Most midterm voters say their minds were made up before the campaign started

A new Angus Reid Global poll found that 86% of Americans who voted in the 2026 House midterms had already decided before the campaign began, even as record spending hit an estimated $11.2 billion. Half of Americans also say large donors tried to influence the outcome unfairly.

Why it matters: - Record campaign spending did not appear to move many voters in the 2026 midterms. - The findings suggest persuasion may be limited in a polarized electorate, especially in House races. - Concerns about money in politics remain high, with large donors seen as the top source of unfair influence.

What happened: - Angus Reid Global found that 86% of Americans who voted for the U.S. House said their mind was made up from the start and did not change during the campaign. - Just 4% said they changed their mind at some point during the campaign. - Another 5% said they stayed undecided until making a last-minute choice. - AdImpact estimated that $11.2 billion was spent or reserved on political advertising in the 2026 midterm campaign.

The details: - Among voters who lean toward neither party, 73% said their mind was made up from the start. - That compares with 92% of Democrats and 84% of Republicans. - Among unattached voters, 12% said they stayed undecided until the last minute. - Asked why they voted the way they did, 52% said they wanted that candidate to win. - Another 19% said they wanted to support that party. - About one-fifth, 22%, voted mainly against something. - Within that group, 12% said they wanted to limit the power of the other party. - Another 10% said they wanted to stop another candidate from winning. - Half of Americans, 50%, said advertising by Republican candidates was disrespectful. - By comparison, 32% said the same of advertising by Democratic candidates. - Among Democrats, 73% called Republican advertising disrespectful. - Among Republicans, 61% said Democratic advertising was disrespectful. - Among voters who lean toward neither party, 52% said Republican advertising was disrespectful and 35% said the same of Democratic advertising. - Asked which groups tried to influence the election in unfair or illegal ways, 51% named people who made large donations to a political party or candidate. - That was higher than companies providing AI tools, at 30%. - It also topped Republican candidates, at 26%. - Companies operating prediction markets such as Kalshi or Polymarket drew 24%. - Democratic candidates drew 22%. - Another 19% were not sure. - Concern about large donors crossed party lines, including 61% of Democrats, 54% of voters who lean toward neither party and 43% of Republicans. - Concern was higher among people age 55 and older, at 58%, than among those ages 18 to 34, at 44%. - It was also higher among households earning $100,000 or more, at 60%, than among those earning under $50,000, at 43%.

Between the lines: - The results point to a campaign environment where spending was massive, but voter commitment was already locked in for most people. - The tone of advertising appears to have reinforced negative views across party lines rather than broaden support. - Large donors remain a politically potent target for distrust, especially among Democrats and older voters.

What's next: - The narrow pool of persuadable voters may stay important in close House races, especially among unaffiliated voters. - Concerns about donor influence could keep fueling debate over campaign finance, political ads and election integrity. - Anger at partisan messaging may continue to shape how campaigns try to reach voters in future cycles.

The bottom line: - The 2026 midterms show that record spending does not necessarily mean record persuasion.