By Fredreka Schouten
President-elect Donald Trump didn't need $100 million of his money to win the White House in the end.
Trump contributed another $10 million to his presidential campaign in the closing days of the election, bringing his total investment in the race to $66.1 million, new filings confirm.
Trump’s campaign still had $7.6 million in leftover money in its bank account as of Nov. 28, as the real-estate magnate defied most conventions about political spending and advertising on his way to capturing the presidency.
Donald Trump's 2016 campaign manager Kellyanne Conway discusses her role as the first woman to successfully run a presidential campaign at the fourth annual Women Rule Summit in Washington. Video provided by AFP Newslook
Nearly 74% of the money he raised in the election’s homestretch and immediate aftermath came from small donors, according to the report his campaign filed late Thursday with the Federal Election Commission. It covered activity from Oct. 20 through Nov. 28.
Some big donors aided his candidacy, too. Tech billionaire Peter Thiel, who is playing a key role in Trump’s transition, donated $1 million in late October to Make America Number 1, a pro-Trump super PAC aligned with New York hedge-fund billionaire Robert Mercer and his daughter Rebekah.
In the final days of the campaign, former political rival Ben Carson, whom Trump has tapped to serve as head of his Department of Housing and Urban Development, transferred $100,000 in leftover funds from his presidential campaign to Make America Number 1.
Some of Trump's biggest checks went to his web marketing firm, Giles-Parscale, which waged an under-the-radar digital campaign to target voters in key states.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here