Political Experts Break Down the FINAL Ads of the Midterms

Summary of Political Experts Break Down the FINAL Ads of the Midterms

by Crooked Media

23m•November 2, 2026
Listen to Episode

Overview of Political Experts Break Down the FINAL Ads of the Midterms

In this episode of Political Experts React from Crooked Media, Dan Pfeiffer and Jen Psaki analyze a set of last-minute midterm ads designed to persuade swing voters in tightly contested races. The conversation focuses on how campaigns use conservative media, “trusted messengers,” and character-based attack ads to break through in the final stretch, with attention to races in Michigan, Georgia, Maine, and Kansas.

Key Takeaways

  • The ads are aimed at persuadable right-leaning or low-information voters, not committed partisans.
  • Campaigns are trying to create a “permission structure” for voters to support a candidate they may have been wary of.
  • Character attacks are being used heavily late in the cycle, especially when candidates can’t win purely on policy.
  • Trusted conservative voices can help blunt negative stereotypes, especially in racially or religiously charged campaigns.
  • Several of the races discussed hinge on identity, biography, and voter emotion as much as on traditional issue messaging.

Race-by-Race Ad Breakdown

Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan

  • The ad features conservative figures praising El-Sayed, including right-wing media voices.
  • The strategy is clearly meant to counter Islamophobic attacks and reassure Fox News viewers and skeptical independents.
  • Psaki and Pfeiffer note that it’s likely targeting:
    • Casual Fox News viewers
    • Independent voters
    • White working-class or conservative-leaning voters
  • The ad became controversial because of the use of Tucker Carlson, with critics arguing it could offend Black voters.
  • Their overall take: strategically understandable, though risky, especially given Michigan’s complicated racial and religious dynamics.

Keisha Lance Bottoms in Georgia

  • Bottoms’ ad also targets conservative or moderate voters, especially those who may be hesitant to vote for a Black woman.
  • The message is essentially: Georgia is less racist and more open-minded than pundits assume.
  • The ad is framed as a way to “go viral” and attention-hijack in a race where she is behind and needs a breakthrough.
  • The hosts argue the ad is a calculated attempt to win over voters who might otherwise stay on the fence.

Troy Jackson vs. Susan Collins in Maine

  • The Republican-aligned ad attacks Troy Jackson as temperamental, unhinged, and unfit.
  • The strategy seems designed to reinforce a broader message that Collins is the safer, steadier option.
  • Pfeiffer and Psaki note:
    • Maine’s electorate is older and more female
    • Susan Collins has long depended on older independent women
    • The ad aims to create a permission structure for voters who dislike Trump but may still hesitate to abandon Collins
  • They see it as a smart, if somewhat desperate, late-stage defense, especially in a state where voters are highly motivated by practical concerns like home heating costs.

Adam Hamilton vs. Roger Marshall in Kansas

  • This is the ad both hosts liked the most.
  • It is a Democratic super PAC attack ad targeting Sen. Roger Marshall.
  • The ad uses a sharp contrast:
    • Hamilton as decent, moral, and empathetic
    • Marshall as greedy, predatory, and cruel
  • A key attack point is Marshall allegedly suing patients over unpaid medical bills, which the hosts say “lit a match” in the race.
  • They argue Hamilton’s appeal comes from his ability to speak in a nonpartisan, faith-based moral language that fits Kansas well.
  • The ad works because it gives voters a way to vote against Marshall, not just for Hamilton.

Broader Strategic Themes

Trusted Messengers Matter

One of the strongest recurring ideas in the episode is that ads are more effective when they feature people voters already trust. Conservative voices praising a Democrat can make skeptical viewers stop and listen.

Identity and Permission Structure

The hosts repeatedly discuss how campaigns try to make it easier for voters to cross party, racial, or ideological lines without feeling like they are betraying their identity.

Late-Stage Ads Often Signal Desperation

In races like Maine, a harsh character attack late in the cycle suggests the campaign may be struggling on issues and trying to shift the election onto personality and trust.

Notable Insight

  • “Sometimes you’ve got to get caught trying.”
    The hosts use this idea to describe campaigns taking visible risks in order to show they are at least making an effort to reach beyond their base.

Bottom Line

Pfeiffer and Psaki see these final ads as examples of modern persuasion politics: highly targeted, identity-aware, and increasingly dependent on emotional framing rather than pure policy argument. Their view is that the smartest campaigns are trying to give voters a socially acceptable reason to support a candidate they might otherwise reject.