Elon Musk Faces Humiliating Defeat in Wisconsin, Mocked as 'UnAmerican Billionaire Puppet-Master'

In a dramatic electoral turn of events that has captured the nation’s attention, tech billionaire Elon Musk’s heavy investment in Wisconsin's state Supreme Court race has ended in spectacular failure, much to the delight of his critics. Despite pumping millions into supporting conservative candidate Brad Schimel, Musk’s efforts were completely thwarted by the voters, as they overwhelmingly chose progressive candidate Susan Crawford, thus preserving a 4-3 liberal majority on the state’s highest court.

The outcome marks a significant blow to both Musk and his political allies, and sets a precedent for the influence of wealthy donors in state-level judicial races.

Elon Musk, the billionaire behind Tesla and SpaceX, is no stranger to using his wealth to influence political outcomes. However, his attempt to sway the Wisconsin Supreme Court election stands as one of the most aggressive and high-profile examples of this strategy.

Musk, in partnership with America PAC — a political action committee he founded to support his close ally, President Donald Trump — poured over $22 million into backing Brad Schimel, the Republican candidate.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court race, which saw a massive $90 million in total spending from all parties involved, became the most expensive state supreme court election in U.S. history. Musk’s contribution alone represented over a quarter of the total spending.

Additionally, Musk orchestrated a high-profile petition drive, offering financial incentives to Wisconsin voters to influence their participation in the election. Voters who signed the petition calling for the rejection of “activist judges” — a term Musk often uses to describe liberal judicial ideologies — were promised $100, with three lucky winners set to receive $1 million checks.

Musk’s spending didn’t stop there; he also funded a series of promotional campaigns encouraging people to become “captains,” which further deepened his financial commitment to the race.

Despite the extreme measures Musk employed to sway public opinion, Wisconsin voters rejected his attempts to buy influence over their judicial system. In a clear sign that money alone cannot guarantee success in American democracy, voters selected Susan Crawford, the liberal candidate, ensuring the continued dominance of the court's progressive majority.

The results of the race were not just a victory for Crawford and her supporters; they were also a resounding rejection of Musk’s influence in state-level elections. As House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) pointed out during an appearance on MSNBC, Musk’s bid to buy the state Supreme Court seat failed “spectacularly,” further emphasizing the overwhelming message sent by the voters.

Jeffries went on to lambast Musk, calling him an “unelected, unpopular, unhinged and unAmerican billionaire puppet-master” — a sharp critique that echoed sentiments expressed by many on social media.

One particular tweet from Kat Abughazaleh, a political analyst, summed up the public sentiment: "America hates Elon Musk so much that he can literally wave millions of dollars under voters’ noses and they’ll still tell him to fuck off. You love to see it."

Such commentary flooded social media platforms, including Musk’s own X (formerly Twitter), where critics mocked the billionaire’s embarrassing loss.

While state-level Supreme Court races are often overlooked in national political discourse, the Wisconsin election had far-reaching implications. The outcome of the race was seen as a proxy battle for the political future of the country, especially in the wake of President Trump’s return to the political spotlight.

With critical issues like abortion access, redistricting, and voting rights looming on the horizon, control of the Wisconsin Supreme Court holds immense significance. A conservative majority on the court would have paved the way for potential restrictions on abortion rights and changes to voting laws — both of which are contentious issues in the state and across the nation.

By preserving the liberal majority, Wisconsin voters ensured that progressive rulings on these issues would continue, at least for the time being. The election was also one of the first major tests of the ability of figures like Musk and Trump to influence down-ballot races.

With Musk’s financial clout failing to produce the desired outcome, the race stands as a cautionary tale for wealthy donors looking to buy political influence at the state level.

The fallout from Musk’s failed bid to influence Wisconsin's Supreme Court race is already being felt. Democrats have expressed deep satisfaction with the outcome, using the loss as evidence that attempts to subvert democracy with vast sums of money can be thwarted by grassroots voter action.

Derrick Honeyman, spokesperson for Susan Crawford’s campaign, did not mince words when reacting to Musk’s financial interference. "It turns out that Schimel is such a bad candidate that Elon Musk will spend whatever it takes to prop up Schimel's failing campaign in a corrupt attempt to buy influence on the Supreme Court for his company's lawsuit,"

Honeyman told Newsweek before the election results were confirmed. “It’s corrupt, it’s extreme, and it’s disgraceful to our state and judiciary.”

For Musk, the defeat in Wisconsin is a stark reminder that political influence cannot be reduced to sheer financial power. His efforts to back Schimel with millions of dollars failed to resonate with voters, highlighting a growing divide between the elites and the electorate.

In the age of growing populism and heightened awareness of corporate influence in politics, Musk’s attempt to buy a Supreme Court seat in Wisconsin now serves as a symbol of what many see as the corruption of the democratic process by billionaires.

Looking ahead, the implications of Musk’s defeat could reverberate throughout the political landscape. Musk’s financial backing has been a powerful tool for shaping political outcomes, but as his Wisconsin investment shows, it may not always guarantee success.

In the coming months, Republicans — many of whom have relied on Musk’s wealth to support their causes — will likely have to rethink their strategy. As House Minority Leader Jeffries urged, the GOP must distance itself from Musk and his attempts to dominate the political system with his unchecked resources.

Meanwhile, Musk’s close ally, Donald Trump, is already gearing up for a return to the political stage in the 2024 presidential race. As the Republican Party faces increasing scrutiny over its reliance on wealthy donors like Musk, it will be interesting to see how the party recalibrates in response to this new political reality. Will Trump and his allies continue to use Musk’s financial might to influence elections, or will this defeat serve as a wake-up call?

In the end, the defeat of Musk’s candidate, Brad Schimel, in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court election serves as a powerful reminder that democracy still works — even in the face of immense financial power. While Musk’s vast wealth may have temporarily given him an advantage, the voters of Wisconsin ultimately proved that their voices cannot be bought.

The 4-3 liberal majority on the state’s Supreme Court remains intact, securing crucial decisions on issues like abortion, voting rights, and redistricting for the foreseeable future. And for Musk, this political misstep is a humbling reminder that no amount of money can guarantee political victory in the court of public opinion.