In politics, money has always bought connections. In 2026, some candidates are paying a steep price to disconnect.
With the midterm elections set for November 3, a remarkable pattern is emerging across the country: candidates who once welcomed tech industry super PAC spending are now scrambling to distance themselves from it, treating their own benefactors as political poison.
Why Are Candidates Rejecting Tech PAC Money in 2026?
Candidates are distancing themselves from tech PAC money because public opinion has turned sharply against AI companies, data centers, and billionaire political spending. According to Politico and Gizmodo, the industry is now seen as politically toxic, with candidates in both parties calling for stricter AI guardrails and populist backlash growing against wealthy donors.
The clearest example comes from California, where Politico's California Playbook reported that new independent expenditure committees backed by tech money are picking favorites in Democrat on Democrat contests for open state Legislature seats. In one race, committees called Grow and Leads have collectively spent more than $1.8 million supporting a candidate named Hernandez against fellow Democrat and community organizer Sarah Rascón, according to campaign finance records.
The twist: Hernandez is going out of her way to disassociate from that spending. Just this week, she posted two Instagram videos, including one based on a viral meme of former Theranos CEO Elizabeth Holmes, that appear designed to distance her campaign from the very groups bankrolling her path to Sacramento, Politico reported.
What Happened With OpenAI's Greg Brockman and Leading the Future?
OpenAI President Greg Brockman was a major early supporter of Leading the Future, a pro-AI super PAC formed to elect industry-friendly candidates in the 2026 midterms. The New York Times reported, as covered by Gizmodo, that Brockman is walking back his support following intense backlash, underscoring how quickly AI political money has become radioactive.
According to Gizmodo, Brockman's reversal came roughly a year after his initial commitment. In June, OpenAI released a statement saying Brockman's engagement with the PAC had solely been in a personal capacity, not on behalf of the company. By July, WIRED reported that rank and file employees were raising concerns internally.
The broader context matters. Gizmodo noted that the general public has dramatically soured on both AI and data centers, making the issues a major fault line for candidates in both parties. Some Republican candidates are even breaking from President Trump to call for stricter AI guardrails.
Is the GOP Splitting Over Big Tech and AI Safety?
Yes. Politico reported that Utah Governor Spencer Cox has called for Congress to pass AI safety laws and block high-end technology sales to China, while Florida Governor Ron DeSantis called opposing AI safety a losing position for the party. Tech consultant Nu Wexler told Politico there will definitely be an anti-Big Tech lane in the 2028 Republican primary.
Senator Josh Hawley is testing the limits of Trump's hands off approach to AI, Politico reported. Meanwhile, tech executives signed what the president called a morally binding constitution to police themselves on AI safety at a White House luncheon, a self-regulation pledge critics say lacks teeth.
This intraparty tension is not happening in a vacuum. C-SPAN programming this week focused on Campaign 2026 and divisions within political parties, and MultiState reported that many forecasters expect a Democratic wave election that could flip five governor seats and nine legislative chambers, creating new trifectas in Arizona, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
How Are Super PAC Connections Shaping Key Senate Races?
Big money is still flowing, and its origins are becoming campaign issues themselves. Axios reported that Senate Majority PAC, the Democrats' main Senate super PAC, is spending $3.4 million on a 30-second attack campaign against Senator Susan Collins in Maine, one of the closest Senate races of the midterms.
The ad draws on a ProPublica investigation into an FBI inquiry involving Collins and Martin Kao, a former defense contractor who pleaded guilty to campaign finance and loan fraud charges. Kao told investigators his company used political contributions to Collins and groups supporting her to help secure tens of millions of dollars in federal defense contracts, according to ProPublica. Democrats believe they can turn that complicated investigation into a simple message: Collins did not put Maine first.
Elsewhere, the New York Times reported that AIPAC's decision to target New Jersey Democrat Tom Malinowski, widely seen as an ally of Israel, baffled even its own supporters. One longtime donor, Leonard Gregory of San Diego, told the Times he has stopped writing checks entirely. AIPAC is now conducting a strategic review of its political operations.
What Does This Mean for Voter Outreach Strategy?
The lesson for campaigns in the final five weeks before Election Day is clear: voters are scrutinizing who funds you, not just what you say. In Florida, Spectrum Bay News 9's Political Connections reported that the state now has roughly 13.5 million registered voters, including about 5.6 million Republicans and 4.1 million Democrats, with GOP Chair Evan Power touting a 1.5 million voter advantage. But Florida Democrats actually out-registered Republicans by about 500 new voters in September.
In an environment this volatile, campaigns need direct voter contact that they control, rather than relying on outside groups whose spending can become a liability. That is where disciplined field operations and AI powered phone banking through HyperPhonebank give campaigns an owned channel to reach persuadable voters with their own message.
Smart operations are also pairing outreach with modern analytics. Tools like HyperPulse synthetic polling let campaigns test how donor controversies and attack ads are landing with voters before those narratives harden. You can track competitive races in our Election Data Hub as November 3 approaches.
The New Rules of Political Money
The 2026 cycle is rewriting the relationship between candidates and their patrons. From Hernandez's Elizabeth Holmes memes in California to Brockman's retreat from his own super PAC, the political class is discovering that some connections cost more than they pay.
For campaigns navigating this landscape, the safest investment is the oldest one: authentic, direct conversations with voters. Our team at The Political Group has tracked these shifts across our campaign strategy coverage, and the verdict is consistent. When outside money turns toxic, the campaigns that survive are the ones that built their own connections first.