Donald Trump vs. MAGA: The Battle Over Data Centers Explained

Welcome back to Power Play! Each week, senior writer Molly Taft tackles a significant issue surrounding this midterm season: data centers. If you have questions or comments for the column, feel free to contact Molly via email at [email protected] or securely on Signal at mollytaft.76.

Molly McCann Sanders, a prominent figure among conservative women supporters of Donald Trump, has raised thoughtful concerns about the impact of data centers on communities. Living in Texas and identifying as a pro-life Catholic, she brings a unique perspective to the discussion. Sanders holds staunch conservative views regarding immigration and expresses strong opposition to eminent domain, a government practice that enables the acquisition of private property for public use. Her involvement as president of the Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund, founded by the influential Phyllis Schlafly, further solidifies her position within the conservative movement.

“I’m alarmed by the idea that these data centers can move in and pollute,” Sanders admits. Although she describes herself as “not a data center expert,” her wariness about the technology sector is palpable. By advocating for measured approaches, she emphasizes the necessity for communities to examine the implications of these centers carefully.

While she remains a supporter of Trump, she diverges on the topic of data centers, openly critiquing the Republican Party’s recent efforts to engage the “laptop class”—a demographic of tech-savvy young men who seem to resonate with the GOP’s pro-technology messaging. Sanders views this approach as a potential misstep, particularly as midterms draw closer.

The sentiment regarding data centers is shared among many Americans. Recent polling data from The New York Times revealed that over 60% of citizens, including nearly half of Republicans, oppose new data center constructions. Additionally, insiders within the Republican party, including the National Republican Senatorial Committee, have circulated private memos advising caution regarding the party’s stance on AI and data center investments, labeling unqualified support as “a losing position.” Architecting this narrative illustrates the growing unease around these technological developments.

While the GOP grapples with public sentiment, Trump himself complicates the scenario. In a series of recent posts and speeches, he has unabashedly defended data centers and AI technology. One of his significant public statements asserted that communities resisting data centers are “backwards and poor,” an indication of his rigid stance on technological progress. This characterization, however, has elicited backlash, even from staunch supporters on platforms like Truth Social, where negative comments about data centers were found to outnumber positive ones by a substantial four to one ratio.

For Sanders, this kind of rhetoric is troubling. “That is not the right way to go about this,” she states, emphasizing the necessity to address legitimate community concerns over pollution and local disruption. Her voice amplifies the ongoing debate about how technological advancement must reconcile with environmental and societal responsibilities.

Insights from political analysts further suggest this won’t be an easy path for the GOP. Hugo Lowell, who covers the White House, notes that “Trump’s bullish stance on AI” could stem from a belief that limiting data center development may hinder America’s competitive edge against China. This perspective has found echo in remarks from tech leaders and advisors affiliated with the White House, including former AI czar David Sacks and investor Joe Lonsdale. They have voiced similar concerns about the global tech race and have emphasized the critical need for robust AI infrastructure in the U.S.

Interestingly, at the recent Republican midterm convention, data centers barely dominated the conversation, as noted by Sanders. The only noteworthy discussion on the subject transpired during a debate between Lonsdale and Steve Bannon’s tech editor, Joe Allen. This lack of focus underscores the complexities faced by the party amid contrasting opinions about the future of technology in America.