Podcast Summary: Future Hindsight – "Small Dollars, Big Strategy" with Brian Derrick
Date: October 9, 2025
Host: Mila Atmos
Guest: Brian Derrick, political strategist, activist, co-founder of Oath
Overview
In this episode, host Mila Atmos interviews Brian Derrick, the co-founder of Oath, a donor advising platform aimed at helping individuals make impactful political donations. Derrick shares how Oath seeks to empower small donors by providing data-driven insights and civic education, ultimately maximizing the effectiveness of political giving. The discussion delves into campaign funding dynamics, the diminishing returns of campaign contributions, the importance of state and local races, and how grassroots engagement is reshaping Democratic politics.
Key Discussion Points & Insights
1. The Challenge of Small Donor Engagement
[00:55 – 02:47]
- Many voters are overwhelmed by donation requests from unfamiliar candidates.
- Donating is a vital form of civic engagement, but few have the tools to do it effectively.
Quote:
“Oftentimes people are overwhelmed by the sheer number of requests that they're getting from candidates and causes that they might really align with… So we created Oath as a donor resource to address that overwhelming feeling.”
— Brian Derrick [03:08]
2. How Oath Works: The Impact Score
[04:25 – 06:29]
- Oath’s core feature is its “impact score” (0-10), designed to guide donors to where their money matters most.
- The impact score is based on:
- Competitiveness (likelihood of a close race)
- Stakes (potential for race to affect legislative balance)
- Financial Need (projected optimal funding and comparison to opponent/outside spending)
- Oath aims to direct funds to races where a contribution could tip the balance, versus already well-funded or unwinnable campaigns.
Quote:
“Our goal is to really be on the donor side, to be a donor advocate and help them navigate the ecosystem and create political change in the process.”
— Brian Derrick [04:07]
3. Redefining Success in Political Giving
[07:00 – 08:43]
- Oath measures success by “bang for buck,” not just win rates.
- They target funds to races determined by less than 5% margin—where dollar input is most impactful.
- Huge sums are wasted on already safe races; in 2024, 67% of Democratic Senate donations went to races decided by more than 5%.
Quote:
“Most organizations will tell you, ‘Oh, we endorsed 40 candidates last cycle and 30 of them won; we’re super effective.’ But that can hide poor targeting decisions.”
— Brian Derrick [07:25]
4. The Importance of State and Local Elections
[09:58 – 12:55]
- State and local positions—secretary of state, attorney general, county clerks—have immediate effects on people’s lives, yet are often underfunded.
- Civic education is crucial: people must understand what these offices do to feel motivated to support them.
- Oath uses infotainment/social media and post-election reporting (like a “Spotify Wrapped” for donations) to keep donors informed and engaged.
- Case example: Chris Mays’ narrow attorney general win in Arizona had a direct impact by defending abortion rights.
Quote:
“It’s so clear to people when you lay it out, that there was an overlooked race… she won by a very, very narrow margin. And then millions of people’s lives were directly impacted as a result.”
— Brian Derrick [12:40]
5. Grassroots, Public Financing, and Modeling Candidate Strength
[12:55 – 17:20]
- In discussing NYC's mayoral race, Derrick explains how public financing programs and grassroots momentum can level the playing field.
- Oath doesn’t rate NYC municipal candidates due to unique public matching laws but recognizes the impact of small donor matching.
- Candidate quality—measured by real enthusiasm, organizing, and polling trends—influences Oath’s modeling, but not all factors are quantifiable.
Quote:
“All that we can offer is that we want you, as an individual donor, to have the full picture of the data available behind your decision making at any point in time. We're going for transparency.”
— Brian Derrick [15:49]
6. The Role and Limitations of Super PACs
[21:12 – 26:05]
- Oath tracks all visible super PAC and outside spending data, though total transparency is hampered by “dark money.”
- Super PAC dollars are less effective than direct campaign dollars: rules prohibit coordination and direct candidate messaging, resulting in inefficiencies.
- Campaigns benefit from early and direct contributions—enabling them to build staff and organize, unlike last-minute ad blitzes from super PACs.
Quote:
“A super PAC dollar is less effective than a dollar given directly to a campaign… One of the reasons that we're always directing people, especially grassroots donors, to give directly to the campaigns instead of these sort of faceless groups.”
— Brian Derrick [25:08]
7. The Importance of Timing and Tactics in Donations
[26:24 – 30:16]
- Early donations allow campaigns to invest in ground game, staff, and voter engagement; late funds usually go to (less effective) media buys.
- Research shows TV ads are the least cost-effective way to net votes; staff and canvassing (especially early) are much more impactful.
Quote:
“Once that's established, you want to give as early as humanly possible. And that's because the campaign can spend the money on different things early in the cycle compared to very late in the cycle.”
— Brian Derrick [27:12]
8. Down-Ballot Success and Long-Term Impact
[30:23 – 34:01]
- Derrick gives examples of overlooked but pivotal races—such as breaking a GOP supermajority in North Carolina by flipping a single seat with a margin of 871 votes.
- Upcoming judicial retention races in Pennsylvania (with modest fundraising) could have outsized impact on presidential elections and ballot access.
Quote:
“Just being able to have that veto power could be massive for 2028… and it might have all come down to 871 votes in a race that no one has heard of.”
— Brian Derrick [32:10]
9. The "Stock-Picking" Analogy and the Role of Oath
[34:01 – 36:25]
- Oath isn’t about exploiting a flawed system, but leveling the playing field for grassroots donors, who lack the coordinating power of billionaires.
- Even in public financing regimes, donors need guidance; Oath aims to empower, not override, grassroots intention.
Quote:
“Billionaires have full time teams telling them where to spend their money... Why shouldn't grassroots donors have the same thing?... That's how we see Oath.”
— Brian Derrick [34:51]
10. The Zoran Mamdani Effect and Democratic Party Change
[36:25 – 40:03]
- Mamdani’s campaign in NYC symbolizes a broader “revolution” in the Democratic Party—new messages (on affordability), new messengers (youth, diversity), and new media (social and grassroots organizing).
- This signals a generational shift, reminiscent of the Tea Party’s effect on the GOP.
Quote:
“He represented a new generation of people who said, we’re ready to pass the torch, and you can either pass it or we're gonna take it. And sort of embodying that energy.”
— Brian Derrick [38:03]
11. Civic Spark: What You Can Do
[40:04 – 41:47]
- Derrick’s actionable advice: Pick an election you’ve never participated in—especially an overlooked or local race—and get involved as a donor or volunteer.
- This personal engagement demonstrates your power and broadens the focus beyond high-profile races.
Quote:
"Taking a small step of being involved, knowing who one of these candidates is... is a great way to remind yourself that you have more power in our electoral system than you think."
— Brian Derrick [41:35]
12. Closing Thoughts: What Gives Hope
[41:55 – 44:45]
- Derrick feels hope from the surge of new candidates and engaged voters, especially from younger generations, and the growth of grassroots movements.
- While setbacks (like Trump’s wins) are dispiriting, they also spark wider desire and action for change—across both major parties.
Quote:
“After Trump 2.0, which is infinitely darker, I think people are looking for a less safe, more bold vision of what it looks like to turn the page... looking for something that is more hopeful but also is a more bold vision for how we can actualize our values.”
— Brian Derrick [44:05]
Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments
-
On donor frustration:
“People's frustration should be even higher that at the same time that we spent over a billion dollars to lose that race, we were underfunding races that we lost that we could have won...”
— Brian Derrick [08:58] -
On civic education’s importance:
“I can't convince you to give to a really high impact secretary of state race if you have no idea what a Secretary of state does.”
— Brian Derrick [10:24] -
On the battle within the Democratic Party:
“There's not much debate anymore that that battle is happening and a different party is going to emerge on the other side of it.”
— Brian Derrick [37:26]
Timestamps for Important Segments
- How Oath Empowers Donors – [02:47]
- Defining the Impact Score – [04:35]
- Diminishing Returns in Political Giving – [06:29]
- Role of State & Local Elections – [09:58]
- Civic Education Tactics and Reporting – [10:39]
- Super PACs vs. Direct Giving – [21:12]
- Most Effective Uses of Donations – [26:24]
- Case Study: Arizona Attorney General Race – [11:32]
- Civic Spark: Action Item – [40:19]
- What Makes Derrick Hopeful – [41:55]
Actionable Takeaway
Find and get involved in an election—outside your usual scope—that’s happening soon. Whether as a donor or volunteer, focusing on overlooked races (like state judicial seats or utility commissions) maximizes your impact and deepens your engagement with democracy.
For more resources and to explore races with high impact scores, visit Oath’s website.