Trump presses ahead with Iran war despite warnings of political risk for midterms

Highlights:

• White House sources said there was extensive debate about how the Iran operation could impact Republicans' midterm hopes
• Advisers want Trump focus on domestic affairs, not foreign policy
• Anticipated messaging pivot to focus on healthcare, affordability before midterms delayed once again
• Long-term political impact of attack will depend on how conflict plays out in coming weeks

US President Donald Trump pressed ahead with military strikes against Iran despite private warnings from senior aides that the escalation could be difficult to contain and carry political risks for Republicans in November's midterm elections, according to two senior White House officials and a Republican close to the administration.

The large-scale attack has drawn near-unanimous praise from foreign policy hawks in Washington, who have long dreamed of toppling the authoritarian regime in Tehran. But some White House officials worry the foreign policy gamble may derail Republican chances of holding onto control of Congress at a time when war-wary voters are more concerned with the cost of living than conflicts abroad.

Before the strikes, Trump repeatedly sought briefings on how the military action could allow him to project strength domestically, the senior White House officials said. Top aides cautioned that US intelligence did not provide a clear guarantee that escalation could be avoided once strikes began and that the administration risked tying its political fortunes to an unpredictable aftermath.

Trump ultimately sided with those who believed decisive action would show him as a strong leader, even if it carried long-term risks, the officials said.

None of those officials expect immediate political fallout. Instead, they expect what one described as a "slow‑burn effect," driven by the duration of the conflict, scope of retaliation, number of American casualties and impact on gas prices.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll on Sunday showed only one in four Americans approved of the US strikes that killed Iran's leader. About half of the respondents — including one in four Republicans — said they believe Trump is too willing to use military force. The poll closed before the US military announced the first American casualties in the operation.

"The President's decision to launch Operation Epic Fury is one that presidents of both parties have contemplated for more than fifty years, but none had the courage to execute," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement. "Right now, the White House's main priority is working alongside the Pentagon and the interagencies to ensure the continued and ultimate success of the operation."

Focus on economy again defied

With public sentiment in mind ahead of the midterms, White House officials and Trump advisers had been urging the president to focus on the topics that are top of mind for Americans, like healthcare and affordability, as he did in the State of the Union address four days before the attack.

The weekend strikes underscored how quickly that strategy has failed, at least for now. The president said in Sunday interviews the Iran operations are expected to be a four- to five-week process, and he continued to brace the country for more American deaths after the US military announced three service members had been killed.

"The juxtaposition between a successful State of the Union address that focused on affordability and the economic issues that voters care about and going to war in the Middle East days later is not just whiplash-inducing, it's head-spinning," said Rob Godfrey, a Republican strategist.

"Making midterm voters comfortable with that juxtaposition will be one of the most important things that the White House needs to undertake in the next few weeks."

One informal Trump adviser, who has been to the White House in recent days, argued that the main electoral danger lies not with middle-of-the-road or independent voters, but with members of Trump's MAGA movement, for whom non-interventionism was a key part of the president's pitch during the 2024 campaign.

Many of those voters could simply stay home during the midterms, during which voter turnout already tends to be low, the adviser said.

With 58% of Americans disapproving of Trump's performance in office, according to a February Reuters/Ipsos poll, Republicans will need heavy turnout among core supporters to fend off Democratic gains that could flip control of the US House of Representatives and maybe even endanger the Republican stronghold in the Senate.

Competitive house races more vulnerable

White House aides are modeling how a prolonged military engagement in Iran, casualties and higher fuel costs could erode public support in competitive congressional districts, the White House officials said.

The White House believes competitive races in the House, where Republicans hold a narrow majority, are far more at risk from fallout from Iran than the Senate map, the sources said.

The White House political models show dozens of swing districts where even modest voter skepticism could prove decisive, or at least force vulnerable Republican representatives - such as Colorado's Gabe Evans, Wisconsin's Derrick Van Orden and Pennsylvania's Rob Bresnahan - to vote on thorny war-powers resolutions and answer questions about a widening conflict abroad when they want to be focused on domestic issues like the cost of living.

A senior Republican operative working to hold onto the party's congressional majorities said foreign intervention carries more political risk than upside for Trump. Foreign policy victories oftentimes do not register with voters, though foreign policy quagmires typically do.

"Unless this operation goes bad, voters, especially for the midterms, don't care about foreign policy," the operative said.

Trump's capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro in a raid last month prompted little political blowback and resulted in no American deaths. However, since that operation in early January, Trump's approval rating dropped from 42% to 39%, according to the latest Reuters/Ipsos poll.

Analysts said a short-lived war that results in Iran giving up its nuclear program and installing new leaders would be received more positively than a protracted conflagration in which many Americans die.

Interviews with Trump supporters show that - even as a sizeable minority are wary of his growing penchant for foreign intervention - many are willing to go along with his transformation from self-declared "peacemaker" to aggressive military tactician.

"This totally blindsided me, I didn't even know this was even being thought about," said BJ Moore, an 83-year-old Trump voter from Atlanta, Georgia, about the Iran operation. "No one wants to be involved in a war, but Iran just killed thousands of their own people, so I'm fine with what Trump did."