Let me start with a disclaimer. I plan to vote for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. Consider that settled.

But their endless solicitations are driving me crazy. Just today I got nearly a dozen emails requesting money. The transaction might take different forms. You can buy merchandise, like T-shirts or hats, or go directly to the checkout where money is left behind in exchange for a promise to bully a worse bully.

Is this a campaign or a business pitch modeled after used car sales?

The most recent communications sort into two categories. One thanks me for my contributions, while the other lays on a guilt trip for failing to contribute. To be clear, I have coughed up cash a few times.

Shortly after making my first donation, I got a thank-you note that included a request for more money. The next week, I received an email with the subject line, “Our records show that you haven’t given to Kamala’s campaign yet.” Another said, “Robert, we noticed you have been opening our emails but haven’t made a contribution yet.”

It felt like a dunning letter for delinquent dues form a private club. Shouldn’t leaders respect privacy? Is Big Brother monitoring that closely?

The subject line for an email that landed the next day said, “Reply to this email.” The body of the email started, “This is an important request — and it’s not for money.” It went on to say, “Tell us how you think the campaign is going. Tell us why you’re hopeful about a Harris-Walz administration. Share anything you’d like with us.”

I shared. But when I hit send, I immediately was notified, “This is a system-generated message to inform you that your email could not be delivered to one or more recipients.” Could this be a spear phishing scam from a foreign adversary? Is it a nefarious scheme to get my credit card number? I am getting confused. Or is it paranoid?

The Harris-Walz campaign needs money. I get that. But they have already raised more than half a billion dollars and have an estimated $400 million on hand. Some estimates show that is double the amount available to Trump.

Does fundraising success assure victory? Trump outspent Biden in 2020, Hillary Clinton spent more than Trump in 2016, and Romney edged out Obama’s spending in 2012. What’s the lesson? In the most recent presidential contests, the higher-spending candidate lost.

Money talks, but there are other ways to get voices heard. When requests for money are shouted, some will cover their ears.

Campaign spending is unlikely to affect the 90+% of registered voters who have already made up their minds. Some estimates suggest that the truly undecided make up only about 3% of the electorate. Further, the outcomes in 86% of the states are essentially determined. There are about 32 million registered voters in the seven key swing states. If 5% of them are truly undecided, the election will be determined by about 1.6 million voters. With $400 million in reserve, the campaign could spend $250 on each key swing voter.

Kamala and Tim, if you are listening, I am with you. The country can’t endure four more years of the other guy. But, get your stuff together. Don’t make us worry that disorganized and relentless begging is a reflection of how you will govern.

You have proven you can use electronic media to reach us every day. Take this opportunity to disclose your plans. Give us more details on how you will pay for your priorities without increasing the deficit. Let us know how you will walk the tightrope between international conflict and the protection of innocent populations. Who might be appointed to your Cabinet?

We the faithful will stick with you. But, you are turning off many people who are on the cusp.

Please help us get beyond the feeling it’s only about the money.

Robert M. Kaplan is a Senior Scholar at the Clinical Excellence Research Center (CERC), Stanford University School of Medicine.