90% of crypto's Illinois primary spending failed to achieve its objective
Context and Objectives of Crypto Spending
- Linked coverage describes crypto and AI industries spending heavily in Illinois primaries, mostly to oppose candidates seen as unfriendly to their regulatory interests.
- Commenters note Illinois/Chicago’s importance due to major commodities exchanges, crypto trading firms, and overlapping issues like sports betting and prediction markets.
Effectiveness of Primary Spending and Lobbying
- Several argue the spending “failed” because ~90% went against candidates who still won; others say even a small increase in primary-loss risk can deter incumbents from taking hostile positions.
- Debate over strategy: some say it’s usually more effective to support likely winners or buy access after elections; others stress that primaries in safe districts are the real contests.
- Many emphasize diminishing returns: money can help unknowns but doesn’t reliably flip well-known candidates.
Role of Other PACs and Israel/Palestine Politics
- Some see crypto PACs as secondary to Israel-aligned PACs, which spent heavily against pro-Palestinian or “anti-genocide” candidates, often without mentioning Israel.
- Others counter that results were largely consistent with past cycles and existing demographics, and that Israel is low-salience for most primary voters compared to economy/Trump.
Money in Politics and Citizens United Debate
- Strong disagreement over whether “money buys elections”:
- One side: big spending is largely wasteful or correlational; popularity drives donations, not vice versa.
- Other side: money is the main way to shape narratives; lobbying is rational only if it works.
- Citizens United and First Amendment protections for political spending are criticized by some as legalized bribery; others warn that regulating it risks book-banning–type overreach.
Voter Behavior, Insurgent Candidates, and Electoral Systems
- Close primary results for inexperienced, online-influencer candidates spark debate:
- Some see this as meaningful insurgent-progressive momentum.
- Others see “meme candidates” and a neglected, more experienced local left.
- Ranked-choice voting, approval voting, and STAR voting are discussed as reforms to reduce spoiler effects; no consensus on practicality or voter comprehension.
Crypto Regulation vs Civil Liberties
- One subthread focuses on Tornado Cash:
- Critics of prosecution see it as criminalizing open-source privacy tools and chilling DeFi innovation.
- Opponents frame much of crypto as scams and money-laundering facilitation; argue “freedom to be scammed” isn’t a right and national-security concerns justify strict regulation.
Normative Reactions
- Several commenters welcome the failure of crypto PACs and say they actively vote against crypto-backed candidates.
- Others view the mixed results as mildly reassuring for democratic resilience, but warn elites will keep experimenting with influence strategies.