AI backlash is coming for elections

Ask Americans what they think about AI and most say they have concerns. Communities have increased their resistance to data center projects, blocking them across the United States. On social media, anger against AI companies and leaders is rampant – sometimes going so far as to condone violence.

But when you consider the issues most campaigns focus on, AI is much less prevalent, experts say.

More than 60% of Republicans and Democrats surveyed by Ipsos earlier this year agree that the government should regulate AI for economic stability and public safety, and that the development of this technology should slow. Yet, “when you just ask people, ‘What do you think?’ AI and data centers aren’t at the top of the list, at least not yet,” says Alec Tyson, Ipsos’ principal public affairs pollster.

For now, broad issues like the economy and immigration remain priorities for many voters. “There’s a certain amount of oxygen to the major issues that Americans have on their minds, and we’re in a very active time,” Tyson says. “The amount of space available or the potential for another problem to arise has to be a pretty acute or powerful concern. And we’re just not seeing it on a national level yet with AI.”

There is also a lack of clear partisan lines. Data Center Watch, a group that tracks data center projects and opposition to them, found that 55 percent of politicians who publicly opposed major projects were Republicans and 45 percent were Democrats. There is also bipartisan concern about the impact of AI chatbot companions on children. Even as Republican politicians have led the campaign to circumvent state AI laws, disagreements remain within both parties.

Despite this, a few months before the elections, the debates – and outright fights – around AI are intensifying. Tech executives are warning that their companies will disrupt people’s lives — Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei warned that AI could eliminate half of white-collar jobs, and Palantir CEO Alex Karp said Democratic voters could see their economic power hit while “working class, often male voters” would benefit. The activists reacted. Most efforts are peaceful, including protests and messages to lawmakers. But some opposition has turned violent. Three suspects allegedly attacked Sam Altman’s home in two separate attacks within days, and some responses on social media suggested the attacks were justified. Like the joyous reaction of much of the public after the assassination of UnitedHealthcare’s CEO, the violence exposed a latent frustration among Americans.

Meanwhile, well-funded interest groups are already spending millions on lobbying. “A lot of political science work has demonstrated that ordinary Americans follow, in some way, the rhetoric or position of the leaders with whom they align,” Tyson says. Groups like Brad Carson’s Americans for Responsible Innovation focus on educating policymakers about AI to prepare them for upcoming policy debates. Carson, a former Democratic congressman, opposes efforts to circumvent domestic regulations on AI and is also part of Public First Action, which is affiliated with super PACs (political action committees) dedicated to supporting candidates who will support public safeguards against AI. They are a response to Leading the Future, a super PAC funded primarily by OpenAI President Greg Brockman and tech investors Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz. Leading the Future has raised $140 million, according to Axioswhile Public First Action has $50 million in cash, $20 million of which comes from Anthropic.

Data centers have already become a hot spot locally. Opposition to these projects has blocked or delayed $64 billion worth of development across the country, according to Data Center Watch. At the federal level, lawmakers like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) support a pause on data center development.

Candidates running on key AI platforms have already seen money from groups like LTF and PFA flow into their races. That’s what happened to New York state lawmaker Alex Bores, who is currently running for re-election and co-sponsored a bill initially intended to add security and transparency requirements for large developers of AI models. Despite LTF’s larger war chest, Carson believes public opinion is on his side and says now is the time to oppose efforts to block state regulations.

Concerns about job loss could also be at the top of voters’ AI concerns as soon as this summer, according to Brendan Steinhauser, CEO of The Alliance for Secure AI, a nonprofit that aims to “defend humanity” in the age of AI. “Based on what the technology is doing and what industry leaders are saying about the technology, I think this gives me a signal that this could happen very quickly,” he says. The impact on employment is also a major concern for many Gen Zers, says Tyson.

The Alliance maintains an online tracking of layoffs attributed to AI. So far, more than 110,000 jobs have been lost in the United States. Many worked at large tech companies – 30,000 came from layoffs at Oracle alone. But Steinhauser believes the threat could soon become more widely tangible, as job losses are expected to affect all sectors, from the legal profession to general administrative jobs. “That’s when I think this issue will really become a much bigger issue across the country,” he said.

Carson says pollsters regularly tell him that “they’ve never seen a problem move up the ranks faster than AI.” Although many voters don’t mention it spontaneously, “if you introduce the idea of ​​AI and then you bring up issues like prices or employment, they become very important.” But it may still be difficult to vote on this basis. “The candidates themselves are not necessarily clearly differentiated on how they want to approach AI, because it is a nascent and emerging issue,” he says.

If voters aren’t (yet) listening to AI issues, why are industry leaders spending millions on campaigns? Experts say that’s because there’s still so much to gain. “That public story is a little bit different than who actually has power,” says Daniel Schiff, an associate professor of political science at Purdue University. Headlines about Anthropic’s decision to stand up to the Pentagon and mass domestic surveillance, for example, might not resonate with many American voters, he said, but could help them “position themselves in relation to the government.”

Carson says AI is “a great topic to build on” because “most politicians are just starting to realize how powerful public opinion is on guardrails on AI. But you’re going to see more and more people embrace it because an enterprising politician sees an opening.” Of course, the billionaires behind Leading the Future “will try to destroy you, but there’s a limit to that, right? They can’t destroy us all.”