Donald Trump Dismantles Hillary Clintons Big Money Machine
In the end, Donald Trump defeated big money. The Republican's presidential campaign raised less than half of what Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton did. He ran a fraction of the TV ads, even in decisive battleground states. And although prominent Republican donors came to Trump's aid during the campaign's final days, his supportive super PACs and other political groups raised relatively paltry sums when compared to Clinton's groups. Somehow, for the volatile, unpredictable New York businessman, that was enough on his way to winning the White House. More than enough. A swell of white, working class voters, who believed the billionaire when he said he wouldn't be beholden to special interests, propelled him in a manner that defied polls and the predictions of pundits relying on conventional wisdom for how to win elections. Trump edged Clinton in the swing states of Florida, North Carolina, Ohio and Pennsylvania and snatched Wisconsin, a state expected to serve as Clinton's bulwark against a Trump surge. He promised to "drain the swamp" that is Washington, D.C. and its lobbyists and professional politickers. In a victory speech delivered in the wee hours of Wednesday morning, Trump credited his victory to voters "who want and expect our government to serve the people, and serve the people it will.", Now, Trump has to prove it. Trump's relationship with big money, From Trump's first day on the trail, when he rode the Trump Tower escalator down to announce his bid, the first-time candidate told voters he would be different. He was running against the establishment  Republican as much as Democratic. Politicians are "controlled fully they're controlled fully by the lobbyists, by the donors and by the special interests, fully," he said. And that, he promised over and over through months of Republican primaries, wouldn't be him. Meanwhile, his Republican primary opponents were on the money trail, setting up officially sanctioned super PACs and courting big donors. The money didn't help, the super PACs weren't enough and Trump endlessly mocked his opponents for toadying to big donors. And despite her railing against "secret, unaccountable money in politics," the super PACs supporting Clinton collected eight-figures worth of money from sources trading in cash that's tough, if not outrightly impossible, to trace. Money also couldn't adequately mask what many voters perceived, fair or not, as Clinton's damning flaws. There's her penchant for secret-keeping, be it delivering private speeches to Wall Street executives or shielding her State Department emails from public scrutiny. And her Clinton Foundation wooing of the ultra-rich and unsavory foreign governments undercut her pledges that she's represent the interests of who she once half-heartedly and ham-handedly described as "everyday Americans.", Bernie Sanders' surprisingly strong challenge to Clinton in the Democrats' presidential primary was largely fueled by liberals' reaction against what many considered Clinton's insincerity on matters of political money and influence. After Clinton vanquished Sanders, a U.S. senator from Vermont, she never quite captured his supporters' energy and enthusiasm for her own purposes. Trump, meanwhile, repeatedly hammered Clinton as "crooked" liar most interested in her own power and prestige. No matter that Trump belittled his opponents, exaggerated his charitable giving, refused to release his tax returns and was caught on tape describing how he'd sexually assault women. The body politic sided with Trump over Clinton. Draining the swamp, Trump now turn to setting up an administration, with jobs presidents often turn to lobbyists to fill, and setting an agenda for his presidency. Voters and campaign finance reform advocates will be looking to see how Trump acts to reduce the influence of money in politics that he decried throughout the campaign. "To the extent that Mr. Trump, while campaigning, has criticized the current campaign finance system, his only solution offered seems to be more candidates like him who are billionaires and can self finance and that's not a solution," said Paul S. Ryan, vice president for policy and litigation at nonpartisan group Common Cause, and a longtime advocate for campaign finance reform. In October, Trump released a slate of proposals that he said were meant to reform Washington. He called for longer bans on lobbying by executive branch officials, members of Congress and congressional staff. He also said he would move to tighten the legal definition of lobbyists, forcing more advocates to disclose their activities under laws covering lobbyists. Read More All the Emotions of Election Night in One Photo, He also said he would ask Congress to prohibit lobbyists for foreign governments from fundraising for political candidates, and seek a constitutional amendment requiring congressional term limits. Trump has some measure of public faith Respondents to a Center for Public Integrity/Ipsos poll earlier this year gave Trump higher marks than Clinton on the prospect of them reforming the nation's campaign money system. Still, most of Trump's proposals are a tall order that would require support from Congress. Constitutional amendments are exceedingly rare. And much of the strength of his proposals lie in the details he has yet to flesh out. In addition, Ryan points out, Trump's campaign lawyer, Jones Day partner Don McGahn, a former head of the Federal Election Commission, has traditionally battled any restrictions on money in politics. "Don McGahn says publicly that he thinks most campaign finance laws are unconstitutional," Ryan said. What Trump thinks about this will be revealed as prepared to move into the White House.