Resonate’s PT50 data makes clear that tariffs have evolved from a niche trade policy into a wedge that is reorganizing voter coalitions ahead of 2026.
For decades, tariffs were the stuff of trade negotiators, discussed in economic journals and backroom policy shops. That changed with Donald Trump. He transformed tariffs into a political identity marker, selling them as proof that he would stand up to China and revive American manufacturing.
President Donald J. Trump; image via White House
Years later, this issue persists, dividing the electorate and transcending traditional partisan divides. Resonate’s PT50 report shows that tariffs have become less about GDP curves and more about whether voters feel seen in an era of economic dislocation.
At their core, tariffs are about trust: who voters believe will protect their pocketbooks and who they think will defend American jobs. The PT50 findings reveal that tariffs now function as a proxy for economic nationalism.
Image from Resonate PT50 report
In the Midwest, where shuttered factories and supply-chain shocks remain vivid, tariffs poll well among non-college whites and older voters who link them directly to job security. These voters are not parsing academic debates about global competitiveness; they are responding to a clear signal that government is willing to take sides on behalf of American workers.
But that message carries risks. College-educated women in the suburbs are particularly suspicious of tariffs. These voters already feel squeezed by inflation, and they connect tariffs with higher prices on groceries, clothing, and consumer goods. For them, tariffs are not a patriotic gesture but a hidden tax. Campaigns that push too hard on tariffs could mobilize their opponents while alienating swing voters they need in suburban Philadelphia, Atlanta, or Phoenix.
Republicans still own tariffs rhetorically. Trump turned the policy into a populist rallying cry, and most GOP candidates have adopted it as part of their standard stump speech. Yet cracks are visible. Traditional pro-business Republicans warn that tariffs disrupt supply chains, anger trading partners, and ultimately fuel inflation. The party risks internal friction between its donor class and its working-class base.
Democrats, meanwhile, are caught in a familiar bind. Progressives rail against tariffs as regressive consumer taxes that hurt the poor. Populist Democrats, particularly those representing Midwestern districts, quietly acknowledge that tariffs have political upside among blue-collar workers they cannot afford to lose. Without a clear position, Democrats risk being defined entirely by their opponents, appearing as either hostile to American industry or evasive about their economic plan.
This chart tracks voter concerns from January 2023 through June 2025, highlighting shifting priorities over time. Worries about poor leadership in the U.S. government and an economic slowdown or recession dominate the top of the graph, frequently trading places as the leading concern, with leadership peaking near 48% and recession fears spiking as high as 62% in mid-2023.
Concerns about rising taxes remain a consistent but secondary issue, hovering mostly between 35% and 42% before dipping closer to one-third of voters by mid-2025. Meanwhile, fears of eviction have stayed relatively low throughout the period, fluctuating between 6% and 9%. The overall picture shows a public most preoccupied with broad national leadership and economic stability, while more personal threats, such as eviction, remain a lesser, though persistent, concern.
Resonate’s findings reveal a complicated landscape for Trump’s favorability. On personal style and behavior, half of voters say they are dissatisfied, while only 13% are satisfied, leaving a sizable 36% persuadable. That persuadable group is politically crucial because it shows that many voters remain open to shifting opinions depending on events, messaging, and how campaigns frame the president’s actions.
Image from Resonate PT50 report
When the focus shifts to political policies, the split looks slightly different: 41% are dissatisfied, 19% express satisfaction, and 40% are undecided. This suggests that while Trump’s personality remains polarizing, there is more room for debate on the substance of his policies.
For campaigns, the takeaway is clear. Messaging that zeroes in on policy outcomes rather than personal controversies may resonate with the large bloc of voters who are neither firmly against nor firmly in favor. The persuadable middle, especially, represents both a challenge and an opportunity heading into 2026.
The data shows a widening gap in where Americans turn for medical advice. Trust in government health workers has fallen to under 30% and dropped another 3.6% in the past three months, reflecting persistent skepticism toward official institutions. By contrast, personal doctors are the most trusted source by far, with nearly 60% of voters relying on them for guidance, a 6% increase in just six months.
What is striking is the continued influence of alternative media figures. Even as social media trust slips to just 8%, almost one in four voters still cite alternative media personalities as a credible source of medical information. This suggests that campaigns and policymakers cannot assume mainstream institutions hold the upper hand in health communication. Any effective strategy must account for the fractured ecosystem of trust, where doctors dominate but nontraditional voices still command significant sway.
For Republicans, the danger lies in assuming tariffs are a universal winner. The policy may juice turnout in working-class precincts, but it risks driving suburban moderates further away. If tariffs become the loudest GOP talking point in states like Pennsylvania, they could cost more votes in the Philadelphia collar counties than they gain in Luzerne or Erie.
For Democrats, the risk is paralysis. Silence on tariffs only confirms suspicions that the party is out of touch with blue-collar concerns. If Democrats cede the ground entirely, they invite further erosion among the very voters who once formed their industrial base. Yet if they adopt tariffs wholesale, they risk alienating their progressive flank and undermining their inflation message in urban and suburban markets.
The PT50 report makes clear that tariffs have moved beyond trade policy and now function as a symbolic marker of economic identity. They represent the divide between voters who believe globalization stripped their communities of stability and those who worry that tariffs drive up costs in an already fragile economy. For Republicans, the challenge is to lean into populist appeal without alienating suburban moderates who are wary of higher prices. For Democrats, the task is to engage on tariffs in a way that speaks to workers’ anxieties while keeping their cost-of-living message intact.
As the 2026 cycle approaches, tariffs are no longer just about steel, soybeans, or supply chains. They have become shorthand for which party can credibly claim to defend American families in uncertain times. Campaigns that treat tariffs as a narrow policy fight risk missing the larger story. Success will belong to the side that can translate tariffs into a broader narrative of fairness, security, and opportunity that voters believe will make their everyday lives better.