With the 2026 midterm elections approximately a year away, predicting the results is premature. However, it is highly probable that artificial intelligence technologies will again play a significant role in the narrative.
Concerns that AI would be employed to manipulate the 2024 U.S. election now appear somewhat outdated, especially after a year where the president shared AI-generated images of himself as the pope via official White House channels. Yet, AI extends beyond mere information manipulation. It is also becoming a defining partisan topic. Early adopters in politics are embracing this technology, which is creating a divide between parties.
This disparity is anticipated to grow, leading to one political faction primarily utilizing AI in the 2026 elections. If AI’s potential to automate and enhance political activities such as tailored messaging, voter persuasion, and campaign planning is even partially fulfilled, it could create a significant systemic advantage.
Currently, Republicans seem prepared to gain an edge in the 2026 midterms. The Trump White House has proactively incorporated AI-generated content into its digital communication strategy. The administration has also leveraged its regulatory authority and federal purchasing power to direct the development and inherent values of AI technologies away from “woke” ideologies. Furthermore, Trump associate Elon Musk has molded his AI company’s foundational models to reflect his own ideological perspectives. These actions suggest a broader, continuous alignment within the Big Tech industry towards the Republican party’s political objectives and potentially its values.
Democrats, currently out of power, are primarily taking a reactive stance on AI. A significant group of Congressional Democrats, in April, challenged the Trump administration’s governmental adoption of AI. Their letter to the Trump administration’s Office of Management and Budget presented thorough criticisms and inquiries regarding DOGE’s practices and demanded a cessation of DOGE’s AI usage. Nevertheless, they also affirmed support for “implementation of AI technologies in a manner that complies with existing” laws. This represented a perfectly rational, albeit subtle, position, demonstrating how one party’s actions can influence the political alignment of the opposition.
These changes are more a product of political dynamics than ideological convictions. The apparent deference of Big Tech CEOs to the Trump administration seems largely a tactic to safeguard their interests, while Silicon Valley remains represented by centrist Democrat Ro Khanna. Furthermore, a June survey indicated nearly equal levels of apprehension among Democrats and Republicans concerning the growing use of AI in America.
One could argue that each party has inherent stances on AI. An April House subcommittee hearing on AI trends in innovation and competition shed considerable light on this balance. Republicans, mirroring the Trump administration’s approach, expressed skepticism regarding any significant regulation of the AI industry. Democrats, conversely, emphasized consumer protection and resistance to concentrated corporate power. Despite the influence of the Democratic party’s corporate faction and Trump’s unpredictable populism, these positions align with the parties’ historical views on technology.
While Republicans prioritize fostering close ties with tech moguls and dismantling regulatory obstacles to their business models, Democrats could resurrect the 2020 campaign messages of candidates such as Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. They could present an alternative future where the profits of large tech firms and the fortunes of billionaires are taxed and reallocated to young individuals grappling with an affordability crisis in housing, healthcare, and other fundamental necessities.
Furthermore, Democrats could utilize AI to visibly demonstrate their dedication to participatory democracy. They could employ AI-powered sensemaking tools such as Polis, Remix, and CrowdLaw to gather extensive voter input and align their political platform with the public interest.
It is remarkable how infrequently these types of sensemaking tools are being adopted by political candidates and parties currently. Rather than leveraging AI to gather and learn from constituent feedback, candidates more often perceive AI as merely another broadcast medium—effective solely for presenting their image and message to the public. A notable example: British Member of Parliament Mark Sewards, likely intending well, recently drew criticism after unveiling an insubstantial AI avatar of himself to his constituents.
The future trajectory of AI’s political polarization will likely hinge on unforeseen future events and how political factions strategically capitalize on them. A recent European political debate concerning AI exemplifies this dynamic.
Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson, affiliated with the country’s Moderate party, conceded in an August interview that he employs AI tools to obtain a “second opinion” on policy matters. The backlash from his political adversaries was immediate and intense. Earlier this year, Kristersson had advocated for the EU to soften its groundbreaking new AI regulation and removed an AI tool from his party’s website after it was misused to create images of him seemingly requesting an endorsement from Hitler. While arguably far more significant, neither of those incidents garnered global attention to the extent that the Prime Minister’s disclosure of his personal use of tools like ChatGPT did.
Demographic factors, specifically age, might dictate how AI’s influence on the midterms plays out. A significant trend that contributed to Trump’s victory in the 2024 election appears to have been the rightward shift of young voters, particularly white men. To date, YouGov’s polling data does not indicate a substantial change in young voters’ Congressional voting intentions since the 2022 midterms.
Both embracing and distancing themselves from AI could be strategies parties adopt to secure the allegiances of this young voting demographic. Although the Pew poll indicated that a considerable proportion of Americans across all age groups harbor general concerns about AI, younger Americans are significantly more prone to reporting regular interaction with AI, hearing extensively about it, and feeling at ease with their level of control over AI in their daily lives. A Democratic party eager to re-establish its relevance and garner approval from young voters might consider AI as both a practical tool and a pertinent subject for engaging them.
Both the electorate and political figures ought to acknowledge that AI is no longer merely an external factor influencing elections. It does not resemble an unstoppable natural catastrophe showering deepfakes upon a defenseless populace. Instead, it is akin to fire: a power that political participants can channel and control for both practical and symbolic aims.
Any party prepared to engage with the realm of corporate AI and influence the technology’s future must acknowledge the valid apprehensions and opportunities it offers, proposing solutions that both tackle and capitalize on AI.
