Securing American primacy in artificial intelligence has become a central aim of President Donald Trump’s second term. Washington’s objectives are clear: to preserve America’s lead in artificial intelligence, spread its preferred “AI stack”—the full set of chips, software, data and cloud infrastructure that make advanced systems work—and extend the country’s military, intelligence, and economic edge.
To achieve this, the Trump Administration and its allies in Silicon Valley argue for policies that prize innovation over regulation, and for a rapid buildout of the infrastructure AI requires: data centers, high-capacity power supplies, and fiber networks. Trump began this push on his first day back in the White House, when he
rolled back the AI safety regulations and guardrails of the Biden era. The president’s July 2025
AI Action Plan presented a blueprint for achieving global AI dominance by accelerating AI innovation, cutting regulation, and taking a “build, baby, build” approach to AI infrastructure. And, in December, Trump signed an
executive order designed to constrain the ability of states to regulate AI—including by threatening to deny federal funds to states with “
the most onerous and excessive laws” that “threaten to stymie innovation.”
A significant segment of the American population opposes Trump’s laissez-faire approach, and the absence of broad popular support would threaten America’s quest for dominance in artificial intelligence. Popular opposition to data centers is likely the canary in the coal mine. Propelled by concerns about data centers
driving up the price of electricity and water, and creating pollution, community
resistance against data center construction is
growing across the country. Politicians are taking note, with growing bipartisan
calls for tech companies to pay their “fair share” of utility costs––including from the
president himself. If 2026
proves to be the year of AI takeoff, the
concerns of numerous Americans about its effects on our economy, politics, and human relationships could coalesce into a potent populist political force.
Until recently, policy debates around AI have been the preserve of wonks and technology specialists. That reality is changing as Americans begin to feel the early tremors of the coming AI earthquake: skyrocketing
electricity bills,
disappearing jobs, and mind-boggling applications such as
Moltbook, a new social network where AI bots engage with and learn exclusively from one another.
AI policy is ascending as a priority in American political discourse, particularly around questions of affordability and jobs. State-level elections in Virginia, New Jersey, and Georgia last year have already illustrated its importance. The midterm elections in November will likely crystallize this shift. By the time voters head to the polls in the 2028 presidential election, we will have entered a new era of AI politics, with artificial intelligence poised to emerge as a defining issue of that race.
Americans and the AI anxiety
Public opinion polling on AI remains remarkably sparse, but the little that exists paints a portrait of anxiety. Six in 10 Americans
distrust AI and almost all agree that regulations prioritizing AI safety and security are essential, according to Gallup. A recent Pew Research Center
survey found that half of Americans feel more concern than excitement about AI’s increasing presence in daily life; 57% rate its risks to society as high, while only a quarter see the benefits as high. According to YouGov,
77% worry that AI could eventually pose a threat to humanity.
Perhaps most revealing is the
gap between the AI experts building the future and the public living in it: the experts express far greater optimism about AI’s potential to benefit everything from the economy to education to the environment.
My research points to similar conclusions. Late last year, I convened more than 300 Americans—with a focus on the swing states of Arizona, Michigan, and Georgia—to solicit their views of the future of America’s role in the world. I met Republicans, Democrats, and independents from 29 states, ranging from Gen Z college students to mayors and small business owners. I had come to ask about U.S. foreign policy and global cooperation. What they wanted to discuss was AI.
Many Americans I met recognized that AI enhances American economic and military power, but they were far more concerned about its long-term costs for their families and communities. I heard them worry aloud about the inadequacy of AI regulation in protecting children and preventing the wildfire spread of misinformation.
I found them anxious about AI exacerbating economic inequality, jeopardizing their employment prospects, and amplifying political polarization while eroding the quality of education and degrading Americans’ capacity to perform critical cognitive tasks. I heard immediate, tangible complaints about the impact of AI on their communities: electricity bills climbing skyward and the incessant hum of data centers disrupting once-quiet neighborhoods.
Rather than a boon to the local economy, data centers were seen as a drain on local resources—operations that benefit from generous incentives, drive up utility costs for communities, and generate few permanent jobs in return. Tech industry insiders were bullish on the need for rapid AI innovation. Nearly everyone else sounded a note of deep pessimism.
Similar sentiments are already reshaping politics at the state and local levels. For now, the most intense debates focus on data center construction, a particularly charged issue in swing states that host some of the largest data center markets, which helps explain why it caught President Trump’s attention.
Electricity costs figured prominently in Virginia’s gubernatorial election last November, where data centers are proliferating and typical facilities consume as much electricity as
100,000 households. In Georgia, Democrats secured their first seats on the state utility regulatory commission since 2007, propelled by similar concerns. And in Arizona, local opposition has already blocked several major data center projects.
These rumbles are only the beginning. As companies deploy AI more aggressively and workforce disruptions ripple across industries and regions, job elimination may well become the next political lightning rod. And as the rate of technological change outpaces society’s ability to adapt to it, the U.S. will soon be ripe for a full-blown populist backlash against artificial intelligence. National security arguments for a zero-regulation environment that helps the U.S. outrun China are unlikely to resonate with voters who have watched their middle class jobs evaporate or who struggle to pay surging electricity bills. The chasm between the promises of the
tech oligarchy and the reality of Main Street will give birth to furious political battles.
The new politics of AI
The emerging politics of AI does not map onto the traditional left-right ideological spectrum, and is already spawning unexpected coalitions. Once again, the debate over data centers offers a preview. Socialist Vermont Senator, Bernie Sanders and conservative Florida Governor, Ron DeSantis have
emerged as leading opponents of AI data center construction—even as Sanders’s proposed
moratorium failed to win over fellow progressives. At the local level, Republicans and Democrats have
united behind community movements to block proposed facilities. And Republican senators including Josh
Hawley, Katie
Britt, and Marsha
Blackburn are demanding tougher AI regulation—a stance notably at odds with their president’s.
This political muddle reflects a deeper reality: neither party has found its footing on AI policy. Given President Trump’s anti-regulation policies and conspicuous coziness with Big Tech, Democrats should be winning this argument. They are not. Though majorities in both parties favor stronger AI regulation, neither party has established a
clear political advantage.
To prevail, Democrats need to develop a fresh political vocabulary for AI policy. Americans have never voted with AI as an electoral issue, and most politicians have yet to master the debate. Democrats must acknowledge the tangible difficulties, losses, and anxieties Americans are experiencing, even as the AI boom lifts stock markets and innovation promises revolutionary productivity gains. They cannot let the voters forget how much of the Trump Administration’s AI agenda appears designed to benefit the tech moguls who helped propel him to power and
continue to fill his political coffers.
The policy challenge is to craft an agenda that is responsible rather than reactionary.
Public opinion seems to favor a
balanced approach: one that
prioritizes rules and consumer protection over sprinting to compete with China, without abandoning AI progress entirely. A new Democratic platform might rest on three planks. The first is regulation covering everything from data center construction to privacy protections, trust and safety standards, and legal liability frameworks. The aim should be to ensure AI is developed safely and securely, and to hold companies accountable for negligent behavior, while maintaining space for rapid innovation.
The second plank is social policy: new government programs to support people impacted by AI development, from retraining for workers impacted by AI-related layoffs to price stabilization in electricity markets strained by data centers. The third is national security policy that extends America’s AI advantages such as export controls restricting China’s access to the most sophisticated AI chips. Such measures would buy Washington time to develop prudent policies and manage AI-related disruptions without ceding leadership to Beijing.
Across all three planks, Democrats should reject the Trump Administration’s deference to the private sector, seeking instead a more sustainable balance between commercial interests (which often arrive with campaign contributions attached), concerns about economic equity, and the broader national interest.
The AI race is undoubtedly the most consequential strategic competition of our time. But geopolitics will not supersede retail politics. If politicians, tech leaders, and national security experts do not quickly adapt to this reality, a populist backlash could derail America’s AI ambitions.
