Steve Dempsey

HORROR MOVIES ARE having a cultural moment.

Obsession, the Back Rooms, Weapons. Horrors are single-handedly pulling crowds back into cinemas and saving American movies. They’re also probably the best analogy for American politics.  

We’ve got a monstrous bad guy, a breakdown in sanity and moral order, and the dawning realisation that the call has always been coming from inside the house. But right now perhaps, we’re seeing something else. 

Ahead of the midterm elections, Donald Trump is appearing in television ads that look remarkably like campaign spots.

One shows him striding down a corridor in black and white, promising to “demolish the deep state” and expel his enemies.

It closely resembles an ad from his 2024 campaign.

This is strange, as he’s not on the ballot.

It’s even stranger as a line at the end of the ads says: “Paid for by the U.S. Government.”

"This is the final battle. With you at my side, we will demolish the deep state, we will expel the warmongers from our government... we will liberate America from these villains once and for all."

President Trump narrates a new ad paid for by the U.S. Government. pic.twitter.com/uT1YTLlDbh

— AdImpact Politics (@AdImpact_Pol) September 28, 2026

The White House calls these broadcasts public service announcements and has even set up an ill-tempered webpage that states attacks on the President’s ads are dishonest.

By Monday, spending on the three spots was nearing $1.5 million (€1.33 million), according to the Associated Press.

Every horror film has a moment when the monster realises the tables have been turned, and its victims are no longer afraid. Suddenly it feels a gnawing sense of fear and doubt.

Previously effective threats seem hollow, a need to dominate the screen seems desperate rather than menacing. Is this where we are with Donald’s desperate ads? Could these desperate ads be a sign that the horror show is coming to an end? 

First, let’s ask how desperate these ads really are.

Sure, political advertising can influence voters, but only with a huge media spend, and it no longer moves the needle like it used to do.

In May 2025, streaming accounted for more US television viewing than broadcast and cable combined.

Live sport still gathers a crowd, but America no longer watches the same shows on the same networks.

A 2024 Pew Research study found that 21% of American adults regularly get news from social media influencers, rising to 37% among under-30s.

So it’s no surprise that the last presidential election was termed the podcast election, with podcasters like Joe Rogan and Alex Cooper proving more influential than traditional TV personalities.

A clip from these podcasts can provide more versatile and long-lasting media than paid TV too. It can be repurposed for a multitude of social media channels where the algorithm will ensure it finds its intended audience.  

Related Reads

Why Robert F Kennedy Jr is copying Dollar Shave Club

Suits and suitability: what is RTÉ for in the modern age?

No sex please, we're scrolling: Data is showing us that smartphones may be reducing fertility

So maybe these ads are less desperate and more desperately outdated. Assuming TV ad spend will change voters’ minds in the modern media age seems like lazy thinking. But are they illegal? 

They are reportedly funded by US Customs and Border Protection, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security. While government departments can legitimately advertise to tell citizens how to get a vaccine, register for a service, or respond to an emergency, there are restrictions on government-funded “publicity or propaganda” covering communications that are purely partisan, covert or devoted to self-promotion.

Public Citizen filed a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission saying the spots are campaign ads that should not be produced or distributed with taxpayer money.

Democratic lawmakers are also getting in on the act, asking the Government Accountability Office and the Office of Special Counsel to determine whether the use of government funds on the ads was illegal.

Potential illegal use of government funds could be another sign of desperation. But it could also be indicative that this US administration cares more about winning than adhering to the rules. 

Either way, perhaps the horror movie analogy is most pertinent if we ask whether this is the monster thrashing about for purchase just before its demise, or whether this is one of those horrors with a fake-out ending where the monster rears its head again before the credits roll.

Jason Voorhees leaps out of the water at the end of Friday the 13th. Freddy Krueger survives at the end of A Nightmare on Elm Street.

Will the current US president suffer defeat in the mid-terms only to reappear to terrorise his victims?

He’s certainly a villain worthy of multiple sequels.

Steve Dempsey is a media and technology expert and commentator.