Artificial intelligence is drastically reducing the cost and time required to produce political advertising, yet recent election results suggest that viral AI-generated content does not automatically translate into electoral victory. Campaigns can now generate attack ads and targeted messages in hours, a process that previously required days of work by writers, voice actors, and production teams. This shift is transforming political creative from a high-cost asset into a more affordable, disposable form of content.
The scale of AI adoption in the current cycle is documented by two different tracking methods. AdImpact, an ad-tracking firm, identified 29 campaign ads in federal and gubernatorial contests that explicitly disclosed the use of AI content as of two weeks ago. The Wesleyan Media Project, which also counts ads that did not make such disclosures, has identified at least 164 AI-influenced ads this cycle. While exact totals are difficult to pin down, both figures indicate widespread integration of the technology into campaign operations.
Industry professionals agree that AI democratizes access to professional-grade creative tools. Jesse Hunt, a veteran Republican consultant, noted that the technology allows for more content production in varying styles at a lower cost. Chris Moyer, a Democratic strategist, described the shift as a democratization of tools that previously required significant resources, enabling smaller-budget campaigns to access capabilities once reserved for larger operations. Will Ritter, co-founder of the agency Poolhouse, stated that his firm went from using no AI in the last cycle to incorporating AI components into most of its current ads. He emphasized that while the technology is powerful, it still requires professionals who know how to integrate it effectively to ensure the message remains clear rather than becoming a showcase for visual effects.
Despite the efficiency gains, the impact on actual election outcomes remains mixed. In Massachusetts, Republican gubernatorial candidate Brian Shortsleeve gained attention in February with an AI-generated radio ad featuring a synthetic voice of Governor Maura Healey making disparaging comments about the state's economy and electricity rates. The ad raised questions about legal limits on deepfakes; while 31 states have enacted laws regulating political deepfakes, the Federal Election Commission has not implemented specific AI rulemaking. Although the ad boosted Shortsleeve's profile during his bid for the GOP nomination, he was defeated in a landslide in the September primary by Mike Minogue.
A similar pattern emerged in Los Angeles, where independent mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt used AI-generated videos depicting himself as a superhero saving a dystopian city while portraying Mayor Karen Bass as a villain. These videos garnered millions of views on social media platforms and helped transform Pratt from a longshot into one of the top three contenders. However, the viral momentum was not enough to secure a place in the general election; Pratt finished third in the June 2 primary.
Other examples include an ad from the National Republican Senatorial Committee targeting Texas state Rep. James Talarico with an AI-generated video of him reading old social media posts, and a viral image of Michigan Senate nominee Mike Rogers portrayed as a superhero. The electoral impact of these specific campaigns remains uncertain as those races are not yet decided.
Strategists warn that while AI levels the playing field for production costs, it introduces new challenges regarding voter trust. Moyer cautioned that as AI becomes more widespread, voter cynicism will increase regarding the authenticity of ads. Hunt emphasized that authenticity is critical, noting that while AI offers cost savings, the cheapest option does not always produce the most persuasive or memorable message.