AI super PAC network had little effect on the U.S. midterms

Leading the Future, a network of super PACs backing AI development, entered the U.S. midterm elections with more than $20 million in its accounts and support for dozens of winning candidates from both parties. But most of the money went to safe districts, while candidates backed by the network lost in several more competitive races. In the primaries, Leading the Future spent about $26 million, including on a campaign against Democrat Alex Bores, an advocate for AI safety. His candidacy drew widespread attention, but he finished second.

AI super PAC network had no effect on the outcome of U.S. elections

A network with a budget of about $100 million

Leading the Future launched in August 2025, pledging to oppose policies that, in the organization’s view, impede innovation. At launch, the network had about $100 million from some of Silicon Valley’s wealthiest tech figures, including Andreessen Horowitz, Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale and OpenAI’s Greg Brockman. The network was led by prominent political strategists.

The organization was conceived as a “structured ecosystem” with the flexibility to participate in the 2026 elections and beyond. It includes 501(c)(4) organizations as well as federal and state super PACs working with both parties:

The network’s structure and overlapping strategists quickly drew comparisons with Fairshake, a large, well-funded network of super PACs supporting cryptocurrency that had a notable impact on the 2024 elections.

Sasha Haworth, executive director of the Tech Oversight Project, says Leading the Future intended to intimidate lawmakers and force them to back down: the network warned it would spend millions to influence members of Congress’ decisions, as well as their primary races and reelection bids. According to Haworth, the aim was to stop politicians from advocating for AI safety and regulation of the tech industry. Leading the Future did not respond to requests for comment.

Campaign against Alex Bores

Late last year, the network directed millions of dollars toward an ad campaign against Democrat Alex Bores, a former Palantir engineer and state legislator who was running for the House of Representatives in New York’s 12th District on an AI safety platform.

Haworth says the network expected to crush Bores and use his defeat as proof of its ability to influence elections. But the campaign turned into a high-profile clash over competing views on AI and helped Bores draw attention to himself and his platform.

Public First, an AI safety advocacy network that receives substantial financial support from Anthropic, spent $15 million backing Bores. He did not win, but finished second in a competitive primary. First place went to Micah Lasher, who advocated for holding tech companies accountable and for AI safety.

Leading the Future spent about $26 million in independent expenditures during the primaries. Spending fell ahead of the general election: the network put in about $10 million, mostly backing candidates in districts where the outcome was considered predictable. Funding also declined: the network reported no donations in the second and third quarters.

The shift in strategy coincided with polls showing widespread distrust of big tech companies and political lobbying in Washington. According to an NBC exit poll, 56% of voters said AI and data centers played a “significant” role in their vote.

Haworth calls backing candidates in safe districts an attempt to build relationships with future members of Congress. Public First Action co-founder Brad Carson, by contrast, called the midterms a victory for AI safety advocates: in his assessment, voters from both parties rejected the AI industry’s efforts to elect a Congress that would ignore its activities.

Where the backing fell short

Leading the Future performed less well in higher-risk races.

One of the network’s biggest bets was Darlene Graham, sister of the late Senator Lindsey Graham. She served in the South Carolina state legislature and was running for a full term. Her Democratic opponent, Annie Andrews, nicknamed her “Darlene for Data Centers” because of her strong support for AI and data center construction. American Mission donated more than $2 million to Graham’s campaign. She lost, receiving 46.5% of the vote. South Carolina last elected a Democrat to the Senate in 1998.

In nearly all its other competitive House races, the network backed Republicans through American Mission. The exception was the campaign of Florida Democrat Jared Moskowitz, who was running for reelection with support from Think Big. Moskowitz defeated former Boca Raton Mayor Scott Singer by 13,000 votes.

In North Carolina’s 1st District, Leading the Future backed Republican Laurie Buckhout, a retired Army colonel, through American Mission. In 2025, under President Donald Trump, she served as an assistant secretary of defense and worked on cybersecurity policy. Guardrails Alliance, another organization in the AI safety advocacy network, backed her opponent, Democrat Don Davis, in the primary. Davis had previously co-authored a bill limiting tax breaks for data center construction. Davis won.

The network also backed Aaron Flint, a retired combat veteran, conservative commentator and former state director on Republican Ryan Zinke’s team. Flint ran in Montana’s 1st District but conceded defeat to Democrat Sam Forstag, a wildland firefighter. Forstag was backed by several prominent progressives, including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and advocated strict federal oversight of AI. The Associated Press has not yet called the race.

American Mission Florida, a regional super PAC in the network, directed $3 million toward supporting Republican Byron Donalds in the governor’s race. Donalds and his opponent, David Jolly, took different approaches to AI safety, but disagreed most sharply over data center construction: Donalds opposed state-level bans and moratoriums on building them.

What lies ahead for tech companies

After the elections, Silicon Valley is bracing for increased scrutiny over the broad powers and freedom the industry enjoyed during Trump’s second term. Democrats have promised to summon executives from major tech companies to congressional hearings. Senator Ron Wyden signaled a possible next step in a short post on X: subpoenas.

Dataist’s take: The results show the limits of political spending. Backing candidates in safe districts helped Leading the Future maintain ties with future members of Congress, but did not secure wins in several competitive races. Attention may now shift from campaign funding to the work of Congress and possible hearings on the influence of tech companies.