“`html
We are almost one year away from the 2026 midterm elections, and it’s far too early to forecast the results. However, it’s a reasonable assumption that artificial intelligence technologies will once again be a significant narrative.
The widespread apprehension that AI might be exploited to sway the 2024 U.S. election now feels somewhat outdated in a year where the president shares AI-crafted images of himself as the pope on official White House accounts. Yet, AI transcends mere information manipulation. It’s also emerging as a politically charged topic. Political pioneers are embracing the technology, which is creating a divide across party lines.
We anticipate this divide will expand, leading to AI being predominantly utilized by one political faction in the 2026 elections. If AI’s potential to automate and enhance the efficiency of political tasks—such as tailored messaging, persuasion, and campaign strategies—is even somewhat realized, this could create a systematic advantage.
At this moment, Republicans seem ready to utilize the technology in the 2026 midterms. The Trump administration has vigorously incorporated AI-generated memes into its digital communication strategy. The administration has also leveraged executive orders and federal procurement power to steer the development and inherent values of AI technologies away from “woke” ideologies. Moreover, Trump associate Elon Musk has molded his AI firm’s Grok models in alignment with his ideological perspectives. These moves seem to be part of a broader, ongoing realignment of the Big Tech industry towards the political ambitions, and perhaps also the principles, of the Republican party.
Democrats, as the party currently in opposition, find themselves largely reacting to AI developments. A significant group of Congressional Democrats responded to actions from the Trump administration in April by contesting their adoption of AI in governance. Their correspondence to the Trump administration’s Office of Management and Budget included detailed criticisms and questions regarding DOGE’s behaviors while advocating for a cessation of DOGE’s AI usage, yet also stated they “endorse the implementation of AI technologies in a manner that adheres to existing” laws. This was a totally sensible, although nuanced, stance, which illustrates how one party’s actions can shape the political strategy of another.
These transitions are influenced more by political currents than by ideology. Big Tech executives’ compliance with the Trump administration appears primarily as a strategy to gain favor, while Silicon Valley is still represented by progressive Democrat Ro Khanna. Additionally, a June Pew Research survey indicates nearly identical levels of concern from Democrats and Republicans regarding the rising use of AI in America.
There are, arguably, expected positions each party would take regarding AI. An April House subcommittee hearing on AI trends revealed much about that equilibrium. Following the Trump administration’s lead, Republicans expressed skepticism about any regulation of the AI sector. In contrast, Democrats highlighted consumer protection and the need to counterbalance concentrated corporate power. Despite the shifting dominance of the corporate wing within the Democratic party and Trump’s unpredictable populism, this mirrors the historical positions of the parties regarding technology.
While Republicans aim to cozy up to tech magnates and dismantle barriers around business practices, Democrats could rejuvenate the 2020 narratives of candidates such as Andrew Yang and Elizabeth Warren. They could envision an alternative future where the profits of Big Tech firms and the wealth of billionaires are taxed and redistributed to young individuals grappling with an affordability crisis in housing, healthcare, and other essential needs.
Furthermore, Democrats could leverage technology to convincingly demonstrate their commitment to participatory democracy. They could utilize AI-powered collaborative policymaking tools like Decidim, Pol.Is, and Go Vocal to gather voter feedback on a large scale and align their platform with the public interest.
It is remarkable how little these types of sensemaking tools are being used by candidates and political parties currently. Instead of employing AI to capture and learn from constituent feedback, candidates often perceive AI merely as another broadcasting tool—valuable only for projecting their image and message to the public. A notable example: British Member of Parliament Mark Sewards, presumably acting in good faith, recently faced ridicule after unveiling a vacuous AI avatar of himself to his constituents.
The trajectory of political polarization surrounding AI will likely be influenced by unpredictable future events and how partisans opportunistically capitalize on them. A recent political incident in Europe surrounding AI highlights how this can transpire.
Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson, affiliated with the country’s Moderate party, admitted in an August interview that he employs AI tools to gain a “second opinion” on policy matters. The backlash from political rivals was severe. Earlier this year, Kristersson advocated for the EU to pause its groundbreaking legislation regulating AI and retracted an AI function from his campaign site after it was misused to create images of him seemingly seeking an endorsement from Hitler. Although arguably far more significant, neither of these incidents garnered global attention the way the Prime Minister’s acknowledgment of using tools like ChatGPT did.
Age dynamics may influence how AI’s effects on the midterms unfold. One notable trend that swayed the 2024 election in favor of Trump appears to have been the rightward shift of young voters, especially white males. Up to now, YouGov’s political tracking survey does not indicate a significant shift in young voters’ Congressional voting intentions since the 2022 midterms.
Adopting—or distancing themselves from—AI may be one strategy the parties utilize to wrest control of this youthful voting segment. While the Pew survey revealed that substantial portions of Americans across all age groups are generally concerned about AI, younger Americans are much more likely to report regular interactions with AI and feel comfortable with their level of control over it in their lives. A Democratic party eager to reestablish relevance and gain approval from young voters might turn to AI as both a tool and a subject for engaging them.
Both voters and politicians should acknowledge that AI is no longer simply an external factor influencing elections. It’s not an uncontrollable natural calamity raining deepfakes down on a protective electorate. It’s more akin to a fire: an entity that political actors can harness and manipulate for both practical and symbolic ends.
A party willing to intervene in the realm of corporate AI and mold the future of the technology should recognize the valid fears and possibilities it presents, offering solutions that effectively address and utilize AI.
This essay was crafted alongside Nathan E. Sanders and originally published in Time.
“`