>Your logic doesn't leave room for the possibility that there is a correlation between electability and ability to raise funds. I.e. the candidate most likely to win raises more funds and not vice versa.

That's circular logic. "They must be the most qualified, because they raised the most money and the person who gets elected is the one who raised the most money".

In a functioning democracy there should be a cliff where, no matter how much you spent, you cannot simply buy the election.