DAVID MARCUS: Trump's base trusts him to play strong hand in Iran
Of all the ways to try to influence President Donald Trump, the absolute worst is to threaten him. And yet, there is a segment of MAGA world podcasters and influencers insisting that if the commander-in-chief takes direct action against Iran, it will divide and crush Trump's base.
Don't count on it.
The argument from podcast land is that Trump ran on a promise of no new wars and that any direct American action against Iran would betray that promise and plunge America into another forever war in the Middle East.
Let's slow down a bit. In his first term, Trump killed Quasim Soliemani, the top Iranian general, to howls from the left, and some of these same right-wing podcasters, that it would start World War III. It didn't. They were wrong, Trump was right.
Here we are again, the president faced with a choice. He can use U.S. bunker bombs to deal the lethal blow to Iran's nuclear program, or he can take the Joe Biden route, and sheepishly back off his demand for unconditional surrender, and let Iran continue its march to nukes.
Depending on the polling, about 80% of Republicans think that a nuclear Iran poses a critical threat to the United States. And while voters are more split on direct U.S. action, Trump is laser-focused on stopping Tehran's bomb.
Trump excels at solving problems everyone else says are impossible. Just look at the southern border, sealed tight as a Ziploc bag, even though everyone swore only Congress could do that.
Likewise, in Iran, Trump doesn't want to hear a rehashing of the 8 million reasons why nobody can stop their nuclear program. He wants to hear how to stop it, and if those urging restraint can't tell him how, he's going to listen to those who can.
This goes back to the farcical threat that Trump is going to lose his base if he bombs Iran, that the guy in an Ohio diner is going to side with the podcasters over the president he voted for. How did that work out for Elon Musk?
The analogy is an apt one, because Musk's threats and criticisms over the Big Beautiful Bill potentially raising the debt had real resonance among GOP voters, and yet, they chose Trump over a chastened richest man in the world. They support Trump's overarching economic goals more than they dislike the debt.
Same thing in Iran. Is there skepticism about using direct American military might? Of course. This ain't a pickup game of shirts and skins. But do they trust Trump overall to stop Iran from getting nukes? Absolutely.
Talk of regime change and threats to kill Iran's supreme leader understandably make Americans jittery 25 years after the launch of the disastrous war in Iraq, but Trump isn't talking about invading with boots on the ground, and his base knows this.
What the podcasters don't seem to understand is that the only way to influence Trump is to influence his voters. He doesn't care how many followers an influencer has on social media, half of which could be bots from foreign information operations, anyway.
Actually, one has to wonder if our geo-political foes, whose bot farms seek to manipulate social media platforms in America and sow discord, are disappointed by their return on investment.
On X, it seems like to bomb or not to bomb is a divide ripping our country apart. In real life, it simply isn't.
The final thing that Trump understands and that his base trusts, is that the United States was losing the international status quo under his predecessors, on global trade, on the border, on China policy, and yes, in the Middle East. In all of these cases, he is determined to reverse that trend.
There is nothing wrong or unpatriotic about arguing that direct U.S. action against Iran would be a mistake, and Trump no doubt welcomes lively debate. But as Vice President JD Vance, no chickenhawk, pointed out Tuesday, this is Trump's decision to make.
Trump promised that Iran would never obtain a nuke, and he has a habit of keeping his campaign promises, even when taking slings and arrows from noisy voices on his own side.
There isn't a podcast in the world that can keep Trump from fulfilling this promise as he sees fit, and his base, the real power behind the administration, expects nothing less.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Police arrest man accused of sneaking into Memphis mayor's neighborhood, find rope, stun gun
Editor's note: This story has been updated with an additional charge for Trenton Abston and to include publicly available information about his background. Memphis police have arrested the man believed to have trespassed into Memphis Mayor Paul Young's gated neighborhood late on June 15, finding a stun gun, gloves, rope and duct tape in the man's car. 25-year-old Trenton Abston was arrested June 18. He is being charged with aggravated criminal trespassing and stalking, two misdemeanors. Shortly after first appearing in the criminal court system, Abston had felony attempted kidnapping added to his list of charges. "At the time of his arrest, officers recovered a Taser, gloves, rope, and duct tape from his vehicle. The investigation is ongoing, and additional charges may be forthcoming," the Memphis Police Department said in a statement posted to Facebook. "Upon further review of both public and private security camera footage, we have determined that the suspect did not approach multiple homes, as initially reported. Instead, after scaling a wall, the individual went directly to the Mayor's residence." According to a police email obtained by The Commercial Appeal, a man jumped over a fence to Young's East Memphis neighborhood — a gated community — and knocked on his door around 9:30 p.m. on June 15. The man left the house before police could speak with him, but his face was recorded on a doorbell camera. Police credited "the rapid response of our officers and the use of camera technology throughout the neighborhood" with how they were able to identify the man. According to the criminal court system, this was the first time Abston had appeared in court aside from two traffic tickets. The alleged trespassing came amid heightened tensions for politicians after a Minnesota man allegedly broke into multiple homes and shot two Minnesota state lawmakers and their spouses in the early hours of June 14. Two people, Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark Hortman, were killed. Two more people, Sen. John Hoffman and his wife Yvette Hoffman, were injured in a separate incident. It was also the second run-in with potential danger Young has faced since being sworn in as mayor. In March 2024, Young was grabbed by a man attempting to get into his vehicle at Folk's Folly. Young was uninjured in that incident, and his security detail was able to prevent the man from entering the car. A 'small amount of pepper spray' was sprayed at the man in that instance, City Communications Director Penelope Huston said at the time. Lucas Finton covers crime, policing, jails, the courts and criminal justice policy for The Commercial Appeal. He can be reached by phone or email: (901)208-3922 and and followed on X @LucasFinton. This article originally appeared on Memphis Commercial Appeal: Police arrest man accused of trespassing at Memphis mayor's property
UPI
18 minutes ago
- UPI
Trump administration ending LGBTQ suicide hotline in July
Supporters of the LGBTQ community march to the U.S. Capitol on June 8. A specialized suicide lifeline for the LGBTQ community is ending on July 17. Photo by Leigh Vogel/UPI | License Photo June 18 (UPI) -- The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline no longer will offer a specialized service for LGBTQ callers as of July 17. The Trump administration issued a stop-work order to the non-profit Trevor Project, which has operated the specialized 988 LGBTQ suicide lifeline since 2022, the New York Times reported. Officials with the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration confirmed the stop-work order calls for the hotline to cease operation on July 17. Suicide prevention services remain available, but there no longer will be a "Press 3 option" for LGBTQ callers. "Everyone who contacts the 988 Lifeline will continue to receive access to skilled, caring, culturally competent crisis counselors who can help with suicidal, substance misuse, or mental health crises or any other kind of emotional distress," SAMHSA officials said in a prepared statement. Trevor Project Chief Executive Officer Jaymes Black said the end of the specialized hotline is very bad for the LGBTQ community. "This is devastating, to say the least," Black told The Hill. "Suicide prevention is about people, not politics." He called the specialized hotline a "bipartisan, evidence-based service that has effectively supported a high-risk group of young people through their darkest moments is incomprehensible." The LGBTQ suicide prevention service was established in 2022 to address the needs of respective callers, many of whom "experience distinct mental health issues," the New York Times reported. Such issues include discrimination and rejection by family members, which contributes to high suicide rates within the LGBTQ community. SAMHSA officials said the Press 3 service option received $29.7 million in federal funding for the 2023 fiscal year and $33 million for each of the 2024 and 2025 fiscal years. The specialized hotline's entire 2025 budget was spent as of June, and no more funding is coming, according to SAMHSA. The suicide prevention hotline will get the same $520 million in funding for the 2026 fiscal year as it did for 2025, Office of Management and Budget spokeswoman Rachel Cauley told NBC News. The budget won't "grant taxpayer money to a chat service where children are encouraged to embrace radical gender ideology by 'counselors' without consent or knowledge of their parents," Cauley said. The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline was established in 2005, and President Donald Trump in 2020 signed legislation establishing the specialized service for LGBTQ callers. The specialized service received about 1.3 million calls, texts and online chat messages since 2022, according to SAMHSA. It also received an average of 2,100 contacts every day in February.
USA Today
20 minutes ago
- USA Today
A divided Congress mulls war powers as Trump considers strike in Iran
A divided Congress mulls war powers as Trump considers strike in Iran Authorizing foreign wars is the job of U.S. lawmakers, but recent presidents have stretched their own powers to engage in global conflicts. Show Caption Hide Caption Trump teases possible strike on Iran but says it's not too late for deal "I may do it. I may not do it." President Trump teased a possible strike on Iran but also said it is not too late to negotiate. WASHINGTON – Lawmakers in the House and Senate are divided on how and whether to act on President Donald Trump's suggestion that he may authorize a U.S. strike on Iran amid missile attacks between Iran and Israel. Congress is the only branch of government that has the power to declare war, according to the U.S. Constitution, but presidents have stretched their own powers to engage in foreign conflicts in recent decades because the president can authorize strikes in defensive cases. As Israel and Iran trade blows in an escalating aerial war, Israel is aiming to take out Iran's nuclear facilities with the possibility of the U.S. military's help. Trump said on June 18 his decision is imminent and that he wasn't concerned about upsetting parts of his core MAGA political base that are publicly warning against the United States being entangled in another foreign conflict. Trump first ran for president in 2016 as an ardent critic of the war in Iraq. Once in the White House, he ordered a drone strike on an Iranian military commander, Qassem Soleimani, without telling Congress. Former President Barack Obama argued George W. Bush-era war authorizations from the early 2000s covered drone strikes in Yemen. And former President Bill Clinton conducted missile strikes in Sudan and Afghanistan in 1998 without explicit Congressional approval. Some lawmakers of both parties say they want a say in whether the U.S. gets involved in the conflict between Iran and Israel, which began on June 13 when Israel struck Iran. Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Kentucky, and Ro Khanna, D-California, introduced a resolution to block U.S. involvement in the conflict without Congressional approval. "This is not our war," Massie wrote on X. "Even if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution." Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Virginia, introduced a similar measure in the Senate. Both the resolutions in the House and Senate are privileged, which means the chambers will be forced to vote on them as soon as next week, Kaine said. "It is not in our national security interest to get into a war with Iran unless that war is absolutely necessary to defend the United States," Kaine said in a statement. "I am deeply concerned that the recent escalation of hostilities between Israel and Iran could quickly pull the United States into another endless conflict." But support for the resolutions may not fall neatly along party lines. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pennsylvania, has said he will vote against Kaine's push because he wants to ensure Trump can destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities. And Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, said the Constitution is "pretty clear" that the president can't take the country to war without Congressional approval. "You can't have a president just beginning a war on his own," Paul said. "So if that decision should be made, he should come to Congress and ask for permission." However, many Republicans in the Senate say Trump is well within his rights to move unilaterally for a single strike. "A single bombing run, historically, has not been understood to require congressional authorization," said Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. "To engage in sustained hostility, to engage in continued warfare, does require congressional coming to the floor.' Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, told CBS News on June 15 that "the worst possible outcome" would be the survival of the Iranian nuclear program. Destroying it through diplomacy would be preferred, he said. But "if diplomacy is not successful, and we left with the option of force, I would urge President Trump to go all in to make sure that when this operation is over, there's nothing left standing in Iran regarding their nuclear program," he said. "If that means providing bombs, provide bombs... If it means flying with Israel, fly with Israel." Others are keeping their powder dry until Trump makes his plan clear. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota, told reporters on June 17 that Trump is "perfectly within his right to do what he's done so far." Asked whether he would consider allowing a War Powers resolution to come to the floor to authorize force in the case it's needed, Thune said: "We're getting the cart ahead of the horse here." "Clearly if this thing were to extend for some period of time there could be a more fulsome discussion about what the role of Congress should be, and whether or not we need to take action," Thune said. "Right now, let's hope and pray for the best outcome, the best solution. In my view, that would be Iran coming to the negotiating table and agreeing to end their nuclear program."
