- Billionaire Elon Musk invested over $21M in Wisconsin’s pivotal Supreme Court race
- Judge Susan Crawford secured a 4% victory margin despite unprecedented spending
- Democrats flipped Trump-won counties through grassroots mobilization efforts
- Case study shows 10-point swing in Sauk County after Musk-funded campaigns
- Legal challenges arose over $1,000 voter incentive petitions
In a historic rebuke to billionaire political influence, Wisconsin voters decisively rejected Elon Musk’s multimillion-dollar attempt to sway Tuesday’s Supreme Court election. The normally low-profile judicial race shattered spending records, becoming a proxy war for control of a battleground state’s election laws ahead of 2028. Democratic-backed Judge Susan Crawford’s victory preserves a 4-3 liberal majority on Wisconsin’s highest court, which will likely rule on voting rights cases and redistricting maps.
Musk’s America PAC deployed controversial tactics including $1,000 payments to voters who signed anti-judicial activism petitions and $20-per-door payments to canvassers. The tech mogul framed the race as critical for Western civilizationin social media posts, while Democrats successfully positioned the election as a referendum on billionaire election interference. Exit polling revealed 68% of voters disapproved of Musk’s direct involvement, with 22-year-old Milwaukee student Kenneth Gifford calling it an attack on respectable democracy.
Three critical insights emerge from this $85M judicial spending spree:
- Grassroots organizing outperformed paid voter incentives 3:1 in turnout metrics
- 72% of PAC-funded door knockers failed verification checks for completed work
- Constitutional amendment votes split-ticket 19% more than judicial races
The Sauk County case study proves particularly damning for Musk’s strategy. Despite America PAC’s $2.3M investment in this Trump-leaning region north of Madison, Crawford outperformed 2023 Democratic margins by 8 points. Similar patterns emerged in Brown County (Green Bay), where Sunday’s Musk rally drew 2,000 attendees but failed to prevent a 3-point Schimel loss.
Legal experts highlight concerning precedents set by the race. Wisconsin’s unanimous Supreme Court refusal to block voter payments – despite Attorney General Josh Kaul’s lawsuit – creates ambiguity about financial incentives in future elections. However, the failed experiment suggests voters penalize candidates perceived as beholden to outside financiers, with 54% of independents citing Musk’s involvement as their primary voting motivator.
National implications are already unfolding. Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, who contributed to Crawford’s campaign, tweeted: Money can’t replace authentic voter connections.Meanwhile, Republican strategists report declining donor interest in judicial races after this high-profile failure. As Musk posts conspiracy theories about judicial corruptionon X, analysts note Wisconsin’s results could reshape campaign finance approaches in 10 upcoming state Supreme Court races.
