Overview of The New Yorker’s “Elon Musk Is Trying to Buy the Midterms, and He Doesn’t Care Who Knows It”
In this episode of The New Yorker’s Political Scene, Evan Osnos, Jane Mayer, Susan Glasser, and documentary filmmaker Alex Gibney examine Elon Musk’s massive political spending, his growing influence over American elections, and the deeper question of how one billionaire came to wield so much power over politics, technology, and even war. The conversation argues that Musk’s donations to Republicans are not just ideological—they’re also a way to protect his businesses, shape regulation, gain access to government data, and preserve a level of influence that democracy was not designed to absorb.
Main Topics Covered
Musk’s unprecedented political spending
- Since July, Musk has reportedly given more than a quarter of a billion dollars to Republicans, making him the largest known donor in the midterms.
- The hosts stress that the scale is so huge it risks becoming numbing, even though it may have real electoral consequences.
- His spending is framed as part of a broader pattern: he has already broken records with his political and campaign contributions.
Why Musk is back in politics
- The discussion traces Musk’s return to politics after a period when he seemed to pull back following backlash to his behavior and Tesla’s weakened standing.
- Gibney argues Musk is driven less by pure ideology than by self-interest and risk management:
- avoiding investigations into his businesses,
- protecting himself from regulators,
- and preserving political cover for his companies.
DOGE, deregulation, and government data
- A major theme is Musk’s role in the so-called DOGE effort, which the panel describes as an attack on the regulatory state.
- Gibney says the bigger, underappreciated story is data access:
- Musk’s people gained broad access to federal systems,
- which could be used for surveillance, influence, or political manipulation.
- The conversation raises alarm about how much unaccountable power he accumulated through a mix of government access and private ownership.
Starlink, Ukraine, and private power in wartime
- The episode highlights Musk’s satellite network, Starlink (and the Pentagon-supported version, Starshield), as an example of private infrastructure with geopolitical consequences.
- The hosts discuss a Reuters report suggesting Ukraine’s communications were disrupted amid high-stakes political tensions.
- Their point: Musk’s decisions can now affect not just markets or elections, but life-and-death outcomes in war.
AI, OpenAI, and Musk’s shifting rhetoric
- Musk is described as one of the earliest public warnings voices about AI danger, while also being a major investor in AI development.
- Gibney questions whether Musk’s warnings were partly strategic—possibly a way to slow others down while he caught up.
- This tension fits a larger pattern: Musk often appears to believe in guardrails for others, but not for himself.
Myth-making, branding, and the “sell you a dream” strategy
- A recurring idea is that Musk is not just wealthy; he is exceptionally good at selling narratives.
- Gibney says Musk’s genius lies in understanding the myths people want to believe:
- the rugged individualist,
- the climate savior,
- the visionary builder,
- the tech messiah.
- Jane Mayer notes that Musk marks a shift from dark money to something more brazen: billionaire power no longer hides—it performs in public.
Key Takeaways
- Musk’s political spending is not just ideological; it is defensive and strategic.
- He appears to be using wealth to shape the regulatory and political environment around his companies.
- His influence now spans elections, AI, military communications, and federal data.
- The episode suggests the U.S. system is poorly equipped to deal with a private citizen whose wealth and reach rival institutions of the state.
- The upcoming midterms are framed as a test of whether voters can resist this kind of concentrated power.
Memorable Insights
- Jane Mayer: Musk represents the “coming out party for dark money”—it is no longer hidden.
- Gibney describes Musk as someone who can be both “a joke and deadly serious” at the same time.
- A striking final image from the discussion: Musk thinks he is Frodo, but he acts like Saruman—a reference to his self-image as a hero versus the authoritarian force he may actually resemble.
- The episode ends on a warning: the real danger may be not just Musk’s money, but the data and systems he may already control.
Why This Episode Matters
This conversation is less about one billionaire’s eccentricities than about what happens when money, technology, media, and the state are all vulnerable to the same person. The episode argues that Musk is a stress test for American democracy—and that the midterm elections may show whether the system can still hold.