A.I. Is Not Very Popular With Voters, New Poll Finds

By the Editorial Team · Thursday, September 17, 2026

A recent national poll found that voter trust in political parties to handle A.I. is nearly evenly split, with Republicans favored by 42 percent and Democrats by 40 percent, while 61 percent of voters oppose constructing data centers crucial to A.I. infrastructure. Although A.I. ranks low as a voting issue currently, experts and politicians from both parties are increasingly debating regulation, suggesting the topic could become more influential in future elections.

A recent national poll reveals widespread voter skepticism toward artificial intelligence (A.I.), with no clear partisan consensus on which political party is best positioned to manage the technology’s challenges. Conducted from September 8 to 13 among 1,503 likely voters, the survey highlights divided trust and varying concerns around A.I., alongside a notable reluctance regarding data center construction that supports the technology.

According to the poll, 42 percent of respondents said they trust Republicans more on A.I. issues, while 40 percent favored Democrats. This stands in contrast to other major topics—including immigration, the economy, and foreign conflicts—where Democrats hold a consistent advantage. Despite the contentious national debate, A.I. does not yet appear to be a decisive factor for most voters, with less than 1 percent naming it as their top issue ahead of the November midterm elections. The economy remains the dominant priority.

Opposition to data centers—facilities essential to A.I. infrastructure—was a prominent finding. Overall, 61 percent of respondents opposed their construction, including nearly 80 percent of voters under 30. Opposition decreased with age but still constituted a slim majority among those older than 65. Among those opposed to data centers, 56 percent favored imposing limits rather than enforcing outright bans.

Reasons for opposing data centers varied by political affiliation. Nearly one-third of opponents cited environmental or climate-related concerns, a motive more frequently attributed to Democrats. Republicans who opposed data centers were more likely to express a general distrust of A.I., with some respondents referencing popular culture to illustrate their fears. One described the technology as “terrifying,” while another alluded to the film “The Terminator.”

On the political front, federal regulation of A.I. remains in flux. President Donald Trump, speaking shortly after the survey’s completion, issued a forceful rejection of proposed regulatory measures, arguing that any constraints could undermine the United States’ competitiveness against China. He suggested that leadership with a “High IQ” was the only control necessary. Similarly, House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, has voiced opposition to federal A.I. oversight.

Conversely, several prominent Democrats, particularly progressives, have called for urgent restrictions. Senator Bernie Sanders has advocated for a moratorium on superintelligent A.I. development, citing warnings from experts about potential existential risks within the next decade. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez supports Sanders’s approach, according to her office, though many Democratic lawmakers have not embraced the proposed measures.

Interestingly, the call for action spans party lines. In Michigan, both the Democratic Senate candidate Dr. Abdul El-Sayed and Republican contender Mike Rogers have urged for regulatory safeguards. Dr. El-Sayed supports an “all-out pause” on A.I., while Rogers — diverging from Trump’s stance — has emphasized the need for government-imposed guardrails to manage rapid advancements in the technology.

While A.I. remains a lower-tier concern for most voters at present, some political strategists believe the issue will gain prominence in coming election cycles, potentially becoming a focal point in the 2028 presidential race as the technology evolves and its societal impacts become clearer.

This article was reported by synthesizing coverage from multiple independent news outlets to present a balanced, unbiased account. Read about our editorial standards. Spotted an error? Let us know.