New research from Indivisible and Lake Research Partners, based on a survey of 6,000 Americans, indicates that Democratic candidates who combine a focus on lowering costs with a commitment to fighting corruption are significantly more likely to win over battleground voters. The findings challenge the conventional wisdom that affordability and accountability are competing priorities, showing instead that they are mutually reinforcing.
Survey Reveals Strong Voter Support for Combined Message
The polling, conducted among 2026 battleground voters, key 2028 Senate battleground voters, and voters of color across the South, found that 71% of 2026 battleground voters are extremely concerned about politicians rigging the system to benefit themselves at the public's expense. Additionally, 69% are extremely concerned about political corruption costing taxpayers money, and 88% strongly agree that the nation must focus on both lowering costs and addressing corruption.
Most notably, 73% of 2026 battleground voters are more likely to support a candidate who both fights to lower costs and takes on corruption and special interests. This compares with just 19% who prefer a candidate focused solely on corruption and 5% who prefer a candidate focused solely on lowering costs. The data suggests that pairing the two issues creates a far more persuasive message than either issue alone.
Accountability Strengthens Credibility of Affordability Plans
Ezra Levin and Leah Greenberg, co-executive directors of Indivisible, argue that the point is not simply that voters care about both issues, but that accountability gives an affordability agenda credibility. When voters believe the system is rigged, a promise to lower costs may sound like another campaign pledge that will never become reality. Showing voters that Democrats are willing to fight against the status quo answers the question lurking behind every campaign economic promise: why should voters believe this time will be different?
The authors note that this helps explain why antiestablishment outsiders are viewed more favorably than either political party, as they are seen as more willing to challenge the system rather than simply manage it. For Democrats, this is both a warning and an opportunity. Concrete plans to lower costs matter, but they become more credible when Democrats make clear they are willing to confront the powerful interests that have benefited from the current political order.
Democrats Urged to Connect Corruption to Economic Pressures
With Republicans in control of the House, Senate, presidency, and Supreme Court, Levin and Greenberg contend that Republicans cannot credibly claim to be fighting a corrupt regime they themselves control. Democrats, however, can force them to defend the indefensible. The authors suggest that Democrats should connect the Trump administration's self-dealing and abuses of power to the economic pressures voters are feeling, showing that the fight against corruption is also a fight against the forces making life more expensive, and then pair those attacks with concrete plans to lower costs.
If Democrats win in November on that message, the authors stress that they must follow through. A mandate to take on corruption and lower costs cannot end on election day. Democrats should use the power voters give them in 2027 to conduct aggressive oversight, expose politicians and corporate actors lining their pockets at the public's expense, and hold the powerful accountable. This follow-through is essential to rebuilding a credible opposition party and a Democratic brand that too many Americans see as part of the problem.
Clear Path to November
The path to November is clear: run on affordability, but make the case for why Democrats can actually deliver it by pairing concrete plans to lower costs with a commitment to take on corruption and special interests. Voters do not just want to hear that Democrats understand the affordability crisis; they need to believe Democrats are willing to fight the people and interests standing in the way of solving it. Affordability and accountability, together, offer Democrats the strongest case to voters – and a mandate to govern after winning.
