# AI super PACs spent millions on the midterms, and many of their biggest bets lost

> Pro-industry groups put $4.8M behind one Senate candidate who lost. Safety-minded PACs had mixed nights too. Both sides say they will be back in 2028.

- URL: https://devisdead.ai/news/ai-super-pacs-spent-millions-on-the-midterms-and-many-of-their-biggest-bets-lost
- Published: 2026-11-04T23:12:31Z
- Author: DevIsDead Newsroom
- Section: Policy
- Tags: super pacs, midterms, leading the future, regulation
- Originally reported by TechCrunch (https://techcrunch.com/2026/11/04/ai-pacs-spent-millions-trying-to-shape-congress-heres-how-they-fared/).

Money from the AI industry showed up all over Tuesday's midterms, and a lot of it backed the losing side. Rebecca Bellan tallied the results for [TechCrunch](https://techcrunch.com/2026/11/04/ai-pacs-spent-millions-trying-to-shape-congress-heres-how-they-fared/), and the scorecard is rough for the biggest spenders on both sides of the AI regulation fight.

## The industry side

Leading the Future, the political operation funded by Andreessen Horowitz and OpenAI President Greg Brockman, works through partisan arms. Its Republican arm, American Mission, joined another AI-focused PAC, Building the Future, in putting $4.8 million behind Darline Graham in South Carolina's Senate race. Graham lost. It also put more than $500,000 apiece into two Republican House races, for Montana's Aaron Flint and North Carolina's Laurie Buckhout. Both lost.

The Democratic arm, Think Big, did better: it backed Florida Rep. Jared Moskowitz, who kept his seat.

## The safeguards side

Public First, a group backed by Anthropic, lost with several Republicans its affiliated PAC supported, but did better with Democrats. It also gave $3 million to a PAC behind California state Sen. Scott Wiener, who was ahead when TechCrunch published.

Guardrails Alliance, which tries to make AI-company money a liability for whoever takes it, spent more than $1 million apiece against Flint and California Rep. Jimmy Gomez. Both lost, and the $300,000 it spent backing Angela Gonzales-Torres, who beat Gomez, paid off.

## Did the money matter?

Hard to say. A Democratic wave took out plenty of Republicans no matter who funded them, including many backed by the half a billion dollars Elon Musk reportedly spent. Leading the Future also backed some candidates it expected to win who then lost.

The group told TechCrunch it cares more about primaries, where money buys name recognition and a chance to shape a candidate's AI agenda. It spent $27.38 million there, $8 million of it against Alex Bores, the New York Assembly member whose congressional bid ended in June.

Guardrails Alliance political director Charlie Blaettler has a less flattering theory for the industry's quiet general election: in a close race, AI money becomes the story. "Our goal is to make AI money politically toxic," he said.

## The fight that's left

Under the ads, the real argument is preemption. Should Congress write one national AI framework that overrides state laws, or should states keep writing their own rules? Leading the Future wants the national version and says it will spend again in 2028. Guardrails Alliance says it will keep going after industry-backed candidates.

For anyone shipping AI products, that question decides whether you follow one rulebook or many. Tuesday didn't settle it.

**[Scoreboard](/scoreboard) update:** Humans +1. AI industry money makes a $4.8M Senate bet and loses it.

Stay undead.