Republican campaigns see immigration as a winning issue for midterms

Republican Campaigns Emphasize Immigration Enforcement in Midterm Advertising

Republicans have run substantially more advertisements referencing immigration enforcement than Democrats during the first half of 2026, according to an analysis of data from the firm AdImpact. The data covers advertisements purchased from January through June, prior to separate incidents in Maine and Texas this month in which immigration enforcement officers shot and killed individuals.

The AdImpact data set tracks television and digital political advertising buys. Republicans and aligned groups accounted for nearly 300 advertisements that mentioned immigration or focused exclusively on the topic, compared with 62 such advertisements from Democrats and aligned groups. Republican spending on these advertisements totaled approximately $53 million, while Democratic spending totaled approximately $17 million. The analysis relies on data from AdImpact, which tracks political advertisements, and a Gallup poll; these sources have not been independently verified in this report.

One advertisement funded by the MAGA KY PAC, which supported efforts to defeat Republican Representative Thomas Massie in a primary, stated: "Republicans stood up for Americans. Democrats sat down for illegals. Thomas Massie sides with these radical-left lunatics." The advertisement cost more than $831,000. Massie, who had criticized President Trump, lost the primary to Trump-endorsed candidate Ed Gallrein.

In the Michigan governor's race, a $928,000 advertisement featured Republican candidate Perry Johnson stating, "No greater example of waste, fraud, and abuse in Michigan than using our tax dollars to give benefits to illegal immigrants. As governor, I'll be incredibly supportive of ICE coming here and removing these fraudsters." Johnson has described himself as a "MAGA Conservative."

Immigration ranked as the second-highest spending category for Republican advertisements after mentions of Donald Trump. For Democrats, references to ICE ranked third after healthcare. Cameron Shelton, a professor of political economy at Claremont McKenna College, stated that campaigns seek to define the election's central issues rather than change voter opinions. He noted that heavier Republican investment in immigration advertising suggests the topic is viewed as mobilizing for their electorate.

Most advertisements aired during the primary season. More than 90 percent of gubernatorial, House, and Senate seats are considered safe for one party, making primaries decisive in many districts. Some Democratic candidates in New Jersey, Illinois, and Minnesota referenced enforcement actions in advertisements supporting calls to abolish ICE. The Illinois Future PAC ran two advertisements, each exceeding $800,000, backing Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton's position on abolishing ICE; she later won the Illinois Democratic Senate primary.

Republican National Congressional Committee national press secretary Mike Marinella stated that Republican candidates connect immigration to border security, crime, and economic issues. He said the most effective message varies by district. Crossings at the southern border have declined since President Trump took office. Republican advertisements frequently include phrases such as "securing the border" and reference border wall funding, limits on commercial driver's licenses for certain immigrants, and the SAVE America Act, which would require stricter proof of citizenship for voting. In Florida's 19th congressional district, candidate Jim Oberweis spent $880,000 on seven advertisements advocating an end to birthright citizenship.

Democratic advertisements have focused on criticism of votes funding immigration enforcement or expanding detention authority, personal family connections to immigration, and general statements opposing expanded enforcement. Frank Sharry, senior fellow at Third Way, stated that Democrats are addressing immigration after the Biden administration period but are not centering campaigns on the issue.

A Gallup poll released in July found that most Americans view immigration positively and support some form of pathway to citizenship over a policy of deporting all individuals without legal status. The poll showed partisan differences: majorities of Republicans favor increased Border Patrol hiring, deportation of individuals without legal status, and bans on sanctuary cities. The analysis relies on data from AdImpact, which tracks political advertisements, and a Gallup poll; these sources have not been independently verified in this report.

Republican advertisements in Senate races in Ohio, Texas, and Alaska and gubernatorial races in New York and Iowa have begun targeting Democratic opponents on immigration. Zach Lahn, the Republican primary winner for Iowa governor, spent about $475,000 on an advertisement pledging to prohibit H-1B visa holders from employment with Iowa government agencies and universities.

Sharry noted that advertisements represent one communication channel among many, including interviews and debates, and cautioned against using ad data alone to predict general-election strategies. The patterns observed through June indicate continued emphasis on immigration by Republican campaigns and more limited focus by Democratic campaigns in the period leading to the November election.