President Donald Trump has positioned himself as a central figure in the 2026 midterm elections, urging voters to treat the contest as if he were directly on the ballot. His approach, however, contrasts sharply with the advertising strategies of candidates from both parties.

Democratic campaigns and their allies have aggressively referenced Trump in television ads, spending more than $163 million since September 1 and airing nearly 180,000 ads that mention the former president across broadcast, cable, and streaming platforms. This strategy reflects Democrats’ efforts to frame Republican contenders as aligned with Trump’s policies, which critics blame for rising costs and economic strain.

For example, Georgia Sen. Jon Ossoff, who is seeking reelection, has invested nearly $3 million in ads spotlighting his opponent, Rep. Mike Collins, over his association with Trump. One such ad accuses Collins of supporting Trump’s tariffs and the military actions in Iran, blaming these policies for increasing gas, grocery, and health insurance prices. The message paints Collins as siding with Trump at the expense of voters’ economic wellbeing.

In Pennsylvania’s 1st Congressional District, Democratic ads targeting vulnerable Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick have also frequently invoked Trump, despite Fitzpatrick’s votes against some of Trump’s key policies, such as tariffs and war powers. All four ads mentioning Trump have aired around 2,000 times since early September, part of Democrat Bob Harvie’s campaign to unseat Fitzpatrick.

House Majority PAC, a Democratic super PAC focused on House elections, argues that this focus reflects voter concerns. Its spokesperson, Katarina Flicker, cited polls and focus groups identifying affordability as the top voter issue and attributing price increases to politicians seen as corrupt or out of touch.

Data from AdImpact, which tracks political media spending, shows that among issues discussed in Democratic ads, Trump ranks as the fourth most frequently mentioned theme, following healthcare, taxes, and accusations of opponents’ ties to special interests. Republicans, in contrast, have mentioned Trump far less in their advertising, ranking the topic 33rd behind taxes and crime.

Republicans have been more restrained in linking themselves publicly to Trump, with fewer ads—approximately 16,000 run at a cost of $11 million—mentioning him. The Republican National Committee criticized Democrats’ heavy focus on Trump as an admission of having no substantive policy agenda. Spokesperson Natalie Baldassarre described the messaging as "Trump Derangement Syndrome" and a sign of Democratic weaknesses.

Republican candidates are instead running a more varied campaign playbook. Idaho Sen. Jim Risch has highlighted his cooperation with Trump on tax cuts, for instance. Republican strategist Alex Conant characterized the party’s approach as experimental, deploying a wide range of messages to gauge voter response, unlike Democrats’ more uniform focus on Trump.

Overall, political advertising spending in this election cycle remains high, with Democrats having spent or reserved $1.8 billion nationwide and Republicans slightly outpacing them with $2.2 billion in total expenditures. Strategic differences underscore the parties’ contrasting assessments of Trump’s influence: Democrats see him as a liability for their opponents, while Republicans aim to leverage his legacy in selective ways without making him the dominant theme of their campaigns.