logo
Swing Voters Skeptical of Trump Involving US in Iran-Israel Conflict—Data

Swing Voters Skeptical of Trump Involving US in Iran-Israel Conflict—Data

Newsweek3 hours ago

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Swing voters are resistant to President Donald Trump potentially involving the United States in the conflict between Iran and Israel, according to data exclusively shared with Newsweek by Impact Social.
Newsweek reached out to the White House via email for comment.
Why It Matters
Trump is weighing whether to involve the U.S. in the conflict, which escalated earlier this month when Israel launched new strikes against Iran aimed at diminishing its nuclear capabilities. Israel, as well as the U.S., has warned Iran may be close to having the ability to build nuclear weapons.
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi told Fox News there is no proof Iran has plans to create a nuclear weapon.
However, many Americans would not necessarily be on board with the U.S. joining the conflict, recent surveys suggest, putting Trump in a challenging situation. The White House said on Thursday that Trump will make a decision within two weeks, and European leaders engaged with Iran on Friday in hopes of de-escalating the situation.
What To Know
Swing voters are skeptical of the U.S. joining the conflict, according to the Impact Social data. The data stem from Impact Social's analysis of social media discussions among swing voters, including disillusioned Trump voters, centrists, and Obama-Trump voters, using social media discussions dating back to May 2016 to identify more than 40,000 swing voters.
Only 9 percent of posts analyzed indicated pro-war sentiment, while 28 percent were anti-war. The majority, at 63 percent, were more neutral, such as sharing articles about the situation.
Of those sharing anti-war sentiment, 24 percent expressed it would be "reckless" to enter the conflict, while 18 percent raised concerns about the U.S. being "used by" Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Fifteen percent expressed blame toward Trump himself over dismantling the Obama administration's Iran nuclear deal.
President Donald Trump in the Oval Office at the White House on June 5, 2025.
President Donald Trump in the Oval Office at the White House on June 5, 2025.Phil Snape of Impact Social wrote that anti-war swing voters "voters draw parallels to Iraq and Afghanistan, accusing Trump of repeating past mistakes."
"Many fear the U.S. is lurching toward 'World War III,' with Iran seen as a more formidable opponent and the stakes higher than in previous engagements," he wrote. "Some accuse the Trump administration of twisting intelligence to fit a pro-war narrative—an eerie echo, they note, of 2003."
Some swing voters also feel the U.S. entering the conflict would be a betrayal of Trump's pledge of no new wars on the campaign trail, Snape wrote.
"Other critics target Trump directly, blaming him for dismantling the Iran nuclear deal brokered by the Obama administration. This reversal, they argue, eliminated a functional—if imperfect—deterrent to Iranian nuclear ambitions, replacing it with a confrontational strategy that has now spiraled out of control," he wrote.
Among those who shared pro-war posts, 35 percent believe it is now time to "finish the job," viewing Iran potentially having nuclear weapons as a "direct threat to the U.S. and Israel." Thirty percent praised Trump's leadership. Nineteen percent shared general anti-Iran sentiment.
Those voters "trust him to manage the situation and protect America."
"For them, Trump is a commander who understands the stakes, one who has 'saved America before' and will do so again," he wrote. "Many cite previous Iranian aggression, including proxy attacks on U.S. troops, as justification for action."
Snape said that what is most striking is the "deep skepticism cutting across both left and right-leaning swing voters."
"This is not a reflexive anti-war response but rather a specific rejection of the idea that U.S. interests are served by joining Israel's military campaign. Critics cite historical precedent, perceived manipulation by foreign leaders, and fears of another endless entanglement in the Middle East," he said.
What People Are Saying
President Donald Trump told reporters on Wednesday: "I don't want to fight either. I'm not looking to fight. But if it's a choice between fighting and them having a nuclear weapon, you have to do what you have to do, and maybe we won't have to fight."
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader of Iran, in a public address: "The Americans should know that any U.S. military intervention will undoubtedly be accompanied by irreparable damage. The U.S. entering in this matter is 100 percent to its own detriment. The damage it will suffer will be far greater than any harm that Iran may encounter."
Senator Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, Wednesday on X (formerly Twitter): "The Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war. That's why I filed a resolution to require a debate and vote in Congress before we send our nation's men and women in uniform into harm's way."
What Happens Next
Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met with European diplomats in Geneva on Friday. Araghchi said Iran would not engage with the U.S. while Israeli strikes continued.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump says "maybe" he'll try to fire Fed chief Jerome Powell
Trump says "maybe" he'll try to fire Fed chief Jerome Powell

CBS News

time18 minutes ago

  • CBS News

Trump says "maybe" he'll try to fire Fed chief Jerome Powell

President Trump suggested Friday he may try to fire Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, calling the central bank leader a "Total and Complete Moron" for leaving interest rates steady. The president has been lashing out against Powell for months, criticizing the central banker — whom Mr. Trump appointed in his first term — for not lowering interest rates at a faster pace. It's unclear whether the president is legally allowed to fire Powell before his term ends in May 2026, and Mr. Trump said in April he has "no intention" of doing so. But in a post criticizing Powell on Friday, Mr. Trump floated the idea, writing: "Maybe, just maybe, I'll have to change my mind about firing him?" "But regardless, his Term ends shortly!" the president added. Any attempt to fire Powell would be legally contentious. Federal law and prior court precedent says members of the Federal Reserve's Board of Governors, including the chair, can only be fired "for cause." The Supreme Court ruled last month that the Trump administration can fire members of other independent federal agencies — but specifically exempted the Fed, calling the central bank a "uniquely structured, quasi-private entity." Powell said last year he will not resign if Mr. Trump asks him to step down. The two met at the White House last month. Mr. Trump also called Powell a "dumb guy" in his Friday evening post. "I fully understand that my strong criticism of him makes it more difficult for him to do what he should be doing, lowering Rates, but I've tried it all different ways," Mr. Trump wrote on Truth Social. "I've been nice, I've been neutral, and I've been nasty, and nice and neutral didn't work! He's a dumb guy, and an obvious Trump Hater, who should have never been there." The Fed declined to comment to CBS News. Why has Trump criticized Powell? Mr. Trump's issues with Powell hinge on the Federal Reserve's interest rate policies. The central bank's interest rate-setting committee, which is chaired by Powell, has kept its benchmark rate steady so far this year, after lowering it slightly from a two-decade high last year — following a series of rate hikes in 2022 and 2023 to quell inflation. Most recently, the committee opted against lowering rates earlier this week, drawing backlash from Mr. Trump. The decision comes with tradeoffs. High interest rates can slow down economic growth and make it more expensive for Americans to borrow money, which is why Mr. Trump wants cuts. But lowering interest rates too quickly could overheat the economy and cause inflation to spike yet again. While inflation has cooled off in recent years, it's still higher than the Fed's 2% annual target, and the Fed warns Mr. Trump's tariffs could push prices up. "Because the economy is still solid, we can take the time to actually see what's going to happen," Powell said earlier this week. Mr. Trump disagrees, nicknaming Powell "Mr. Too Late" and arguing that inflation is already low. On Friday, the president amped up his criticism, calling Powell a "numbskull" and suggesting the other members of the rate-setting Federal Open Monetary Committee "override" him. Mr. Trump also said Powell should lower interest rates immediately and just hike them again if inflation spikes — an idea that's at odds with the Fed's cautious strategy. "Don't say that you think there will be Inflation sometime in the future, because there isn't now but, if there is, raise the Rates!" wrote Mr. Trump. The attacks are a redux of Mr. Trump's first-term criticism. The president pushed back against Powell after the Fed hiked interest rates in 2018, but called Powell his "most improved player" for slashing rates during the 2020 pandemic.

RFK Jr. goes after immigrants to cut health insurance costs
RFK Jr. goes after immigrants to cut health insurance costs

Politico

time22 minutes ago

  • Politico

RFK Jr. goes after immigrants to cut health insurance costs

The Trump administration is tightening eligibility for Obamacare coverage in what it says is a bid to combat a 'surge of improper enrollments' and to lower insurance costs broadly. Critics say the rule changes will cause eligible people to miss out on a chance at subsidized health insurance and increase the uninsured rate. 'With this rule, we're lowering marketplace premiums, expanding coverage for families, and ensuring that illegal aliens do not receive taxpayer-funded health insurance,' HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in a press release that projects $12 billion in savings from the rule changes next year. Those changes include reducing the enrollment period for plans by two weeks, adding paperwork requirements for some enrollees, ending the use of federal subsidies to help cover the cost of transgender people's transition-related medical care, and barring Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals recipients from purchasing insurance on the exchanges. Those are immigrants brought to the country without documentation when they were children whom President Barack Obama protected from deportation. The final rule also repeals a special enrollment period for individuals in households earning less than 150 percent of the federal poverty level. CMS estimates about 725,000 to 1.8 million people will lose coverage as a result of the final rule. In January, CMS said about 24 million people had signed up for Obamacare coverage for 2025. Many of those will lose coverage because enrollment will be less consumer-friendly, said Larry Levitt, who advised President Bill Clinton on health policy and is now executive vice president for health policy at KFF, a health care think tank. 'I think the combination of the shorter open enrollment period and the more complex income verification rules will result in more people falling through the cracks,' Levitt said. Levitt noted that many policies in the final rule are effective only for the 2026 plan year, but that could change if Congress codifies them. The House last month included some of the changes in its version of President Donald Trump's megabill. The Senate hasn't yet voted on its version of the bill, which aims to extend Trump's 2017 tax cuts but needs budget savings to do it. The final rule shortens the annual open enrollment period from Nov. 1 to Dec. 31. The previous enrollment period ran from Nov. 1 to Jan. 15. The regulation also eliminates a policy under which individuals with low incomes who are eligible for premium-free plans are automatically re-enrolled in them. Under the new rule, they will be re-enrolled with a $5 monthly premium in plan year 2026. If the individual files paperwork showing they are still eligible for a no-premium plan, they'll be re-enrolled in one. Taken together, CMS estimates the changes will cause individual health insurance premiums to drop by an average of 5 percent.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store