Disclaimer: I worked on policy for Lt. Governor Earle-Sears’s gubernatorial campaign from June to September. The views I express in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Lt. Gov. Earle-Sears politician or her campaign.

What do Bernie Sanders, the socialist senator from Vermont, and Ron DeSantis, the MAGA-aligned governor of Florida, have in common? They both oppose data centers. How about Gretchen Whitmer, the blue-dog Michigan governor thought of as a potential presidential candidate, and Donald Trump (who hardly needs an introduction)? They both support data centers. Odd, right? But these breakdowns aren’t limited to top national politicians. Consider New York’s 12th Congressional District Democratic primary, where Alex Bores, a New York state assemblyman, has made a name for himself advocating for, among other things, strong restrictions on data center development—and big tech has spent millions opposing him. Even when you zoom in on the most controversial candidates, you’ll still see these signs. In the Republican primary for Florida governor, James Fishback has called his Trump-endorsed opponent, Byron Donalds, a “slave to the tech bros” for his support of data centers. These odd political alliances point to something deeper going on, namely that our politics are reorienting around technology, and data centers are right smack in the middle of it.

So then, let me explain why data centers are suddenly so important. Aside from perhaps the chips needed to power new AI systems, data centers are the critical link between AI as a theoretical possibility and a concrete reality. If you want AI, then you’re going to need plenty of data centers; alternatively, if you’re opposed to rapid AI-growth, then you must, to some degree, oppose data center development. Since data centers are especially prominent in suburbs, they’re quickly becoming the physical face of the AI revolution to millions of Americans.

Virginia could serve as a good case study here. I worked on policy for the Winsome Earle-Sears campaign for governor in Virginia (in a race she ultimately lost to now-Governor Abigail Spanberger). Northern Virginia, where I’m from and where our campaign was headquartered, is known as “data center alley” for its ultra-high concentration of data centers. Indeed, our state is now home to about 600 data centers, many of which have been built since 2022 due to pro-AI efforts from the Youngkin administration.

At first, I thought, naively, that data centers wouldn’t be a huge deal for our campaign. I could not have been more wrong. The number of local constituents I met who fervently opposed the creation of new data centers was staggering. Their feedback was clear: they didn’t just want fewer data centers, or data centers that would pay higher taxes; they wanted no more data centers, period. After some meetings, I walked away with the sense that while data centers may not end up being the defining issue in our race, they could, and would, overwhelm some local candidates and become increasingly critical to future races.

So far, that prediction has been supported. One of our swing-race delegates in Prince William County lost his race in part due to pressure from his opponent over data centers. It was among the first real electoral confirmations of the potency data centers had as a political force—and the anti-data center team won. Our opponent, Abigail Spanberger, ran on a relatively anti-data center ticket, saying that she would make them “pay their fair share.” And again, plenty of national politicians have come down in sometimes surprising ways around data centers. But why?  

On the pro-data center side, the benefits are first and foremost economic. Data centers make our economy look great; one figure even showed that, throughout the first half of 2025, data centers and related investment in computer technology as a result of the AI boom accounted for 92% of our GDP growth (how much of that is felt by workers is a separate question). Furthermore, while we shouldn’t read too deep into that exact figure, much of Governor Youngkin’s economic growth in Virginia—which was historic in many ways—can be attributed to the explosion in data center development during and after 2022 (1). So, if you’re the governor of a fairly populous state (or, say, the president of the United States) looking to pump up your numbers on the economy, data centers are unquestionably a top option. Additionally, for the national security hawks reading along, data centers are essential to keeping America competitive in the AI space with China. Without them, we might as well concede that race to our adversaries. So, if you think that’s a race worth winning, you’ll likely come out on the side of the data centers.  

On the anti-data center side, the drawbacks are more diffuse. Some environmentalists are wildly opposed to them, fearing their large water footprint. While it’s true that data centers use a lot of water, for the sake of clarity, it’s important to note that one of the biggest data centers today, xAI’s Colossus II, uses as much water as about 2.5 In-n-Out Burgers, plus data center water is reused instead of wasted anyway (but alas, this may be the subject for a future article). Unlike water usage, however, the energy costs of data center development are undoubtedly high, and those costs can be felt by taxpayers. I’d say that is the most common argument against data centers. Many skeptics fundamentally criticize data centers as being big, noisy, and disruptive to the fundamental character and labor dynamics of their local communities, and these were the sorts of folks who were most common in Northern Virginia. But for some, their opposition to data centers also comes from a fear of the consequences of runaway AI development. Most of these people are perfectly reasonable, and many are deeply insightful (contrary to the views of some people, it is certainly worth having a serious conversation about what AI will do to the future of humanity and the future of the American worker); but a small few are dangerously radical, as we saw recently when someone shot thirteen bullets at an Indiana politician’s home and left a note that read simply: “No Data Centers,” or when an individual threw a molotov cocktail at OpenAI CEO Sam Altman’s home.

​Whichever way you come down on this debate, it’s clear that our politics are beginning to realign. The traditional distinctions in our politics, like between supporters and opponents of a larger government, are still important, and indeed they are still probably the defining divisions in how Americans think about politics. But the division over what to do with technology (whether it is merely an extension of the populist vs. institutional divide or not), boiled down to a debate over the presence of data centers in our local communities, is rapidly resetting alliances and forming new ones across the political spectrum. So, while I’m cautious to offer predictions about the future, I suspect that after the midterms, when prominent mainstream network pundits turn to their “decision desks” to look for explanations for the election results, they’ll hit the economy, immigration, foreign policy—all the usual suspects—but then they’ll be forced to admit that those boring old data centers were actually a sleeper issue. Then, in 2028, big tech will play an even bigger role in national elections, and the divide over data centers will grow deeper, and this “sleeper issue” will come to look more like a “sleeper agent” that has been awoken. By then, if not earlier, we’ll all have to reckon with data centers—and by extension, with our artificial (intelligence) future.  

​(1)  Very interestingly, Youngkin’s successor, Abigail Spanberger, who again ran on a “tax the data centers” ticket, has moved more in favor of data centers since taking office, highlighting how potent these centers can be for elected officials looking to boost their economies.