But don't Republicans pine for small government and don't we all like efficient government?
Why is the big-spending Clinton campaign with its gigantic staff held up as the standard compared to which Donald Trump falls short?
You could answer that it's wrong to compare the style of a campaign to the style by which the candidate would govern. And yet we're continually pushed to infer that Donald Trump, as President, will speak the same way and display the same demeanor we see at rallies. But perhaps that's because the speech and demeanor strike people as inappropriate for a State of the Union address or a face-to-face meeting with a foreign leader. It works as anti-Trump, so the media like that argument, and they don't like the argument that he's running an innovative, efficient campaign. It's the same reason the media don't stress Hillary Clinton's extreme resistance to press conferences and frame that as a terrible characteristic for a President.
The media feel like lawyers for the Clinton campaign, taking whatever the evidence is and presenting it as advantageous to their client.
From the above-linked article:
Mr. Trump spends little on polling and made his first advertising purchase of the general election campaign only last week. His rapidly growing digital fund-raising and voter-targeting operation is a partnership with the Republican National Committee, relying significantly on lists built and maintained in recent years by the party....Clinton is the one running on the argument that Citizens United is a horrific Supreme Court case that must be overruled because it's wrecking the way we do politics, but ironically she's the one doing politics that way and Trump — despite the freedom of the outside groups to spend money on his behalf — is running his operation on his own and relying the resources of the party whose nomination he worked hard to win.
Although he has opened offices in Ohio and Florida in recent weeks, Mr. Trump’s field efforts rely primarily on roughly 500 Republican National Committee organizers scattered across 11 swing states.
The arrangement is a kind of throwback to the pre-Citizens United era, when party organizations — not independent “super PACs” and political nonprofits — assumed many of the financial and organizational burdens of national campaigns....
But, we're told, Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers don't want to help him. And some GOP insiders are trying to figure out how to deprive Trump of the resources of the GOP.
The difficulty, though, is that as November approaches, the Republican National Committee is more reliant on Mr. Trump for cash than on other recent nominees. Millions of dollars are coming in through a small-donor-focused committee operated jointly with the committee, which is splitting a share of the proceeds with Mr. Trump. Over half the money raised by the Trump campaign and the committee combined in July came from donors giving less than $200, far more than for any recent Republican nominee....I would think that sounds great, and yet — to the NYT — it's a "difficulty."