Podcast Summary: On the Media – "The Democratic Party Spam Machine"

Date: November 19, 2025
Host: Brooke Gladstone (WNYC Studios)
Guest: Adam Bonica, Associate Professor of Political Science, Stanford University

Overview

This episode of On the Media unpacks the rise and impact of aggressive, often deceptive digital fundraising tactics used by the Democratic Party and its affiliates. Host Brooke Gladstone speaks with political scientist Adam Bonica, whose research exposes how these strategies bombard donors—particularly seniors—with emotionally manipulative messages and misleading claims. The conversation delves into how these practices harm the party's brand, compare to Republican fundraising, and what efforts are underway to address the damage.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. The Ubiquity and Odd Nature of Democratic Fundraising Spam

• Adam Bonica recounts being inundated with 3,600 fundraising emails in just one year from Democratic campaigns.

  “It was 3,600 in that year alone, which is a lot. … We're being spammed in a pretty serious way.” (01:35)

• These messages often feature all-caps urgency, celebrity names (e.g., Taylor Swift, George Clooney), and melodramatic warnings.

  “One came that said, ‘we're close to tears,’ or … ‘not mad, just disappointed.’” (01:48)

2. The Ecosystem Behind the Spam

• The main architects are digital fundraising consultants, with Mothership Strategies singled out as a key firm shaping these tactics since its founding in 2014. (02:22)
• Three main sources:
  • Consulting firms (like Mothership Strategies)
  • Official Democratic campaign arms (sometimes partnering with these firms)
  • “Spam PACs” – clusters of unaffiliated, generic-sounding political action committees exploiting donor lists (03:16–03:43)
• These PACs use rotating identities so if one is blocked, others continue spamming. The money often cycles back to the consultants.

3. Deceptive Tactics and Legal/Ethical Concerns

• Fundraising emails/texts often make demonstrably false claims.

  “I actually got a text ... saying that Taylor Swift was going to 8x my donation. These matches are just sort of phantom matches.” (05:16)

• Such “matching” schemes often would violate campaign finance laws if actually real.

  “… even if these matches did exist, they would violate campaign finance law because you can't donate for someone else.” (05:44)

• PACs exploit trending causes (e.g., defending NPR) with misleading appeals referencing public figures (Ken Burns, Rick Steves). (06:19)

4. Who’s Being Targeted—And Harmed

• The vast majority of spam PAC fundraising comes from seniors, often those 65 or older.

  “Basically all of it is coming from seniors... skewing much older than that.” (07:28)

• Astonishing examples:

  “An 89 year old woman from Indianapolis ... $69,000 over ... 7,500 separate donations.” (07:55)
  “An 84 year old man from Oxford, Ohio ... $194,000+ through more than 2,200 transactions.” (08:27)

• These are not especially affluent individuals, putting at risk years of savings. Donations are driven by cognitive decline or disability, echoing the tactics of classic financial fraudsters. (08:57)

5. Parallel to Scams and Dark Patterns

• Tactics mirror classic fraud:
  • Legitimate-looking branding (e.g., IRS-like messages; party/candidate branding)
  • Manufactured urgency, fear, and deadlines
  • Phantom rewards (e.g., “400% match”)
  • Dark patterns in sign-up and donation pages: forced donations, pre-checked recurring gifts, requests for personal data (09:56–11:47)
• Social shaming/extortion-themed messages:

  “Our records say you're voting for Trump. Donate now to correct that or we're going to tell people you know...” (11:31)

6. Damage to the Democratic Party Brand

• The relentless tactics erode trust, threaten the party’s reputation, and alienate its base.

  “The most valuable asset a political party possesses is its brand ... the Democratic Party is systematically destroying its own.” (11:47)

• Despite outspending Republicans in 2024, Democrats saw little benefit and risk burning their most engaged supporters.

  “The only answer they're giving us is these desperate messages as opposed to treating people like partners and allies in a shared cause.” (12:01)

7. Republican Tactics: Worse, But Now Different

• Republicans pioneered these “sketchy” tactics and moved on to mega-donors after exhausting their small donor base.

  “Republicans are really not doing very well in small fundraising because they have sort of depleted that population.” (13:19)

• In 2024, half of Republican funds came from just 100 donors—a stark increase since 2008.
• Democrats have a rising advantage among younger, professional, and individual donors (esp. under 40), yet are squandering this with spam tactics instead of cultivating more genuine engagement. (13:19–15:02)

8. Reform Efforts and Potential for Change

• ActBlue, the main Democratic fundraising platform, implemented stricter rules against deceptive fundraising in direct response to such criticism.

  “…they released new rules on preventing this type of deceptive fundraising…” (15:12)

• Political scientist Bonica urges voters to back and empower politicians who resist spammy tactics. Money especially influences who can run credible primary campaigns—not just general elections. (15:57)

9. Examples of Doing Fundraising Right

• Mamdami, a national candidate, famously asked donors to stop giving once hitting her goal:

  “I'm about to say something you've never heard a politician say. Please stop sending us money.” (16:44)

• Kat Abugazale, Democratic candidate in Illinois, rejects fake deadlines and commits to ethical fundraising:

  “No spammy guilt trip texts, no focus groups to test my views, and no grifty consultants...” (17:40)

• These candidates demonstrate a more respectful, issues-based alternative.

10. Industry Response and Accountability

• Mothership Strategies defended its tactics as necessary:

  “Democrats must fight fire with fire. Hard hitting, urgent language ... is part of that … It’s utterly false to suggest that seniors are being intentionally targeted.” (21:11)

• Major party committees (DCCC, DSCC) failed to respond, even though they have the power to set standards.
• Bonica emphasizes that treating donors merely as ATMs reflects deep disrespect and ultimately impairs democratic organizing. (19:09–19:41)

11. What Real Mobilization Looks Like

• The most effective resistance strategies against authoritarianism involve grassroots mobilization, not simply fundraising.

  “That looks a lot like what organizations like Indivisible are doing... Mandami says, ‘I don’t need your money, but I do need your organization.’” (20:16)

Notable Quotes by Timestamp

• “We're being spammed in a pretty serious way.”
  – Adam Bonica (01:35)
• “Spam PACs ... will just spam those donor lists incessantly ... and they seem to be funneling much of the money ... back to these digital fundraising consulting firms.”
  – Adam Bonica (03:43)
• “I actually got a text ... saying that Taylor Swift was going to 8x my donation. ... They're very effective because a lot of people believe ... it will borrow from his [Obama’s] legitimacy.”
  – Adam Bonica (05:16)
• “Basically all of it is coming from seniors ... skewing much older than that.”
  – Adam Bonica (07:28)
• “This looks like it very much represents years and decades of savings that they have donated through these tactics.”
  – Adam Bonica (08:57)
• “The most valuable asset a political party possesses is its brand ... in the relentless pursuit of online donations, the Democratic Party is systematically destroying its own.”
  – Interviewer, quoting Bonica (11:47)
• “It's hard to imagine a company sending messages like this, right?”
  – Adam Bonica (12:01)
• “Republicans are really not doing very well in small fundraising because they have sort of depleted that population. ... Instead of figuring out how to actually tap into that [new Democratic advantage] they're doing these types of tactics which are really off-putting ...”
  – Adam Bonica (13:19)
• “Please stop sending us money. … we have the money to be on TV, in your mailbox, on your phone. But there's one more place we need to be. Your block.”
  – Mamdami campaign (16:50)
• “No spammy guilt trip texts ... and no grifty consultants who care more about their paycheck than actually winning.”
  – Kat Abugazale’s campaign promise (17:40)
• “They're not seen as allies. They're not seen as participants in this process. They're seen as money to be extracted. And that never feels good.”
  – Adam Bonica (19:41)
• “The best evidence we have is that the types of strategies that are most effective against authoritarian parties is mass mobilization.”
  – Adam Bonica (19:41)

Important Segment Timestamps

• 01:35 — Adam Bonica on the overwhelming volume and nature of spam
• 03:16 — Breakdown of consulting firms, official organs, and spam PACs
• 05:16 — “Matching” scams and illegality
• 07:28 — Elderly donors as primary targets
• 09:56–11:47 — Parallels to scam, dark patterns explained
• 12:01 — Impact on party brand
• 13:19 — Comparison of Democratic and Republican digital fundraising
• 15:12 — ActBlue imposes new anti-deceptive rules
• 16:44–17:40 — Examples of ethical fundraising (Mamdami, Abugazale)
• 19:41 — Donors treated as cash sources, not partners
• 20:16 — The case for mass mobilization over fundraising

Tone and Takeaways

The conversation is incisive and skeptical, with Bonica expressing both concern and hope. While the Democratic fundraising apparatus is called out for its cynicism and harm, there are glimmers of change through reform efforts, platforms revising rules, and models of ethical fundraising by emerging candidates. The overall message: real opposition and civic engagement depend on mobilizing people, not extracting money.

Further Reading

• Full Mothership Strategies statement: on the media website
• Adam Bonica’s Substack: Data and Democracy

Next Episode Tease:
Tune into the Big show Friday for a deep dive into the Democratic Party’s identity crisis.