Transcript of The $10 Billion Midterm Ad War New

From The New York Times, I'm Michael Barbaro. This is The Daily.

In Ohio, there's new fallout from a vicious attack ad that has rocked the governor's race.

The ad is causing rifts even within the Republican Party. You're wondering what Vice President J.D. Vance thinks about that ad in the Ohio governor's race? Well, he's got 2 words: stop whining.

When sick and desperate meet each other, you get ads like this.

Over the past few days, the background noise of this fall's midterm elections— campaign advertising— exploded into public consciousness because of a highly controversial TV commercial in Ohio, which highlighted the 2 very different stories that Democratic and Republican candidates across the country are telling in the final days of campaigning. Today, national political correspondent Shane Goldmacher takes us inside the most expensive midterm ad campaign in America. It's Monday, October 26th.

Shane, welcome back to the show.

Thanks for having me.

My pleasure. So I have a question for you. In your role as national political correspondent, how many campaign ads do you estimate that you have watched? for this midterm election? Just give me a number.

Oh, man. Hundreds. Yeah, hundreds and hundreds of TV ads. I am the person who has voluntarily signed up to get every new television ad in every congressional race emailed to me.

What does that even look like?

It looks like an obliteration of my inbox.

But—

You get every single ad that runs anywhere in these midterms?

Directly sent to you. In House and Senate races. It doesn't mean I'm watching all of them, but I will, at the end of many days, take a chunk of time to just sit for 40 minutes and suffer through what the parties are putting on television.

Unwind with candidates.

Just unwind with them.

Unwind with, like, a brewski and a series of attack ads.

Yes. You're a master.

It's a masterclass.

Bad client.

Bad client. So just explain why you spend so much of your time doing that. And we've talked about this a little bit through various campaigns, but I think it bears repeating. Why you dwell in the land, and sometimes the sewer, of American campaign advertising so meaningfully.

I just think that campaigns spend an enormous amount of time thinking about what they're gonna put in these ads. They spend the majority of their money on digital and television ads. That is how they communicate to people. And that is the greatest distillation of what they think is their message and can help them win. You can tell when somebody goes negative, what that means. You can tell what issues are resonating, and it changes, right? The tenor, the topics of the ads change from cycle to cycle. You can see a campaign get more desperate over weeks and months as they go more negative. When somebody starts negative, maybe they're behind. You learn so much just by watching. You call a lot of people, talk to a lot of people. That's important too, obviously. But this sort of sets the mood music of the entire election for me.

Right. It's a— it's an X-ray, I think you've said to me in the past. Campaign ads are an X-ray that doesn't lie of what campaigns are hopeful of and worried about and what they think the electorate is up to.

Yes. And you have to remember that these TV ads are the chance that candidates have and super PACs have to introduce themselves to the most important set of voters, which is people who don't actually want to pay attention to the campaign. People who are too busy working, too busy living their life, or apathetic about politics. So, campaigns campaigns spend an enormous amount of money and energy figuring out what is the one message that you can force-feed somebody while watching football, make them suffer through on YouTube pre-roll, that introduces your candidate, says, hey, I'm a different kind of Democrat, or I'm a different kind of Republican, or says, I'm the guy who's gonna cut your taxes, the gal who's gonna cut your costs. You know, picking which one thing you want to emphasize for those disengaged voters.

Right. Who in many, many races become decisive, especially in a lot of the tight, tight races that we've been talking about with you, with our colleagues throughout these midterms. So let's talk about the stories that both parties are telling in this midterm election, especially in this frantic last week or so of this election. And let's start with a story that the Democrats have been telling. In these ads?

I think that the story the Democrats are telling is pretty simple. They're trying to fill in for voters the story of Donald Trump. Are you better off now than you were a few years ago? There's one path to saving America. Elect enough Democrats to Congress to stop Trump. The president typically is the lead driver of every election, of midterm elections in particular, and he's unpopular. And they're trying to tell the audience why.

Trump's war abroad costs taxpayers $1 billion a day on a war we have no business fighting. Our schools crumble, our factories shutter, our gas prices skyrocket.

And they're telling a story that Trump made promises of change to improve the economy, to lower prices, and telling how and why he failed. It's a story that includes tariffs in some places, the war in Iran in other places, the cost of living.

The endless war in Iran is costing us all billions for bombs, brutal at our gas pumps.

There's an entire genre of Democratic ads this year of Democratic candidates standing at a gas station pumping gas, or in particular, Democrats standing in a grocery store saying, Donald Trump failed you.

And that is why these groceries are so expensive. That is why this regular fuel costs $5, $6 a gallon.

And it's a pretty simple story to tell. Donald Trump promised no new wars. Instead, there's a war in Iran, and people see the direct link between that war and these price increases. Someone you just interviewed, James Talarico, the Democratic—

You do listen to the show. I do.

I do. The single most expensive ad that he's put money behind this cycle features basically all of the above.

I'm James Talarico. In the State House, I brought both parties together to make life more affordable.

In this ad, he starts in a grocery store holding a brown bag of groceries, and he tips through All the things that now cost too much.

Too many Texans feel like they're drowning. The cost of groceries, gas, healthcare.

Then he makes his way to his car, a reminder of gas, and says, we're gonna try to cut costs. Elect me. That's what I'm gonna do.

I approve this message because it shouldn't be this hard to keep your head above water.

And I think what it's trying to tap into is the broad sense that people feel like they're falling behind and somebody, the elites, are getting ahead. And when Democrats are talking about cost of living, they apply it to, like, a huge range of things. There've been a number of ads about drugs and drug prices in particular. And so in Iowa, Democrats are running against Ashley Hinson, who's a congresswoman. Josh Turk is the Democratic nominee, and a super PAC supporting him has an ad filmed in a drugstore with a series of people basically saying— It's all more expensive.

Way more expensive because of Ashley Hinson.

Things are more expensive. Because of Ashley Hinson. Ashley Hinson took over $160,000 from drug companies. Then she voted to raise our prices. And they tie her to campaign contributions that she's taken, votes that she's taken, and saying she's the reason you pay so much when you go to the drugstore. She sold us out before, and she'll sell us out again. And so what that anti-Hinson ad is doing is something that Democrats are doing all across the country in a lot of different races. And that is directly tying accusations of corruption, Republican corruption, to your personal cost of living.

Hmm.

Say more about that.

I mean, it's not the most intuitive thing, right? People think about corruption and maybe somebody's buying and selling some president or lawmaker in Washington.

And making the person who benefits from it rich.

Yes. And the idea is tapping into people's sense that they are falling behind and someone else, the elites, not them, is getting ahead. And you see this in a slew of different spaces where Democrats are saying, this Republican in Congress is getting rich, and you, dear person watching this ad unwillingly, you're getting poorer, that your spending power is going down, and you have someone to blame. It's the people in power. Pick us. Try something new.

This would seem on the part of Democrats to be a somewhat clever linking of 2 very good issues for them.

Yeah, you're tapping into people's natural frustration and anger with the existing party in power and saying, things aren't getting better for you, and the reason is that they are corrupt, that they are looking out for themselves. And Trump is the mood music of the midterms. He's not— he is in a lot of these ads. Such-and-such a person votes with the president 100% of the time. But the corruption allegations tend to be about the local Republicans that they're running against.

Not so much Trump.

Not so much Trump, but it is— tapping into Trump's party and the perceptions, and that that corruption is costing you. It's not just that they're corrupt because, you know, focus groups and polls show everybody thinks everyone is corrupt.

That's not enough anymore.

It's not enough. No, it's not even close, right? Everyone presumes everyone's corrupt. But these people's corruption, they're saying, is actually costing you money. Wow.

That's really, really interesting.

And a lot of these places are places where Trump might have once been popular, and he is no longer popular. And so the theme is— They say to find someone you agree with 100% 100% of the time, look in the mirror. So who did Gabe Evans agree with 100% of the time?

Donald Trump.

You know, Gabe Evans votes with Trump 100% of the time.

Jeff Crank.

He votes with Donald Trump 100% of the time. Mike Collins is a ride-or-die Trump fanatic and MAGA extremist. He's voted with Trump 100% of the time. Jen Kiggins.

She is a fool for Trump.

You see this over and over. Percentage of time they vote with Trump in these swing districts where Trump is unpopular. They don't have to make a more complicated argument. They say, this member of Congress, this senator is with Trump.

Not with you.

You are not with Trump. Vote for the Democrat. You see this in Maine.

Susan Collins was the deciding vote for Trump's cuts to Medicare and Medicaid.

There are ads about Susan Collins saying she's just like Trump.

She wrote Trump's bill to increase ICE funding with No restrictions, no restraints.

She has a different reputation. She might have changed over time, but she votes with Trump X percent of the time.

Collins has voted with Trump nearly 96% of the time, and she's hurting Maine.

In state after state, it's 85%, 93%, 99%, 100% voting with Trump.

And that is seen by Democrats in some cases as a sufficient indictment of the Republican candidate. You're with this guy He's so unpopular. He presided over higher costs of all these things. Done.

This is the go-to in a place where Donald Trump is unpopular. The challenge for Democrats is to win the Senate. They have to win places where he's not really popular, but he's not so unpopular that he's an albatross for the party. And it's in those places where the Democrats have to get a little bit more creative. They have to come up with an ad that sells them as a different kind of Democrat.

Such as?

So I think maybe the best example is Adam Hamilton, who leads the largest church in Kansas, is the Democratic nominee in a state that very few people expected to be highly competitive.

A state where—

But it is very competitive.

Yeah. A state where Democrats haven't won a Senate seat in almost a century, and now it is ranked as a toss-up by most political prognosticators. And Adam Hamilton's campaign is very much, I'm not your typical Democrat. Here in Kansas, we're right smack dab in the middle of the country. And one of the ads he did early on, it was literally him standing in the middle of a field saying, we're right in the middle of the country, and that's where I am. We have to fix our broken politics by meeting in the middle.

Adam Hamilton for Senate. It's time for something different.

I'm middle politically. And the word Democrat? Not in this ad.

Right.

Middle.

Middle of the middle. You can watch that ad and have literally no idea whether Hamilton is running as a Democrat, a Republican, or, like, a candidate from Mars.

Yeah.

And this is— for all of Trump's unpopularity, this is the risk for Democrats is they need voters to vote for them or to not vote who don't like Democrats.

Hmm.

So these races are not just about one party. The Democrats aren't just trying to win votes. They're trying to get Republicans unenthusiastic. And one of the tools they're using in Kansas and elsewhere is Jeffrey Epstein.

It was one of the worst child abuse scandals in history. Dozens of young girls sexually trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein.

The first ad coming in from national Democrats in this race—

Marshall voted to keep the Epstein files sealed.

—was not about Donald Trump. It was about linking the Republican incumbent there to Jeffrey Epstein.

Roger Marshall used his office to protect pedophiles. He doesn't belong in the Senate.

Saying he had blocked the release of the Epstein files. And this tactic very much seems to be about taking Republicans who might vote Republican if they voted and saying, ugh, I'm unhappy with the Republican Party. It was Trump who had said there was something hidden in the Epstein files. It was Trump and the Republicans who had said, we're going to release the files. And then they came into power and they were trying to stop the Epstein files from being released. And there was a real revolt, really one of the first revolts from the MAGA wing of the party frustrated, disappointed with Donald Trump. It was his own party objecting to him over this issue.

Right.

And Democrats are trying to take that little scab and jab it open.

So what Democrats achieve by running ads painting their Republican opponents in a place like Kansas as protecting Jeffrey Epstein is not what you might think it is on its face, which is just to tie Epstein to those candidates. It might be that, but you're saying it's about telling Republican voters who were always upset about Epstein that their party hasn't gotten that right, and that they should be disappointed in the entire Republican Party and perhaps just not even vote. I mean, it doesn't sound like they're saying that directly, but that's the intended outcome. It's to reach out to voters who might not go for the Democrat, and it's to get that Republican to just feel honestly kind of just crappy about their party.

Yeah. I mean, I want to explain this in a kind of complicated way, which is I'm watching these ads in 30-second increments.

Mm-hmm.

But the campaigns think about them in a story. They start with one thing, they end somewhere else. And the Epstein stuff fits into this broader story because it's also about people who you trusted to put in power doing something for the quote-unquote elites, And not for you. It's not really quite corruption in the same way, but if you think about this as a broader story arc, it's a piece of it. And it's a piece that is clearly aimed at getting those disillusioned Republicans to stay disillusioned right now. It's a permission structure. You voted for Republicans in 2024, but guess what? It's been a disappointment. Try us out.

And if you don't try us out, don't try anything at all. Yeah.

All right.

Well, Shane, we're gonna take a quick break. When we come back—

More ads.

We're gonna— different kinds of ads. When we come back, we're gonna talk about the story that Republicans are telling in their midterm advertising.

We'll be right back.

Shane, talk now about the Republican advertising and the story that Republicans are telling. I'm curious how much Republicans are actually running on their record of governance over the past 2 years in all this advertising.

So we've started by talking about a lot of the ads that are interesting, but I do think it's important to note that some of the most effective ads are boring, and those ads make a pretty plain case that Trump came in and he cut your taxes.

Which he did.

He did. That the quote unquote big beautiful bill in 2025 had massive tax cuts. And they highlight some of the specific elements in it that are popular when pulled out in polling. There is a congresswoman running for reelection in South Texas, Monica de la Cruz. She has an ad that is sort of a perfect encapsulation of this.

Today, life costs more, but you sent me to Congress to do something about it.

She's in a restaurant. They're making tortillas, and she's walking through the restaurant and ticking through all the different things that have been achieved by this very specific piece of legislation.

No tax on tips. No tax on overtime. Up to $11,000 more in your pocket every year.

And so this is the Republican story, that it was the Democrats and President Biden who drove up the costs, and that they've been chipping away at this problem, and that they just need more time to finish the job.

I suspect that that is a relatively tough case to make 2 years into this second Trump term.

I mean, there's a reason that the party in power almost always loses in midterm elections. It's because that's generally a tough case to make. And so—

We tried We're trying.

We—

yeah, we're trying. I mean, finish the job was literally a phrase that Joe Biden also wanted to use, and it's a phrase that Republicans are using now too, right? It's the other people's fault. We've done as best as we could. Just give us a little bit more time. But for some Republicans, that's not quite enough. And what you're seeing in their ads is a pitch that they're actually bipartisan, that they don't agree with Donald Trump 100% of the time. Drinking a Labatt and watching the Red Wings, man, it just doesn't get any more Michigan than that. And I think the one that stands out most to me is Mike Rogers, the Republican nominee for Senate in Michigan, a critical race against a Democrat, Abdul El-Sayed. And here in Michigan, we know that Canada is not our enemy. And tariffs are a big deal in Michigan. Detroit, you're just over a bridge to Canada. And so in this ad, you see Mike Rogers sitting at a bar holding a Labatt. A Canadian beer. We need to end this tariff war now. Saying, we need to end this tariff war now.

Doesn't say Trump's name.

No Trump's name.

Doesn't say who instituted those tariffs, but everybody watching in Michigan will get it.

Yes. Also not saying that he's a Republican, right? The inverse of that Adam Hamilton ad. He's not saying, I'm Mike Rogers, I'm a Republican, vote for me so I can keep Donald Trump in power. Instead, the little text on the screen is, bring both parties together. And by the way, my opponent is too liberal, too extreme. Vote for me, the guy willing to break with Trump on tariffs.

How many Republicans are running that kind of ad in these midterms?

You can basically track Trump's approval rating as it's gone down and see a growing number of Republicans start to run ads touting their bipartisanship.

I've worked with Democrats and Republicans to get things done.

I was in Iowa earlier this year at an event for Zach Nunn, Republican in Congress, that J.D. Vance went to. And now if you watch Zach Nunn's ads—

Zach Nunn is the 3rd most bipartisan member of Congress.

He's walking around saying, I cross party lines. And 6 months ago, it might have been okay to be more in line with the main line of the Republican Party. Now it's advantageous to be more bipartisan.

Both sides throwing out attacks. Both sides creating one heck of a mess.

Ashley Hinson, the Senate candidate in Iowa, running a number of ads talking about bipartisanship.

It's funny in a commercial, but not in Washington. To get stuff done out there, you gotta bring folks together.

She's a mom in her kitchen, and she has her kids literally having a food fight. And she's saying, that's both parties. That's a mess. We can bring people together.

I'm Ashley Hinson, and I approve this message because if my boys If families can get along sometimes, so can Washington.

Maybe the number one person is Susan Collins in Maine. Want to know who Susan Collins really is?

Susan Collins grew up in Caribou, and she picked potatoes as a kid.

Who for years has run as a sort of distinct brand from Trumpism and Republicanism.

Senator Collins stood up to her own party, voting to protect Congress's power to authorize extended military And she's saying, I'm Susan Collins.

You know me. I'm bipartisan. I work across the lines. I get things done for Maine. I'm not like the Republicans in Washington.

So bipartisan in these ads is code for, I'm the kind of Republican, even in this era of MAGA Republicanism, even in this era when the president is so unpopular, that you can trust. Because if I use that word, I'm willing To move away from Trump.

Yes. This makes sense in these bluish-purple states. You're not surprised to see that in Maine. But what is interesting is seeing it in places like Iowa, states that President Trump won all 3 times. That's what tells you the political climate has deteriorated for Republicans.

Mm-hmm.

Okay. What you're describing so far sounds largely defensive, but my sense is that there's no shortage of Republican advertising in this campaign that is very much On the offense.

I would be hard-pressed to think of a major race in this country where Republicans are not running a lot of ads about their Democratic opponents because the Republican brand is damaged right now. And so they don't want you to think just about them or their distance from Trump. They want to demonize and disqualify the Democrats.

They want open borders, free healthcare for illegals.

Men in girls' locker rooms.

And wants to set violent criminals free.

Call them too extreme. Call them too radical. F the police? That's crazy. Cite their policy positions. Make them seem scary.

What else is he hiding?

And more than anything, under one big umbrella—

Janelle Stelson. Adam Hamilton. Charles Booker.

Just too liberal.

Too liberal. Too liberal for Kentucky.

For Pennsylvania.

For Kansas.

That phrase is in ad after ad after ad. And again, so much of this battlefield in both the House and the Senate is in traditionally conservative districts or states, places that did vote for Donald Trump.

Right.

And so it's often effective.

Every mom in Texas should be worried about James Talarico.

The ad that has aired more than Any other ad by dollars this year is an attack ad on Talarico in Texas that does exactly this.

James Talarico supports parents being charged with child abuse if they do not support transitioning their children.

It is a mother of 5 saying he is outside the mainstream, specifically on the trans issue. And she says pretty ominously, if you care about your children—

Do not vote for James Talarico.

Do not vote for James Talarico. And it fits into a whole genre of ads, which is sort of moms in kitchens worried about Democrats going too far left. But as we get closer to the election, you see often something a little bit darker and more personal.

Hmm.

Explain.

I mean, I think the ad that everyone's been talking about is in Ohio.

My name is Donna Arthur, and I'm Amy Acton's mother.

In the governor's race, where Vivek Ramaswamy is featuring testimony from the mother of his opponent, Amy Acton, basically calling her daughter a liar and saying she can't be trusted.

She's lied her entire life. My daughter needs help, and she can't help you if she needs help herself. Don't vote for people who lie. Don't let her become your governor.

But what this ad leaves out entirely is the backstory about why Amy Acton's mother is estranged from her daughter.

Just tell us that story.

So, Amy Acton says they have not spoken since she was 12, and that's because her mother lost custody of both her and her brother, and that documents provided by the campaign show that her stepfather had been indicted on charges of raping her.

Wow.

Her stepfather pled not guilty, and he fled the state before a trial.

And so the person in this ad, her mom, was married to the man who allegedly raped her.

Yeah. And suddenly is narrating a TV ad. And this ad has caused a firestorm. The state's Republican governor has called for it to be taken down. Numerous Republicans across the country have said this crosses a line. Why use estranged family members with these kinds of allegations in their past to raise questions about somebody's character. And so this is the kind of thing that you see a campaign do in these sort of desperate, darker last weeks of a race.

The fallout from this ad would seem to be a kind of case study for what can happen when a campaign decides to go this personally negative, that It can backfire kind of spectacularly, and even your own party ends up denouncing you.

I think this is a rare ad that has done its damage, but the fear that Republicans have is the attention on this isn't just gonna potentially damage Ramaswamy, but the entire Republican ticket in a state that is crucial for the Senate. And also has at least one key House race.

So, Shane, stepping back, it seems like the Republican strategy in all its components is to defend their legislative accomplishments, brag about them, say, we've actually done more than you might realize. And if you don't buy that, then distance yourself from Trump. And if that's insufficient, really Just, like, take out the hatchet and hurl it at your opponent.

Yeah, I think that you can even simplify the Republican strategy to compare us to the Democrats, right? The Republicans know that President Trump is unpopular. They are desperate for voters to not just think about Republicans because they don't like Trump. They don't like the direction of the country. They know Republicans are in power, and they're saying, consider this a contrast. between these scary Democrats. We're not all aligned with Trump on everything. We did do some things for you. Just make this a comparison because—

Between us, not Trump and our rivals, but us and our rivals.

Because if it's an up or down on the Republicans, it's a down, right? We see the polling. The down is down on Republicans. There's almost no important place where Republicans are above 50%. But if you say, how do you feel about Republicans compared to a socialist? They want people to think about that comparison when they vote. And that's what the story of all of those ads put together is. Think of this as a choice election in some regard.

Maybe this is unanswerable, but I think we have to ask it. Seems like the right final question. Because you've watched all these ads, which side has told their story best in these ads? Which side has basically put forward the most effective ads?

I think the party out of power Has an easier story to tell in general. And it's especially easy right now because they're telling a story people already sort of feel, which is they voted for Trump and the Republicans hoping for change, hoping for economic relief. They see a war in Iran that has driven up costs. They see tariffs that have driven up costs, in particular for some business communities. And they're blaming Republicans for that. And 2 years ago, it was the Democrats on their heels on the economy. You know, the most famous ad from the 2024 campaign was Trump's, Kamala Harris is for they/them. President Trump is for you.

Mm-hmm.

Yes, it was casting her as too liberal and too extreme, but the rest of that ad was about Trump is fighting for your economic well-being. And what Democrats have done Over the nearly 2 years they've been out of power and said, actually, we do want to fight for your economic well-being. And so the ads are these 30-second little snippets that you see along the way, but they're amplifying your life experience. And the advantage that the party out of power has right now, the advantage the Democrats have, the reason that they're ahead in the polls, is the story voters are telling themselves is being echoed in that advertising. And the Republicans are saying, wait a second, but also consider this.

A harder argument.

It's just a trickier story to tell.

Well, Shane, thank you very much.

Let's watch more ads together.

Uh, no. No, I'm done.

We'll be right back.

Here's what else you need to know today. Venezuela's most popular opposition leader, María Corina Machado, returned to the country on Sunday after nearly a year in exile. Her arrival increases pressure on Venezuela's authoritarian government, which is backed by the United States, to begin a transition toward democracy.

Anne. I don't know if you've noticed, but he seems very focused on home renovations.

He should be on Over the weekend, former President Barack Obama made his first appearance at a midterm campaign rally on behalf of Ohio Democrat Amy Acton and delivered unusually personal attacks against President Trump.

There's gold everywhere. What's up with the gold? Everything— more gold. He's got the White House looking like Sumeria. Saddam Hussein opened a Cheesecake Factory. So he's clearly not focused on lowering prices for you.

Meanwhile, President Trump is intensifying efforts to intervene in the midterm elections. In back-to-back moves, Trump asked a federal court to block the certification of a Senate race in Alaska if the Republican incumbent Senator Dan Sullivan, were to narrowly lose, claiming that the presence of another candidate with a nearly identical name tainted the election. Soon after, the administration sent letters to local election officials across California demanding that they help identify potential noncitizens on the voter rolls and set aside all of their ballots. Today's episode was produced by Carlos Prieto, Adrienne Hirst, Jessica Chung, and Rachelle Bonja. It was edited by Mark George and Devin Taylor, contains music by Marian Lozano and Dan Powell, and was engineered by Alyssa Moxley. Our theme music is by Wonderly. That's it for The Daily. I'm Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.