Taxpayer-Funded Trump Ads: The 'Love Me' Blitz on the Public Dime

Sunday night, between a truck commercial and a beer spot, one ad stood out from the rotation: a choir sang "love me" on loop under footage of the president. The tagline at the end was the surprise: Paid for by the US Government. No campaign committee, no PAC, just public money. That is the line these taxpayer-funded Trump ads cross, and it should bother voters of any stripe.

What aired during the game

Three nationally broadcast spots, all starring President Trump, started airing this month with that government-paid disclaimer, according to reporting by Reuters. In the first, Trump says "America will never be a communist country" while a chorus sings "love me" in the background. The next spot cuts between Mount Rushmore and Trump onstage as he praises what he calls the golden age of America. The last spot is built around "the final battle," with Trump pledging to demolish the deep state "with you by my side." Reuters noted that spot is nearly identical to a Trump campaign ad from the last election cycle, except for the disclaimer at the end.

These taxpayer-funded Trump ads did not run on some obscure channel. They aired during Saturday Night Live and during Sunday NFL games, which is about as mainstream an audience as television offers. The timing matters. They are running roughly five weeks out from the November third midterms, which could reshape the balance of power in Washington.

The White House has a defense ready. It calls the spots "public service announcements" meant to promote patriotism, and on its website last week it described them as "a reminder for Americans to love their country and know why it's worth defending." But when Reuters asked which government agency is paying for the taxpayer-funded Trump ads, what they cost, and whether taxpayer-funded Trump ads are a proper use of public money, the White House did not respond.

The word everyone is using is propaganda

The label did not originate with this column. Richard Painter, who served as chief White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush and now teaches law at the University of Minnesota, said of the campaign, "It's not the kind of thing the United States government lawfully can pay for under federal statutes," in the Reuters report. He pointed out that Washington banned domestic propaganda back in the forties, during the rise of communism in Europe, so the United States would not start doing what authoritarian regimes do. "Glorification of the president himself, that's one telltale sign of propaganda," Painter said. He looks for a pair of other markers too, attacks on political enemies and the absence of any clear policy issue, and said these taxpayer-funded Trump ads check those boxes. "Put all that together," he said, and the ads are "clearly propaganda."

David Hopkins, a political science professor at Boston College, put the legal question plainly. "It seems to be a fairly clear-cut violation of legal prohibitions against public money being used for campaign purposes," he said. Painter and other legal experts also raised the nineteen thirty-nine Hatch Act, which bars government employees from campaign activity on the job. And it fits a pattern. As this site argued back in September, this White House keeps testing how far it can push before someone pushes back.

Even his own party is flinching

The criticism is not only coming from Democrats. Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters, "I like the message, but it shouldn't be paid for with taxpayer dollars." Republican Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana said on CBS Sunday, "You can't spend public money to promote yourself." Democratic Senator Chris Murphy wrote on X, "Never take another Republican seriously when they pretend they care about 'waste, fraud and abuse.'"

Here is the part that makes the whole thing stranger. Republicans do not need the help. Their allied groups have reserved almost a billion dollars in advertising for the coming weeks, compared with about six hundred seventy million dollars for Democrats, according to AdImpact, which tracks political ad spending. The campaign war chest is already tilted. So why reach into the public till? The administration has offered no answer, and the White House would not even say which agency is footing the bill.

Charlie Black, a Republican strategist who has worked on multiple presidential campaigns, warned that the taxpayer-funded Trump ads could backfire. History shows that when a president is unpopular, the more visible he is, the worse his party does, Black said. He might beat the odds, Black added, but he doubts it.

Why it matters

Fiscal conservatism used to mean not spending other people's money on yourself. These taxpayer-funded Trump ads fail that test so openly it is almost impressive. A president who campaigned against waste is using the treasury to run taxpayer-funded Trump ads that amount to a personal highlight reel, complete with a love song, during football. The legal fig leaf is thin. The country banned this exact behavior decades ago because the country decided the government should not be in the business of glorifying whoever happens to hold the office.

The midterms are close, and recent polling already shows Democrats with a double-digit lead. If these taxpayer-funded Trump ads were supposed to help, they may do the opposite: every replay reminds voters that their own money paid for the airtime. Love me, the chorus sings. Voters might rather have the refund.