Politics / February 20, 2025

Elon Musk Is Trying to Buy Another Election

Not satisfied with controlling the federal government, the shadow president’s political action committee is suddenly spending big on a crucial Wisconsin Supreme Court election.

John Nichols
Elon Musk walks to the Eisenhower Executive Office Building (EEOB) near the White House in Washington, DC, US, on Thursday, Feb. 13, 2025.

Elon Musk walks to the Eisenhower Executive Office Building near the White House in Washington, DC, on Thursday, February 13, 2025.

(Stefani Reynolds / Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Billionaires tend to buy what they want: mansions, yachts, spaceships, communications platforms, connections that allow them to transform nations. That’s a global reality in what will be remembered as an age of resurgent plutocracy. Contemporary oligarchs obtain influence in different ways—in some nations, through direct bribes and shady business arrangements; in others with slightly more genteel democratic sensibilities, through the sort of election expenditures that former US Senator Russ Feingold has long described as “legalized bribery.”

The head of today’s billionaire class, Elon Musk, has used his fortune to insert himself into the electoral processes of many countries—most notably the United States, where the world’s richest man spent upwards of $260 million to secure the election of a malleable lesser billionaire as president. With the threat of additional spending against dissenting Republicans in the Congress, Musk has so intimidated one of the country’s two major parties that he is now widely seen as guiding key affairs of state from a perch as Donald Trump’s “special government employee.”

But the South African-born billionaire does not appear to be satisfied with the outsized role he has assumed with regard to the federal government. He now seeks to influence elections at the state level too—and, in so doing, to upend the civic architecture of a country where the historic and constitutional mandate was for a division of powers that guarded against kingly overreach.

This week, a Musk-backed political action committee, Building America’s Future, bought a reported $1.5 million in advertising time on television stations across the state of Wisconsin, where one of the most critical elections of 2025 will be decided on April 1. The race is for an open seat on the state’s powerful Supreme Court, which currently has a 4–3 progressive majority. The senior member of the court, widely respected progressive Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, is standing down. Running to replace her are Dane County Circuit Court Judge Susan Crawford, who is backed by Bradley and dozens of current and former jurists and court commissioners from across Wisconsin, and former Wisconsin attorney general Brad Schimel, a right-wing ally of former governor Scott Walker who was appointed to a Waukesha County judgeship after being defeated in his 2018 reelection bid for the AG post.

If Crawford wins, progressives will maintain their majority on a court that has been asked to prioritize cases involving abortion rights, labor rights, and free and fair elections. Since Wisconsin is an intensely contested battleground state where five of the last seven presidential contests have been decided by under 30,000 votes, the court’s decisions carry significant national implications.

Fearful that his anti-union agenda could be upended, along with other policies that he and his right-wing legislative allies implemented before voters swept him from office in 2018, Walker has been working overtime to nationalize the Supreme Court race. He’s made no secret of his desire to get conservatives from outside Wisconsin excited about Schimel’s bid, declaring, “The April 1 election is important for those of us in Wisconsin, but it is also vitally important to the rest of the nation.”

The former governor’s message looks to have gained traction with right-wing donors, including, it appears, Musk. The mega-billionaire has made it clear that he favors Schimel, even if he does not seem to know much about how elections are run in Wisconsin. In January, after the court candidates filed their petitions to get on the ballot, Musk tweeted on his X platform, “Very important to vote Republican for the Wisconsin Supreme Court to prevent voting fraud!”

Wisconsin voters elect Supreme Court candidates on a nonpartisan ballot, which means it is not possible to cast a vote this April on the Republican line—or, for that matter, the Democratic line.

Historically, court races in Wisconsin saw candidates attract bipartisan support. That’s less common in today’s hyper-partisan era, when huge amounts of out-of-state money pour into the state’s high-stakes judicial contests. As in the 2023 race that flipped the court from conservative to progressive control, that money tends to follow partisan lines. Along with labor and business groups, the state’s Democratic and Republican parties have been increasingly active in court contests. Crawford has gotten a boost from wealthy Democratic donors, while Schimel has attracted significant support from top Republican funders. Much of the money has come in the form of so-called “late independent expenditures,” such as a $1.35 million ad buy from Fair Courts America, an Illinois-based group funded primarily by billionaire conservative donor Dick Uihlein, which is expected to attack Crawford.

But the entry of the Musk-aligned group has stirred things up in Wisconsin, where media reports and political discussions have focused intense scrutiny on the billionaire’s latest political move.

The Nation Weekly

Fridays. A weekly digest of the best of our coverage.
By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You may unsubscribe or adjust your preferences at any time. You can read our Privacy Policy here.

“Wisconsin is once again the front line against a billionaire takeover of our democracy,” said state Senator Chris Larson, a Milwaukee Democrat who is a longtime backer of reforms that would get big money out of politics. “On April 1st, we must stop Musk’s attempt to buy America out from under us by electing Susan Crawford.”

While Wisconsin conservatives thanked Musk—undoubtedly as part of a ploy to get him to fork over more cash before April 1—Crawford’s camp responded with a hard-hitting statement from spokesperson Derrick Honeyman. “In D.C., Elon Musk has taken control of Americans’ private financial information and cut funding for hungry kids. Now, Musk is trying to buy off Brad Schimel and take over control of the Wisconsin Supreme Court so that Schimel can rubber-stamp an extreme agenda of banning abortion and cozying up to corporations,” said Honeyman. “It’s not surprising that Schimel is groveling for the support of shady special interests—he’s already been caught begging on his knees for far-right donors to give him cash, and now Elon seems to be answering his pleas. Schimel has a long record of cozying up to corporations, including refusing to hold big drug companies accountable for the opioid epidemic that devastated our communities and receiving more than $17,000 from the pharmaceutical industry. Wisconsinites want a Supreme Court Justice that is guided by fairness and common sense, not an extreme politician like Brad Schimel.”

Tying Schimel to Musk might turn out to be a smart strategy. According to a new Economist/YouGov poll, a clear majority of Americans view Musk unfavorably—by a 52–42 margin. And discomfort with the billionaire’s role in politics has been accelerating in recent weeks. “This share who say they have a very unfavorable opinion of Musk increased 7 percentage points in the past week, to 43 percent from 36 percent,” explained the polling group. “This shift was especially pronounced among Independents and younger adults.”

Those are precisely the voters Crawford will need to boost her numbers in April. So it is that the Crawford campaign was out Tuesday with fresh messaging that says, “Shady Schimel Has Always Been Bought and Paid For—Now Elon Musk Is Cutting the Checks.”

Disobey authoritarians, support The Nation

Over the past year you’ve read Nation writers like Elie Mystal, Kaveh Akbar, John Nichols, Joan Walsh, Bryce Covert, Dave Zirin, Jeet Heer, Michael T. Klare, Katha Pollitt, Amy Littlefield, Gregg Gonsalves, and Sasha Abramsky take on the Trump family’s corruption, set the record straight about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s catastrophic Make America Healthy Again movement, survey the fallout and human cost of the DOGE wrecking ball, anticipate the Supreme Court’s dangerous antidemocratic rulings, and amplify successful tactics of resistance on the streets and in Congress.

We publish these stories because when members of our communities are being abducted, household debt is climbing, and AI data centers are causing water and electricity shortages, we have a duty as journalists to do all we can to inform the public.

In 2026, our aim is to do more than ever before—but we need your support to make that happen. 

Through December 31, a generous donor will match all donations up to $75,000. That means that your contribution will be doubled, dollar for dollar. If we hit the full match, we’ll be starting 2026 with $150,000 to invest in the stories that impact real people’s lives—the kinds of stories that billionaire-owned, corporate-backed outlets aren’t covering. 

With your support, our team will publish major stories that the president and his allies won’t want you to read. We’ll cover the emerging military-tech industrial complex and matters of war, peace, and surveillance, as well as the affordability crisis, hunger, housing, healthcare, the environment, attacks on reproductive rights, and much more. At the same time, we’ll imagine alternatives to Trumpian rule and uplift efforts to create a better world, here and now. 

While your gift has twice the impact, I’m asking you to support The Nation with a donation today. You’ll empower the journalists, editors, and fact-checkers best equipped to hold this authoritarian administration to account. 

I hope you won’t miss this moment—donate to The Nation today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel 

Editor and publisher, The Nation

John Nichols

John Nichols is the executive editor of The Nation. He previously served as the magazine’s national affairs correspondent and Washington correspondent. Nichols has written, cowritten, or edited over a dozen books on topics ranging from histories of American socialism and the Democratic Party to analyses of US and global media systems. His latest, cowritten with Senator Bernie Sanders, is the New York Times bestseller It's OK to Be Angry About Capitalism.

More from The Nation

Trump’s “Warrior Dividend”  Might Be His Scariest Idea Yet

Trump’s “Warrior Dividend” Might Be His Scariest Idea Yet Trump’s “Warrior Dividend” Might Be His Scariest Idea Yet

This week’s “Elie v. US” explores the authoritarian threat beneath Trump’s bonuses for military families. Plus, a case for getting rid of the Second Amendment.

Elie Mystal

How Do We See Hegseth?

How Do We See Hegseth? How Do We See Hegseth?

Surf's up!

Steve Brodner

HUD Is Refusing to Enforce Anti-Discrimination Law—and Won’t Let Anyone Else Do It, Either

HUD Is Refusing to Enforce Anti-Discrimination Law—and Won’t Let Anyone Else Do It, Either HUD Is Refusing to Enforce Anti-Discrimination Law—and Won’t Let Anyone Else Do It, Either

The initial chaos of layoffs has been followed by a concerted effort by the Trump administration to halt the enforcement of the Fair Housing Act.

Bryce Covert

Unleashing AI

Unleashing AI Unleashing AI

Ignoring the dangers, tech companies race forward.

OppArt / Peter Kuper

Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN) walks toward the Capitol on December 10, 2025.

Why Ilhan Omar Makes the Right Lose Its Mind Why Ilhan Omar Makes the Right Lose Its Mind

Trump and his MAGA allies want people like Omar to vanish from this country—and they hate her for refusing to do so.

Isi Baehr-Breen

Brad Lander on What It Takes to Win as a Progressive

Brad Lander on What It Takes to Win as a Progressive Brad Lander on What It Takes to Win as a Progressive

The outgoing New York City comptroller discusses governing on the left, his run for Congress, and why housing and affordability should define the next Democratic fight.

Q&A / Bhaskar Sunkara