Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign included a prominent promise to significantly reduce energy prices, pledging at an Economic Club of New York event in September to cut energy costs by half or more within 12 months of taking office. Central to the Republican platform was the goal of “destroying inflation” through expanding domestic energy production. However, recent economic data and ongoing geopolitical developments have challenged the fulfillment of this promise.
Consumer Price Index figures released last week showed a 9.1 percent increase in petrol prices in September, marking the steepest rise since the onset of the conflict in Iran. Energy costs, especially gasoline prices, remain highly visible to American consumers and are expected to influence voter sentiment in the approach to the midterm elections just over two weeks away.
Historically, Republican campaigns have leveraged “petro-politics” effectively, often criticizing Democratic administrations for environmental regulations and advocating for expanded drilling and fossil fuel production. Republican candidate John McCain, for instance, increased public support for fewer drilling restrictions during his 2008 presidential bid. However, this election cycle presents a different dynamic. Public understanding appears to have shifted, with many voters recognizing that energy inflation stems less from inadequate domestic supply and more from complex policy decisions domestically and internationally.
An October poll by Reuters and Ipsos found that 60 percent of Americans disapprove of Trump’s handling of Iran, and 78 percent hold the White House responsible for rising prices. Similarly, a September survey by the Searchlight Institute identified key voter priorities for lowering energy bills as curbing utility profits, ending the war in Iran, improving grid efficiency, and restricting data centre expansions. These issues, however, do not align easily with traditional Republican strengths.
One growing concern is the impact of data centers associated with artificial intelligence (AI) development on electricity costs. Research from the Centre for Economic Policy Research suggests that data centre growth substantially raises household electricity prices, a trend causing public backlash. While the White House maintains strong support for AI infrastructure, voters in swing states like Pennsylvania and Ohio are increasingly associating rising energy costs with the expansion of data centers. In Ohio, Senator Jon Husted, a Republican supporter of attracting data centers to the state, faces opposition from Democrat Sherrod Brown, who campaigns on holding corporations accountable for electricity price increases linked to AI developments.
Republicans are also confronting criticism related to “crony capitalism.” An August Reuters/Ipsos poll indicated that half of Republican respondents believe Trump’s business interests influence his policy decisions. With Big Oil historically backing the Republican Party and new shale production requiring prices near $80 per barrel to be profitable, the administration’s promise to unleash cheap domestic energy faces economic and political challenges.
The ongoing war in Iran remains the most significant factor affecting energy prices. The conflict has driven a 45 percent increase in U.S. petrol prices since its inception and revealed vulnerabilities in U.S. Middle East policy and global influence, particularly regarding China. Beijing continues as the largest buyer of Iranian oil, complicating U.S. efforts to isolate the regime. Moreover, the war has accelerated the global transition toward electric vehicles and clean energy, a shift from which China stands to benefit, according to the International Energy Agency.
Looking beyond the midterms, the implications for the “Make America Great Again” movement are uncertain. While economic concerns such as inflation rising faster than wages—and 40 percent voter disapproval of current management—pose challenges, some analysts note that the appeal of right-wing populism to its base may transcend economic factors alone. However, persistent inflation tied to foreign conflict and an absence of diplomatic resolution could test the standing of a president who has emphasized his deal-making skills as a political strength.