Supreme Court hands GOP a huge victory in who is entitled to low TV advertising rates

The leftists never cared about whatever "high-minded" bullshite position they were pushing. They just wanted to get Trump.

In a competitive house or senate race, the ruling could plausibly shift the margin by roughly 0.5–2 percentage points in favor of the side that can best exploit it (currently the Republicans), but this is an estimate with wide uncertainty, not a precise forecast.

The “lowest unit charge” rate that candidates already receive in the final 60 days is often 2–5× (sometimes higher) cheaper than the market rates paid by outside groups or party committees. One recent example showed a super PAC paying more than 4× the rate of a candidate/joint fundraising committee for the same spot. Extending the discount to party committees and certain joint fundraising committees means their broadcast ad dollars can buy substantially more airtime (higher gross rating points) for the same spend.

Republican party committees have held a meaningful cash advantage over Democratic ones this cycle (on the order of tens to over $100 million in recent filings, plus additional super PAC resources). That edge is amplified when the money can be spent at candidate rates rather than full market rates

Academic and empirical work on campaign advertising generally finds that ad volume has a real but modest effect on vote share in down-ballot races (Senate/House), larger than in presidential races and more impactful later in the campaign. Typical findings show that a sizable advertising advantage (e.g., one standard deviation more airings) is associated with roughly 0.5–1+ percentage points of vote share, with diminishing returns as markets saturate. In very close races, the marginal effect of additional efficient broadcast spending can matter at the margins

Per Grok