Trump’s decision to strike Iran opens new fissures in midterms.
- The San Juan Daily Star
- 2 days ago
- 4 min read
By TIM BALK
President Donald Trump’s decision to attack Iran pushed a new, unpredictable issue to the forefront of American politics just as the midterms were getting underway, leaving both major parties navigating a volatile and potentially divisive conflict.
Republicans on Saturday largely cast the strikes as a vital operation to confront a dangerous, authoritarian adversary, while Democrats warned that the operation could spiral into a perilous and protracted military campaign that would threaten to destabilize the region.
In Texas, where Democrats hope to flip a Senate seat after years of disappointment, the two leading Democratic rivals in Tuesday’s primary condemned the strikes.
“CONGRESS, not the PRESIDENT, but CONGRESS has the EXCLUSIVE authority to declare war!” Rep. Jasmine Crockett wrote on social media, calling on congressional Republicans and Democrats to “stand up to this President.”
State Rep. James Talarico, her chief rival, wrote on social media: “No more forever wars.”
Republicans in a competitive three-way clash for the Senate nomination in Texas hailed the attack in glowing statements: Sen. John Cornyn, the embattled incumbent, said he was “proud of the support being provided by President Trump.” Ken Paxton, the state attorney general, said the president had displayed “courageous leadership.” And Rep. Wesley Hunt, a late entry into the primary race, said Trump had delivered “bold leadership” and “bold action.”
Still, a few Republicans sided with Democrats in arguing that Trump had reached beyond his powers and was at odds with his own past warnings about intervention abroad. And a handful of Democrats, concentrated in swing congressional districts, expressed measured support for the attack, which the United States carried out jointly with Israel.
“It’s one of these put-your-finger-to-the-wind situations,” said Steven Maviglio, a Democratic consultant in California, noting that many elected officials still had limited information about the operation. He added, “People are just testing the waters right now.”
Across the country, midterm candidates released a flurry of videos, social media posts and statements responding to news of the strikes, which was soon followed by an announcement by Trump that the attack had killed Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s longtime supreme leader.
In Maine, Graham Platner, a progressive Democratic running in the state’s closely watched Senate primary, quickly sought to frame the bombing as the action of an American president seeking to strengthen his political hand going into the midterms.
“He is doing this because he is flailing politically,” Platner, a Marine veteran who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, said in a video on social media, appearing near a war memorial in snowy Fort Kent, Maine. “He ran on ending foreign intervention like this. But because he sees his political future at risk, he is willing to send young American men and women into harm’s way.”
Platner was joined by his Democratic primary rival, Gov. Janet Mills of Maine, in forcefully criticizing the strikes. Trump, the governor said in a statement, was “recklessly pushing the United States into a dangerous conflict.” Platner said that “no one in the Democratic Party should support this kind of operation.”
Some Democrats did.
Rep. Greg Landsman of Ohio, a Democrat in a swing Cincinnati-area district, said in an interview that the strikes had been “a long time coming” after the authoritarian Iranian government killed thousands, according to aid groups, in a crackdown on protesters this winter.
“My hope is that this is the beginning of the end — that this leads to a lasting peace in the region,” Landsman said, adding: “At some point, you have to say, ‘Enough,’ and we’re not going to continue to allow this bully to wreak havoc on the region or its own people.”
Landsman said he was particularly pleased that the Trump administration had informed the so-called Gang of Eight, the top congressional leaders and the chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, before the attack began.
A University of Maryland poll conducted two weeks ago found that just 21% of Americans supported a U.S. attack on Iran. But an AP-NORC poll, conducted last week, found that 79% of Americans were extremely, very or moderately concerned about Iran’s nuclear program.
Among Republicans who were conspicuously quiet for much of Saturday was Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who is considered one of the most vulnerable Senate incumbents. In a statement Saturday evening, Collins said that Iran had posed a “serious threat” but added that sustained military operations “require full engagement with Congress.”
“There are important questions that will be discussed in the Senate’s classified briefings with Administration officials next week,” she said.
Most of the Republican base is squarely behind Israel and will be likely to support the intervention, at least in the short term, said Rob Collins, a former executive director of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. He said he thought it was a more straightforward issue for Republicans than it was for Democrats.
But “it’s first hours,” Collins added, noting that there was still a large group of Republicans who wanted to “wait and see how this unfolds.”
In Iowa, Rep. Zach Nunn, a Republican who faces a potentially challenging path to reelection, offered the president cautious praise even as he emphasized his opposition to American boots on the ground in Iran.
“As a combat veteran, I do not take military action lightly,” he wrote on social media.
Other Republicans who hail from the party’s libertarian wing were critical of Trump’s actions.
“I am opposed to this War. This is not ‘America First,’” Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, who faces a primary challenger backed by Trump, wrote on social media. Massie is pushing for a congressional vote on the matter.
Former Rep. Steve Israel, a New York Democrat who previously chaired the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said it was too soon to say what the ramifications of the attack would be for the midterms.
But Israel noted that foreign conflicts had cut in both directions in the past: In 2002, Republicans picked up seats after President George W. Bush rallied Americans behind the war in Afghanistan. Four years later, Republicans faced a midterm drubbing as popular opinion turned against the war in Iraq.
Comments