00:48:59 · Max Read, Teddy Schleifer
[00:48:59] S1: write this down. [00:48:59] S3: Sorry. He spent... Looks like about 470 to $500,000,000, somewhere in that range, on the election. Other tech people that folks may have heard of are Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz, the founders of Andreessen Horowitz, the venture capital firm, spent a $100,000,000 themselves. There's also people like the company Coinbase. [00:49:19] S1: Mhmm. [00:49:19] S3: Which joined Andreessen Horowitz in backing a big crypto super PAC this cycle. And there's a couple other individuals such as Greg Brockman, the president of OpenAI, who spent a ton of money on MAGA Inc, the Trump super PAC, and also has been a huge proponent of all this money supporting, quote, unquote, pro AI politicians. [00:49:40] S1: A couple years ago, it felt like a sort of conventional wisdom was coalescing among at least some people in the valley that, they were so rich. Maybe Elon in particular was so rich, they could really just spend freely and get what they wanted out of politics. Feels a little bit like a big lesson from this election is that that's not really true. Tell me a little bit about how spending has functioned here, it's maybe different from two years ago, and and how... What kind of lessons we might take away from it.
00:50:05 · Teddy Schleifer
[00:50:05] S3: Sure. I mean, so now sixteen years ago, the Citizens United decision comes down from the Supreme Court, which kinda begins this new era of anything goes billionaire political spending. And now people can cut checks of unlimited sizes to political committees. And every cycle, you know, the the zeros keep adding up to more and more. So in 2,024, you know, Elon Musk spent somewhere around $300,000,000, and this is just in disclosed giving. We're not even touching all the undisclosed giving that happens. And the narrative formed, I think, somewhat unfairly that, like, it was a it was a raging success. So the the... What Musk did in 2024 was perceived as successful. And I think the the the gospel of kind of the entire world of of money and politics is that money helps with politics, that you you win elections by spending more money. This cycle, I think... And and I I... This is a meta critique of my own stuff over the last decade. Like, I don't know. I mean I mean, there there are times when that's true. There are times when it's not true. Last night was a vivid illustration of the fact that you can spend, you know, in Musk's case, $500,000,000 or $450,000,000, and this stuff doesn't necessarily convert.
00:51:15 · Max Read, Teddy Schleifer
[00:51:15] S1: Yeah. So part of what I wanna do in talking to you is create, I don't wanna call it a loser list. Let's call it like a return on investment power ranking. I wanna know whose money was well spent and whose money wasn't. And I wanna talk about some of the people that you were just mentioning. Seems to me... And and and I... I'm gonna throw out the the names that seem like they've done particularly well, and I want you to feel free to challenge me if you disagree. Reid Hoffman is basically the only Democratic donor among the tech group in the $20,000,000,000. It's gotta feel like he did pretty well with his money. [00:51:45] S3: Yeah. I mean, Reid's single biggest investment this cycle, at least publicly, was he spent $17,000,000 on supporting James Talarico, including in the Democratic primary, which was competitive. And, you know, of course, the general election was was competitive, and Talarico won by, you know, a shockingly large margin. Makes you wonder if Reid didn't even need to spend anything in the general, honestly, in retrospect. You know? Yes. He he he is somebody who knows a thing or two about political spending at this point. He's been doing this now for, like, ten or fifteen years. And he believed that Talarico was, you know, a generational talent and the sort of person who could win Texas, and, you know, he won. So [00:52:22] S1: So we can maybe put him somewhere near the top. Sure. [00:52:25] S3: Let's do that.
00:52:25 · Teddy Schleifer, Max Read
[00:52:25] S3: Let's do that. [00:52:25] S1: Another person I wanna talk about, it didn't come up before because he hasn't been a huge donor, sort of nationally across the midterm cycle, but Sergey Brin did pretty well for himself. [00:52:33] S3: Yeah. Sergey is not on the list we mentioned because all of his giving is at the state level. But Sergey Brin, the founder of Google, if if Reid is a veteran, you know, Sergey is a rookie. He spent over a $100,000,000 this cycle, on a California political effort called Building a Better California. Brin basically started this group to push back on the proposed wealth tax in California [00:52:59] S1: Mhmm. [00:52:59] S3: Which, at least as of this recording, seems like it's gonna fail. And that is in large part because Sergey and other wealthy people from tech spent $330,000,000 on a political effort to kind of cripple this thing. And it worked. I mean, the the the... Sergey, they were able to demolish this thing financially. Not only did they raised $30,333,000,000 dollars, but the pro side of the union pushing this billionaires tax in California basically raised bupkis. They they they were outspent tremendously, and it's a testament to money in politics. [00:53:34] S1: So these two guys, Sergey and Reid, we might put at the top of our list. [00:53:37] S3: Yeah. [00:53:38] S1: Partly because they're the only guys who got what they wanted out of the races last night. I wanna turn to the crypto people because, this is a whole grouping that you've put together [00:53:46] S3: Yeah.
00:53:46 · Teddy Schleifer, Max Read
[00:53:46] S3: Yeah. [00:53:46] S1: When we're looking at the top 20 top donors. We have the Winklevoss twins who were big donors to Trump and Trump aligned packs. And there's also this thing called Fair Shake, a super pack, that is is crypto aligned. Where are the crypto people spending their money? What are they looking for? [00:54:01] S3: Yeah. So this kinda started in 2024 when, Fairshake raised somewhere in the 100 to $150,000,000 from a couple of key crypto companies [00:54:13] S1: Mhmm. [00:54:13] S3: Including Coinbase, Ripple, and Jason Horowitz. And the narrative that was set was that it was a raging success [00:54:21] S1: Mhmm. [00:54:21] S3: And that, basically, they were able to elect a very pro crypto congress. Even Trump ended up being, you know, seen as pro crypto. [00:54:29] S1: Yeah. [00:54:29] S3: And they wanted to keep it going in 2026. They had some successes in primaries. Like, there was a congressional race in Maryland in a Democratic primary where they elected a a pro crypto person. They had some losses in primaries where, the Illinois senate race. But this November, their big bet was identical to 2024 Mhmm. Which was to defeat Sherrod Brown, the Ohio senator who used to be in charge of the Senate Banking Committee [00:54:59] S1: Mhmm.
00:54:59 · Max Read, Teddy Schleifer
[00:54:59] S1: Mhmm. [00:54:59] S3: Which, of course, regulates crypto. It's a big deal in in Washington. Sherrod Brown was the target of $45,000,000 of ads against him by fair shake in September and October. And Sherrod Brown won last night. And, you know, there's a invincibility or an infallibility that I think that that that that people felt about crypto were like, if you were gonna oppose the crypto industry, you were gonna get demolished. And Sherrod Brown, I'll be very resonant for him because he lost in 2024, in part because the crypto industry, I think, spent $40,000,000 then. But this time, they won. And, you know, the crypto industry has won some other races, so I don't wanna say that they're totally on the bottom of the losers' list. But certainly in their highest profile race, it's an l for them. [00:55:46] S1: Yeah. I mean, there's lots of room on the losers' list. [00:55:48] S3: Sure. [00:55:48] S1: One interesting thing here is I think there was a a whole narrative that got built out of both the money that crypto was spending, but also a sense that there was this demographic shift in 2024. Yeah. Young men were becoming conservative or Republican, a sense maybe the Democrats had to appeal to crypto owners, crypto traders. You know, this was a narrative obviously pushed quite hard by the crypto industry. Feels like the armor has been pierced a little bit on this. Like, maybe we'll see Democrats being a little more aggressive with the crypto industry after something like that.