Elon Musk’s America PAC emerged as a powerful force in Republican politics by channeling hundreds of millions of dollars into campaigns, but its financial influence has not translated into consistent electoral success. The PAC’s spending, particularly in Texas, helped expose the limits of a strategy built around injecting money into campaigns while also tying Republican candidates to what some strategists view as an increasingly damaging Musk brand.
Money and the Musk brand
Two years ago, America PAC was a new force in Republican politics. Its fundraising model attracted money not only from Musk but also from major venture capital figures such as Sean Maguire. In 2024, as previously reported, the PAC’s ground operation was not necessarily especially strong. Its central strategy was to keep injecting money until campaigns succeeded, much as venture capital firms fund companies in the hope that one will eventually win.
That strategy now appears to be failing. Early signs emerged in the months after DOGE, when Musk himself became a politically toxic figure for Republicans who continued to associate themselves with him.
“We’ve got a monkey’s paw situation where we can take America PAC’s money, but it gets smeared with the Musk brand,” Vittoria Elliott said. “At best, those two factors may cancel each other out. The truth is that the Musk brand appears to be more harmful than Mr. Musk and his candidates can offset with money.”
America PAC’s spending and its candidates
Leah Figer agreed, asking Hugo Lowell, who worked closely on WIRED’s live tracker of Musk’s political spending, to discuss the candidates Musk supported and their results.
“Musk’s America PAC totaled close to $500 million. He actually spent $500 million alone this mid-cycle,” Lowell said. At that level, he argued, Musk was effectively operating a shadow Republican National Committee.
Lowell noted that without America PAC’s funding, some losses might have been even larger. The PAC’s ground operation was a major focus in both 2024 and the current election season, with Texas receiving the greatest concentration of Musk’s time, money and other resources because it is his home base.
“He basically got nothing,” Lowell said. Ken Paxton lost by a wide margin, while Gina Hinojosa, running alongside James Talarico, was elected governor.
A possible role as kingmaker
Republican operatives and people in Donald Trump’s political orbit may ultimately judge Musk’s spending less by the candidates it elects than by what it buys him politically, Lowell said. For Musk, $500 million is effectively a rounding error—an enormous sum in political terms, but relatively small compared with his wealth.
The likely result, Lowell argued, is that Musk can remain a kingmaker through 2028. If he chooses to support a particular presidential candidate, few potential rivals would be able to compete with him financially. If he spends another $500 million or more in the next election cycle, Lowell said, it is difficult to identify anyone else with comparable resources.
Source: www.wired.com
