In a family from Ohio or Arizona, the problem seems straightforward: the electricity bill has risen, and next to the house, a giant gray building without windows has appeared, humming around the clock. No one asked for permission. In Washington, they see the same problem differently — as a question capable of determining who will control the Senate after November.
Why now
Construction of data centers for artificial intelligence has accelerated on a wave of billion-dollar investments from major tech companies, but it is precisely now, a few months before the midterm elections, that discontent has reached critical mass. An August University of Pennsylvania poll showed that 61% of Americans oppose building new data centers near their homes — this is 12 percentage points higher than in the February-March survey, with discontent shared by 69% of Democrats, 54% of Republicans, and 53% of independent voters.
This is no longer a party line — it is a rare case where voters from both camps have merged in the same frustration. A CNN analysis of campaign advertising showed that candidates across the political spectrum are using growing resistance to artificial intelligence and the infrastructure needed to power it: this year, over $31 million has been spent on political advertising mentioning data centers, with over 99% of these funds going to ads opposing AI infrastructure projects.
Republicans themselves acknowledge the scale of the problem. The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) warned that data centers have become a "hidden issue" throughout the midterm election cycle, according to a memo obtained by CNBC.
Who benefits
The biggest gain right now is going to Democrats, who are exploiting the split in their opponents' positions. An analysis of advertising data by AdImpact firm, conducted by NPR, showed that since January, campaigns and outside groups have spent over $45 million on advertising mentioning data centers in this year's gubernatorial, House, and Senate races.
This is not about abstract technological discussion, but about utility bills — this is the argument that resonates most with voters.
The situation in Ohio is illustrative: supporters of Democratic candidate Sherrod Brown spent millions to portray his opponent, Republican Senator J.D. Vance, as the "face of data centers," accusing him of providing corporations with tax breaks worth over $2.5 billion, which caused electricity bills to rise by thousands of dollars.
But the benefit is not only to Democrats. Within the Republican Party itself, some politicians are saving their own campaigns by diverging from the president. The most striking example is Texas, where Governor Abbott, who previously helped transform the state into a national leader with 537 data centers (second place after Virginia), now advocates for suspending construction of new facilities until an audit of their electricity and water consumption is conducted, stating: "Texans must come first."
Abbott explains this shift not by ideology, but by the fault of the industry itself. According to him, AI data center developers largely provoked opposition themselves by not working with local communities before launching projects — many facilities appeared without public discussion, causing concerns about energy consumption, water use, and impact on neighboring areas: "They dug themselves into a hole, so they got the resistance they deserved."
Opposition's reaction and within the party
Trump is not changing his rhetoric despite warnings from his own strategists. But even his vice president formulates the position more cautiously than the president. Believing that almost all resistance to data centers arises where their construction means higher utility rates for local people, Vance defends Trump's position on the importance of data centers for the economy, while adding: if a data center is built, it should return energy to the grid, not take it from it — and it is precisely when electricity bills rise too much that a real problem arises.
Democrats, meanwhile, are openly taking advantage of the public split within the GOP. While Republicans and the president diverge in their messaging on data centers, Democrats are using the increasingly growing skepticism of voters and the public split within the GOP.
It is telling that the administration is trying to compensate for reputational losses with promises that are not yet backed by details. Trump invited technology companies to the White House to make commitments to develop their own electricity generation, attempting to ease tensions around the cost of electricity for data centers, saying: "They need PR help, because people think that if a data center appears, electricity prices will rise. This won't happen."
However, even Trump has supporters who don't believe him: an Economist/YouGov poll conducted August 21-24 showed that 47% of Trump's 2024 voters oppose building a new data center in their community, while only 35% support such a project.
Against this backdrop, the scale of the Stargate infrastructure project — over $400 billion in investments from OpenAI, Oracle, and SoftBank and 25,000 new jobs — looks convincing on paper, but does not compensate for the specific frustration of a specific voter who sees a new number on their electricity bill every month.
What this means for November
Three states where Trump won in 2024 — Ohio, Texas, and Michigan — are now considered competitive precisely because of this issue, and their results will affect Senate control. If Republicans en masse follow Abbott and Paxton's path and begin to publicly distance themselves from the presidential line on data centers, the party risks losing not only votes but also control of its own message three months before the election. The question that remains open is: will the White House manage to propose something more concrete than promises to "not worry," before voters in Ohio and Michigan vote with their wallets.
