Artificial Intelligence is currently reshaping modern politics, influencing everything from how campaigns target voters to how governments make policy decisions. Is the rapid growth of AI’s influence going to improve democratic participation if regulated properly, or instill mistrust and unavoidable biases come this year’s midterms?  

Throughout 2025, the use of AI reshaped how consumers view the world on a global scale. According to an article published Jan. 16, 2026 by Atlantic Council experts, both the United States and China were competing for AI dominance and raced to build vast data centers to support AI development, pouring nearly five trillion dollars into projects.   

The Atlantic Council experts explained that people are increasingly turning to AI systems to understand what is happening on a global and national scale. “If an AI model’s knowledge has been altered by sources intended to deceive, then the users will be, too,” the Atlantic Council experts state.   

In 2026, the U.S. is expected to double down on exporting AI-driven technology, sign more AI-focused partnerships with Saudi Arabia and the United Ara Emirates, enter its first global phase with the United Nations, and test whether or not international cooperation can be shaped by AI or only coexist. The Atlantic Council experts also reported that this year, the race for AI will still be intensified, with the U.S. and China holding the greatest influence.  

Greg Granger, professor of history and political science who primarily studies foreign policy, said that AI-driven data analytics can give certain candidates or certain parties unfair advantages, but it is no different than business leaders, investors and policy makers using AI to assist them.   

“Another general factor to consider that there is no one AI. The wide array of AI tools makes tracking campaigns very challenging—it might take AI to do so. Along with this diversity comes the rapidly changing capabilities of AI tools, the results of which are hard to predict,” he said.   

In a functional sense, Granger explained that graphic and commercial designers and their roles in campaigns can be largely replaced by AI. “Research staff can concentrate on AI prompters and readers, as can travel organizers, speech writers and strategists. AI will evaluate its own results with instant and continuous checking of daily polls,” Granger said, adding that AI often finds patterns humans might not detect. 

Keith Dromm, professor of philosophy and interim director of the Louisiana Scholars’ College, explained that while ethical concerns surrounding AI entering politics aren’t strictly ethical, they should be considered broadly philosophical.   

Dromm said that he is concerned about AI-manipulate imagery, also known as “deep fakes,” being used to slander political candidates and political oratory, which in the United States has been a very important source for political ideas and memorable quotes.   

He used President Kennedy’s famous line, “Ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country,” as an example of what AI usage could become if it becomes a common and widely known practice. Dromm warns we might no longer have such ideas or quotes.  

“I am sure that politicians are already using AI to write their speeches,” Dromm said, explaining that AI could never be as creative, and the product would be less impactful. “It will be hard to take inspiration from a machine, and I don’t think we will be quoting for decades the famous lines of a president’s AI-assistant.”  

Dromm said that an algorithm can never be considered “politically neutral,” because they’re ultimately created by humans who have their own biases that will inevitably get reflected in the algorithm. “Also, the notion of ‘politically neutral’ is just too theoretically elusive to be captured by an algorithm,” he added.   

Long before the establishment of AI, politicians manipulated voters to influence their voting behavior. Dromm explained that AI may make this manipulation more effective, but there is also a tension between such manipulation and consent.   

He shared that there should be ethical limits on AI use in campaigns. Dromm said the more difficult question is whether there should be legal limits, adding that those would be more difficult to decide upon and then implement.   

Granger added that aside from campaign finance laws and laws over libel, slander and political speech, which is often greatly protected, there are no current laws or regulations against the use of AI in politics. Granger explained that the use of AI in campaigns is not different legally from the use of the internet or other sources of information. He said that the federal structure is complicating efforts as states want to regulate AI companies, while the federal government prefers to concentrate on national regulation in the hands of the federal government.   

He explained that the difference is that AI is not only about the conveyance of information, but rather about the creation of information flows that can go beyond our normal internet algorithms.  

“In some cases, in which AI scrubs the web and collates information, it can be considered conveyance or re-creation of information,” he said. “In other cases, as AI advances it can generate misinformation on its own volition and intentionality. One other question is whether the misinformation would be designed to protect the campaign’s interest or that of the AI tool.”  

According to Granger, the long-term effects AI could have on the political science field will be like those on all academic fields, whereas many in instructional positions are struggling with AI-related challenges to academic integrity in the classroom.   

“Collecting data and performing statistical analysis is one area that can benefit political scientists—assuming everything is accurate. There are numerous ways for academic institutions to participate in the development of AI and in the study of AI’s effects on society, which is a systemic opportunity for universities.”  

While there is no political science degree at Northwestern State University of Louisiana, K.C. Thompson, a junior communication major, is working towards obtaining a political science academic minor. “I chose a minor in political science because, as an aspiring journalist, policies affect my future career in so many ways. I want to be informed about why certain policies matter and how they work, past all the legal terminology,” he explained.   

Studying government has changed the way Thompson views AI in politics; he said that AI is just like every other innovation within technology. It’s starting off lawless and uncharted, but eventually, with time, it can be more structured.  

Thompson explained that AI usage has the power to make misinformation harder to detect but can also allow voters to accurately stay informed. “Sometimes the language can be easily pointed out with language models; however, with image generation, it makes it [detecting AI] 50/50 with some images that are so obvious, and some look exactly like a real image. It’s scary,” he said.  

With the 2026 midterm election approaching in November, Thompson said that he is unsure how AI will factor in, adding that there is still so much about democracy we don’t understand about it because we are also learning and adjusting.   

“I believe that everyone should always try to fact-check everything they come across before blindly believing it,” Thompson advised. “We live in the age of information, and the world is at your fingertips. The answer can be found if you truly search for it.”  

He explained that AI will change modern political campaigns. “It takes away the most important part of the field, which is the human element. We don’t want our leaders to reflect the thoughts of a machine; we want them to reflect the constituents they serve.”  

As a voter, Lalaina Wood, a senior health and exercise science pre-physical therapy major, said that her overall thoughts on AI use are mostly positive. She said that working in physical therapy clinics and wanting to pursue a career in healthcare has allowed her to witness how AI is useful for documentation.   

However, Wood explained that politics is a very controversial topic, as well as AI, so she thinks it would be best to keep them separate from one another.   

“Political figures are supposed to try to connect with people and state their own beliefs. I feel like using AI would defeat the purpose of that,” Wood said. “Instead of a genuine, sincere campaign, AI could potentially make it feel generic and robotic. Politicians should rely on their own expertise rather than robots.”  

While Martha Sierra, a junior communication major, cannot vote in this country as she was born in Mexico, she encouraged all voters to do their research and verify their sources. She has seen that political figures should not use AI because they are using AI to push false information to voters.   

Sierra referenced President Donald Trump’s social media post from January featuring former President Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle Obama, as primates in a jungle. According to the Associated Press, the post has since been deleted, after both Republicans and Democrats criticized the video as offensive and racist.   

“He’s pushing videos that are obviously made with AI to go against another political figure. Well, based on his supporters, they agree with that, and it’s only spreading more hate,” Sierra said.  

She added that while she doesn’t support AI usage to generate material, it could be used to organize material. “Don’t use it to create things like press releases, photos, just don’t use it in that sense,” Sierra said.   

While it is unclear whether AI will worsen or reduce bias and misinformation in the coming year, experts and students agree that navigating these rapidly evolving tools without compromising their ethical judgment will be a challenge.