Elon Musk Spends $25 Million to Confirm the Harsh Truth: Many People Dislike Him and Money Can't Buy Everything

On Tuesday, in what can only be described as a significant political blow, Brad Schimel, the Republican candidate backed by Elon Musk in the race for a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, suffered a resounding defeat at the hands of his liberal opponent, Susan Crawford. The scale of the loss was a bitter pill for Musk to swallow, as he had invested a staggering $25 million into Schimel’s campaign, framing the election as a pivotal moment in the battle for America's future.

However, the results of the election not only sent a clear message to Musk but also forced him to confront a painful truth: his vast fortune and influence, while impressive, are not always enough to secure victory.

The election in Wisconsin, a state that has been a battleground in recent national elections, was supposed to be Musk’s opportunity to cement his position as a political kingmaker. Schimel’s defeat, however, sent shockwaves through the political landscape, not only because of the overwhelming margin but also due to the role Musk played in the campaign.

His involvement in Schimel’s bid for a seat on the state’s highest court turned out to be a double-edged sword, with Musk’s personal and political baggage contributing to a backlash that some may say cost Schimel the race.

For Musk, a man used to charting his own course through the worlds of business and technology, this defeat was an unprecedented blow to his political aspirations. The billionaire entrepreneur, who has been a staunch supporter of the Republican Party and President Donald Trump, has spent the past few years carving out a political influence through his financial contributions and public persona.

His involvement in the 2024 presidential race was a calculated move to buy influence and secure a seat at the table, essentially becoming an unofficial member of the Trump administration. Musk spent over a quarter-billion dollars to back candidates aligned with his interests and in return, he gained access to key Republican figures and policy discussions.

Musk's goal with the Wisconsin Supreme Court election was clear: to prove his power as a political kingmaker. But despite Musk’s massive financial contribution to Schimel’s campaign, the results told a different story.

Crawford, the Democratic candidate, won by a decisive 10-point margin. Even in the areas of the state that lean heavily Republican, Schimel was unable to replicate the success of his party's 2024 presidential election performance, with counties shifting towards Democrats. This outcome was not just a repudiation of Schimel, but of Musk's personal brand, which has become increasingly polarizing in recent months.

Musk’s influence in the race was felt not only through the $25 million spent, but also through his highly visible and sometimes bizarre public support for Schimel. Musk promoted Schimel’s campaign on X (formerly Twitter) and staged campaign events that seemed more focused on Musk himself than Schimel.

During one campaign event, Musk appeared wearing a cheesehead hat, a nod to Wisconsin’s famous sports culture, before autographed it and tossed it into the crowd like a rock star. At other times, Musk’s involvement seemed awkward, as he spent more time defending his own ventures, like the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), than actually stumping for the candidate he was supposed to be supporting.

Perhaps most controversially, Musk's PAC engaged in a questionable strategy that offered monetary incentives for voters to sign petitions condemning “activist judges,” with promises of million-dollar checks to those who participated. This gambit raised legal concerns, leading to the modification of Musk’s original offer. But it did little to endear him to voters, especially in a state with a long history of progressive politics and a strong tradition of protecting judicial independence.

Musk's attempt to sway voters with money backfired, as his name and reputation became a central issue in the race, with Democrats gleefully labeling the election a referendum on Musk’s influence.

Turnout in the election surged to nearly 40% higher than in previous elections, suggesting that Musk's presence on the campaign trail had ignited strong emotions among Wisconsin voters. While the Democratic base was highly motivated to oppose Musk’s heavy-handed intervention, even some Republicans who typically align with the conservative agenda distanced themselves from Schimel, unwilling to embrace the tech magnate’s polarizing influence.

Musk’s failure to convince these voters that Schimel was worth supporting resulted in a blowout loss that was far worse than expected.

Despite his loss, Musk’s response to the defeat was characteristically dismissive. In his typical fashion, he took to social media to offer a cryptic message, writing that “there is value to losing a piece for a positional gain,” an odd reflection of his competitive nature. He also turned to his familiar pattern of engaging with conspiracy theorists, promoting a video from right-wing figures like Alex Jones and Roger Stone, suggesting that the election had been stolen—a familiar refrain among those who are unwilling to accept unfavorable outcomes.

The question now is whether this defeat marks the beginning of the end for Musk's political influence. While his personal fortune remains immense, the loss in Wisconsin represents a significant challenge to his ability to shape political outcomes in the future.

Candidates across the Republican Party, while still eager for financial support, may begin to view Musk as more of a liability than an asset, especially if his political strategies continue to backfire.

Musk’s relationship with Trump, too, may be entering a new phase. Following the loss in Wisconsin, reports indicated that Musk would soon step back from his role in the White House, taking on a “supporting role” rather than an active leadership position.

This move, while framed as a natural progression due to legal restrictions on his tenure as a “special government employee,” signals a broader shift in Musk’s political fortunes. His growing unpopularity among voters—evidenced by polling that shows 60% of people view him unfavorably—has raised alarms within the Republican establishment, leading some to question whether his involvement in future elections will prove toxic to their chances.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board echoed these concerns, warning that Musk’s increasingly polarizing presence could ultimately hurt the Republican Party, particularly in critical elections like the upcoming 2026 midterms. His growing irrelevance could cost the GOP control of Congress, as his political ventures have increasingly become a rallying point for Democrats who see him as a symbol of the party’s growing dependence on billionaires and corporate elites.

However, while the Wisconsin Supreme Court election was a major setback for Musk, it is unlikely to mark the end of his involvement in politics. As history has shown, Musk is a master of reinvention and will likely bounce back from this failure, continuing to throw his vast wealth behind the next candidate or cause that aligns with his interests.

Nevertheless, the lesson from Wisconsin is clear: money may buy influence, but it cannot always buy victory, and in the world of politics, personal branding matters just as much as financial power.

As Musk reflects on the consequences of his $25 million investment in Schimel’s campaign, the question remains whether he will recalibrate his approach to politics or continue to push forward, undeterred by his failures. In the world of American politics, even billionaires like Musk are subject to the whims of the electorate, and in Wisconsin, the voters have spoken.

For now, Musk is left to ponder whether his fortune can still buy him the political power he craves—or whether it has become a millstone around his neck.