Democrats are confronting a difficult choice as the 2026 midterm campaign enters its final stretch: spend scarce resources defending the party’s most competitive seats, or invest in Republican-leaning states where recent polling suggests a broader path to power. Four major Democratic campaign organizations have publicly appealed for additional donations as Republicans outpace them in television and other advertising across the congressional map. The funding gap is raising concerns that Democratic candidates could lose winnable races if they cannot keep up with Republican spending. Since Aug. 1, Republicans have placed or spent about $820 million on advertising in Senate races, compared with $556 million for Democrats, including reservations through Election Day, according to data from AdImpact. Republicans lead Democratic spending in eight of the nine most expensive Senate contests. The House map shows a similar imbalance. Republican groups have spent or reserved roughly $454 million, compared with $381 million for Democratic groups. In districts decided by 10 points or fewer in the 2024 presidential election, Republicans hold an approximately $90 million advertising advantage. Democratic leaders say they need more money both to protect vulnerable incumbents and to test whether the party can compete in states that have traditionally favored Republicans. Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Executive Director Julie Merz said the party needs additional cash to expand its reach, while House Majority PAC leader Mike Smith warned that failing to match Republican spending in the closest contests could put winnable seats out of reach. The Senate presents the sharper strategic dilemma. Democrats need to defend seats in Georgia, Michigan and New Hampshire while flipping Maine and North Carolina, then would need at least two additional victories to take control of the chamber. Potential targets include Alaska, Iowa, Ohio and Texas — states President Donald Trump won by double digits in 2024. Texas has become the most prominent question mark. Republican groups have outspent Democrats there by roughly three to one since Aug. 1, even though Democrat James Talarico has held a narrow lead over Republican Ken Paxton in most public polls. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and Senate Majority PAC have not yet purchased television advertising in the state, although Senate Majority PAC says it is reviewing the race. Some Democrats are urging a major investment in Texas as well as Kansas, Iowa, Mississippi and South Carolina. Sen. Ruben Gallego of Arizona said the party should “go big” in Texas, while Sen. Mark Kelly said Democrats should pursue opportunities in Kansas rather than leave potentially competitive races uncontested. Other Democratic senators and operatives caution that the party could waste money chasing what one senator called “shiny objects.” They argue that Michigan and New Hampshire require more immediate help and that resources should not be diverted from races Democrats must win to capture the Senate. Democrats in Michigan are seeking more support for Abdul El-Sayed, while New Hampshire Democrats want additional spending behind Rep. Chris Pappas. Some senators have suggested that strong Democratic positions in Georgia and North Carolina could allow money to move elsewhere, but allies of North Carolina nominee Roy Cooper are warning donors not to ease up in a race that could tighten. The House strategy is more expansive. Democratic groups are spending more than Republicans in districts Trump carried by more than 10 points, betting that voter frustration over the economy and the administration will create openings in traditionally red territory. Twenty-five districts Trump won by at least 10 points are receiving spending from at least one major party-aligned outside group, compared with 15 districts won by Vice President Kamala Harris by any margin. That approach comes as Democrats trail badly in several traditional battlegrounds. In New York’s district represented by Republican Mike Lawler, Republican groups have spent or reserved about $20 million since Aug. 1, compared with $3.8 million for Democrat Cait Conley. In New Jersey, Republican groups have committed about $16.4 million behind Rep. Tom Kean Jr., while Democrat Rebecca Bennett has received about $2.3 million in spending during the same period. Republicans say their early financial advantage will allow them to define Democratic candidates before the opposition raises enough money to respond. Democrats counter that they do not need to match Republicans dollar for dollar and that their message about rising household costs may resonate more strongly with voters. The funding debate has also reached Capitol Hill. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries pressed Democratic lawmakers in a closed-door meeting to contribute more to the party’s campaign efforts and pledged additional money from his own political accounts. Senate Democrats held a similar fundraising discussion. For voters, the contest over campaign spending will shape which candidates can afford sustained advertising, organizing and voter outreach in the closing weeks. Democratic fundraising executives warn that without a significant infusion of money, the party may lose races that could otherwise be competitive — while spending too broadly could leave its most important defensive contests exposed.