WASHINGTON — Major setbacks hit the artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency sectors during this week’s Illinois primary elections, marking an early defeat for tech companies attempting to establish political dominance in midterm races and cement their status as influential forces in American governance.
These industries poured millions into Illinois Democratic primary contests, backing candidates they expected would favor minimal regulatory oversight of technologies that are transforming employment and financial management across the nation.
Through super PACs with unlimited spending authority, they launched television campaigns and distributed promotional materials that rarely mentioned their technological focus. The messaging instead emphasized opposition to President Donald Trump’s policies and support for progressive initiatives, mirroring tactics employed by organizations such as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
However, this indirect approach failed to prevent the AI and cryptocurrency sectors’ involvement from sparking controversy in Illinois’s contentious primaries, where an unusual number of vacant seats created highly competitive contests.
The cryptocurrency-supported political action committee Fairshake invested over $10 million targeting Illinois Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton, who secured the Democratic nomination to replace Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.
Both Fairshake and Protect Progress, another crypto-linked organization, invested additional millions backing Stratton’s primary opponents, U.S. Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi and Robin Kelly, without success, based on Federal Election Commission records.
Representatives from Fairshake and Protect Progress did not respond to comment requests.
Technology-backed organizations achieved varying outcomes in Illinois House primary races.
State Rep. La Shawn Ford, who previously endorsed state measures regulating AI and cryptocurrency sectors, secured the Democratic nomination to replace U.S. Rep. Danny Davis. Fairshake allocated nearly $2.5 million opposing Ford’s campaign in a contest where at least four additional political organizations spent funds against the progressive legislator or supporting his competitors.
Cook County Commissioner Donna Miller won the Democratic primary to succeed Kelly after Fairshake spent over $800,000 opposing state Rep. Robert Peters, another progressive supporter of cryptocurrency regulation legislation.
AI-supported spending created internal conflicts in that contest.
The AI-funded Think Big PAC contributed more than $1 million supporting Jesse Jackson Jr., a former congressman who admitted guilt in a 2013 fraud case. Jackson simultaneously faced approximately $1 million in opposition spending from Jobs and Democracy PAC, another AI-backed organization.
Both PACs declined to provide comments.
Think Big operates as a subsidiary of Leading the Future, funded by prominent Silicon Valley leaders including venture capitalist Marc Andreessen. Andreessen opposes federal AI regulations and strongly supports the Republican president’s AI agenda.
Jobs and Democracy PAC receives funding from AI company Anthropic, which supports certain safety regulations as AI technology advances. Both PACs targeted progressive candidates advocating for substantial technology regulations and increased taxation on wealthy individuals.
The substantial financial investments in Illinois races approached $20 million total, demonstrating both industries’ political aspirations and intensifying already heated primary competitions.
“Corporate money is being used to paint corporate-backed candidates as fearless progressives,” said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, a political group that works to elect anti-corporate progressives.
“The question for the Democratic Party is whether we elect people who actually believe in these positions or will we elect milquetoast candidates who give lip service to these values but don’t back them in actual policy,” Green said.
Campaign finance analysts and ordinary voters continue grappling with understanding the technology sector’s political impact.
“They’re so new to the game that public opinion isn’t very well formed about them,” said Brian Gaines, a political science professor at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. “You don’t get a clear signal for who is the progressive and who is the moderate on AI and crypto policies.”
“People are wary of the technology,” Gaines said, “but they don’t know what to think yet.”
