2026-02-02T10:00:46.898Z / 美国有线电视新闻网(CNN)
一场持续数月的人工智能未来控制权争夺战于11月蔓延至副总统JD·万斯(JD Vance)的办公室，当时两位唐纳德·特朗普总统的盟友进行了面对面的坦诚对话。
白宫人工智能主管大卫·萨克斯(David Sacks)在2025年试图将相关措辞纳入必须通过的联邦拨款法案中，这些条款本会消除各州的人工智能监管措施，并让国会对这项强大技术的新监督权力受限。但长期担任特朗普法律顾问、对总统的新科技盟友持怀疑态度的迈克·戴维斯(Mike Davis)两次帮助召集保守派活动人士和立法者阻止了这一企图。与此同时，特朗普公开表达了对其优先事项之一缺乏进展的不满。
据两名了解此次会面的人士透露，在万斯的办公室里，以好战风格著称的戴维斯指责萨克斯试图绕过国会，在缺乏足够保障措施的情况下将人工智能强加给美国民众。萨克斯则反驳称，他只是在执行特朗普释放人工智能繁荣的愿望，而戴维斯却在阻碍这一进程。
反科技阵营与保护自由派的对立
这场冲突暴露了特朗普阵营内部就如何激进地推广这项正迅速重塑社会和经济的技术产生的日益扩大裂痕。一方是影响力不断增强的科技领袖及其盟友；另一方是担心工作岗位受到冲击的工薪阶层选民、关注儿童安全的文化保守派，以及对科技行业持深深怀疑态度的“让美国再次伟大”(MAGA)运动拥护者。
尽管这个不稳定的联盟为特朗普带来了短期胜利，但人工智能控制权的争夺战才刚刚开始——而国会可能成为下一个战场。为此，科技公司已雇佣数百名说客，并向国会竞选活动捐赠数百万美元，同时还在人工智能友好型超级政治行动委员会(Super PAC)储备资金，以应对中期选举。反对者也正在积极准备动员。
“我们将拼命抗争，”前特朗普顾问、科技批评人士史蒂夫·班农(Steve Bannon)在总统签署行政命令后于自己的播客中表示，“所以不要以为有人会轻易屈服。”
“沙神”与“公民自由”的博弈
特朗普已迅速采取行动推动这项技术，据某些衡量标准，人工智能在其第一任期大部分时间里帮助支撑了美国经济。萨克斯担任白宫人工智能和加密货币特别顾问期间，特朗普在去年夏天制定了加速人工智能项目的框架。为在人工智能竞赛中击败中国，其政府还对英特尔公司(Intel Corporation)进行了10%的股权收购，并对外国芯片征收25%的关税。
但特朗普明确表示希望进一步推进，承诺为科技公司提供他们渴望的监管自由。许多科技公司都是其政治运作和新白宫宴会厅的最大资金支持者。
“我们将有大量投资进入，但如果他们必须获得50个不同州的50种不同批准，那你就别想了，因为这根本不可能做到，”特朗普在签署行政命令时表示。
对这些努力的反对来自特朗普运动内部的有影响力人士。班农将其极具影响力的“战争室”播客定位为日益壮大的反科技民粹主义浪潮的前沿阵地，戴维斯是其常客。同样持这种立场的还有人工智能怀疑论者、“战争室”撰稿人乔·艾伦(Joe Allen)，他走遍全国试图说服保守派听众抵制科技公司及其将技术强加给人类的计划。
“他们最终目标是打造‘沙神’，”艾伦表示，“我担心世界上有足够多轻信的人，无论这些研究项目产出什么，都会被奉若神明。”
民意转向与政治风险
随着选举年临近，政府拥抱人工智能的风险开始显现。皮尤研究中心9月的民调显示，一半美国人表示对人工智能与生活的日益交织感到担忧而非兴奋，而只有10%的人感到兴奋多于担忧。
在不同政治派别的社区中，地方领导人正响应公众压力，阻止或减缓人工智能项目，尤其是数据中心。越来越多的候选人将不断上涨的电费归咎于耗能巨大的人工智能公司。
萨克斯认为，保守派对人工智能的“强烈反感”源于疫情期间对大型科技公司的敌意以及对社交媒体的长期担忧。他称这种看法是错误的。
“我认为，关注公民自由的右翼人士不应希望政府在人工智能领域扮演这种超侵入性的角色，”他在自己的播客中表示。
但一位为科技客户提供政治策略建议的共和党人士告诉CNN，人工智能公司应关注日益增长的反对声浪，因为“从长远来看，特朗普可能会面临政治逆风而背弃人工智能。”
“这应该是该行业真正关切的问题，”该人士要求匿名以自由发表评论，“我认为这就是为何支持者们如此热衷于强调输给中国的国家安全风险，他们试图将特朗普逼入困境。”
一些共和党人已开始背离特朗普对人工智能的全面支持。当一项禁止州级人工智能监管的条款首次出现在国会预算协调法案中（该法案承载了特朗普大部分立法议程）时，17位共和党州长联名致信国会要求将其从法案中删除。佛罗里达州州长罗恩·德桑蒂斯(Ron DeSantis)推动本州制定人工智能保障措施，坚定宣称“我们不会放弃任何权利”。与此同时，参议员乔希·霍利(Josh Hawley)举行听证会，斥责人工智能高管未能保护儿童。
随着更多共和党人将反科技立场纳入政治品牌，反对声浪不仅给特朗普带来挑战，也给他最可能的继任者万斯带来难题。这位副总统长期以来试图在与硅谷的深厚联系和民粹主义根源之间走钢丝——这一紧张关系在其办公室的戴维斯-萨克斯会面中显露无遗。
“美国掌权之路在于通过反科技寡头的大门，”班农在被问及这一新兴分歧时对CNN表示，“你必须坚定、一致且真诚。”
公众情绪转变与策略调整
即使在特朗普的人工智能支持者中，也日益意识到公众情绪正在迅速转向反对这项技术。去年12月，萨克斯和其“全面投入”(All-In)播客的联合主持人在与直言不讳的人工智能批评家、保守派评论员塔克·卡尔森(Tucker Carlson)交谈时承认，该行业在应对日益增长的公众恐惧和批评方面行动迟缓。
卡尔森就能源消耗、工作岗位流失以及“人工智能可能完全失控并吞噬我们”等问题向主持人施压，同时也嘲讽了这项技术参差不齐的公开推广。
“谁负责这个技术的营销？”卡尔森问道。
“我不知道，”萨克斯回答，“是我吗？”
迅速变化的民意迫使白宫调整策略。特朗普签署的最终行政命令与11月泄露的草案相比明显缩减。与草案不同，最终版本明确表示政府“必须与国会合作”制定国家人工智能标准。该命令还不适用州对未成年人的保护或数据中心监管——这两项是戴维斯长期以来一直要求的关键例外条款。
“我们正积极参与并推动这一进程，”戴维斯在特朗普签署命令后于班农的播客中表示。
萨克斯未回应置评请求，戴维斯也拒绝讨论在万斯办公室的会面，仅表示：“我不会谈论我与白宫官员的私人讨论。但大卫·萨克斯是个好人，他正本着诚意与我合作，以制定最有利于特朗普总统的人工智能政策。”
国会山第一次出现了议员们主动塑造人工智能未来并回应选民对该技术日益增长的反对情绪的势头。一名了解谈判情况的共和党参议院工作人员表示，在2025年大部分时间里，国会实际上被边缘化，而白宫内部派系就该给萨克斯和科技高管多大自由度展开辩论。但行政命令“应该是促使议员们采取行动的关键推动力”。
田纳西州共和党参议员玛莎·布莱克本(Marsha Blackburn)（与戴维斯密切合作）预计将在未来几周内提出新的国家人工智能法规。不过，特朗普已任命得克萨斯州参议员特德·克鲁兹(Ted Cruz)（科技行业盟友）牵头立法工作。
任何立法都可能需要民主党支持才能在参议院通过，而少数党尚未阐明其自身的人工智能监管策略。民主党参议员此前曾联合阻止和解法案中的人工智能相关条款，但在对人工智能潜力持乐观态度与主张加强监管的议员之间仍存在广泛分歧。
参议院协议还必须通过众议院和多数党领袖史蒂夫·斯卡利斯(Steve Scalise)——后者去年曾试图在《国防授权法案》中加入禁止州级人工智能法律的条款，后被戴维斯、布莱克本等人动员反对。
行业游说与政治博弈
多次失败后，人工智能倡导者已暗中敦促萨克斯和斯卡利斯放弃这一做法。去年年底，亲特朗普超级政治行动委员会“Building America’s Future”发布了由总统青睐的民调机构提供的调查数据，显示美国人希望国会制定人工智能政策，而非各州各自为政。但数据也显示，选民压倒性支持保护儿童免受人工智能不良影响的立法。
据知情人士透露，这项民调旨在向国会的斯卡利斯及其他志同道合的共和党人表明一条潜在前进道路——一条既能获得科技巨头支持，又能解决共和党亲家庭派系对人工智能的担忧的路径。
一位与反州级监管组织合作的共和党人士称，这种政治格局对共和党而言是“雷区”。
“我们代表工薪阶层，如果我们对就业影响不够敏感，毫无疑问会付出政治代价；如果我们对保护儿童不够重视，同样会付出政治代价，”该人士表示，“我认为总统也意识到了这一点。”
随着2026年竞选活动升温，人工智能行业主要参与者已更熟悉如何在华盛顿赢得影响力。OpenAI联合创始人兼总裁格雷格·布罗克曼(Greg Brockman)去年向支持特朗普的超级政治行动委员会“MAGA Inc.”捐赠了2500万美元。另一个名为“引领未来”(Leading the Future)的超级政治行动委员会由行业利益集团支持，已积累约1亿美元资金以打击反人工智能候选人。
但倡导者承认，这远远不够，可能需要改变人工智能的叙事方式来对抗反对声浪。
“很多美国人害怕人工智能且不理解它，”今年发起人工智能基础设施联盟以倡导行业发展的前亚利桑那州参议员克里斯滕·西尼玛(Kyrsten Sinema)表示，“人工智能公司在帮助人们看到人工智能在日常生活中的应用方面做得并不出色，这个故事需要被讲述。”
埃隆·马斯克最近认为，未来二十年内，人工智能自动化和机器人技术将使工作成为可选，人类将拥有所需一切，大多数人将依靠全民基本收入生活。天使投资人、萨克斯“全面投入”播客的联合主持人杰森·卡拉卡尼斯(Jason Calacanis)呼吁“一场曼哈顿计划”，让全国团结起来，包括“10个新城市、1000万套新房子，以及全民免费医疗和贸易学校免费教育”。
“这才是解决问题的办法，”他表示，“这是没人在做的。”
但这些幻想场景并未安抚最强烈的反对者。艾伦称卡拉卡尼斯的提议是“如何取代所有人并安抚民众的计划”。
卡尔森则将这种乌托邦愿景斥为“我最反感的人工智能对话内容”。
美国有线电视新闻网记者哈达斯·戈尔德(Hadas Gold)和克里斯汀·霍姆斯(Kristen Holmes)对此报道亦有贡献。
Trump’s AI push exposes a divide in the MAGA movement
2026-02-02T10:00:46.898Z / CNN
A monthslong power struggle over the future of artificial intelligence spilled into Vice President JD Vance’s office in November, when two of President Donald Trump’s allies met face-to-face for a frank conversation.
David Sacks, the White House AI czar, had spent 2025 trying to tuck language into must-pass federal funding bills that would have wiped away state AI regulations and left Congress with limited new oversight of the powerful technology. But Mike Davis, a longtime Trump legal adviser skeptical of the president’s new tech allies, twice helped rally conservative activists and lawmakers to stop it. Trump, meanwhile, had grown publicly frustrated at the lack of progress on one of his top priorities.
In Vance’s office, Davis, known for his combative style, accused Sacks of trying to run over Congress and impose artificial intelligence on the country without sufficient safeguards, according to two people with knowledge of the meeting. Sacks countered that he was simply carrying out Trump’s desire to unleash an AI boom, and Davis was getting in the way.
Ad Feedback
Vance ultimately encouraged Sacks to work with Davis. A few weeks later, Trump signed an executive order, shaped in part by both men, that aims to block states from enforcing their own artificial intelligence regulations and directs his administration to team up with Congress to create a “single national framework” for AI. The order is widely expected to face legal challenges.
The episode laid bare a growing fault line within Trump’s coalition over how aggressively to unleash a technology that is rapidly reshaping society and the economy. On one side are increasingly influential tech leaders and their allies. On the other are working-class voters fearful of job disruption; cultural conservatives worried about child safety; and MAGA loyalists who view the industry with deep suspicion.
While the uneasy alliance delivered Trump a short-term victory, the battle over AI is just beginning — and Congress may be the next front. In anticipation, tech companies have hired hundreds of lobbyists and donated millions of dollars to congressional campaigns, and they are stockpiling cash in AI-friendly super PACs ahead of the midterms. Opponents are also preparing to mobilize.
“We’re going to fight like hell,” Steve Bannon, a former Trump adviser and a leading tech critic, said on his podcast after the president signed the executive order. “So don’t think that anybody is placated.”
‘Sand gods’ vs. ‘civil liberty’
Trump has already moved quickly to boost a technology that, by some measures, helped prop up the US economy through much of his first year back in office. With Sacks working as a special White House adviser on artificial intelligence and cryptocurrencies, Trump laid out a framework last summer to fast-track AI projects. To gain an edge in the AI race against China, his administration also took a 10% stake in the chipmaker Intel Corporation and imposed 25% tariffs on foreign chips.
But Trump has made clear he wants to go further, promising to deliver for tech companies the regulatory freedom they crave. Many of those companies are among the largest financial backers to his political operation and his new White House ballroom.
“We have the big investment coming, but if they had to get 50 different approvals from 50 different states, you can forget it, because it’s not possible to do,” Trump said when he signed the executive order.
Opposition to these efforts has emerged from influential voices within Trump’s own movement. Bannon has positioned his influential “War Room” podcast at the vanguard of a growing wave of anti-tech populism. Davis is a regular guest.
So is Joe Allen, a leading AI skeptic and “War Room” contributor who has traveled the country trying to urge conservative audiences to push back against tech CEOs and their plans to force their technology on humanity.
“They are ultimately aiming toward building sand gods,” Allen said. “And I fear there are enough credulous people in the world that whatever comes out of these research projects will be worshipped as a god.”
The risks of the administration’s embrace of AI are beginning to crystalize heading into an election year. Half of Americans say they are more concerned than excited about AI’s increasing intersection with their lives, according to a Pew Research Center poll from September, while just 10% feel more excited than concerned.
In communities of all political stripes, local leaders are responding to public pressure to block or slow AI projects, especially data centers. Increasingly, candidates for office are blaming rising utility bills on energy-hungry AI companies.
Sacks has argued the “very visceral” conservative disdain for AI stems from hostility toward Big Tech dating to the pandemic and from lasting fears about social media. He says that’s misguided.
“I don’t think that people on the right who are concerned about civil liberty should want the government to play this super-intrusive role in AI,” he said on his podcast.
But one Republican who advises tech clients on political strategy told CNN that AI companies should be concerned by growing backlash because “there’s a potential in the long run for Trump to see political headwinds and walk away from AI.”
“It should be a genuine concern of the industry,” said the person, who asked not to be named in order to speak freely. “I think that’s why there’s so much discussion from proponents about the national security risks of losing the AI race to China. They’re trying to box Trump into a corner.”
Some Republicans are already breaking from Trump’s full embrace of AI.
When language banning state-level AI regulations first surfaced in a congressional budget reconciliation package that carried much of Trump’s legislative agenda, 17 Republican governors sent a letter calling on Congress to strip it from the bill. In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis has pushed ahead with proposals for his state to put its own safeguards around AI, defiantly declaring, “We’re not going to give up any rights.” Sen. Josh Hawley, meanwhile, has held hearings to admonish AI executives for failing to protect children.
As more Republicans stitch anti-tech stances into their political brands, the backlash is creating challenges not only for Trump, but also for Vance, his most likely successor. The vice president has long tried to straddle a line between his deep ties to Silicon Valley and his populist roots — a tension on display in the Davis-Sacks meeting in his office.
“The path to power in America is through the anti-tech oligarch gate,” Bannon said to CNN when asked about this emerging divide. “You have to be hard, consistent and authentic.”
Even among Trump’s AI cheerleaders, there is a growing realization that public sentiment is quickly shifting against the technology. In December, Sacks and the co-hosts on his “All-In” podcast acknowledged that the industry had been slow to respond to mounting public fears and criticism during a conversation with conservative commentator Tucker Carlson, an outspoken AI critic.
Carlson pressed the hosts on concerns ranging from energy consumption to job disruption and “the potential this gets completely away from us and eats us.” But he also mocked the technology’s uneven public rollout.
“Who’s in charge of the marketing for this?” Carlson asked.
“I don’t know,” Sacks replied. “Me?”
The fast-changing sentiments have forced a shift in tactics from the White House.
The final executive order Trump signed was noticeably scaled back compared with a draft that leaked in November.
Unlike that version, the final copy said his administration “must act with the Congress” on a national AI standard. The order also won’t apply to state protections for minors or regulations of data centers, two critical carve-outs that Davis had long demanded.
“We’re very much at the table and driving this process,” Davis said on Bannon’s podcast after Trump signed the order.
Sacks did not respond to a request for comment. Davis also declined to address the meeting in Vance’s office, telling CNN: “I am not going to talk about my private discussions with White House officials.”
“But David Sacks is a good man who is working with me in good faith for the best AI policy for President Trump,” he added.
On Capitol Hill, there is for the first time real momentum for lawmakers to shape the future of AI and respond to growing voter backlash over the technology. For much of 2025, Congress was effectively sidelined while factions within the White House debated how much latitude to give Sacks and tech executives, said a Republican Senate staffer with knowledge of the negotiations. But the executive order “should be the kick in the pants lawmakers need to act,” the staffer said.
Sen. Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican who has worked closely with Davis, is expected to introduce new national AI rules in the coming weeks. Trump, though, has tapped Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, an ally of the tech industry, to take the lead on legislation.
Any legislation would likely need Democratic support to pass the Senate, and the minority party has yet to articulate its own strategy for regulating AI. Democratic senators previously banded together to block AI language from the reconciliation package, but a broader split remains between lawmakers optimistic about AI’s potential and those eager to crack down on the technology.
A Senate deal must also get through the House and Majority Leader Steve Scalise, who tried last year to tack on to the National Defense Authorization Act a blanket ban on state AI laws before Davis, Blackburn and others mobilized opposition.
After multiple defeats, AI advocates have quietly urged Sacks and Scalise to move off that approach.
Late last year, the pro-Trump super PAC Building America’s Future released survey data from the president’s favorite polling firm that suggested Americans want Congress to set AI policy, rather than a patchwork of states. But their data also showed voters overwhelmingly supported legislation protecting children from AI’s more problematic powers.
The polling was intended to signal a potential path forward for Scalise and other aligned Republicans in Congress — one that could be supported by Big Tech but also address some looming child safety concerns that those in the pro-family wing of the GOP have with AI, according to a person with knowledge of the strategy.
One Republican working with groups advocating against state regulations called the political landscape a “minefield” for the GOP.
“We represent working people, and if we’re not sensitive towards the impact on jobs, no question, there’s going to be political cost to that. If we’re not sensitive to protecting children, no question” there will be a political cost, the person said. “I think the president’s aware of that.”
As the 2026 fight heats up, major players in the AI industry have become more versed in the ways of winning influence in Washington.
Greg Brockman, the co-founder and president of OpenAI, a company at the forefront of the artificial intelligence boom, gave $25 million to the pro Trump super PAC MAGA Inc. last year. Another super PAC, called Leading the Future, is backed by industry interests and has amassed about $100 million to target anti-AI candidates.
But that will only go so far, advocates acknowledge, and a change in the AI narrative might be needed to combat a vocal opposition.
“Lots and lots of Americans are scared of AI and don’t understand it,” said former Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, who launched the AI Infrastructure Coalition this year to advocate for the industry. “AI companies haven’t done the most excellent job of helping people see AI in their daily lives. That story needs to be told.”
Elon Musk recently argued that within two decades, AI automation and robotics will eventually make work optional, humans will have everything they need and most people will live off a universal income. Jason Calacanis, an angel investor and Sacks’ “All-In” co-host, called for “a Manhattan Project” that the country can rally around. It would include “10 new cities with 10 million new homes and free health care for everybody and free education for trade schools,” he said.
“That’s what solves the problem,” he said. “That’s what nobody’s doing.”
But those fantastical scenarios have hardly appeased the loudest dissenters. Allen called Calacanis’ proposal a plan for “how to replace everyone and keep the population placated.”
Carlson, for his part, dismissed such utopian visions as “the thing that offended me most about the AI conversation.”
CNN’s Hadas Gold and Kristen Holmes contributed to this report.