As the US Midterms Approach, AI Emerges as a Key Issue Concerning Voters
As the midterm elections draw nearer, the role of artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming increasingly pivotal in shaping voter concerns. A significant turning point occurred in December when the Trump administration signed an executive order that effectively curtailed states’ ability to regulate AI. This order mandated the administration to sue and withhold funds from states attempting to impose regulations on AI. This action was a clear endorsement of industry lobbyists eager to bypass constraints while undermining the efforts of consumers, advocates, and industry associations that have long pushed for state regulation.
Trump’s actions have crystallized the ideological alignments surrounding AI within America’s political factions, setting up a new battleground for the midterm elections. A nationwide survey conducted in May 2025 revealed that over 70% of likely voters favored both state and federal regulators having a role in AI policy. A subsequent poll by Navigator Research in December 2025 echoed these sentiments, showcasing a substantial net +48% favorability for increased AI regulation. Despite this overwhelming preference among voters and even within his party—where Congress had previously united to defeat a state AI regulation moratorium—Trump has prioritized the interests of the industry, challenging the will of voters across both blue and red states.
The Emergence of AI as a Wedge Issue
Candidates and parties are beginning to identify ways to leverage this emerging wedge issue ahead of the midterms. In 2025, popular discourse around AI was frequently framed as a conflict between humans and machines, suggesting that advances in AI come at the expense of human jobs. Each new model release, capable of writing, teaching, or coding, raises concerns about job losses in these sectors.
This framing, however, may not resonate as profoundly in political contexts. Instead, the debate can be better encapsulated as populism versus institutionalism. The MAGA movement represents a shift in American party politics, aligning the Republican Party with populism while positioning the Democratic Party as defenders of traditional governmental institutions and democratic norms. Trump’s AI order disrupts this framework, serving the interests of economic elites at the cost of populist consumer protections and signaling an ongoing alliance between MAGA and big tech.
Local Resistance to AI Infrastructure
Currently, there is a growing populist resistance to the government and big tech collaboration on AI, emerging at the local level. Communities in states such as Maryland, Arizona, North Carolina, and Michigan are actively opposing AI data centers due to concerns over environmental and energy affordability impacts. This localized opposition spans across political ideologies, with both progressives and Trump supporters rallying to influence local officials to resist data center development.
While this resistance is local for now, it holds potential to evolve into a national movement that could fracture the MAGA coalition. Notably, data centers are one of the few national issues yet to polarize voters. Studies indicate that many voters remain largely unaware of data center developments, with only a less than 10 percentage point difference between supporters of Trump and Harris regarding their positions on local data center initiatives.
The Political Landscape and Legislative Responses
Political leaders are yet to crystallize a clear stance on these emerging concerns. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis appears to be positioning himself as a skeptic of the administration’s AI policies. Conversely, progressive figures like Senator Bernie Sanders and Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib have proposed a moratorium on AI data center construction, while Senator Amy Klobuchar has vocally opposed Trump’s executive order.
While these political reverberations primarily affect regions targeted for data center construction, the implications of AI extend beyond physical infrastructure. The energy and environmental costs linked to data centers represent only a fraction of the broader risks posed by tech companies. The Trump administration’s frequent justification of corporate AI support as a response to a national security threat from China is widely regarded as unfounded.
Conclusion: The Growing Political Salience of AI
Any discussion surrounding AI policy must encompass individual harms, such as job losses resulting from automation, as well as systemic economic risks linked to concentrated AI investments. The increased power of monopolistic tech companies poses democratic threats, while the degradation of civic functions like journalism and education by AI cannot be overlooked. For the free market to serve public interests, tech companies profiting from AI must be held accountable for the associated costs.
The political significance of AI will only amplify as its financial investments and societal impacts grow. This presents a unique opportunity for candidates from any political party to champion the cause of opposing AI-linked harms in the upcoming midterm elections. Political solutions should focus on organizing and expanding engagement around AI regulations, moving beyond the local concerns of data centers to address the broader implications of the Trump executive order and its alignment with industry interests.
