Contact Me By Email

Contact Me By Email

Tuesday, August 25, 2026

Study’s Alarming Finding: At Least 1 in 4 N.F.L. Players Gets Brain Disease

Study’s Alarming Finding: At Least 1 in 4 N.F.L. Players Gets Brain Disease

 Summary

“At least one in four N.F.L. players who died from 2016 to 2021 had C.T.E., with researchers estimating the actual rate may be higher. Cumulative head impacts are the main predictor; prevention is possible.

The actual prevalence, researchers said, may be much higher.

A black-and-white image of a football player’s hand on an opponent’s helmet.
The biggest predictor of C.T.E. is the cumulative force of hits to a head over a lifetime.Zack Wittman for The New York Times

By John Branch

John Branch has reported on C.T.E. in sports for more than 15 years.

Since the degenerative brain disease known as C.T.E. was first scientifically linked to football about 20 years ago, and as hundreds of former professional football players have been diagnosed with the disease after their deaths, a haunting question has lingered:

Just how many N.F.L. players will end up with C.T.E.?

New data provides a sobering indication: At least one in four of all the people who have played in the N.F.L. might expect to end up with chronic traumatic encephalopathy, according to a study of hundreds of cases over a recent six-year period.

Researchers considered every former N.F.L. player who died from 2016 to 2021. There were 878. Some died in their 20s, some in their 80s, most in between.

The study’s main finding was simple math: At least 215 of those 878 former players — 24.5 percent — had C.T.E.

The actual prevalence could be far higher. The roughly 25 percent rate does not consider the 643 brains that were not examined. Some of those, maybe many of them, likely had C.T.E. too.

C.T.E. is a progressive neurological disease caused by repeated impacts to the head. It can be definitively diagnosed only by examining the brain after death.

Studies have shown that the rate of C.T.E. in people who have not sustained repeated impacts to the head is nearly zero.

If the new study’s statistics were applied to today’s players — 1,696 on the league’s 32 regular-season rosters, not including more than 500 members of practice squads and those ineligible due to injury — at least 400 of them would be diagnosed with C.T.E.

Experts say that the rate of brain disease represents an occupational safety hazard with little comparison in the American workplace.

“There are workers who’ve been exposed to high levels of asbestos exposure, which leads to very high rates of lung disease,” said David Michaels, who led the Occupational Safety and Health Administration during the Obama administration and is now a professor at the George Washington School of Public Health. “And certainly, you know, a lifetime working in coal mines leads to very high risk of black lung disease.

“But a degenerative neurological disease — I’ve never seen anything comparable.”

C.T.E. was first discovered in boxers nearly a century ago and termed “dementia pugilistica.” Symptoms can include memory loss, confusion and uncharacteristic mood swings, decreases in executive function and increases in erratic and impulsive behavior, including addiction.

These days, C.T.E. is most commonly associated with football players, but it has been found in the brains of other athletes who sustained repetitive blows to the head, including hockey, rugby and soccer players, as well as wrestlers and bobsledders. Those in the military who work with artillery also seem susceptible to the disease.

N.F.L. players jostling for position.
Hundreds of former N.F.L. players have been found to have had C.T.E., which can be diagnosed only posthumously.Zack Wittman for The New York Times

For years, the N.F.L. downplayed the risks of repeated head trauma, often insisting that not enough is known about C.T.E. to draw conclusions about its dangers, origins and prevalence. Uncertainty has left room for inaction; scientists have yet to decipher, among many things, why some people can play football for decades and not get C.T.E., while others have had severe cases in their teens.

But the prevalence rate now reported by researchers might be hard to ignore. It is the latest research from neuropathologists and other scientists mostly affiliated with Mass General Brigham, Boston University and the UNITE Brain Bank, which have led C.T.E. research and handled most donated brains of former athletes over the past two decades.

Researchers involved in this study, published on Tuesday in The BMJ, hope to produce a subsequent paper in the coming months estimating the overall rate of C.T.E. in all N.F.L. players at the time of their death.

Making such an estimation is complicated by unknowns. What is certain, researchers said, is that C.T.E. is preventable.

“We know what’s causing it,” said Dr. Daniel Daneshvar, the lead author of the study, the chief of brain injury rehabilitation at Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital and an associate professor at Harvard Medical School. “It’s a neurodegenerative disease where we know and have complete control over the risk. And understanding the extent of that risk is one of the steps into making sure that we can mitigate and decrease that risk.”

Dr. Daneshvar said that the biggest predictor of C.T.E. is the cumulative force of hits to a head over a lifetime — including those sustained before reaching the N.F.L.

“We can change that cumulative force without changing the game of football,” he said, suggesting that children refrain from playing tackle football and that teams at all levels eliminate hits during practices. 

The 25 percent rate cited in the latest research may surprise fans or others who view the game from a distance, but not those close to football.

“I bet the real number is a lot bigger,” said Randy Grimes, 66, who played center for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers from 1983 to 1992. “Obviously, it’s going to be a lot bigger if you add the untested ones.”

At least two of his former offensive linemates, both guards, were diagnosed with C.T.E.: Tom McHale, who died at 45; and John Bruhin, who died at 57. Another teammate, linebacker Keith McCants, had C.T.E. and died at 53.

If the new data were applied to the rest of his teammates over his career, Mr. Grimes is likely to have played with dozens of C.T.E. victims, who either died without being tested or who are aging quietly in the shadows.

Mr. Grimes said that he has yet to feel the symptoms that would make him worry about his own cognitive health. But he runs a nonprofit organization that counsels retired athletes, including football players, and sees symptoms that he suspects are associated with C.T.E.

“It’s not something that’s brought up, it’s not something that players want to talk about,” Mr. Grimes said. “We probably could move forward faster in our research if we did talk more about it. But players don’t want to do it. They don’t want to think they have it, they don’t want to think they’re seeing it. Deep down, we all know that probably the majority of us are going to have some form of C.T.E.”

While hundreds of former N.F.L. players have been diagnosed with C.T.E., typically after loved ones donate the brains because of worrisome symptoms, most C.T.E. cases are not publicly disclosed.

Only a few cases reach public consciousness, usually when attached to a famous name, like Junior SeauKen Stabler and Frank Gifford, all inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

Others become notorious because of criminal behavior that might later be explained, in part, by C.T.E., like Aaron Hernandez and Phillip Adams, who committed murder and were diagnosed with C.T.E. after their own deaths. In July 2025, Shane Tamura, who played football but did not reach the N.F.L., killed four people in a New York City building that houses the league’s headquarters. After Mr. Tamura’s death, an autopsy confirmed that he had C.T.E.

C.T.E. cannot be diagnosed in the living, though some ex-football players, like Hall of Fame running back Tony Dorsett, presume they have it. Some players, like Chris Borland and John Urschel, walked away from their professional careers early as a preventive measure to protect their brains.

The growing roster of C.T.E. cases has done little to diminish football’s popularity. The N.F.L. reportedly earned more than $23 billion in revenue in 2024.

“The N.F.L. continuously strives to make the game of football safer, including by implementing strategies to reduce concussions and head impacts,” the league said in a statement. “The N.F.L. remains committed to ensuring that the N.F.L. community has access to a robust — and expanding — set of resources to enhance their physical and mental well being.”

The N.F.L. Players Association, the union representing players, said that the new study “is a sobering reminder that football carries real risks, and those risks can have lasting consequences for players and their families.”

It added: “The findings should serve as a call to action across the entire football ecosystem.”

Scientists hope to soon be able to clinically diagnose C.T.E. in the living with a large degree of certainty, the way that other neurodegenerative diseases, like Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s, often are.

For now, most brains of former N.F.L. players are never examined, so an unknown number of possible C.T.E. cases go undiagnosed. As awareness of the disease grows, family members are increasingly donating the brains of recently deceased former players who displayed C.T.E.’s stew of symptoms. The brains that are donated are not a random sample. Telltale signs of the disease were often evident.

In 2017, 110 of the first 111 brains of former N.F.L. players that had been donated to that point were diagnosed with C.T.E.

What is different for the latest study is that it applied C.T.E. cases to the broader context of a general N.F.L. population in the same time period — not just those whose brains were donated.

Researchers tallied all of the former N.F.L. players known to have died between 2008 and 2021 (2,079 of them) and found that 16.6 percent — one in six — had been diagnosed with C.T.E.

They narrowed the data to the most recent six-year period because, they said, it coincided with a surge of brain donations after several well-publicized cases of C.T.E. and the 2015 film “Concussion.” (In 2014, 17 brains were donated to what is now called the UNITE Brain Bank. In 2018, 53 were.)

In that subset, 235 brains had been donated for examination. Most of them, 215, were found to have at least some level of C.T.E.

That means, “under the most conservative of assumptions,” researchers wrote, 24.5 percent of the players who died had C.T.E. The total does not include several other brains examined by scientists not affiliated with the researchers, and thus unverifiable, or those widely presumed to have had C.T.E. due to the severity of symptoms but who were not tested at death.

The identity of most C.T.E. diagnoses is not made public, but loose extrapolation can be revealing. How many C.T.E. victims in N.F.L. history played for, say, the New York Giants? (Thousands, perhaps.) Or for coaches like Bill Belichick or Pete Carroll? (Hundreds, probably.) How many were teammates of Tom Brady? (Scores, at least.)

The growing sample size of C.T.E. cases makes for stark realizations. For example, eight members of the 1972 Miami Dolphins, the only undefeated team in modern N.F.L. history, have been diagnosed with C.T.E.

The latest, previously unreported, was Mercury Morris, the speedy halfback who played eight seasons in the N.F.L., struggled with headaches and drug addiction in retirement, and died in 2024 at age 77. 

Not all C.T.E. cases belong to long-retired players in their geriatric years. The 2001 New England Patriots, who won the Super Bowl, had seven former players die between the ages of 35 and 50, according to The Boston Globe. At least three were diagnosed with C.T.E., researchers said.

The latest research, however, suggests that at least 10 others from that team might have C.T.E., if the one-in-four ratio applies.

The 2009 Chargers, a team that went 13-3 in the regular season, already have three deceased players who were found to have C.T.E. and whose names were made public.

One was Vincent Jackson, a three-time Pro Bowl receiver who died in a hotel room of alcohol poisoning at 38. Another was Kevin Ellison, a defensive back who died at 31 when he was struck by a car after wandering onto a California freeway.

The other was defensive back Paul Oliver, who was 29 in 2013 when he shot himself on the stairs of his family home in front of his wife, Chelsea, and their two young sons.

Ms. Oliver said that she occasionally hears from her husband’s former teammates or their family members, worried that they, too, are feeling the effects of C.T.E. She suspects that the 25 percent figure is far lower than the reality.

“I feel like if we were able to test everybody for C.T.E. while they’re still alive, the majority would have C.T.E.,” she said.

Her husband played four years in the N.F.L. and sustained a series of concussions, she said, and then became someone “who just wasn’t him.” He lived with headaches, became delusional and paranoid, and began drinking heavily, she said. The couple discussed the prospect of C.T.E. shortly after Mr. Seau, the longtime Chargers star who finished his career with New England, shot himself in the chest to preserve his brain for testing.

Learning that, statistically, her husband might have had a dozen or more teammates with C.T.E., that he was not alone with his disease, does not bring any measure of solace, Ms. Oliver said. “It just makes me sad.”

She does not expect fans to understand. She reads comments on stories about former football players behaving badly or dying by suicide. “You’ll see multiple people, like, ‘Bet they’re going to blame C.T.E.’ I just shake my head. These people have no clue. They just don’t, because they haven’t lived it firsthand. So I can’t fault them.”

“To them,” she added, “concussions, C.T.E., that’s a not-them problem.”

If you are having thoughts of suicide, call or text 988 to reach the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline or go to SpeakingOfSuicide.com/resources for a list of additional resources.

John Branch writes feature stories for The Times on a wide swath of topics, including sports, climate and politics. He is based in California.“

Monday, August 24, 2026

Subscriptions: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

 

6 Exercises Physical Therapists Wish Everyone Did to Age Well

 

6 Exercises Physical Therapists Wish Everyone Did to Age Well

“Try these simple movements to stay strong and limber.

A person in a gray exercise outfit does a wall push-up.
Bee Trofort for The New York Times

Sign up for the Well newsletter.  Essential news and guidance to live your healthiest life.

In many cases, aches and pains can be a reflection of your daily routines.

Habits like sitting at a desk all day, looking down at your phone or even straining to pick your socks up off the floor can lead to a body that feels creaky, tight and sore. Making time to practice good movement habits can keep you feeling limber and strong.

Physical therapists know this all too well.

“People come in with the same problems over and over again,” said Theresa Marko, a physical therapist in New York City.

She often finds herself recommending the same exercises as solutions, she said — exercises that, for example, “counteract, you know, going to see ‘The Odyssey’ for three hours.”

We asked physical therapists to share the exercises they wish everyone incorporated into their fitness routines. Here are six that came up again and again.

1. Standing on one leg

A person stands on one leg with the other leg raised and bent.
Bee Trofort for The New York Times

Good balance is important for both fitness and everyday life, but it deteriorates with age, unless you’re “really deliberate about practicing it,” said Conor Nordengren, a physical therapist in Wellesley, Mass.

One of the simplest ways to do this is by regularly standing on one leg, experts said.

This simple exercise can “strengthen all the muscles in your foot, your ankle, your knee, your thigh,” Dr. Marko said. It also helps to build stability — not only in your legs, but also in your hips, pelvis and lower back. “I stand on one leg in the kitchen, waiting for coffee, waiting for the elevator,” she added.

If standing on one leg is challenging for you, lightly rest your hand on a chair, a wall or a countertop until you feel stable enough to let go. If the exercise feels easy, close your eyes.

Stand on each leg for at least 30 seconds every day.

2. Hip hinges

The ability to properly bend forward, or hinge, at the hips is useful both for daily tasks, like picking things up off the floor, and for exercises like deadlifts and kettlebell swings.

But many people struggle with hip hinges, said Dhara Shah, a physical therapist at Emory Healthcare in Atlanta. It’s common to round your back and lock your knees when you bend over, which puts pressure on your spine and can lead to pain or injury.

Regularly practicing hip hinges can also strengthen your glutes and hamstrings.

To do a hip hinge, send your hips backward while bringing your chest forward. Keep your back straight, your shoulders pulled slightly back, your abdominal muscles pulled toward your bellybutton and your knees softly bent.

Practice this movement daily, doing two sets of 15 hinges.

3. Sit-to-stands

The act of sitting down and then standing back up may seem simple, but with age, it can become increasingly difficult without proper strength and stability. Making time to practice “sit-to-stand” exercises will pay off by strengthening your quads, glutes, hamstrings, calves and core muscles, and improve your ability to to do lunges and squats, the experts said.

To do a sit-to-stand, lower yourself into a chair and stand back up in a slow, controlled way. If this feels challenging, practice it several times a day until it feels easier.

If it already feels easy, lower your body even more slowly and just barely tap your butt to the seat before slowly standing up again. The lower the surface, the more challenging it will be. “That control piece makes it a little harder,” Dr. Shah said. Do two sets of 20 repetitions several times a week. For more of a challenge, do it while holding weights or a kettlebell.

4. Dead bugs with diaphragmatic breathing

A person lying on a teal yoga mat does a dead bug exercise.
Bee Trofort for The New York Times

Many people feel the effects of sitting for long periods in their neck, shoulders or back, but the problem often begins in their innermost core muscles, said Carrie Pagliano, a physical therapist in Arlington, Virginia. “With a lot of these issues, people are just missing fundamental strength,” she said. When your core is weak, your neck and shoulders often compensate to keep you upright.

Physical therapists recommended doing the dead bug exercise while practicing diaphragmatic breathing to build core strength at the deepest level.

To do a dead bug, lie on your back and raise your legs at a 90-degree angle, then raise your arms straight toward the ceiling. With your spine pressed into the floor, slowly straighten and lower your left leg while also lowering your right arm, until both are fully extended. Return to the starting position, then repeat with the opposite sides.

While extending, slowly exhale through your mouth to contract your deep core. While returning to the starting position, inhale and feel your belly expand. Do two sets of eight exercises a few times a week.

This breath work helps “stabilize your core from the inside out,” said Alicia Ferriere, a physical therapist in Maplewood, N.J. Together with the dead bugs, it can help support your spine and relieve aches in your neck and shoulders.

5. Wall push-ups

Push-ups allow you to practice lifting your body weight, which is essential for staying independent as you age and getting up if you fall, Dr. Nordengren said. They primarily strengthen the chest, shoulders, arms and core.

Unless you’ve regularly been doing push-ups from the ground, experts recommended doing them with your hands on a stable, raised surface such as a wall or a countertop. As you build strength, you can gradually lower the surface until you reach the ground.

“I’ll very rarely have people do them from the floor right away,” Dr. Nordengren said, especially since “a lot of people struggle with the technique.”

Start in a plank position, with your back flat and your feet pressed into the floor. Next, engage your core and slightly tuck your tailbone underneath you to prevent your back from arching. Bend your elbows into a 45-degree angle, while slowly lowering your chest, then push yourself back up. Imagine that you are pushing the floor away, Dr. Nordengren said, and be sure to reach your arms long at the top. Do two sets of 10 reps twice a week.

6. Cat-cows

To counter the effects of sitting or standing for long periods of time, many physical therapists recommended the cat-cow stretch, in which you alternate between arching and curving your back while on all fours. Take a few deep breaths in each position to feel a deeper stretch. This classic stretch can help relieve stiffness in your spine, shoulders and neck and improve your mobility.

When you’re in an all-fours position, you can limber up other body parts, too, Dr. Ferriere said. Try reaching forward with each arm or stretching each leg out behind you and doing a few hip circles.

Ultimately, these exercises are “giving you a little extra buffer to live your life,” Dr. Nordengren said, so your body is strong, steady and prepared for the unexpected.“

Sunday, August 23, 2026

Jeffries and Kushner Meet Privately as Midterm Attacks Fly - The New York Times

Jeffries and Kushner Meet Privately as Midterm Attacks Fly

"President Trump’s son-in-law and the man in line to be speaker of a Democratic-led House discussed how Democrats and the administration could work together.











Jared Kushner, left, and Representative Hakeem Jeffries, right. 
Nathan Howard for The New York Times, Tierney L. Cross/The New York Times

Representative Hakeem Jeffries, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, met privately in recent weeks with Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law and top outside adviser, and discussed potential areas of common ground, according to five people with knowledge of the meeting.

The rare engagement was held in a private space in New York City, offered up by a mutual friend of the two men, according to two people with knowledge of the meeting and a third who was briefed on it. They and others were granted anonymity to discuss a meeting about which they were not authorized to speak publicly.

Through aides, neither man would comment on the session, which was described by one person with knowledge of it as a broad conversation on a range of topics. Still, its timing underscored that those around Mr. Trump were well aware of the likelihood of a Democratic-led House, and trying to foster as much of a working relationship as possible before any change. Mr. Jeffries is in line to be the speaker, were Democrats to win the majority.

Democrats and the president have been savaging each other on the campaign trail with increasing fury as the midterm elections approach, and as Republicans are fighting to retain their thin House and Senate majorities.

Mr. Trump has called Mr. Jeffries a “thug,” and at a May campaign event referred to him as a “low IQ” person who had inspired him to deride Democrats as the “Dumocrats.” Mr. Jeffries routinely suggests that Mr. Trump is not only extreme but corrupt, vowing that Democrats would “hold the crooks accountable” if they won control.

The private get-together was described by one of the people as a catch-up for Mr. Kushner and Mr. Jeffries. The two men have stayed in touch since they worked together on a criminal justice bill midway through Mr. Trump’s first term.

During the recent meeting, the pair discussed housing, immigration and the high cost of living as potential areas of common ground. Mr. Kushner suggested that Mr. Jeffries should meet with the White House chief of staff, Susie Wiles, two people with knowledge of the meeting said.

The likelihood of any compromises between the White House and Democrats on those issues seems remote.

Mr. Trump this year refused to sign a bipartisan housing bill in part because he said it was “Warren centric,” referring to Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, its top Democratic champion. And he has repeatedly expressed openness to a deal with Democrats on immigration, only to back away from any such agreement. He successfully lobbied Republicans to abandon a bipartisan border security bill in 2024.

White House officials and an aide to Mr. Kushner did not respond to messages seeking comment.

In a statement, Mr. Jeffries did not acknowledge the meeting, but suggested that the only way Democrats would cut deals with the administration would be if Republicans were willing to come their way on cost-of-living issues, his party’s top priority.

“Throughout this Congress, Republicans have adopted a my-way-or-the-highway approach to governing that has failed the American people,” he said.

He added: “In every conversation that we have with the Trump administration, we will continue to make it explicitly clear that the affordability crisis is not a hoax, and nothing short of transformational policy change is acceptable. We are fighting for an affordable America. The question is whether Republicans will join us.”

Mr. Kushner, who worked as a senior West Wing adviser in the president’s first term, is no longer formally part of Mr. Trump’s government. He has been deeply involved in the president’s efforts to resolve the war with Iran that Mr. Trump began, to enforce a cease-fire in Gaza and to bring an end to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. He and Mr. Jeffries also met last year, according to two people with knowledge of that conversation.

The meeting came as nearly all polls revealed Republicans to be at a disadvantage in the midterms, and showed how members of Mr. Trump’s inner circle were digesting what a Democratic majority next year could look like.

Should that happen, Mr. Jeffries would be under intense pressure from progressives to use his power as a check on Mr. Trump, including through aggressive oversight.

Mr. Kushner is frequently consulted by a number of Mr. Trump’s advisers, and he has told people that if anything bipartisan is to get done with Congress, Mr. Jeffries is the most serious person among Democratic leaders. Ms. Wiles, he has said, is the most serious inside the West Wing.

But with Republicans in control of both chambers, Mr. Trump has mostly steered around Congress in his second term, trampling its powers and prerogatives. He has faced little pushback from G.O.P. leaders.

Should Democrats win the House, Mr. Jeffries would have to balance the need to keep the government funded with Democratic calls to defy Mr. Trump at every turn, and possible pleas to impeach him for a third time.

Mr. Jeffries and Mr. Trump have danced around questions about what their relationship could look like next year should Democrats take control.

“I think he’s a nice guy,” Mr. Trump told Punchbowl News in a recent interview, when asked about Mr. Jeffries. “I’d probably get along with him very well.”

Mr. Trump pointed to a meeting with Mr. Jeffries in the Oval Office last fall — the only one they have had in his second term — and described it as a positive one.

In fact, during that meeting, which was billed as a bid to avert a government shutdown, the president positioned hats with a “Trump 2028” logo directly in front of Mr. Jeffries and Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader, trolling the Democrats with the suggestion that he would run for a third term in violation of the Constitution.

Afterward, Mr. Trump posted an A.I.-generated meme of a mustachioed Mr. Jeffries wearing a sombrero, drawing an angry response from the House minority leader, who called the image racist and dared Mr. Trump to insult him next time “to my face.”

Soon after the meeting, the government shutdown began.

This year, Mr. Jeffries has remained noncommittal about any plans to pursue a third impeachment of the president, and has not discussed publicly what oversight could look like if his party were to win the majority.

“We’ve not ruled anything in and not ruled anything out in terms of accountability,” he told The New York Times in an interview last month, noting that his focus would be on forcing out major Trump officials.

“We’ve got to make sure we continue to get rid of toxic Trump cabinet secretaries,” he said. “Pete Hegseth, in my view, should be next on the list.”

Maggie Haberman is a White House correspondent for The Times, reporting on President Trump.

Annie Karni is a congressional correspondent for The Times."

Jeffries and Kushner Meet Privately as Midterm Attacks Fly - The New York Times

The Data Center Backlash Bursts Into the Midterms - The New York Times

The Data Center Backlash Bursts Into the Midterms

"With opposition to the centers mounting, many Democrats and a growing number of Republicans are campaigning against them.

By Shane Goldmacher

Shane Goldmacher is a national political correspondent. He reviewed television and digital ads airing in races across the country about data centers for this piece.

The fight over data centers is suddenly at the epicenter of the midterm elections.

One new ad in Texas begins with someone typing into a chatbot, “Why is my electric bill going up?” Another in Ohio blames one of the state’s Republican senators for a proliferation of data centers, calling them “a total scam.” And in top House battlegrounds in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, the Democratic challengers are all running ads against the server warehouses powering the artificial intelligence boom.

Data centers have become unlikely fault-lines in the broader fight over an A.I. revolution that is remaking the global economy and threatening to disrupt the job market. Now politicians are racing to tap into the backlash — or inoculate themselves — as political strategists in both parties described the issue as an unusually fast-moving force that is already reshaping races for the House, the Senate and governor’s mansions.

“It’s very much a bottom up, organic movement,” said Anna Greenberg, a veteran Democratic pollster, who said that while people’s views on data centers were largely tied to how close they live to them, the facilities were also becoming symbols of the excesses of Silicon Valley.

“Data centers are a physical manifestation,” she said. “Billionaires are building them, and it feeds into all of the big tech skepticism that is there. It’s very symbolic of everybody’s issues with A.I.”

There are signs that the emerging data center debate is scrambling the usual partisan divisions.

So far, Democrats have chiefly been the ones racing to harness voter anger about data centers over rising electricity prices, water use and mistrust of the tech sector. They aim to punish Republicans for cozying up to industry by approving many of these projects.

But in recent weeks, a growing number of Republican candidates have scrambled to shield themselves from any fallout. They have voiced skepticism about data centers, despite President Trump’s full-throated cheerleading for the A.I. industry and fears among party leaders in Washington that blocking construction of the centers could slow the economy and make the United States less competitive against China.

Some Republicans are now using “data center” as an epithet, and casting themselves as the real opponents of corporate tax breaks and unfettered construction. Last week, Mike Rogers, the Republican running for Senate in the key swing state of Michigan, said that he supports a one-year moratorium on data center construction.

Polls show a revolt brewing against data centers. A Gallup poll conducted in March showed 71 percent opposed local construction of the centers, and a summer survey from the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania showed that the number of people opposing new data centers in their areas had risen by 12 percentage points since February and March.

The fallout has been so swift that in some races, including the governor’s contests in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Florida, both Democrats and Republicans are airing television ads about data centers.

On Wednesday, a remarkable memo from the National Republican Senatorial Committee warned that data center politics was endangering Senator Jon Husted of Ohio, a Republican. His challenger, Sherrod Brown, the state’s former Democratic senator, has aired millions of dollars of ads, calling Mr. Husted “the face of data centers in Ohio.”

“More than any other thing in this race, data centers are the anchor hanging around Husted’s neck,” the memo said.

Thumbnail of page 1

The one-page document, which was earlier reported by Axios, amounted to a desperate plea for the well-heeled industry to finance an advertising campaign — lest a Husted loss serve as “a cautionary lesson” for politicians elsewhere.

Zac McCrary, a Democratic pollster, said that opposing data centers offered Democrats a rare chance to make inroads in rural areas and small towns that are resisting the developments.

“It absolutely shakes up the snow globe on the partisan coalitions in a part of the world where Republicans have been dominant,” he said. “It’s one of the few issues today that does not immediately code as red or blue, left or right.”

In Florida, Representative Byron Donalds, the Republican nominee for governor, spent more than $2 million on one ad in his primary, vowing to “protect” the state from data centers that “jack up utility rates.” In the ad, he tried to cast that position as standing with Mr. Trump, whose administration sought to blunt some of the opposition earlier this year by proposing a “ratepayer protection pledge,” in which data centers promise not to drive up electricity costs.

His Democratic opponent in the fall, David Jolly, said that “we don’t want crime or data centers in our neighborhoods” in one of his first ads of the general election.

In a sign of how top-of-mind data centers have become, Mr. Donalds brought up the topic unprompted at an event last week in Naples, Fla. “Listen, I know people have concerns,” he said. “I’ve seen the polling. But leadership isn’t just looking at polling.”

He then tried to thread the needle between selling the importance of artificial intelligence for the United States’ competitive future and addressing boiling anger at local data centers. “I don’t want it near your home, just like I don’t want it near my home,” Mr. Donalds said.

Mr. Jolly’s position is less complicated. In an interview on Thursday, he said Florida should impose a moratorium on data center construction until the full impacts could be studied.

The fierceness of the mounting opposition has startled some in the tech sector.

“This is a powder keg,” warned Chamath Palihapitiya, a public-facing venture capital investor, in a post on X this week, responding to the dire warning in the N.R.S.C. memo. He wrote that the A.I. industry had “failed miserably in doing the basics” of selling itself.

Political strategists and pollsters in both parties said that voters have linked the facilities to concerns over higher electricity prices, water use, the fate of farmlands and general fears about the advent of artificial intelligence and big tech.

“They didn’t do a good enough job explaining anything,” Ryan James Girdusky, a Republican political strategist and podcaster, said of the industry.

In Texas, the Democratic candidate for Senate, James Talarico, and for governor, Gina Hinojosa, have held recent events about data centers, accusing their Republican rivals of pocketing data center donations while backing expansions.

“Texans are mad,” Ms. Hinojosa said in an interview. “It is hard to convey what feels like an invasion by data centers with no rules, no laws to protect Texas. They’re popping up everywhere.”

It was her advertisement that featured a chatbot being asked about the cause of rising electricity prices. The answer it provides? Blaming Gov. Greg Abbott and data centers.

Even before that ad, Mr. Abbott, a Republican, had been shifting his stance on data centers. Less than a year ago, Mr. Abbott bragged that Google’s $40 billion investment made Texas “the epicenter of A.I. development,” bringing both construction jobs and tax revenues.

But this summer he announced new standards for data centers on water use and electricity and called to end some tax incentives. Earlier this month he directed the state’s utility commission to audit all data centers seeking permits before they could move forward.

“Data center growth cannot come at the expense of Texans’ livelihoods,” said Catherine Frazier, a spokeswoman for Mr. Abbott.

Mr. Abbott is hardly the only politician pivoting.

Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania, a potential Democratic candidate for president in 2028, had been a booster of A.I. investments. In June 2025, Mr. Shapiro said he was “proud” of Amazon’s $20 billion data center investment, bragging it would be the largest private sector investment in the state’s history.

On Tuesday, Mr. Shapiro signed an executive order imposing what he called the “strictest guardrails in the nation” to stop “predatory developers.”

“I’ve heard loud and clear from the people of Pennsylvania,” said Mr. Shapiro, who is up for re-election this year.

Now Mr. Shapiro has started airing a television ad attacking his Republican challenger, Stacy Garrity, as the “number one fan of data centers.” Ms. Garrity has her own ad hitting Mr. Shapiro for “data centers in our backyards,” but her campaign can afford only a small fraction of the airtime.

Garrity for PA, via AdImpact
Shapiro for Pennsylvania, via AdImpact

Another Republican candidate for governor running on data center politics is Representative Tom Tiffany of Wisconsin, who has attacked his Democratic rival as “Data Center David Crowley.” Mr. Crowley narrowly won the nomination over a democratic socialist, Francesca Hong, who had demanded a data center moratorium.

Neither Mr. Crowley nor Mr. Tiffany has called for a moratorium.

Mr. Crowley has preferred to let local communities decide, with a number of guardrails and restrictions. Mr. Tiffany, who called data centers “exciting new technology” just a few months ago, is now calling for a repeal of tax incentives.

In Michigan, William Lawrence, a progressive activist, rode an anti-data center message to win the Democratic nomination in a key Michigan House seat this month and then immediately made a general election ad targeting Representative Tom Barrett, the Republican incumbent, on the issue.

Mr. Barrett campaigned on Tuesday with Speaker Mike Johnson in Michigan, who warned that, while “community concerns” needed to be accounted for, “a broad moratorium against data centers is kind of a dangerous prospect right now.”

The next day Mr. Barrett began airing a new data center ad of his own, in which he claimed that “I stood up to my own party and voted against giving your tax dollars to data centers.”

In an interview, Mr. Lawrence, who supports a moratorium, called the ad “outrageous” and said voters would not be satisfied with half measures. Data center opposition, he said, was “number one in terms of intensity” in the district.

“It’s bringing together three-time Trump voters, anti-vaxxers, environmentalists, independents, nonvoters, people who are in our cities, people who are in the rural areas,” Mr. Lawrence said. “And it’s bringing together all these people because none of us trust big tech to do right by our communities.”

Patricia Mazzei and Ruth Igielnik contributed reporting."

The Data Center Backlash Bursts Into the Midterms - The New York Times