The US artificial intelligence sector attempted to replicate the crypto industry’s political success, yet critics argue the strategy has failed to deliver expected results.

According to MarketWatch’s report on Thursday (Oct 8), a large Super PAC founded last year originally aimed to replicate the political influence the crypto sector gained during the 2024 US presidential election for the artificial intelligence industry. Nevertheless, as opposition toward AI and data centers mounts across American society, this ambitious political initiative is encountering growing resistance.

$25 Million Donation Falls Through

Leading the Future, the AI-focused Super PAC, first suffered a major financial setback. Greg Brockman, co-founder of OpenAI, and his wife planned to make a second $25 million donation, but scrapped the contribution after OpenAI employees advocating stricter industry regulation voiced criticism internally.

Meanwhile, the organization has taken a relatively restrained approach in its involvement in the US House and Senate midterm elections this November. It mainly supports Democratic and Republican candidates running in low-competition constituencies. This marks a stark contrast to its high-profile spending strategy in party primaries earlier this year, when it poured funds in an attempt to defeat New York state Democrat Alex Bores in a House primary. Bores, a state assemblyman, drew attention for pushing new AI legislation in New York State.

In comparison, Fairshake, the crypto industry’s Super PAC, funded campaigns during the 2024 election and successfully unseated Ohio’s incumbent Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown, who had long been skeptical of cryptocurrencies. Two years ago, Fairshake spent nearly $200 million backing crypto-friendly candidates and opposing industry critics, ultimately helping the sector secure a more favorable policy environment in Washington.

Public Opposition Reshaping the Political Landscape

Critics of Leading the Future argue that with opposition to AI and the data centers required for its development emerging within both US political parties this year, the Super PAC has had to adopt a far more cautious strategy for the midterms than initially planned.

Jeff Hauser, Executive Director of the left-leaning think tank Revolving Door Project, stated: “I think they are being forced to back down.” Hauser told MarketWatch that despite Leading the Future’s large war chest, AI has become an increASIngly unpopular yet vital political topic, so candidates “do not want their endorsement.” He added that Leading the Future initially “clearly intended to copy” Fairshake’s political playbook.

Kyle Morse, Deputy Executive Director of the left-leaning oveRSIght group Tech OveRSIght Project, said strategists behind Leading the Future “cannot pursue aggressive tactics as they originally hoped, because fundamentally the political environment has shifted.”

Morse told MarketWatch: “AI is an entirely different beast from crypto. Most people do not interact with crypto regularly, but AI is already directly impacting people’s daily lives.” He noted public concerns over AI-driven job displacement, rising electricity bills caused by power-hungry data centers, and resentment toward government subsidies for such facilities funded by taxpayer money.

Faced with questions regarding the canceled $25 million donation, spending in low-competition districts and whether it is scaling back its political operations, Leading the Future did not respond directly. Instead, it provided MarketWatch with a general statement.

The organization stated: “Leading the Future’s mission has always been to cultivate a large cohort of innovation-friendly political leaders who can work together in Congress to build a robust, responsible national AI regulatory framework. This mission remains unchanged as we look forward to new members of Congress taking office, celebrate the successful re-election of many incumbents, and continue building a lasting coalition that wants America to maintain global leadership in AI development.”

Betting on Sure-Win Candidates

According to data released by Tech OveRSIght Project as of Thursday, Leading the Future has raised more than $75 million, and its affiliated Democratic and Republican groups have spent roughly $34 million combined. The Super PAC announced last month it would back four Democratic House candidates and four Republican Senate candidates in the November 3 election. Nevertheless, analysts at Cook Political Report judge that these candidates are running in constituencies or races with no substantial competition.

Adam Kovacevich, CEO of tech industry coalition Chamber of Progress, said Leading the Future is not the only AI Super PAC channeling funds into low-competition districts in the final weeks before the election. Chamber of Progress’ corporate partners include OpenAI and other major AI firms.

Kovacevich told MarketWatch that Leading the Future “may have decided it is better to make more friends than enemies.” The Chamber of Progress CEO further explained: “The strategy deployed in the Bores race was a winner-take-all model with higher risk but also greater potential upside. Pouring full funding to support or oppose a single candidate to send a political signal carries extremely high stakes.” He added: “Therefore, a safer donation strategy for Super PACs is to back incumbents who are highly likely to win. It is clearly the more prudent choice.”

When asked whether Leading the Future stands a chance of replicating Fairshake’s success, Kovacevich remarked: “In politics, people always study what has worked in the past.” But he stressed that AI advocates face a different landscape from the crypto industry, as public policy discussions around AI “are far less mature” and “debates are centered mainly on state-level bills rapidly passed in Democratic-led states.” In his view, the AI industry faces a “different task,” and relevant legislation is much less developed compared with crypto policy discussions back then.

Political Lobbying Extends Beyond Elections

Hauser of the Revolving Door Project emphASIzed that Leading the Future “is only one component of a sophisticated, diverse and well-funded political operation run by the AI industry.” Major AI companies also expand political influence through traditional lobbying and other channels that do not require public disclosure.

Last week, leading US AI firms attended a meeting at the White House with President Trump and his aides, eventually reaching a voluntary agreement pledging safeguards for their products. Trump has repeatedly opposed broad AI regulation and criticized industry figures calling for more safety controls over fears of catastrophic risks.

Trump has also repeatedly promoted his so-called Ratepayer Protection Pledge, designed to shield American consumers from electricity price hikes driven by rising power demand from AI data centers. Some analysts predict substantial shifts in US AI policy may not arrive until a new president takes office in January 2029.

The AI sector has been a key engine driving gains in the US economy and stock market. Year-to-date, the Global X Artificial Intelligence & Technology ETF (AIQ), which holds AI-related stocks, has climbed 29%, while the S&P 500 Index tracking large US equities has risen just 13% over the same period. Despite sustained investor enthusiasm for AI in capital markets, political disputes over jobs, energy costs and regulation are bringing new challenges to this fast-expanding industry.