March 18 2026 - 1:45pm
Several days after the Iran war began, I asked Rep. Thomas Massie if he sensed Democrats were eagerly voting for his bipartisan War Powers Resolution to cloak their support for the conflict. Massie said he thought about introducing a formal declaration of war just to see how many people across the aisle would vote with Donald Trump. The ambivalence in their caucus may explain why Democrats are so far struggling to capitalize on the politics of this unpopular conflict.
This reflects a broader trend, as Democrats are certainly unpopular at the moment. A poll conducted by NBC News in the early days of the war found the Democratic Party to be less popular with voters than ICE. What’s worse, the same poll found that, by a significant margin, registered voters have more positive views of the Republican Party than Democrats, at 37%. For months, the RealClearPolitics average has shown Democrats to be less favorable than Republicans.
All this bad news for Democrats comes despite Trump’s low approval rating and high public disapproval of the new war. Democrats parrot these criticisms. Moderates including Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Elissa Slotkin have issued clear soundbites against Trump, arguing that his strategy is reckless and against the Constitution.
None of this cuts through, though, and it’s because there’s a lack of a distinct strategy on the part of the Democrats. Take Slotkin, whose social media posts actively promote arguments for Iran-related action against Vladimir Putin. On CNN, she said defeating Iran is “very difficult to do without a long-scale engagement”. This is a deliberate half-in, half-out approach to war with Tehran, leaving open the possibility that she supports some use of force, in line with Trump.
Democrats are using other lines. Slotkin and high-profile Democratic colleagues are understandably tying the war to affordability questions, such as gas prices and fertilizer costs. But there’s one clear argument they’re missing, which is the most powerful: Trump appears to be flip-flopping on his promise of stopping endless wars.
It’s easy to see why. That would involve Democrats appearing to agree with MAGA supporters who were deeply attracted to the President’s frequent anti-war messaging. They can’t do that because it would chip away at their belief system and call into question their party’s recent history. The Democrats are still, by all accounts, pro-war. This is the reason House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries will still defend Barack Obama’s strikes on Libya even while condemning Trump.
In a recent discussion with Tim Miller, progressive strategist Morris Katz marvelled at how Schumer was missing an “open layup” on Iran. Miller suggested Schumer’s statement that “no one wants an endless war” misses the mark because it doesn’t imply that Democrats are anti-war, just that they don’t want them to be endless. Katz agreed, noting that Democrats were calling for a vote on the war without even saying how they’d vote.
Katz suggested Democrats would be better off telling voters that Trump promised peace and affordability and is delivering the opposite. This sounds obvious enough. It works on two levels, highlighting rising costs and a shaky foreign policy. But it would also highlight perhaps the most powerful criticism: a breach of trust between Trump and voters.
Ultimately, Democratic Party leaders are not opposed to war with Iran. They’re opposed to this particular war with Iran, its duration and the fact that it is being run by Trump. That puts them at odds with their ostensibly anti-war voters, and leaves them vulnerable to fail at making the most of a political gift.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe