‘Hook and squeeze’: Democratic fundraising machine targeting elderly donors in Alaska

By THE ALASKA STORY

Aug. 17, 2026 – A Democratic fundraising and turnout network planning a major push into Alaska’s 2026 elections is part of a political fundraising industry that draws extraordinary sums from a small and disproportionately elderly pool of donors, according to a new investigation by political scientist Adam Bonica.

Bonica, a Stanford University professor who studies money in politics and describes himself as a lifelong Democrat, analyzed more than 300 million federal contribution records alongside voter-registration data to determine who responds to the relentless stream of political texts and emails filling Americans’ phones.

The answer, he found, is overwhelmingly older Americans.

The messages are familiar to almost anyone who has contributed to a political campaign: “All hope is lost.” “We’re BEGGING.” “Quadruple-match EXPIRES in 180 MINUTES!” Some claim that prominent political leaders are personally waiting for the recipient’s response. Others use countdown clocks, artificial deadlines and warnings that Social Security is about to be cut unless another $15 arrives immediately.

What looks absurd to many recipients may be effective on people experiencing age-related cognitive decline, loneliness, fear or confusion.

In his investigation, titled “Hook and Squeeze,” Bonica describes an 85-year-old Ohio retiree who made more than 7,800 Democratic donations totaling over $648,000—more than twice the estimated value of his home.

A 91-year-old woman living in an Indianapolis senior facility reportedly made more than 25,000 donations totaling over $250,000.

Those are extreme cases, but Bonica found a much broader pattern. Approximately 138,000 donors, with an average age of 75, have each made at least 100 donations to the Democratic-aligned political action committees he examined. Although they represent less than 1% of Democratic donors, this group accounted for nearly half of the $1.4 billion raised by the PACs since 2017.

Bonica calls them “captive spam donors.”

Meta advertising data examined by Bonica showed that between 70% and 85% of impressions from fundraising advertisements placed by the largest of these PACs went to people 65 or older. That age group represents approximately 14% of Meta’s adult users in the United States.

The analysis does not establish that every organization deliberately selects seniors as its target audience. The groups deny doing so and argue that older people are naturally more politically engaged and more likely to donate. Bonica’s point is that the messages themselves act as a filter: Most recipients delete them, while a narrow and potentially vulnerable group responds repeatedly.

The tactics resemble warning signs identified in other forms of elder financial exploitation: manufactured urgency, fear, guilt, false exclusivity, official-looking notices and pressure to act before the recipient has time to reconsider.

The Alaska connection runs through the Progressive Turnout Project, a Democratic hybrid PAC based in Illinois, as well as others.

Bonica identified a network of eight PACs connected through treasurer Harry Pascal, including Progressive Turnout Project, Dem Turnout 2024, DemocracyFIRST PAC, Progressive Takeover, Stop Republicans, Stop Trump, Turnout the Vote and Dem Turnout 2026.

Through 2025, the network raised more than $390 million from individual donors, according to Bonica’s analysis of Federal Election Commission filings.

He estimates that approximately $20 million went directly to Democratic candidates or independent expenditures supporting them. Another $100 million funded field programs, get-out-the-vote operations and related payroll, while approximately $20 million covered administrative costs.

The remaining $249 million—about 64 cents of every dollar raised—went back into fundraising, Bonica concluded.

Progressive Turnout Project disputed that calculation through its attorneys. The organization said the network spent approximately $177 million on fundraising, or about 45 cents of every dollar, and directed more than half its budget toward voter contact.

Much of the difference involves how tens of millions of dollars in Facebook advertising and payments to digital firms should be classified. PTP categorized some expenditures as “digital organizing,” while Bonica counted advertisements consisting primarily of donation solicitations as fundraising.

Even under the organization’s accounting, however, nearly half of every dollar raised was consumed by the machinery used to raise more money.

The Progressive Turnout Project is now coming to Alaska.

Its official 2026 plan lists Alaska among 11 states where it is preparing statewide programs aimed at electing Democrats to the US Senate, House, governorships and state legislatures.

The organization is also recruiting volunteers to send what it calls “News Boosting Postcards” to Alaska voters because of the state’s competitive US Senate race. Its website says the postcards will tell persuadable voters about what it describes as the harmful effects of the Trump and Republican agenda.

Federal records identify Progressive Turnout Project as an active hybrid PAC. From Jan. 1, 2025, through June 30, 2026, the committee reported $42.6 million in receipts and $30.6 million in spending. Of that spending, $27.6 million was classified as operating expenditures, while approximately $1.1 million went to contributions to other committees and about $240,000 to independent expenditures, according to the Federal Election Commission.

The fundraising model is not exclusive to Democrats. Bonica notes that Republicans embraced aggressive digital fundraising earlier, flooding conservative donors with similarly frantic appeals, questionable matching claims and automatically recurring donations.

That strategy may have damaged the Republican donor base. Republicans collected less from small- and medium-sized donors during the 2024 presidential campaign than they did during the 2022 midterm cycle, Bonica reported.

His warning is that Democrats are now following the same path by building an expensive political industry that depends on repeatedly extracting money from the party’s oldest and most responsive supporters. And most vulnerable.

The result is a system in which consultants are paid whether candidates win or lose, elderly donors are repeatedly pressured to give, and a large share of each contribution finances the next message asking for another contribution.

For Alaskans, the investigation provides important context for the national political operation now influencing the state’s elections. The cheerful postcard or breathless fundraising message may present itself as grassroots democracy. But behind it is a sophisticated, enormously expensive machine, and some of its most reliable sources of money may be senior citizens who do not fully understand how often they are giving or where their money ultimately goes.

Bonica’s complete investigation, methodology and responses from the organizations involved can be read at On Data and Democracy.