WASHINGTON, April 28 – As Elon Musk wraps up his highly visible role within the Trump administration, he is setting the stage for a new, equally influential position: a major financial backer for Republicans in the upcoming midterm elections. According to individuals familiar with the discussions, Musk, who recently scaled back his official duties at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), is poised to leverage his wealth and his social media platform, X, to shape the political landscape in 2026.
Musk’s shift comes after he spent months spearheading cost-cutting measures across federal agencies, actions that earned both praise and backlash. With his limited government service set to end in May, Musk is believed to be transitioning toward a more strategic role outside of Washington, while still maintaining strong ties with President Trump. His exit strategy is carefully planned to maintain influence without becoming a political liability.
While he’s pulling back, he’s certainly not walking away,” said someone familiar with the situation. Musk’s dual role as political adviser and mega-donor is expected to make him a major figure in Republican strategies for the midterms. By reducing his public government activities, Musk not only complies with federal service time limits but also shields himself from the intense scrutiny that has recently targeted his companies, particularly Tesla.
From Chainsaws to Campaign Checks: Musk’s Evolving Role
During his time with the Trump administration, Musk became an unmistakable figure, pushing aggressive reforms to cut federal spending by trillions. His showmanship was on full display when he waved a metallic red chainsaw at a major political conference, symbolizing his commitment to slashing bureaucracy. However, his combative style also sparked friction with several key cabinet members, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.
Despite Musk’s claims of transparency and no conflicts of interest, critics often pointed to the complex relationships between his businesses and government agencies. The Department of Government Efficiency’s website frequently touted massive savings for taxpayers, though it struggled with inaccuracies and frequent corrections. Meanwhile, behind the scenes, cabinet members increasingly resisted Musk’s aggressive job-cutting agenda, particularly after Trump emphasized that final staffing decisions remained with department heads, not Musk.
Tensions came to a head with high-profile disagreements, social media snubs, and sharp insults, but the Trump administration publicly maintained that internal debates were part of a healthy policy process. Still, Republican lawmakers faced strong backlash from voters upset about the impact of Musk’s federal program cuts. At town halls, frustrated voters voiced their concerns about Musk’s influence, highlighting the political dangers associated with his strategy.
Tesla, Musk’s leading venture, also suffered heavily from the fallout of his political involvement. Widespread protests, attacks on showrooms, and falling vehicle sales took a heavy toll on the brand’s previously strong reputation. With Tesla’s stock value tumbling and investor dissatisfaction rising, Musk privately sought help from Trump and other allies to restore the company’s image. A notable PR campaign followed, with Trump praising Tesla in a public ceremony and high-profile Republicans showcasing their support on social media. Yet, despite these efforts, the controversy surrounding Musk’s political activities continued to swirl.
Wisconsin Defeat Highlights Musk’s Political Limits
The turning point for Musk’s political influence came during the recent Wisconsin Supreme Court race. Hoping to flip the court’s balance of power, Musk and groups associated with him poured millions into supporting conservative candidate Brad Schimel. Musk personally campaigned in the state, made hefty donations, and framed the race as a battle for the future of Western civilization.
However, despite the financial firepower and high-profile campaigning, liberal candidate Susan Crawford won decisively by ten percentage points. The loss was a major blow to Musk’s political ambitions and exposed the limitations of his influence, especially in politically competitive battlegrounds. His heavy involvement may have actually energized Democratic voters more than it did Republicans, illustrating the risks of becoming too prominent a figure in such races.
By the time the Wisconsin results rolled in, Musk had already angered many Democrats through his aggressive civil service cuts, controversial public gestures, and outspoken criticism of government programs like Social Security. The backlash fed a broader narrative portraying Musk and other wealthy Trump allies as an emerging “oligarch class” wielding outsized influence in American politics.
Following the Wisconsin defeat, Musk noticeably pulled back from overt political activity, focusing more on his core businesses and less on campaign politics in his public postings. Political strategists across the spectrum now agree that while Musk’s financial contributions remain highly valuable to Republicans, his direct involvement in campaigns may need to be more restrained moving forward.
“If Musk keeps funding races but stays out of the spotlight, it could be a win for the party,” said a former Republican strategist familiar with Wisconsin politics.
In the 2024 election cycle alone, Musk contributed over $250 million to support Trump and other Republican causes, making him the largest individual donor. As the 2026 midterms approach, all eyes will be on how Musk balances his enormous political clout with the growing challenges of public perception and political backlash.