Midterm Ad Spending and Rhetoric Signal Shift in Campaign Economics

The 2026 midterm election cycle featured a surge in aggressive negative advertising and personal attacks that analysts say has reshaped campaign spending habits.

Key points from the campaign include: a 2025 Gallup poll showed more than 60% of respondents believe both Democrats and Republicans need to reduce their rhetorical intensity. Experts link this shift to the rise of social media, which has accelerated the speed and reach of political branding. The two-party system encourages affective polarization, a dynamic where candidates prioritize attacking opponents over promoting their own policy platforms.

President Donald Trump used a profanity to describe Norway during a rally last week. He also called a reporter’s appearance disgusting this week. In Maine, Senate candidate Troy Jackson told incumbent Susan Collins to shut up. In Illinois, an ad for Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton used a profanity to refer to Trump. In Pemberton Township, New Jersey, Mayor Matthew Bianchini threatened a constituent with physical violence during a meeting.

Historical context provided by Ted Miller, a teaching professor of history at Northeastern University, indicates that political decency standards have fluctuated for centuries. Miller cited the 1828 election, where Andrew Jackson defeated John Quincy Adams after allies accused Adams of offering an American woman to the Russian czar. Jackson’s supporters painted him as a violent duelist in response. Miller described that decade as a period where personal attacks and corruption accusations defined political discourse. He noted that the standards of political decency have never moved in a straight line.

Miller points to the 1980s and 1990s as a period that normalized combative rhetoric. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich pushed for a harder line in political strategy. In 1993, Republicans questioned the suicide ruling for Vincent Foster, a White House deputy lawyer. Simultaneously, talk radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh and Howard Stern pushed the boundaries of acceptable public language. This media environment prepared the ground for modern digital advertising.

Koen Pauwels, a distinguished professor of marketing at Northeastern University, recalled first encountering American mudslinging in 2000. He described the negativity as extreme and surprising to a Belgian observer. In late October, Ohio gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy ran an ad featuring his opponent Amy Acton’s mother questioning her daughter. The ad referenced a past charge against Acton’s stepfather, who died in 2004 without trial. The ad was removed after airing. Yakov Bart, a research professor of marketing, called the ad a violation of moral and ethical standards. Pauwels noted that candidates in a two-party system cannot waste time on their own programs when the market rewards negative attacks.

The campaign season leading to the Tuesday elections included examples of threats of physical violence and what experts describe as unethical uses of advertising dollars. The behavior extends to municipal levels and both major parties. The market for political communication has evolved to reward provocation over policy detail.