Photo via The Bulwark

We Showed Trump’s Taxpayer-Funded Ad to a Focus Group. The Results Were Abysmal.

Read the original at The Bulwark ↗
Cite

Longwell, S. (2026, October 9). We Showed Trump’s Taxpayer-Funded Ad to a Focus Group. The Results Were Abysmal. The Bulwark. https://www.thebulwark.com/p/voters-in-focus-group-hate-trumps-taxpayer-funded-ads

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

The Bulwark · collected 2026-10-09 · by Sarah Longwell commentary

Quick Summary

The article discusses a focus group study conducted by The Bulwark that examined the effectiveness of Donald Trump's taxpayer-funded ads aired during sports broadcasts. These ads feature excerpts from Trump’s 2024 campaign speeches, emphasizing themes such as defeating political enemies and restoring American values. Despite polls indicating strong public opposition to using taxpayer funds for these ads, the focus group participants—who supported Trump in 2024 but now disapprove of his job performance—expressed intense dislike for the advertisement itself, demonstrating its ineffectiveness in swaying their opinions.
Written by AI on 2026-10-09, from this article's own text only (the story summary below draws on all the coverage).

AI analysis

Story summary

Donald Trump began airing taxpayer-funded ads in August 2023, which he claims are "public service announcements." These ads feature excerpts from one of his campaign speeches where he vows to defeat various perceived enemies such as globalists and Communists. A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll revealed that 86% of people oppose using taxpayer money for election-related TV ads featuring the President or cabinet members, while only 9% support it. To assess whether these controversial ads actually influence voters, a focus group was convened to gauge reactions to the ad content. The results indicated that the public finds such government-sponsored propaganda ineffective and highly unpopular.

Written for “Trump Ad Backlash” on 2026-11-04, grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 Trump Ad Backlash
Politics · 1 article(s) covering the same event.

Compared with similar articles

This article reads leans strongly left and hedges 7% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
The Independent
Hedges 1 of 14 claims Outlet record 59/100
“Article A describes Trump's decision to fund his ads with his PAC rather than taxpayer money, while Article B reports on focus group results for the taxpayer-funded ads.”
The Sydney Morning Herald
Outlet record 61/100
“Article A discusses a push to ban deepfakes following a One Nation campaign ad, while Article B focuses on negative reactions to taxpayer-funded ads featuring Donald Trump's speech.”
ABC News (US)
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 1 of 25 claims Outlet record 67/100
“Article A discusses focus group results for Trump's ads, while Article B reports on a judge's order to cancel those ads.”
The Straits Times
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 1 of 6 claims Outlet record 66/100
“The articles describe different aspects of a campaign issue but do not refer to the same specific incident occurring at the same time.”
Washington Examiner
Hedges 2 of 13 claims Outlet record 69/100
“Article A discusses Trump's announcement about covering taxpayer-funded political ads with his own money, while Article B reports on a focus group reaction to those already aired taxpayer-funded ads.”
The Guardian
Hedges 6 of 59 claims Outlet record 66/100
“Article A reports on Trump's decision to stop using taxpayer funds for self-promoting ads after backlash, while Article B describes the negative reception of the ads in a focus group.”
Washington Examiner
Hedges 0 of 9 claims Outlet record 69/100
“While both articles discuss Trump's taxpayer-funded PSAs, Article A focuses on whether Trump will reimburse taxpayers for the ads, while Article B discusses a focus group's reaction to these same ads. They cover different aspects of the issue and are not describing the exact same specific incident.”
Al Jazeera
Hedges 5 of 32 claims Outlet record 60/100
“The articles describe different aspects: one is about a lawsuit filed by Democrats against Trump over taxpayer-funded ads, while the other discusses focus group results for those same ads.”
Al Jazeera
Hedges 4 of 39 claims Outlet record 60/100
“The articles describe different political advertisements, one by Donald Trump and another by Bruce Blakeman featuring other politicians.”
Daily Mail
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 1 of 34 claims Outlet record 69/100
“Article A discusses focus group results of Trump's taxpayer-funded ads, while Article B reports on a judge ordering Trump to cancel those ads.”
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
27
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
7%
2 of 27 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
Leans strongly left
expected in commentary, which argues a position · beta estimate
Publisher signals
not measured
these signals count newsroom corrections; Commentary has none to count
Outlets on this story
1
Politics
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-10-09 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

The Bulwark · 593 article(s) · 0 correction(s) detected
No corrections detected for this publisher. That may mean careful reporting, or simply that nothing has been checked.

Who wrote this

Sarah Longwell
27 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 To date, Sen. Ted Cruz has called El-Sayed a “jihadist leprechaun,” said that “Americans will die” if he were placed on the Senate Intelligence Committee, and warned that if he learned that a group of terrorists were about to be apprehended, he would “let those terrorists know.”
2026-11-01 · assertive framing · Is the Islamophobic Campaign Against El-Sayed Working?
🔮 The Cook Political Report’s Amy Walter is back for one last hurrah before the midterms, and after a bit of lesbian-specific chit chat, she and Sarah discuss how big the blue wave could get on Tuesday, voters’ hilarious comments about how fed up they are with the deluge of political advertising.
🔮 ELON MUSK MIGHT WANT KEN PAXTON to be a senator more than Ken Paxton does.
🔮 It’s a massive bet that voters will believe the mom—despite overwhelming evidence that she is the one lying—and not recoil (as basically much of the top ranks of the Ohio Republican Party have) at the sheer vileness of the attack. Will it work?
2026-10-25 · assertive framing · How Ohio Trump Voters Reacted to Vivek’s Attack Ad
🔮 How do democracies fall apart, and why do the people who could stop it so often look the other way?
🔮 But still, the voters who will decide this race are reverting to their tribal instincts.
🔮 There are a lot of red states with big elections this year where Democrats are ‘sayin’ there’s a chance,’ like Mississippi, Nebraska, South Carolina, or Iowa, where they may have more than just a chance.
🔮 Plus, Weissmann explains why simply ordering Trump to stop breaking the rules isn’t enough, and whether DOJ lawyers pursuing politically motivated prosecutions could eventually face disbarment.
2026-10-15 · assertive framing · DHS Raids Ilhan Omar’s Home. Weissmann Smells a Rat.
🔮 The speech goes like this: With you at my side, we will demolish the deep state.
🔮 OF ALL THE STATES THAT COULD give us an indication of how big the blue wave will be this cycle, Iowa is one of the most intriguing.
Also by Sarah Longwell
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 27 articles by Sarah Longwell →

Topics

Bulwark Bulwark+ Communists JVL NFL

Subjects

Trump PERSON · 3× Bulwark ORG · 2× Bulwark+ ORG · 2× JVL PERSON · 2× NFL ORG · 2× America GPE · 1× Communists NORP · 1× Donald Trump PERSON · 1× Marxists NORP · 1× Reuters ORG · 1×

Narrative

A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll found that people oppose “using taxpayer funds to pay for election-related television ads featuring the President or members of his cabinet” by a margin of 86–9.2 What’s been less clear is whether the ads themselves are effective.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-10-09
🔮 The speech goes like this: With you at my side, we will demolish the deep state.

Claims (27 extracted, 2 hedged)

IF YOU’VE SPENT MUCH TIME watching the NFL, college football, or Dancing with the Stars over the past week, or if you’re just an average political obsessive,1 you’ve probably noticed the taxpayer-funded ads from Donald Trump. asserted
you → spend → Trump
They’re billed as “public service announcements,” and one of the spots features excerpts from a speech Trump gave at one of his 2024 campaign rallies. asserted
Trump → bill → rallies
The speech goes like this: With you at my side, we will demolish the deep state. asserted
we → go → state
We will expel the warmongers from our government. asserted
We → expel → government
We will drive out the globalists. asserted
We → drive → globalists
We will cast out the Communists, Marxists, and fascists. asserted
We → cast → Communists
We will throw off the sick political class that hates our country. asserted
that → throw → country
We will rout the fake news media, and we will liberate America from these villains once and for all. asserted
we → rout → all
Since the ads began to air, it’s become pretty clear that people hate the idea of the government using taxpayer money to broadcast them. asserted
government → begin → them
And I mean, they truly hate it. asserted
they → mean → it
A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll found that people oppose “using taxpayer funds to pay for election-related television ads featuring the President or members of his cabinet” by a margin of 86–9.2 What’s been less clear is whether the ads themselves are effective. asserted
ads → find → 86–9.2
After all, voters always claim to hate political ads. uncertain
voters → claim → ads
Even when campaign commercials are really effective, voters almost never admit to liking them, trusting them, or being influenced by them. asserted
voters → admit → them
And yet they work. asserted
they → work → ?
But do Trump’s? asserted
Trump → do → ?
To find out, we convened a group of voters from Florida who backed Trump in 2024 but now disapprove of his job performance—the very voters he needs to win back—and showed them the ad. asserted
he → find → ad
What we saw was a whole new level of revulsion. asserted
saw → see → revulsion
In fact, we couldn’t even get through the question. asserted
we → get → question
“If you’ve watched the NFL or watched college football, you might’ve seen it around a little bit,” the focus group moderator began. uncertain
moderator → watch → it
They were immediately interrupted. asserted
They → interrupt → ?
“Oh my God,” Ramiro, 58, from Miami interjected, clearly knowing what was coming. asserted
what → interject → Miami
Then we played the ad. asserted
we → play → ad
This is what makes The Bulwark different: We conduct focus groups with voters to try to understand what makes them tick—what moves them. asserted
what → make → them
We do this in service of getting answers you won’t hear anywhere else. asserted
you → do → answers
We help you see around corners. asserted
you → help → corners
If you value that work, please consider supporting us by becoming a Bulwark+ member. asserted
you → value → member
- Get more from the voices you follow — ad-free podcasts plus member-only shows like The Secret Podcast with Sarah Longwell and JVL. - Get closer to The Bulwark — member-only chats, comments, and early access to Bulwark LIVE tickets. asserted
you → get → tickets
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support