OMITTED

What the news leaves out.

← Omitted front page

Elon Musk loses billions as Tesla stock plunges post-midterms

5 sources · updated 2026-11-06
Left 80% Center 0% Right 20%
4 left · 0 center · 1 right

What happened

After Democrats won control of both the House and Senate in the U.S. midterm elections, Tesla shares fell about 11 percent and SpaceX shares about 9 percent on Thursday, cutting more than $420 billion from the companies' combined market capitalization since Tuesday's close (about $456 billion by Thursday's close). Elon Musk, CEO and largest shareholder of both firms, saw his fortune fall from above $1 trillion after SpaceX's June IPO to below $800 billion; Bloomberg's billionaires index recorded a $33.5 billion (3.7 percent) drop on Wednesday, while other tallies put Thursday's loss at about $80 billion, to $785 billion. The Financial Times first reported that Musk was the biggest midterm donor to Republican candidates and causes, with contributions exceeding $470 million; most of the candidates he backed lost, including in Texas—where Tesla and SpaceX are headquartered—where Democrats James Talarico and Gina Hinojosa defeated Ken Paxton and Greg Abbott. CNN first reported, citing an aide to a Democratic senator, that Musk and SpaceX had been instructed to preserve records on restrictions on a military version of Starlink in Ukraine; the same week, Scottish Mortgage Investment Trust said it had sold the last of a Tesla stake held since 2013 and cut SpaceX from 15 percent to 11.1 percent of assets.
Sourcing check · Partly on the record · 5 articles

1 of 5 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.

What these terms mean and how they're counted
On the record · names a source 1 of 5
On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Scottish Mortgage Investment Trust
Primary evidence · cites a document or data 4 of 5
Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: market data, company statement, regulatory filing, Bloomberg billionaires index
Credits another outlet 0 of 5
The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
Unnamed sources 1 of 5
The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
How it developed
When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Nov 5, 00:12 UTC by Washington Examiner, naming its source. First document in the first report, from Washington Examiner (Bloomberg billionaires index).
Not counted 0
Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out

Unpacked

Left-leaning coverage treats the midterm sell-off as a company-level wipeout. Right-leaning coverage never states Tesla and SpaceX's combined losses and reports only a one-day drop in Musk's personal fortune. The combined market-cap decline sits above $420 billion in CNBC's telling. In the Washington Examiner's account the personal hit is $33.5 billion, with no company total given. Without the company total, a reader cannot see the scale of what the market took off Tesla and SpaceX themselves. Right-leaning coverage says Democratic majorities "loom." Left-leaning coverage names the mechanism investors fear: new congressional probes and stricter regulation of his companies. The first phrasing makes the election itself the threat. The second makes the threat a set of concrete actions Congress could take. What share of the Tesla and SpaceX drop would have happened in the same tech rout if Congress had not changed hands?
Bottom line

If your only number is the Washington Examiner's personal tally, you never learn that Tesla and SpaceX themselves lost over $420 billion in market value after Democrats won Congress.

The Left View
Left-leaning outlets framed the move as investors pricing Democratic control into Musk-specific legal and regulatory risk, not only a generic tech selloff. CNBC stressed possible new congressional probes and stricter rules, quoting Deutsche Bank that analysts 'could envision SpaceX facing some incremental headwinds,' that Texas compute capacity 'could now be at risk of delays,' and that capex 'may need to increase' after Gov.-elect Hinojosa 'made data centers a major campaign issue' and called for a moratorium on new approvals; the same reporting said scrutiny 'could block chances' for a SpaceX-Tesla merger Musk has promoted. They tied the Starlink records hold to restrictions that 'hampered' Ukraine's defense against Russia. Business Insider cast Thursday as a 'frenzied rout in AI and chip stocks'—Nasdaq 100 down more than 6 percent, its worst day since the COVID-19 pandemic—as investors anticipated Democrats 'reining in AI and data-center spending,' with nine tech titans losing just over $150 billion and Musk the largest single hit. A further CNBC piece presented Scottish Mortgage's Tesla exit as profit-taking after a 13-times return, with the trust saying the stock 'had come to reflect much of its promise in autonomy and robotics' amid 'intensifying competition' in China, while still claiming high conviction in SpaceX.
The Right View
The Washington Examiner, the only right-leaning source provided, reported the Bloomberg Wednesday figure and attributed the selloff to investors acting 'in anticipation of the incoming Democratic majorities in Congress.' It did not discuss Musk's Republican donations, the Texas results, data-center policy, a possible merger, or the Starlink records instruction.
Our Take (balanced)
The left's strongest argument is that the drop maps onto named, firm-level risks—Deutsche Bank's Texas data-center 'headwinds,' a reported Starlink records hold, and probe risk after Musk's more than $470 million in largely unsuccessful GOP spending—not a free-floating mood swing. The right's strongest argument, though carried by a much thinner account, is that a large one-day wealth decline followed immediately from anticipated Democratic majorities, fitting a broad AI-and-tech repricing rather than a Musk-only scandal. The central unresolved tension is how much of the move is a partisan-control and AI-regulation shock that also hit other tech fortunes, versus a targeted reassessment of Musk's political exposure and Texas expansion—sharpened by conflicting one-day loss prints ($33.5 billion Wednesday versus about $80 billion Thursday) and by Scottish Mortgage's concurrent, longer-planned profit-taking.

5 sources

More stories

The week's bottom lines, in your inbox

One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.