- Elon Musk is breaking ground as a pro-Trump megadonor.
- While he may not donate the most money this cycle, Musk is behaving unlike any of the uber wealthy Americans before him.
- The Tesla CEO is even holding his own series of political rallies in a key swing state.
America has never seen a megadonor quite like Elon Musk.
On Thursday, the world’s richest man held a town hall event in Pennsylvania, the largest swing state in the 2024 race. The Tesla CEO has pledged to hold more events to promote former President Donald Trump’s election. Musk has also seeded at least $75 million into a pro-Trump super PAC. His pro-Trump group, America PAC, even offers to pay people $47 if they get supporters to sign a petition, which in turn gives the outside group valuable data on potential swing voters. On Friday, Musk upped the offer even further, pledging $100 for every Pennsylvania voter.
“Elon Musk is sort of a natural for Donald Trump, ” journalist Roger Lowenstein, who wrote a biography about Warren Buffett, told Business Insider.
Musk, despite his $247 billion estimated net worth, isn’t the biggest donor this presidential election cycle. According to OpenSecrets, among disclosed donors, that title belongs to banking heir Timothy Mellon, who has spent a staggering $165 million on boosting Trump and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (We won’t know the full extent of 2024 donations until after the election, and that excludes so-called “dark money” groups, which, unlike super PACs, do not have to disclose their donors.)
But where Musk stands out is among the richest of the rich. While there have been plenty of wealthy mega-donors — the Koch brothers, the Adelsons, Michael Bloomberg, and others have spent hundreds of millions on super PACs — the men who recently preceded Musk as the wealthiest American and the world’s richest person have not been nearly as involved. Musk is taking a far different tact than Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, and Warren Buffett.
“The richest man in the world fluctuates over time but not all of them have been able or even wanted to spend money in politics in the past four presidential elections,” Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, a law professor at Stetson University, who has studied big money in politics, told Business Insider.
Lowenstein pointed out how even Musk’s temperament differs exceptionally from someone like Buffett.
“Warren just couldn’t be more different,” Lowenstein said. “This isn’t affected by the fact that Warren was measured to be the richest person in the world. He is very careful about what he says. He does not like personal confrontations. He has always been fascinated by the pragmatic issues of policy. He doesn’t get out there and say, you know, so and so is running the country or all the name-calling that is the political system these days. It’s just not his bag.”
Even Musk has changed. Before this cycle, the largest single political donation he had ever given was $75,000 to Californians for Clean Alternative Energy in 2006. His final 2024 total is already more than 1,000 times that.
It remains to be seen what the South African-born tech titan has in store, but already he is showing an openness to rely on his fortune and his businesses in distinct ways the other three have not.
Just look at how Musk has shaped X, formerly known as Twitter. It begins with his own account, which has roughly 202 million followers.
Musk, who once said he voted for Barack Obama, has pushed memes and misinformation on the platform as he’s become increasingly vocal about his views. He also lifted bans on Trump and other right-wing voices. According to The New York Times, X blocked links to a report with hacked information about Sen. JD Vance, Trump’s running mate, after the Trump campaign reached out. Recently, Musk’s company seized the @America handle to boost his super PAC.
In the post-Citizens United world, the nation’s billionaires have dug deep to support outside organizations whose ad spending blitzes can shape elections. Over time, the hard ban on campaigns coordinating with super PACs, a limit that always allowed for some creative loopholes, has been further eroded. Super PACs can now explicitly partner with the campaigns on get-out-the-vote efforts for the first time. Trump’s campaign is relying on America PAC along with other outside groups to make up the difference for this once critical role for campaigns.
Citizens United blew open the door to big money in politics.
The Supreme Court’s 2010 landmark decision and related lower court rulings opened the door to super PACs. There was almost immediate concern about how the nation’s wealthiest would shape elections, especially presidential races. According to reporter Ken Vogel’s 2012 book, “Big Money,” President Barack Obama told a room that included Bill Gates, then-the wealthiest American and previously the world’s richest person, that he and a small group of people now had outsize power.
“You now have the potential of 200 people deciding who ends up being elected president every single time,” Obama told the room that also included Steve Ballmer, who later replaced Gates as Microsoft CEO.
Around the same time, Buffett, who briefly replaced Gates as the world’s richest person in 2008, made clear that he would stay out of the super PAC business.
“I don’t want to see democracy go in that direction,” Buffett told Berkshire Hathway shareholders during an open Q and A at the multinational’s 2012 meeting in Omaha. “You have to take a stand some place.”
It wasn’t that Buffett and Gates didn’t have political power.
The Oracle of Omaha was the face of the Obama administration’s push to raise taxes on the wealthy, the so-called “Buffett rule.” And during a 2008 presidential debate, both Obama and Republican presidential nominee John McCain floated the investor as a potential Treasury secretary. (Buffett never joined the Obama administration.)
Buffett also publicly endorsed Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020. He held a fundraiser for Obama in 2012. Thanks to Nebraska’s way of awarding Electoral College votes, he’s also lived through the era in which the Nebraska 2nd Congressional District, which covers Omaha and some of the metro area, has become a fierce political battleground. The city’s oracle has yet to make a 2024 endorsement.
Gates praised Harris after she replaced Biden earlier this summer. He has also been a more outspoken critic of Trump. Gates, through his and his now-ex-wife Melinda French Gates’ foundation, played a major role in shaping the US response to the COVID-19 pandemic. He also arguably held the largest media presence of the American billionaires until Musk rocketed into the top slot.
None of the other recent wealthiest men have come close to Musk’s super PAC spending. Bezos made the biggest splash in 2018 when they donated $10 million to With Honor, a super PAC that supported veteran candidates. Unlike America PAC, though, With Honor was geared to support candidates from both parties.
Both Buffett and Bezos also held or held stakes in media companies. Bezos still owns The Washington Post (which, full disclosure, previously employed me.) But neither man positioned those publications in the way Musk has harnessed X.
Of the unofficial group, Buffett was arguably the best positioned for a career in politics. While he’s most associated with Nebraska’s largest city, he was born in the nation’s capital, the son of an avowed anti-Communist congressman. Instead, he has pursued a much softer and less public power flexing.
“He’s a pretty good listening post, and for those who want, a pretty good advice giver,” Lowenstein said. “That way, he has a lot of influence. Obviously, that effectiveness wouldn’t be there if it became public.”
Read the full article here
