federal legislators includes representatives (HOR) and senators. one could be tempted to think that on a fptp system the representative actually represents his district and not his party, something that should be clearer on a senatorial level. However, there are no limits to political donations in the US afaik, which I guess means the rich and powerful ones can invest as much as they can to denigrate the other side, usually a democrat (correct me if wrong). I don’t know if there are like party federal committees that raise money nationally for or against abortion, death penalty, tariffs… and then each party decides how to allocate that money. I don’t know if there are staffers in each party that decide which candidate is compliant enough to follow blindly what the federal committee decides and is not going to be a dangerous maverick because he actually has an independent moral compass. Is it possible for local candidates to run against their own party and actually win? Like a republican that lost his party’s nomination for a district, then becomes an independent and actually wins against his former party? Or are HOR races much more local than I imagine and each representative campaigns exclusively on local issues, raises money only in the constituency to be invested exclusively in the district’ election? Do candidates have to give back the money that was given as a donation that wasn’t actually used to try to win an election? Can a politician actually pretend to raise money for a campaign and then simply pocket it? I have the feeling that most members in the HOR are careerists that usually go with the motions and repeat the official position of their party and only selected individuals are brave or reckless enough to say out loud and clearly what they believe in (extreme example, Marjorie Taylor Greene). Most representatives, when pressed upon a problematic issue will first give you an elusive answer, then contact their party for instructions about what the correct answer is. This applies to both democrats and republicans. I have no idea if federal senators are also mostly followers and not leaders.

However, there are no limits to political donations in the US afaik, which I guess means the rich and powerful ones can invest as much as they can to denigrate the other side, usually a democrat (correct me if wrong). Almost right. There are limits on contributing to candidates, but not on political action committees advertising anything they want, including a candidate. PACs aren’t allowed to coordinate closely with a candidate’s campaign, but that hardly matters in practice. Is it possible for local candidates to run against their own party and actually win? Like a republican that lost his party’s nomination for a district, then becomes an independent and actually wins against his former party? Yes, but it’s extremely rare for it to succeed due to the voting system in use and in some states, ballot access rules biased against new parties. The governor of Alaska was elected that way in 1990. Do candidates have to give back the money that was given as a donation that wasn’t actually used to try to win an election? No. They can, but they can also donate it to charity, make (relatively small) contributions to other candidates, hold it for future campaigns, transfer it to a party committee, or give it to a PAC. Can a politician actually pretend to raise money for a campaign and then simply pocket it? That’s illegal, which doesn’t always stop them from doing it.