Spending on the November midterms keeps climbing, and Stanford political scientist Brandice Canes-Wrone says its power is concentrated in one part of the election calendar. “Where it has the largest effect is in the primaries and actually also in referenda. It does have a marginal effect in general elections,” she said in a Bloomberg segment on October 24, 2026, titled “Has Election Spending Hit a Tipping Point?”
Canes-Wrone is a professor of political science at Stanford and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, where she studies representation and American institutions. Investors should pay attention to her point because two industries facing heavy regulatory scrutiny, artificial intelligence and crypto, have already acted on it in the 2026 primaries.
Why Primaries Reward Big Spenders
A general election pits the parties’ nominees against each other. The Bloomberg segment notes that party affiliation dominates voter choice at that stage, so money has less room to change the result. A committed Republican seldom switches to a Democrat because of a better ad campaign, and a committed Democrat seldom switches the other way.
Primaries run on different mechanics. In a primary, voters within one party choose its nominee, so every candidate on the ballot carries the same label. Referenda are ballot measures where voters decide a policy question directly, and they carry no party label at all. Voters have fewer information in both settings, so advertising and outreach carry more weight. Super PACs supply much of that spending. These political committees can raise and spend unlimited amounts as long as they stay independent of the campaigns they support.
New York’s 12th District Became an AI Proxy Fight
Canes-Wrone pointed to Manhattan. Alex Bores, a state assemblyman and AI safety advocate, was “very much in favor of heavy AI regulation,” in her words, and he lost the Democratic primary in New York’s 12th District. “This was a case where AI, kind of anti-heavy AI regulation, super PACs were very involved,” she said.
The race drew national coverage. The New York Times called it an “A.I. proxy fight,” and The Guardian called it a key front in an “AI civil war.” CNBC reported that AI PACs poured $20 million into the Democratic primary, and Politico described a $26M tech industry war on the June ballot. Vox looked at the results and wrote that the AI industry “won a race” but “lost the war,” one outlet’s view of the longer-term consequences.
Crypto Money Shaped Alabama’s Senate Primary
Canes-Wrone said crypto was heavily involved in Alabama’s Senate race. The industry backed Barry Moore, whom she described as a big proponent of federal regulation that favors the crypto industry. CoinDesk reported that Moore, a candidate a crypto PAC backed with $12 million, won the state’s Republican Senate primary. The New York Times described the midterm spending as the crypto industry’s biggest push yet, and Politico reported the sector racking up primary wins.
Both Sides of the AI Debate Have Organized
The AI industry is split on regulation. According to Bloomberg’s segment, the super PAC Leading the Future backs lighter AI rules and gives to both parties, and the Guardrails Alliance super PAC favors stricter AI guardrails. As a result, primary voters in some districts hear competing, well-funded messages on the same policy question.
The rules on how money reaches candidates are changing as well. The segment noted that a Supreme Court decision in June 2026 increased parties’ ability to coordinate with candidates, which gives campaign finance one more moving part.
What Primary Results Signal for AI and Crypto Investors
In a safe partisan seat, whoever wins the primary is very likely to win the seat. When an industry helps pick that nominee, it helps shape the lawmakers who sit on committees and cast floor votes on AI safety standards, digital asset market structure and related rules. That influence extends to both parties.
Regulation feeds straight into compliance costs, product launch timelines and the size of the market for AI developers, chipmakers, crypto exchanges and digital asset firms. Investors following these sectors can read primary results as an early indicator of how each party’s incoming lawmakers view tech oversight, well before any bill reaches a vote.
Tech Policy Battles Settled Before November
Election night coverage will center on which party controls Congress. Canes-Wrone’s analysis suggests the most important money fights over AI and crypto policy took place months earlier, in contests like the ones in Manhattan and Alabama. After the election, three things will show how much those primary wins translate into policy: which members land on the committees that handle tech, how they vote on AI and crypto bills in the next Congress, and what the next round of super PAC spending disclosures reveals.