Anyone who even occasionally reads the Gun Experiment Blog already knows the story of David Hogg — the anti-gun activist who turned his fame into a Harvard acceptance, a short-lived appointment at the DNC, and a paid role running a PAC whose effectiveness has been questioned by his own party. The whole operation has been described by at least one high-ranking Democrat as little more than a grift.
Hogg’s conduct raised eyebrows almost immediately. Upon joining the DNC, he reportedly used its infrastructure to raise money for his own PAC — the same PAC that pays his salary. He then announced a plan to raise $20 million to primary incumbents he disapproved of, despite a DNC “neutrality” agreement meant to shield sitting Democrats. Hogg was the only one who refused to sign it. It is no mystery why his DNC tenure ended quickly.
Meanwhile, the PAC’s actual record is weak. It has already lost multiple races by large margins, and its one supposed “win” — Zohran Mamdani, a hard-left anti-gun socialist — was widely seen as inevitable regardless of Hogg’s involvement. As for the promised $20 million haul, the numbers simply don’t back it up. Two months after announcing the goal, the PAC held $1.5 million, and since launching in 2023 has collected $15.3 million total. That mismatch between fundraising and actual giving prompted New York State Sen. James Skoufis (D) to remark: “At this rate, he would only have to raise a little over $3 billion to get his promised $20 million to primary candidates. THIS should be the story, folks.”
Despite branding himself as a “reformer” bent on replacing the old guard, Hogg’s PAC spends like every other PAC in Washington — millions on consultants, digital firms, donor lists, and even $5,000 on a fitness class subscription. One of the strangest expenditures: a $100,000 donation to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee — the same committee that could spend that money on candidates Hogg wants to defeat. In other words, business as usual in the swamp he now inhabits quite comfortably.
