The story behind the cartoon
Crypto and AI super PACs spent $250 million in the 2026 midterms in hopes of picking the lawmakers who would decide how — or whether — their industries get regulated, according to a tally by Molly White at Citation Needed. Of the twelve competitive races called so far, the side backed by those super PACs lost nine: $74.7 million went to losing sides, against $28.3 million on winning sides.
The clearest tests were expensive losses. In Ohio, Democrat Sherrod Brown overcame more than $64 million in crypto money spent to oppose him, the most the industry ever spent on a single race, according to Citation Needed. In South Carolina, AI-linked spending of about $4.8 million backing Republican Darline Graham failed to stop Democrat Annie Andrews, who campaigned on protecting kids online and called for a two-year moratorium on new data centers.
The results land just as the regulatory stakes rise: in an analysis published the morning after the election, Transformer's Shakeel Hashim argued the Democratic sweep sharply raised the likelihood of strong frontier AI legislation passing in early 2027, including mandatory testing and developer liability — the outcome the spending was meant to head off.
The joke is the bounce itself: the money arrives cheerful, bag bursting, expecting to be let in — and the ballot box, grumpy with its hand up, refuses the delivery. The bankroll does not get a seat. It gets turned away at the door.

