NEW YORK — Assemblymember Alex Bores and his allies spent months framing his congressional campaign as a battle of powerful tech interests vs. everyday people when it comes to regulating artificial intelligence.
As the race was called for fellow Assemblymember Micah Lasher on Tuesday night, on the surface, it seemed like the Big Tech won. Major industry players spent millions targeting Bores, who finished in second place, in part because of his work spearheading one of the country’s landmark laws establishing guardrails for AI.
But Bores saw it differently.
“We came within a whisker of winning it,” he told POLITICO. “I think it shows that the people are really excited about a vision where they have control over the future. They feel like AI is happening too quickly, that government is not up to the task, and they want real solutions. … Getting the message across is far more important than whoever the one person is who represents this district.”
In all, a whopping $27 million was spent just by groups both supporting and attacking Bores. Think Big, a super PAC in the Leading the Future network, which is backed in part by leaders at OpenAI and the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, spent $8 million against Bores with the hope of sending a message to other politicians who they claim are stymieing tech innovation. Pro-Bores super PACs — many of which were backed by people in the industry who favor AI regulations, like crypto billionaire Chris Larsen and those with ties to Anthropic — dropped more than $19 million to boost him.
That massive spending sparked criticism from Bores’ opponents, who argued he couldn’t be an independent voice on tech policy while being boosted by some of those very interests — a sentiment that Lasher echoed during his victory speech.
“I have some news for the two big AI companies who are taking such an unusual interest,” he said. “I won’t be taking my cues from either of you when it comes to protecting our kids, our jobs and our families.”
Lasher, too, is in favor of regulating AI; he was a cosponsor of the RAISE Act, the very state legislation that Bores was targeted over.
The groups backing Bores also took his loss in stride. Former Rep. Brad Carson (D-Okla.), co-founder of Public First Action, an AI super PAC network linked to Anthropic that worked to boost Bores, claimed in a statement that the spending against Bores backfired by making it a “two-way race between the sponsor of the RAISE Act and one of the bill’s cosponsors.”
Shaunna Thomas, cofounder of Guardrails Alliance, a super PAC backed by unions and tech workers that also boosted Bores, suggested that Leading the Future will “use these results as a warning to scare off all other candidates and elected officials from having a meaningful debate around common sense AI policy that safeguards humanity while encouraging innovation.”
“It would be a mistake to believe their spin,” she said. “The truth: They miscalculated.”
But Leading the Future, which did not explicitly back another candidate in the race, didn’t necessarily take a victory lap Tuesday night.
“Leading the Future is a cross-partisan, national organization dedicated to supporting a thoughtful and substantive dialogue and policy process around AI,” spokesperson Josh Vlasto said in a statement. “We are building a broad coalition at the federal and state levels, and will continue to support policymakers who will work together to pass a national regulatory framework with strong and smart guardrails that protect the safety of kids, users, and communities, ensures America wins the race against China, and creates good jobs for all Americans.”
The super PAC network is spending millions in other races across the country as the debate over AI rages. Democratic Rep. Pat Ryan, who endorsed Bores, told POLITICO that he thinks Bores’ race is an “opening salvo.”
“There are a lot of fairly traditional Democratic primaries playing out where the issue difference was incremental, I think,” he said. “This is one that’s like a seismic issue, that is the canary in the coal mine, I think especially as you look to 2028.”
When asked if he wished the campaign was less about AI, Bores said, “it was a fight that found me, but it’s not a fight we can afford to back down from.”
“I thought I’d feel a lot sadder,” he continued. “I’m looking around at a united party that’s excited about a vision for the future that others will carry forward. This room is really inspiring.”
The primary to replace 17-term Nadler was a contentious campaign.
Lasher, a longtime political operative who was elected to the Legislature in 2024, has spent decades working for some of New York’s most powerful Democrats, including Nadler, Gov. Kathy Hochul and former Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who poured $10 million into a super PAC boosting his campaign. His main argument was that political experience is a must to be effective in Washington, and he leaned heavily on touting his legislative record.
New York’s 12th District is a deep-blue seat in Manhattan and is one of the wealthiest and most highly educated districts in the country.
His stiffest competitor was Bores, who’s represented Manhattan’s East Side since 2023 and gained massive attention because of the AI debate. Still, Bores’ newfound star power wasn’t enough to overcome Lasher’s decades of political experience and the high-profile support he received. Lasher also had another significant asset: his base is in Manhattan’s politically powerful West Side.
Lasher wasn’t immune to criticism throughout the campaign. Some opponents went after him for being boosted by the Bloomberg-funded super PAC. And in the closing days of the race, Nuestro PAC, an outside group focused on Latino voters, dropped $3 million attacking him over his record, including working under Bloomberg when “stop-and-frisk” was expanded and heading StudentsFirstNY, a pro-charter school advocacy group. Lasher has said his own views did not necessarily align with those he was working for at the time.
He also accused the PAC of being funded by crypto and AI interests, which the PAC has denied.
Kennedy scion Jack Schlossberg was another prominent contender. His celebrity made him a wildcard in the race, as he ran a campaign positioning himself as someone representing a new approach to politics, in contrast with current officeholders Bores and Lasher. Schlossberg cultivated an eccentric personality online and ran a campaign that many viewed as unorthodox and chaotic. He was often criticized for not having much political experience — a claim he pushed back on, pointing to his work supporting the Biden-Harris presidential campaign, among other roles.
Anti-Trump commentator George Conway, a former Republican, and public health practitioner Nina Schwalbe were also on the ballot, along with a handful of lesser-known candidates. Conway focused much of his campaign on a promise to impeach the president and said he’d serve only one term. Schwalbe sought to claim the progressive lane but struggled with the influx of money boosting her rivals.
Mayor Zohran Mamdani, a constituent in the district as Gracie Mansion’s newest resident, stayed out of the race. Mamdani served in the state Legislature with Lasher and Bores, both of whom said they would have liked his endorsement. While Mamdani has a strong approval rating in the district and could have been a welcome boost among progressive voters, it also might have turned off some Jewish voters — a prominent constituency in the district — who are not fans of the mayor’s fierce criticism of Israel.
Lasher is the heavy favorite to defeat Republican Caroline Shinkle in the fall.
Leah Clark contributed to this report.
Read the full article here