The midterms weren’t the rebuke of AI money many expected
The midterms are shaping up to be a record-breaking election for Democrats, who have flipped states including South Carolina and Texas. But the election has also shattered records for private political spending. By some estimates, super PAC spending exceeded $2 billion this cycle, more than 50% above previous election cycles. One of the dominant narratives heading into the midterms was that Big…
The midterms have proven to be a record-breaking election for Democrats, who have flipped states like South Carolina and Texas. However, the election has also set records for private political spending, with super PAC spending exceeding $2 billion this cycle, 50% higher than previous cycles. Many had expected Big Tech, particularly the artificial intelligence sector, to heavily invest in AI-friendly lawmakers, similar to the cryptocurrency industry's past spending patterns.
Leading the Future, a major pro-AI super PAC backed by Andreessen Horowitz, Greg Brockman, and Palantir cofounder Joe Lonsdale, had been seen as a prime example of this trend. However, as public sentiment towards AI shifted and Democratic Party insiders cautioned candidates against accepting industry money, the narrative began to change.
Despite this, analysis of election data suggests that the midterms were not a rebuke of AI money as some had anticipated. Over 86% of candidates backed by Leading the Future have won or are currently leading their House or Senate races, and 87% of those supported by Fairshake also saw success. The political efforts of AI and cryptocurrency industries also appear to be converging, with both backing similar candidates.
While Big Crypto outspent the AI industry in terms of overall spending, the results were comparable. Both groups saw roughly similar success rates among the candidates they supported. Notably, Leading the Future played it safe by largely backing incumbents, but just over half of its winning candidates were incumbents. The group also spent more on non-incumbents, with each candidate receiving roughly $511,000 in support, compared to $288,100 per incumbent.
Despite heavy spending, not all investments paid off. For example, Leading the Future supported Republican Darline Graham, who lost her Senate race in South Carolina, while spending nearly $1.4 million on disgraced former Illinois congressman Jesse Jackson Jr., who didn't make it past his primary.
Written by urgent.news from Fast Company's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
