In an extravagant last-minute bid to sway voters, the Kamala Harris campaign orchestrated a series of concerts across swing states on the eve of the election.

The concerts, while star-studded and energetic, culminated in the campaign plunging into a $20 million debt post-election, New York Post reported.

The Harris campaign heavily invested in concerts featuring a lineup of high-profile artists, including Jon Bon Jovi, Christina Aguilera, Katy Perry, Lady Gaga, and 2 Chainz, to boost voter turnout. Stephanie Cutter and David Plouffe, experienced strategists from former President Obama’s campaign team, guided these events.

Concerts Planned Amid Financial Concerns

Jen O’Malley Dillon, the campaign chair, initially hesitated on the scale of the events. This delay in decision-making contributed to escalating costs. Despite the artists donating their time, the scale of the events required considerable financial outlay and logistical support.

Significantly, a planned concert in one city featuring Alanis Morissette was canceled just two days prior, in a last-ditch effort to curb spending. Yet, the overall campaign expenses had already exceeded $1 billion.

Veteran Campaigners Spearhead Big-Budget Events

Oprah Winfrey appeared at the Philadelphia concert to underscore the critical nature of the election, echoing concerns over democratic rights under a potential Trump administration. She aimed to galvanize the base by highlighting what was at stake.

Despite these efforts, one campaign source lamented the timing and strategy, pointing out that many voters had already cast their ballots and were more focused on personal economic strains rather than celebrity endorsements.

Staff and Vendor Payments in Jeopardy

According to insiders, each concert involved large teams of 40 to 60 people, significantly adding to the campaign’s financial strain. "They had huge advance teams for these concerts, like 40-60 people in some cities," revealed one insider.

While staff payments were up to date, pending reimbursements raised anxiety among the campaign workers. The source noted, "I’m sure vendors will start to get upset soon," indicating brewing discontent over financial management within the campaign.

Debt and Financial Reconciliation Challenges

The aftermath of the election saw the Harris campaign grappling with a substantial debt, estimated to be at least $20 million. Efforts to reconcile and manage the finances were underway, but the path to financial stability appeared daunting.

The financial overreach led to criticism within and beyond the campaign circles. A source expressed this succinctly: "They said they were ‘spending to zero.’ I guess they overshot zero," highlighting the gamble that failed to pay off.

Campaign’s Financial Missteps Criticized

Reflecting on the campaign's strategy, another source critiqued the reliance on celebrity-driven events, "It didn’t matter to have a bunch of celebrities talking to no one because one, 75 million people already voted and two, people were concerned about their own financial issues, not Oprah telling them America won’t exist," capturing the disconnect between the campaign’s approach and voter priorities.

The campaign's financial woes underscore a broader issue of budget management in high-stakes elections, where big bets sometimes fail to yield the desired electoral dividends.