Cantor's defeat -- it certainly wasn't the money

Eric Cantor's stunning defeat in the Republican primary in Virginia is full of messages.    The one that strikes me so forcefully is what a minimal effect campaign money played in this election.

Eric Cantor spent more than $5 million on his campaign.    David Brat, who defeat him by 11% points, had only $220,000.   That's a 25:1 ratio.  He didn't even have Tea Party financial backing.  He ran a completely local race.

As the political analysts tease it all apart, the initial belief that it was all about immigration reform doesn't hold up when you look at polls of attitudes about immigration.

The political wisdom I most listen to says it wasn't any one issue as much as the electorate seeing Cantor as out of touch with his constituents, aloof, visiting the district infrequently and as having become a national figure rather than their representative.  They said, when he did visit the district, his entourage would sweep in in black SUVs, and his security guards would elbow people out of the way.

Here's a telling little factoid:    Cantor's campaign expenditures show he paid more to steakhouses -- some $260,000 -- than Brat's entire campaign funds.  

On top of that, Chris Hayes and his guests were quite frank is saying:   Cantor just was not likeable;  nobody liked him, not his colleagues, not his constituents.   He was all about tactics and message, rather than substance.

The bottom line message in all this:   Maybe campaign money is not all that important, after all.

Ralph