US voters are beginning to connect political self-dealing with the cost of living

Sixty-nine per cent of registered US voters say they are very or somewhat concerned about corruption, self-dealing or conflicts of interest in Donald Trump's second administration. That includes almost half of his 2024 voters. Nearly half of all respondents believe corruption has been a larger problem in this administration than in its predecessors.

The Financial Times and Focaldata surveyed 1,648 registered voters online from October 16 to 18; the reported margin of error is 2.8 percentage points. These are perceptions, not findings that any particular transaction was illegal. The White House rejects allegations of conflicts and says the president is fighting government fraud. The results nevertheless align with other current polling: a Washington Post–ABC–Ipsos survey found a rising share of Republicans believe Trump is using office to enrich himself.

The more consequential connection is economic. Fifty-six per cent in the FT poll say their financial position has worsened since January 2025, and more than one-quarter report cutting essentials such as groceries or healthcare. Fifty-four per cent blame the administration or congressional Republicans for rising prices; more than 40% say inflation makes them likelier to vote Democratic. The war with Iran, tariffs and fuel costs give voters immediate prices through which to interpret claims about favouritism and private gain.

Corruption often struggles as an electoral issue because it feels remote from household life. Democrats are trying to link the two: connected people receive favourable deals or regulatory treatment while ordinary households pay more. The poll does not prove that message caused the shift, and a separate AP–NORC survey finds voters still rank lowering costs and ending the Iran war above investigations. But it suggests an anti-corruption argument becomes more potent when framed as a distributional one. The midterm question is not simply whether voters disapprove of self-dealing. It is whether they believe it explains why the system feels expensive and unequal—and whether that belief changes turnout.