Illinois’ Democratic Primaries: The New Playbook for Buying Influence

Yesterday’s Democratic primaries in Illinois are the latest chapter in a documented trend: ideological Super PACs and billionaire-backed groups have learned to exploit low-turnout primaries as the most efficient lever of political influence in American democracy.

Unite America Institute’s analysis of three decades of congressional primary data shows why primaries are the target:

• There are far fewer voters to persuade in primaries
• Primary voters are actually persuadable. In the absence of partisanship as the main signal, name recognition makes all the difference — and money is an effective way to do that.

This is in contrast to general elections — where money matters far less because party labels sort voters shape outcomes in competitive races. Money and activist support regularly changes outcomes. 

Over the last few decades, ideological PACs and Super PACs have learned just how much they can “wag the dog” through primary elections. My research finds:

• Ideological Super PACs have dramatically increased their primary activity over the past three decades, now accounting for the largest share of outside spending in congressional primaries, by far. 
• Candidates backed by these groups defeat establishment-backed incumbents roughly four times more often than in the past. 
• Unlike traditional business and labor PACs, ideological Super PACs actively seek out primary challengers, take risks in competitive states, and prioritize ideological purity over electability.

The result is a primary system increasingly controlled by a small number of ultra-wealthy donors pursuing narrow national agendas, producing nominees less representative of the broader public and less accountable to the constituents they are elected to serve.

Illinois is a continuation of that trend. 

• In the 2022 cycle, Sam Bankman-Fried’s Protect Our Future PAC spent more than any other group in Democratic primaries. 
• In 2026, similar outside groups pumped over $50 million into Chicago-area races, outspending all candidates combined by nearly 40%. 
• AIPAC and affiliated groups are spending millions through newly formed Super PACs with innocuous names whose donors won't be disclosed until after the primary. 
• The pro-crypto Fairshake PAC — with ties to Trump donors — has spent nearly $10 million attacking candidates it dislikes.
• An AI industry PAC has openly declared it is targeting both parties' primaries to block federal regulation.

Tuesday's results were a mixed bag for ideological Super PACs, despite their best efforts:

• U.S. Senate: Illinois Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton, backed by Gov. J.B. Pritzker and traditional party infrastructure, won with roughly 40% of the vote. She defeated Raja Krishnamoorthi — who spent $29 million on ads and received nearly $10 million in backing from the crypto-aligned Fairshake PAC — and Robin Kelly (Congressional Black Caucus), who finished third with 18%.
• 2nd District: Donna Miller (Cook County Commissioner, AIPAC-backed) defeated Jesse Jackson Jr. and others in a crowded field.
• 7th District: La Shawn Ford won. He was the traditional succession candidate endorsed by retiring Rep. Danny Davis, defeating AIPAC-backed City Treasurer Melissa Conyears-Ervin. Notably, Fairshake spent nearly $2 million opposing Ford and lost.
• 8th District: Melissa Bean won — backed by both AIPAC-aligned and crypto/AI money — reclaiming the seat she lost 16 years ago.
• 9th District: Daniel Biss won — the establishment-labor candidate backed by Schakowsky, Warren, and organized labor — over AIPAC-backed Laura Fine and progressive outsider Kat Abughazaleh.

Outside money likely changed some outcomes. But even where outside groups lost, they left their mark. AIPAC's presence made Gaza and U.S. aid to Israel central issues in races where local voters had far more immediate concerns. Even victorious candidates know these groups may target them later by funding a primary opponent if they support AI or crypto regulations that threaten the interests of billionaires who made their fortunes in those industries.

At the same time, Tuesday’s results demonstrate that traditional institutions are not powerless. Stratton overcame a $29 million opponent and $10 million in crypto-funded attacks because she had unified establishment support — the governor, a senator, the state House speaker, and a well-funded allied PAC all pulling in the same direction. Ford and Biss similarly prevailed where labor and local party networks were organized and coherent. The lesson is not that outside money always wins — it’s that it wins most reliably when the traditional coalition is fragmented, as it was in the 2nd and 8th Districts.

Today’s ideological Super PACs do not represent local Chicagoans, and they are not accountable to them. They answer to a handful of billionaires, operate across the country from offices far from Illinois, and pursue national and international agendas — foreign policy, crypto deregulation, AI industry protection — that most Illinois residents never asked anyone to prioritize on their behalf. Whatever its flaws, the old machine was accountable in ways that a Super PAC funded by a Silicon Valley billionaire simply is not.

‍