Crypto, AI, and AIPAC super PACs are spending in lockstep against progressives

Unprecedented sums are being spent on Democratic primaries, reshaping races while keeping their policy agendas largely out of public view. In Democratic primaries across the country, three special interests have been shelling out tens of millions to defeat progressives and help elect centrists who they think will back their policy agendas in Congress. The trifecta of spending groups represent the crypto and AI industries plus the pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC, and in race after race they have been aligned to help the centrists push back against progressive insurgents. The 2026 midterms are projected by AdImpact to be the most expensive ever for ad spending, outdoing even the last presidential cycle, and the three interests are fueling the surge. Super PACs working on behalf of crypto, AI, and AIPAC donors are the highest-spending groups on independent expenditures to influence voters this cycle—combining to spend more than $180 million so far, according to a review of Federal Election Commission records. The super PAC largesse goes into media buys, digital ads, direct mail, text messages and more supporting favored candidates and attacking rivals—but the policy wish list of their funders remains mostly opaque to voters. In both Democratic and Republican races, ads from crypto, AI, and AIPAC-linked groups usually avoid mention of their donors’ core issues, whether decentralized finance, deregulating AI, or military aid to the government of Israel. To Democratic voters, the interest groups’ messages often blare that candidates will stand up to Trump; to Republicans, the AI super PACs tout President Trump’s endorsement. The three interests include top donors to Trump’s super PAC, such as OpenAI President Greg Brockman and his wife, Anna, who gave MAGA Inc. $25 million and the same amount to the AI super PAC Leading the Future. Each of the three interests faces major legislative battles in Congress, either in the packed few months before the midterms or to be taken up by the next class of lawmakers. Last cycle marked the debut of outsize spending by crypto group Fairshake to knock out lawmakers like former Senate Banking Committee chair Sherrod Brown. They were joined by AIPAC’s super PAC, the United Democracy Project (UDP), which ramped up its spending to unseat progressives like Representative Cori Bush; this cycle, they’re joined by tech giants in AI. Of the three interests, AIPAC-tied groups have spent the most so far in the 2026 cycle to influence voters in Democratic races for House and Senate, often using a strategy of seeding pop-up super PACs that delay disclosure of their funding sources until after Election Day. In Illinois primaries in March, three secretive super PACs with names like Elect Chicago Women (ECW) that were bankrolled by UDP spent over $16.1 million to influence voters without publicly disclosing their donors before voters cast their ballots. “What we’ve learned is that candidates need to confront the dark money spending head on,” said Ravi Mangla, press secretary of the progressive Working Families Party (WFP). “When voters learn where the money is coming from, the attacks tend to backfire. The AIPAC brand has become extremely toxic—especially in Democratic primaries. AIPAC knows this too, which is why they’re funneling their spending through shell PACs.” AIPAC’s spending deluge has not always resulted in wins for their preferred candidates: many progressives have prevailed or advanced in primaries, including Randy Villegas in CA-22 and now-Representative Analilia Mejia in NJ-11, whose special election win in February presaged the progressive gains this year. But in other races, a massive outside spending edge provided by the interests helped centrists defeat a progressive endorsed by WFP or the group Justice Democrats (JD). And AIPAC continues to unload on the airwaves: three weeks before the closely-contested Aug. 4 Senate primary in Michigan, moderate Representative Haley Stevens has a 23x outside spending edge over WFP-endorsed Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, counting at least $19.7 million in disclosed spending by UDP and $14.6 million more from the mysterious group A Stronger Michigan. “We’re in a populist moment and, fortunately, many of AIPAC and crypto’s candidates are falling short in their races,” Mangla said. “But if we’ve learned anything, it’s that these groups will overhaul their strategies to remain relevant.” Crypto Onslaught Continues