Exclusive: Americans worry conflict with Iran could escalate, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds
WASHINGTON, June 23 (Reuters) - Americans are anxious over a brewing conflict between the U.S. and Iran and worry the violence could escalate after President Donald Trump ordered the bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll that closed on Monday.
Some 79% of Americans surveyed said they worried "that Iran may target U.S. civilians in response to the U.S. airstrikes." The three-day poll, which began after the U.S. airstrikes and ended early Monday before Iran said it attacked a U.S. air base in Qatar, showed Americans were similarly concerned about their country's military personnel stationed in the Middle East. Some 84% said they worried in general about the growing conflict.
The poll, which surveyed 1,139 U.S. adults nationwide, underscored deep divisions in America over what Washington should do next and highlighted the political risks faced by Trump, whose presidential approval rating fell to 41%, the lowest level of his current term in office that began in January.
The poll had a 3 percentage point margin of error. The U.S. bombing took place just two days ago and the public's view of the conflict could evolve in the days and weeks ahead.
Only 32% of respondents said they supported continued U.S. airstrikes, compared to 49% who said they were opposed. However, within Trump's Republican Party, 62% backed further strikes and 22% were opposed. Republicans were more deeply divided when asked if they supported an immediate end to U.S. involvement in the conflict with Iran, with 42% saying Washington should end its involvement now and 40% opposed to the idea.
Significant majorities of Democrats were opposed to bombing Iran further and in favor of ending the conflict immediately.
Trump ordered the U.S. military to bomb Iran's nuclear sites on Saturday, a dramatic and risky shift in foreign policy following repeated pledges by Trump to avoid military interventions in major foreign wars.
The president's overall approval rating, down 1 percentage point from 42% earlier in the month, has largely held steady in recent months, but is below the 47% reading in a Reuters/Ipsos poll just after he returned to the White House.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
24 minutes ago
- Reuters
VIEW Investors react after Trump announced ceasefire between Iran and Israel
June 23 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Monday that a "complete and total" ceasefire between Israel and Iran will go into force with a view to ending the conflict between the two nations. "On the assumption that everything works as it should, which it will, I would like to congratulate both Countries, Israel and Iran, on having the Stamina, Courage, and Intelligence to end, what should be called, 'THE 12 DAY WAR'," Trump wrote on his Truth Social site. U.S. crude futures fell after Trump's announcement, which came after the close of trading on Wall Street. S&P 500 e-mini futures rose slightly when trading resumed. JACK ABLIN, CHIEF INVESTMENT OFFICER, CRESSET WEALTH ADVISORS, PALM BEACH, FLORIDA "This lifts some of the geopolitical uncertainty surrounding the markets, although, for the most part, equity investors have been kind of shrugging the uncertainty off. I think it's certainly an incremental positive, but I don't think it's a catalyst for the next bull market." "It certainly sounds like a significant milestone, and I hope it it's true." "Part of the problem holding equities back has been higher oil prices and geopolitical risk, and a cease fire or end to the conflict would go a long way towards solving both those issues." "This may be the match that sparks a continuation of the rally we saw today."
The Independent
24 minutes ago
- The Independent
UK lifts warning for Qatar as Trump says Iran and Israel have agreed ceasefire
The UK has lifted advice for its citizens to shelter in place in Qatar after Iran launched a retaliatory attack on a US military base there. Iran launched a missile attack on the base after America's strikes on its nuclear facilities on Saturday. However, US President Donald Trump appeared to react positively, calling the move 'a very weak response' and thanking Tehran 'for giving us early notice' to avoid any casualties. He then claimed Israel and Iran had agreed a 'complete and total ceasefire' to be phased in over 24 hours. Foreign Secretary David Lammy had urged Iran to 'take the off ramp' and return to the negotiating table with the US after American B-2 stealth bombers and a salvo of submarine-launched missiles hit Iran's nuclear facilities on Saturday night. But after a US security alert, the Foreign Office advised British nationals to 'shelter in place' and Qatar shut its airspace as a precaution. The attacks came shortly after. Armed forces minister Luke Pollard said the UK was monitoring the 'fast-changing situation' closely and that 'the UK Government utterly condemns any escalation'. 'Force protection now is at its highest state across all deployed units in the Middle East,' he told the Commons. 'The additional RAF Typhoon jets announced by the Prime Minister have now arrived in the region to reinforce our posture, deter threats and reassure our partners, and I want to be clear, we will not rule out sending further capabilities if they are required,' Mr Pollard said. Meanwhile, the UK started evacuating Britons from Israel, with the first group of 63 flown back via Cyprus and due to return to the UK on Monday. Downing Street said 'around 1,000' people had requested a seat on an evacuation flight – a quarter of the 4,000 who had registered their presence in Israel or Palestine with the Foreign Office. The Government has withdrawn staff from its embassy in Iran and it is operating 'remotely', Mr Lammy told MPs. The Foreign Secretary previously spoke of a two-week window for a diplomatic solution after Mr Trump's apparent decision last week to delay US military action. On Monday, he said the window had 'narrowed' but told MPs the need for a diplomatic solution remained. Mr Lammy said: 'My message for Tehran was clear, take the off ramp, dial this thing down, and negotiate with the United States seriously and immediately. 'The alternative is an even more destructive and far-reaching conflict, which could have unpredictable consequences.' Downing Street had said that preventing Tehran from obtaining a nuclear bomb was a 'good thing' for the UK, but declined to comment on whether the US strikes complied with international law. Meanwhile, oil prices reached their highest level for nearly six months over fears a regional conflict could restrict supply, especially if Iran decided to blockade the Strait of Hormuz. Mr Lammy told MPs the Government was 'closely monitoring' the energy markets and urged Iran to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, saying a blockade would be 'a monumental act of economic self-harm' and make reaching a diplomatic solution even harder.
The Guardian
28 minutes ago
- The Guardian
RFK Jr and Dr Oz announce insurers' ‘pledge' to reform prior authorization
The US health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr and Dr Mehmet Oz announced a voluntary agreement with insurance companies to change prior authorization practices – where private health insurers require patients to ask for permission before they can receive medical treatment. The majority of Americans get health insurance through a private company, whether through an employer, or a privatization of public health insurance programs, such as Medicare Advantage. Prior authorization is an insurance company practice that is both common and abhorred. There are whole social media accounts devoted to egregious examples of it, campaigns for change built around it, and, in Oz's words, there is 'violence in the streets' over prior authorization – an allusion to the broad daylight killing of an insurance company CEO. Oz said repeatedly in a press conference on Monday that 85% of Americans or their loved ones had experienced a delay or denial of care thanks to prior authorization. 'The pledge is not a mandate, this is not a bill or rule – this is an opportunity for industry to show itself,' said Oz, who heads the enormous federal health insurance bureaucracy, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS). CMS oversees the health insurance of about 68 million seniors through Medicare and about 71 million low-income and disabled Americans through Medicaid. 'It's a good start,' said Oz, 'and the response has been overwhelming.' Kennedy called the agreement 'momentous' and said it would help make the health system, 'work to make our country healthy again'. The announcement of voluntary measures echoed one made earlier in the year by Kennedy, who announced the administration had an 'understanding' with food companies to phase out synthetic dyes. Food companies later told reporters there was no agreement. Concurrently, Republicans are working to push a bill through Congress that is expected to result in at least 16 million Americans losing health insurance in the next decade. The bill would add red tape to Medicaid and, advocates say, 'punish' states that expanded care to the low-income. With Biblical references and a bullet point chart, Trump administration officials, two Republican members of Congress and even an actor who played a doctor on TV – Eric Dane of Grey's Anatomy – laid out their hopes for insurers to implement this voluntary agreement that they said covered 275 million Americans. Should they do so, insurers would work to standardize the prior authorization approval and deliver decisions faster and near real-time (not over the course of, say, weeks). Additionally, insurers would reduce the number of procedures and drugs subject to prior authorization, honor existing prior authorization approvals in the event a patient switches insurers in the course of care and build a 'public dashboard' of how the industry is doing which would allow 'medical professionals' to review every denial. Notably, insurance companies made a similar pledge to doctors, hospitals and Americans in 2018, during the first Trump administration. In a press release announcing that agreement, insurers pledged to work with doctors and hospitals to 'eliminate' prior authorization for some procedures, 'minimize care delays' and 'protect continuity of care for patients'. By 2022, the American Medical Association (AMA), which signed onto that agreement, was arguing publicly that insurers failed to live up to their end of the bargain. A 2023 survey by the AMA of 1,000 doctors found 7% of physicians had a prior authorization lead to 'a patient's disability or permanent bodily damage, congenital anomaly or birth defect or death'. Trump administration officials did acknowledge that the practice could be egregious and warranted change. 'A vaginal delivery,' often requires prior authorization, said the Trump administration Medicare director Chris Klomp, 'Why is that a question mark in this day and age?' The insurance industry often argues insurers 'target its use' to prevent wasteful testing by doctors. However, prior authorization is known to be incredibly widespread: in 2023, a spokesperson for a lobbying group told FierceHealthcare that 93% of beneficiaries were in plans that required prior authorization for nearly a quarter of services. Beneficiaries of the federal privatization program Medicare Advantage, which allows private health insurers to manage beneficiaries of the public program Medicare (and is widely regarded as more expensive for taxpayers), issued about two prior authorization requests for every one of its 32 million beneficiaries in 2023, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. The practice has even spawned cottage industries: a ProPublica investigation found one company contracted by major insurers sold a product called 'the dial' that used an algorithm backed by artificial intelligence to control denial rates. Unlike the federal government, some states have found the nerve to legislate. In just one example, New Jersey required insurers to turn decisions around faster, required peer-to-peer conversations between doctors about the insurers' decision and required insurers to share denial rates and reasons – at least some of which one Republican congressman at the dais said he wanted, but was not in the agreement. 'I will say this being a surgeon: I'm a skeptic, the proof is going to be in the pudding,' said Dr Greg Murphy, a Republican from North Carolina, who added that he would be open to regulations, but questioned whether insurers would abide by the agreement: 'Are they doing something to placate an audience?'
