Voterist research note · August 2026
Voters are already asking AI about elections.
The numbers are still early, but the direction is clear: AI assistants have entered the election-information mix. Candidates should respond with a public record that is current, neutral in structure, and easy to verify.
What the surveys found
AI is a meaningful secondary channel—not yet the main one.
27%
used AI tools to get election information daily, weekly, or monthly
11%
used ChatGPT, Gemini, or similar tools to research candidates and elections
3%
named AI chatbots among their top three election news sources
Those figures are not contradictory. Many voters may occasionally ask an AI assistant a question without treating it as a primary news source. The practical takeaway is measured: campaigns should not assume AI dominates voter research, but they should no longer assume it is irrelevant.
Why it matters
An AI answer is shaped by the record it can find.
When a voter asks about a candidate’s biography, policy position, or contrast with an opponent, an assistant has to retrieve and synthesize available information. A fragmented, stale, or poorly sourced public presence leaves more room for omission and error.
A 2025 paper in Nature also found that conversations with AI models produced significant changes in candidate preferences across election experiments. The researchers reported effects larger than those typically found for traditional video advertising, while also finding that some factual claims made by the models were inaccurate.
That combination—real influence and imperfect accuracy—is the case for better evidence, not more campaign spin. A well-structured candidate profile should make it easier for voters and their tools to distinguish a documented position from an unsupported claim.
The candidate response
Build a record designed to be checked.
- Publish positions with direct links to the public evidence behind them.
- Keep identity, office, district, and election details current and consistent.
- Use the same neutral structure applied to every candidate in the race.
- Correct the source record instead of trying to game a particular AI answer.
Read the numbers carefully
What this evidence does—and does not—show.
It does show
A measurable share of voters already use AI for election or candidate research, and conversational AI can influence political attitudes in controlled experiments.
It does not show
That AI is voters’ dominant information source, that every AI answer changes a vote, or that publishing a profile guarantees any particular answer or electoral outcome.
Sources and methodology
Follow the evidence.
Bipartisan Policy Center / Morning Consult
Two online surveys of 3,634 registered voters, fielded October 11–17, 2024; margin of error ±2 percentage points.
Center for Campaign Innovation / 3D Strategic Research
National post-election survey of 1,500 voters, fielded November 3–7, 2024; margin of error ±2.52 percentage points.
Nature: Persuading voters using human–AI dialogues
Pre-registered experiments covering the 2024 U.S. presidential election and 2025 elections in Canada and Poland, published December 2025.