With a majority of midterm races called, a few highlights on how "crypto aligned" candidates performed.

With a majority of midterm races called, a few highlights on how "crypto aligned" candidates performed. Stand With Crypto (@standwithcrypto) endorsed 45 candidates. Fairshake's super PACs spent $154.5M on 98 candidates. How did they do? Endorsed Democrats went 19-0 while Republicans went 7-12 🧵

1/14·View on X

Every endorsed candidate who lost was a Republican, mostly in swing House seats. All 12 of these losers finished between 43% and 49%. They were close races that broke the wrong way.

2/14·View on X

The two endorsed Senate losses were the biggest: Jon Husted (R) in Ohio and Ashley Hinson (R) in Iowa. The one Senate win: Chris Pappas (D) in New Hampshire, who took 56%. 7 endorsed House candidates are still uncalled. 5 are leading.

3/14·View on X

First, how Stand With Crypto grades politicians. Each one gets a 0–100 score from their public record on crypto: statements, votes and bills. A = 90+ (strongly supportive) B = 70–89 C = 50–69 (neutral) D = 25–49 F = under 25 (strongly against)

4/14·View on X

Was crypto stance a factor? Not that we can see. In the 13 called races where an A/B-rated pro-crypto candidate faced a D/F-rated anti-crypto one, the Democrat won all 13. In 12 of them, the Democrat was the anti-crypto candidate.

5/14·View on X

As a super PAC, Fairshake works differently. It spends directly rather than endorsing candidates. Backed by Coinbase and a16z, it runs two affiliates: Protect Progress (D) and Defend American Jobs (R). Together they put $105.3M behind 87 candidates and $49.2M against 11.

6/14·View on X

By count, Fairshake's picks look great: 77 of 89 decided races went its way. By dollars, it's a coin flip. $75.0M backed the winning side, and $75.5M backed the losing side.

7/14·View on X

Putting Stand With Crypto endorsements and Fairshake spend side by side shows little overlap. Only 10 candidates got both an endorsement and Fairshake money. Win rates in called races: Stand With Crypto only: 67% Fairshake only: 93% Both: 75%

8/14·View on X

The win-rate gap is mostly about which races each one picked. 21 of Stand With Crypto's 45 endorsements were decided by under 10 points. For Fairshake-backed candidates it was 20 of 84. 54 of Fairshake's 87 picks got its money only in primaries or runoffs.

9/14·View on X

So did Congress get more pro-crypto? Overall, no. Among graded members, the share rated A or B barely moved: 66% → 67% in the House, 52% → 53% in the Senate. The shift is inside the Democratic caucus.

10/14·View on X

Share of Democrats rated A or B by Stand With Crypto: Senate: 7% → 18%, House: 35% → 44% New Democratic senators like Talarico (TX), Cooper (NC), Pappas (NH) and Turek (IA) are all A-rated.

11/14·View on X

This also varied a lot by state. Change in each delegation's average crypto score: Most pro-crypto: New Hampshire +24, Maryland +10, Illinois +9.5 Most against: Minnesota −12, Ohio −12, North Carolina −8.5 24 states barely moved.

12/14·View on X

Overall, party, rather than crypto alignment, decided a majority of races. Stand With Crypto bet on close races, and its Republicans lost them. Fairshake mostly backed candidates in safer seats and primaries, and won, except for its two most expensive bets.

13/14·View on X

Note: As of time of writing, 51 House races are still uncalled, ~60 new members aren't graded, and FEC filings only run through October 29th Data: Stand With Crypto grades, endorsements and race results; FEC independent expenditures.

14/14·View on X