Trump’s US Taxpayer-Funded Ads Rehash 2024 Election, Draw Bipartisan Reactions

A black-and-white spot shown Sunday is nearly identical to an ad Trump’s presidential campaign used in 2024. The White House is defending it.

An ad boosting President Donald Trump's stature in an off-presidential election year that is circulating on television and social media is garnering bipartisan pushback due to being funded by U.S. taxpayers.

The spot shows Trump walking through a hallway while audio from one of his campaign speeches plays over the footage.

“This is the final battle,” Trump says before promising to remove “the warmongers,” “globalists,” “communists, Marxists and fascists” and what he calls the “sick political class.”

The advertisement is nearly identical to a video Trump posted to Truth Social in January 2024 while campaigning to return to the White House. That version continued for several additional seconds with Trump campaign branding and instructions for supporters to contact his campaign.

The version airing now instead ends with the words “Paid for by the U.S. Government.”

The government-funded advertising push began last week with another 30-second commercial featuring Trump declaring that the United States would “never be a communist country” while the text touted tax cuts, American manufacturing and law enforcement.

A third spot features Trump at Mount Rushmore and excerpts from his Fourth of July speech celebrating the nation’s 250th anniversary.

The “Final Battle” ad alone had generated more than $362,000 in tracked spending by Sunday, according to AdImpact data cited by CNBC.

Earlier tracking showed spending on the first advertisement had already climbed above $400,000 as its reach expanded nationally.

It remains unclear which federal agency or appropriation is paying for the campaign.

Football fans tuning in for Sunday’s NFL games got an unexpected addition to the usual lineup of beer and gambling commercials.

The 30-second Trump spot aired during Fox broadcasts of the Seattle Seahawks-Washington Commanders and Carolina Panthers-Cleveland Browns games on Sunday, according to CNN.

The Daily Beast reported that the ads appeared during the New York Jets-Detroit Lions game. All three matchups were part of the NFL’s Week 3 Sunday schedule, and all aired on Fox Sports.

The placement immediately spilled onto social media, where football viewers posted screenshots and questioned why the federal government had purchased commercial time during NFL games—and, in some cases, said they initially mistook the spot for conventional campaign advertising.

“I assumed it was a campaign or advocacy ad,” one viewer wrote in a Reddit discussion after seeing it during the Commanders-Seahawks game. “But no. They paid for it with our tax dollars.”

The reaction added a sports and entertainment wrinkle to a growing Washington controversy over a series of government-funded advertisements promoting Trump and his administration just weeks before the Nov. 3 midterm elections.

The ad also ran during Fox News Sunday, Saturday Night Live and college football broadcasts over the weekend. Trump was present at the Texas-Tennessee game on Saturday.

One placement came during Saturday’s Ohio State-Illinois game, according to AdImpact.

Republican Senators Join the Criticism

The advertisements have drawn objections from Democrats and at least two Republican senators.

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) called the government-funded advertising “inappropriate” last week.

“It’s not like they need a GoFundMe page to have the dollars to do that sort of ad, and they could do it,” said Tillis, who is not seeking reelection. “But using taxpayer dollars, it feels like [former Hungarian Prime Minister] Viktor Orban.”

Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) also questioned the spending before sharpening his criticism Sunday during an appearance on CBS News' Face the Nation.

“I don’t think any public official, including President Trump or [former Department of Homeland Security Secretary] Kristi Noem or John Kennedy, should spend public money on private ads for themselves,” Kennedy said.

Kennedy had previously criticized Kristi Noem over a $220 million government-funded advertising campaign that prominently featured her, days before she was relieved of her position.

Asked whether a rule should prevent the practice, Kennedy said, “I think there ought to be a rule that you can’t—well, there probably is a rule, you can’t spend public money to promote yourself.”

Democratic lawmakers have separately asked the White House to stop the ads and disclose their source of funding, arguing they violate federal restrictions on taxpayer-funded publicity or propaganda.

White House Says Ads Are Public Service Announcements

The White House has rejected claims that the advertisements are campaign material and describes them as public service announcements.

“The announcements are very clearly not campaign ads; President Trump is not on the ballot and there is no call to action,” the White House said.

Officials have pointed to taxpayer-funded public information campaigns under previous administrations, including Medicare advertising during President George W. Bush’s administration and COVID-19 vaccination campaigns under President Joe Biden.

Federal agencies are allowed to spend money informing Americans about government programs and defending administration policies.

Appropriations law, however, has long restricted taxpayer funding for unauthorized “publicity or propaganda,” and the Government Accountability Office has previously found violations by both Republican and Democratic administrations.

Richard Painter, who served as the chief White House ethics lawyer during the Bush administration and now teaches law at the University of Minnesota, has argued the Trump advertisements cross that line.

“It is a political ad and cannot be paid for out of federal funds,” Painter told HuffPost after the first commercial appeared.