Elon Musk Spent $366M On The Midterms — Will It Work?

SUMMARY

Ed Elson hosts a discussion with Bradley Tusk and Gil Luria, examining Elon Musk's unprecedented $366 million investment in the midterm elections, the effectiveness of such spending, and the broader implications for American democracy. The episode also analyzes the recent sell-off in chip stocks amid AI bubble concerns and concludes with commentary on Kimberly Guilfoyle’s resignation amid corruption allegations.

MAIN POINTS

• Elon Musk has spent $366 million on the 2025-2026 election cycle, surpassing his previous political contributions. [2:00]
• Bradley Tusk argues that while billionaire spending is significant, its impact on election outcomes is often overrated due to diminishing returns and changing media consumption. [6:00]
• Tusk highlights that negative perceptions of billionaire donors, such as Sam Altman and Elon Musk, can sometimes backfire and harm candidates they support. [11:00]
• AI bubble fears trigger a global chip stock sell-off, with South Korean and U.S. semiconductor companies experiencing major declines. [15:00]
• Gil Luria explains that while AI companies like OpenAI and Anthropic are not yet profitable overall, their gross margins are strong, but their long-term sustainability remains speculative. [22:00]
• A disconnect exists in chip stock valuations, with some companies trading at low multiples despite benefiting from AI trends, while others are valued as if growth will continue through 2030. [28:00]
• Kimberly Guilfoyle resigns as U.S. ambassador to Greece following allegations of soliciting money for access, raising broader questions about accountability for political corruption. [33:00]
• The episode concludes by questioning whether broader government corruption will be addressed beyond Guilfoyle's resignation. [36:00]

DETAILED ANALYSIS

Elon Musk's political spending has reached unprecedented levels, with $366 million allocated to super PACs and Republican groups for the 2025-2026 election cycle. This figure exceeds his previous contributions and positions him as the most prominent individual donor in the current cycle. The discussion underscores that Musk's financial involvement is part of a broader trend, as 20 major donors have collectively spent over $1.2 billion, with the vast majority supporting Republican candidates.

Despite these staggering sums, Bradley Tusk, a seasoned political strategist, contends that the actual influence of such spending is often overestimated. He notes that much of the money is funneled into traditional campaign tactics like broadcast television ads and direct mail, both of which are losing effectiveness as audiences migrate to streaming platforms and digital media. Tusk cites recent political upsets, such as Donald Trump's victories and Zoran Mandani's grassroots campaign, as evidence that energy and alignment with voter concerns can outweigh financial advantages.

Tusk further argues that while Musk's investment may secure loyalty from elected officials and reinforce his influence, it is unlikely to alter the fundamental trajectory of the upcoming elections. He predicts the House will flip regardless of spending, and that the perception of Musk as a major spender serves more to deter opposition than to sway voters. The conversation also touches on the diminishing returns of campaign spending, suggesting that after a certain threshold, additional funds have little impact on voter behavior.

Moreover, the growing public skepticism toward billionaire donors can sometimes backfire, as seen in the case of Sam Altman's opposition to Alex Boris, which inadvertently boosted Boris's campaign. Tusk concludes that while the volume of money in politics may continue to rise, its efficacy is likely to decline, especially as technology and social media reshape how candidates engage with the electorate.

The episode then shifts focus to the financial markets, particularly the recent sell-off in chip stocks amid mounting concerns of an AI investment bubble. South Korean semiconductor firms, including SK Hynix and Samsung, suffered significant losses, and the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index in the U.S. also declined. Gil Luria, head of technology research at D.A.

Davidson, attributes the volatility to a mix of negative headlines, including doubts about AI profitability, Chinese competition, and regulatory pressures. Despite these concerns, Luria points out that companies across the AI value chain are reporting robust earnings, raising guidance, and expressing unprecedented visibility into future demand. He acknowledges, however, that skepticism persists regarding the sustainability of current growth rates, particularly for companies like OpenAI and Anthropic, which have yet to achieve overall profitability due to massive training costs.

Luria provides a nuanced view of the AI sector's economics, explaining that while gross margins for leading AI firms are strong, their business models remain speculative given the scale of ongoing investments. He emphasizes that the broader AI ecosystem is likely to remain viable even if current leaders falter, as demand for GPUs, CPUs, and memory will persist across open-source and application-layer models. The discussion also highlights a notable dislocation in chip stock valuations, with some firms trading at low multiples despite their central role in AI infrastructure, while others are priced for continued rapid growth.

Luria identifies Micron, Nvidia, Broadcom, and SK Hynix as undervalued relative to their prospects, contrasting them with more speculative or financially unstable firms like CoreWeave and C3.ai.

The episode concludes with commentary on the resignation of Kimberly Guilfoyle as U.S. ambassador to Greece following revelations of soliciting money for access to the president. The case is presented as emblematic of broader issues of political corruption, with the host questioning whether similar scrutiny will be applied to other figures implicated in questionable financial dealings and conflicts of interest. The segment underscores the persistence of corruption at various levels of government and expresses skepticism about the likelihood of comprehensive accountability.

Overall, the episode weaves together themes of money, influence, and risk in both politics and markets, offering a critical perspective on the limits of financial power and the challenges facing both democratic institutions and high-growth technology sectors.

LINKS

• Vote for Prof G Markets at the Signal Awards.
• Prof G Markets YouTube channel.
• Prof G Markets newsletter subscription.
• Order 'Notes On Being A Man'.
• Subscribe to No Mercy / No Malice.
• Prof G Markets Instagram.
• Scott Galloway Instagram.
• Ed Elson Instagram.
• Ed Elson X (Twitter) profile.
• Ed Elson Substack.
• Upwork freelance hiring platform.
• Granola AI-powered meeting notes for Prof G Markets listeners.
• Framer AI website builder with Prof G Markets offer.

KEYWORDS