© Luke Piotrowski/The New York Times
© Doug Mills/The New York Times
© Win Mcnamee/Getty Images
© The New York Times
What lit a fire under billionaire SpaceX CEO Elon Musk this midterm cycle?
He’s given more than $445 million to Republican candidates and causes this year, making him the single biggest disclosed donor in the 2026 midterms — and the biggest single donor in a midterm cycle ever.
According to the most recent data, he’s given:
REPUBLICAN CAVALRY ARRIVES FOR KEN PAXTON AS BIG-BUCKS TEXAS OFFENSIVE OPENS CASH FLOODGATES
SENATE CONTROL IS A COIN FLIP — AND DEMOCRATS’ PATH RUNS THROUGH TRUMP COUNTRY
All this makes the $288 million Musk gave to help elect President Donald Trump and Republicans in 2024 look miserly.
Why so much more? Because Musk realizes that keeping the Republican majority in Congress has become crucial to America’s secure and prosperous future.
On his social media platform, Musk shared a post last week agreeing that Democrats "must lose" the midterms. Critics claim he’s doing this because he fears investigations by a Democrat-controlled Congress. The truth is, he understands what it takes to build a strong America and what threatens to tear it down.
He’s not alone. He’s been joined by other tech and financial billionaires who are spending tens of millions to protect America’s future from the Democrats.
WARREN GETS DEFENSIVE WHEN PRESSED ON DEMOCRATS ACCEPTING BILLIONAIRE DONATIONS
Tech entrepreneurs and venture capital giants Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz are major contributors to Trump’s MAGA, Inc.
Citadel’s Ken Griffin has spent at least $40 million to support Republican candidates.
Blackstone CEO Steve Schwarzman and his wife Christine have put up almost $32 million to Republican-affiliated political organizations and super PACs this election cycle.
It’s not just tech billionaires who’ve opened their wallets to the GOP. Uline founders Elizabeth and Richard Uihlein have reportedly put up $124 million for their own Restoration of America PAC, and roofing company ABC Supply Chairman Diane Hendricks has given $25 million to MAGA, Inc.
'DARK MONEY’ GROUP ACCUSED OF 'SCHEME' TO TIP ELECTION IN FAVOR OF DEMOCRATS, MANIPULATE GOP VOTERS
In 2025, we saw the denizens of America’s high-tech sector — Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Apple’s Tim Cook and key Google executives — paying out millions for Trump’s inauguration festivities. Bezos, Cook, Zuckerberg and OpenAI’s Sam Altman even attended the inauguration in person — as did Elon Musk.
What did they understand about Trump and the GOP that the media didn’t?
This midterm cycle, according to The Washington Post, total Republican-leaning mega-donors have contributed $1.7 billion this cycle with Musk leading the way, compared to $832 million from Democratic-leaning givers.
Critics dismiss these donors as superrich oligarchs and robber barons trying to protect their ill-gotten money. Critics are wrong, tragically wrong. The truth is, the key stewards of our private sector economy are taking bold action to protect America’s future.
That’s because they see two possible paths to the future, and only two. One makes America strong, prosperous and secure, with tax cuts, investment, energy dominance and a strong, unequaled military.
One deals finally with the Iran that has destabilized the Middle East and killed thousands around the world, including American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, for four decades.
One sees the need to cut what the GAO says could be as much as $500 billion of fraud from the federal budget — the cause that rallied Elon Musk to the DOGE agenda in the first place.
One sees American AI dominance as key to protecting our freedom.
One sees restoring America’s manufacturing and industrial base as key to protecting prosperity.
All that stands on one side. On the other is a party that makes unsustainable policy promises like "Medicare for All."
A party that will give back the uncontrolled government spending spree that drove cumulative inflation up 21% during the Biden years.
A party cradled in corruption, waste and fraud, as exposed first by DOGE and now by Vice President JD Vance’s anti-fraud task force.
A party that has consistently presented weakness and prevarication to America’s foes, whether it’s Iran or China or the Muslim Brotherhood.
Finally, a party that threatens to mobilize the same radical forces that have turned the streets of France and European cities into battlegrounds.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
The choice is clear to Elon Musk, and our private sector’s best and brightest founders and entrepreneurs. Those 77 million Americans who voted for Donald Trump in 2024 now face the same choice. It is either to return to the voting booth in order to protect America’s safe and prosperous future or hand Congress over to those who want to bring back a bankrupt and discredited past.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The choice seems easy. It will be America’s tragedy, and ours, if we don’t take it together.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM ARTHUR HERMAN
The Cyprus Animal Party has urged the education ministry to promote healthier food in schools and reconsider events such as Tsiknopempti, which are associated with meat consumption.
In a statement marking World Vegan Day on November 1, the party said schools should practise the healthy eating habits they teach pupils, rather than promote excessive meat consumption.
It cited findings presented to parliament on October 29 concerning meals provided to National Guard soldiers.
Meat is served seven times a week in military kitchens, eight times in frozen meals and nine times through catering, it said.
The party said it was not seeking to abolish traditions or impose vegan diets, but wanted more plant-based options, highlighting Cyprus’ locally available legumes and other plant foods.
It also called for greater emphasis on health, animal welfare and the environment.
Republican Iowa congressional candidate Joe Mitchell vowed to investigate former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony Fauci if elected to Congress, expressing his desire to serve on an oversight committee while recounting his grandmother's death following a COVID-19 vaccination during a Make Iowa Healthy Again rally Wednesday.
The post Iowa GOP Congressional Candidate Joe Mitchell Eyes House Oversight Seat to ‘Investigate the Hell Out of Anthony Fauci’ appeared first on Breitbart.
During a rally Wednesday, Alaska Democratic Senate candidate Mary Peltola dismissed a New York Times report alleging her campaign took part in an effort to peel votes away from incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan to a same-named rival, calling the story a "distraction" used to sell papers.
"This is just another distraction," Peltola said in a video shared on X by local Alaskan writer Matt Tunseth. "It's another diversion. Every day, it’s some new, you know, ‘Look over here moment.’ Not Dan Sullivan, registered Republican, incumbent, voted for this war in Iran 14 times. Lisa Murkowski quit voting for that war in Iran six months ago, and he’s doubling and tripling down."
The New York Times published an investigation Wednesday that described a covert operation, internally dubbed the "ballot composition project," to recruit spoiler candidates with the same name as Sullivan.
DEM BUCKS PARTY OVER ALLEGED ALASKA VOTE-SIPHONING EFFORT: 'NEITHER PARTY SHOULD BE DOING IT'
According to the report, a Peltola staffer was directed since 2025 to comb through state voter rolls to compile a list of Alaskans named Dan Sullivan.
The operation allegedly involved aides from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), top campaign advisors, party lawyers and an operative who traveled across the state under assumed names.
"The plan worked. This spring, a retired teacher from a tiny fishing village along the Alaska Panhandle, reachable only by air and sea, announced his candidacy for Senate. His name was Dan J. Sullivan," the Times reported.
At the rally, however, Peltola dismissed the report, claiming that it was made to "get subscriptions."
"And this is not somebody who’s working in our best interest. And anybody who’s working in our best interest isn’t going to talk about the nonsense. This is all stuff to sell newspapers. This is all stuff to get subscriptions. Nobody at The New York Times cares about affordability in Alaska," Peltola said.
Fox News Digital reached out to the Peltola campaign and The New York Times for comment but did not immediately hear back.
Sen. Sullivan campaign spokesperson Nate Adams told Fox News Digital, "Instead of admitting she has been caught red-handed in a scheme to manipulate and deceive Alaska voters, Mary Peltola's response is to attack the media outlets she has been lying to for months."
Elisa Rios, Peltola’s former campaign manager who was fired in August, told the Times that while Peltola was not directly involved in orchestrating the project, she was "definitely aware."
In a previous statement to Fox News, the DSCC said it was not involved with the other Sullivan campaign.
TRUMP SAYS 'WE ARE LOOKING INTO' OTHER DAN SULLIVAN ON ALASKA BALLOT, WARNS ABOUT GOVERNOR'S RACE
"Republicans have a long history of recruiting and propping up candidates in an attempt to boost their own campaigns, including recruiting a prisoner with a New York address to run against Mary Peltola and spending nearly half a million dollars to secure a spot on the ballot in Alaska for an Arizona resident in the Senate race this cycle," a DSCC spokesperson said.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
In a statement to The New York Times, Peltola’s campaign said, "The Alaskans for Mary campaign has no involvement with either Sullivan campaign and did not recruit any candidates into the race."
Next week's election is a pivotal one for Colorado, as voters will decide a pair of ballot questions that could secure the state's low-tax, small-government reputation—or shatter it.
Confusingly, there is a slim possibility that they decide to do both. More on that in a moment.
The two competing ballot measures could hardly be more different. The first, Proposition 136, would cap individual and corporate income taxes at 4.4 percent—the state's current flat rate.
The other, Amendment 87, would rewrite the state's constitution to allow for a progressive income tax. It would also set new rates, ranging from 7.4 percent on income over $500,000 to 8.4 percent on income over $1 million. And it would offer a modest tax cut to the lower end of the income spectrum: Individuals earning less than $100,000 would pay 4.2 percent, while those earning less than $25,000 would pay 3.7 percent.
Even with those offsets, Amendment 87 would be a massive tax increase. Both advocates and opponents agree that it would generate about $2–3 billion in additional annual revenue for the state government.
For now, the higher tax rates created by Amendment 87 would only apply to incomes over $500,000. Unsurprisingly, supporters of the measure are framing this as an opportunity to make the wealthy "pay their fair share."
There are two reasons why that argument is a bit deceiving.
As Jared Walczak, a senior fellow at the Tax Foundation, points out, "the new rates would be statutory, while the authorization for a graduated-rate tax would be enshrined in the constitution, permitting the legislature to adjust rates later." Lawmakers would not have to get permission from the voters to make those changes, so Coloradans would be trading away their flat income tax for a new model where income taxes could be hiked by the legislature at any time.
Second, the new rates are not indexed to inflation. As a result, "a household making $450,000 a year in today's dollars would be moved into a higher tax bracket within eight years if their earnings increased by 3% annually," reports The Colorado Sun, which crunched the numbers. Such "bracket creep" would also push more workers over the $100,000 threshold, nullifying the small tax cut for workers making less than that.
Politically, the progressive income tax proposal is dividing Democrats. The Colorado Democratic Party has endorsed Amendment 87 (along with many of its usual allies, like the AFL-CIO and the state's largest teachers union).
But Democratic Gov. Jared Polis has called the proposal "a huge blank check to politicians" that will "cripple our economy and reduce jobs."
In comments to a Denver TV station, Polis also highlighted how higher taxes in Colorado would make the state less competitive with its neighbors. "Utah has a very similar tax rate to what we have. If ours is double, we can't compete for businesses," Polis told Denver7. "It's game over. We will not be able to attract new employers to Colorado if the voters adopt this."
It's not just Utah. If the amendment passes, Colorado would have a significantly higher top income tax rate than any of its neighbors. (The current highest in that group is New Mexico, with its top rate of 5.9 percent.)
Under Colorado law, constitutional amendments typically need 55 percent approval to pass. However, Amendment 87 requires only a simple majority* because it technically repeals provisions in the constitution, rather than adding new ones. Similarly, Proposition 136—the one that would cap the income tax rate at 4.4 percent—requires just a simple majority.
It is possible, though unlikely, that both could pass. That would create a conflict, since the state's income tax can't be capped at 4.4 percent and also hiked to more than 7 percent on incomes over $500,000.
If that happens, the ballot question with the larger share of support would win, per state law. "In short, that means Amendment 87 would need to both win majority support from voters and surpass Proposition 136 in total votes to go into effect," explains the Denver Post, which has encouraged residents to vote against both ballot measures.
Accordingly, Proposition 136 must win majority support from the voters and surpass Amendment 87 (which needs 55 percent to pass, don't forget) to be implemented.
It is all a bit confusing, but the outcomes are worth watching. Colorado has long been a bit of an outlier among "blue" states for its relatively low taxes and booming population. It's now up to the voters to decide if that remains true.
*CORRECTION: This article incorrectly described how Amendment 87 could be passed into law.
The post Jared Polis Warns Colorado's Progressive Tax Ballot Measure Could 'Cripple' the Economy appeared first on Reason Magazine.
© Becky Bohrer/Associated Press
Why do the ruling classes in China appear so paranoid, asks John MacNab. Surveillance is everywhere, yet Communist Party officials seem to live in a permanent state of paranoia and oversensitivity to perceived slights.
The post When The Party Comes to Town appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
A review of political donations shows that NFL owners chipped in more than $18 million to political candidates, most of which went to the GOP
The post Not Woke, Not Broke: NFL Owners Pour Nearly $16 Million into Republican Midterm Elections appeared first on Breitbart.
Republican Iowa gubernatorial candidate Zach Lahn vowed to protect girls’ sports, keep age-inappropriate books addressing transgender topics out of elementary schools, and safeguard unborn children during a recent gubernatorial debate, emphasizing the importance of protecting vulnerable populations and preserving Western cultural institutions.
The post Iowa GOP Gov Candidate Zach Lahn Vows to Defend Western Culture: ‘We Protect the Most Vulnerable in Our Society’ appeared first on Breitbart.
Login