long process that couldn’t be done overnight.

“It’s a very late effort by the Trump folks to play catch up, and the Democrats and the Clinton campaign have been here for a long time. That’s going to have an effect,” he said. “Big rallies are really nice, but actual campaigns matter in Ohio.”

In North Carolina, where Trump has around 170 staffers and 10 offices, Clinton has over 250 workers and 30 offices. Democrats say they are implementing a detailed plan aimed at intensifying turnout among black and college-educated voters, demographic groups that Trump has struggled with. Last month, Clinton brought aboard Dan Kanninen, who played a key role in Barack Obama’s 2008 and 2012 campaigns, to help oversee her campaign in the state.

In New Hampshire, it’s a similar story. While Trump has fewer than 50 full-time organizers and just a handful of offices, Clinton has around 100 staffers and 25 offices.

“Two months out, I think Hillary has a stronger operation than Trump up here. That’s pretty apparent from the number of staff, the number of offices, and the number commercials,” said Jim Merrill, a veteran Republican strategist who oversaw Marco Rubio’s primary bid in New Hampshire and held similar positions on Mitt Romney’s two presidential campaigns. “Trump is behind where we were in 2012.”

In even conservative bastions, Clinton is developing formidable infrastructure. In Arizona, Clinton has around 160 staffers and 25 offices, and in Georgia she has roughly 40 organizers and 10 offices. In that state, Tracey Lewis, who worked on Michelle Nunn's 2014 Georgia Senate bid, recently signed on as a senior advisor.

Republicans declined to detail their numbers in the two conservative states but acknowledged that Clinton had a bigger field presence.

While Trump advisers concede they’re behind in the ground war, they insist they’re making serious gains. The campaign, for example, said it had improved its footing in Florida after engineering a recent staff shuffle. State director Karen Giorno, who’d clashed with many members of the Trump team, was replaced with Susie Wiles, a former top adviser to Scott, the Florida governor.

Yet in an election that’s so far been driven by daily headlines, some are wondering if textbook campaign metrics like TV ads and field staffers will matter as much as they have in previous years.

Some are coming to the conclusion that the New York businessman’s lack of swing-state infrastructure might not be fatal. Throughout his campaign, Trump has invested relatively little on TV ads and field deployment – instead surviving off his ability to pack rallies and generate overwhelming media attention for speeches and statements large and small. On Thursday morning, during a meeting convened by Trump’s congressional supporters on Capitol Hill, Conway said the Republican nominee would give multiple addresses each week focusing on specific policies he’d implement as president.

“The fact that the numbers have moved gradually in Trump’s favor in spite of the onslaught of spending by Hillary causes a lot of head-scratching,” said Kochel, who was chief strategist on Jeb Bush’s presidential campaign. “But the voters are getting their information in a thousand different ways outside of the campaigns’ control.”