Trump's opposition faces another adversary: The 'rally around the flag' phenomenon
On Wednesday, June 18, three days before bombing Iran, Donald Trump had two gigantic American flags planted at the White House. One stood on the South Lawn, and the other on the North side. The banners, hoisted on 30-meter poles like those seen at car dealerships, were unveiled during an inauguration ceremony. The president praised the poles as "the most magnificent poles ever made" – "tall, tapered, rust proof," he added, before turning to the workers and asking if they were undocumented immigrants.
Trump has always professed an excessive love for the flag. At his campaign rallies, he sometimes even hugs the Stars and Stripes placed on stage. And since his re-election, he has not only reshaped the executive branch but has also sought to transform the White House itself, unafraid to give the modest 1,800 monument the feel of a Potomac Mar-a-Lago. Next on his list: a ballroom.
On June 18, as he inaugurated his new flags, the 47 th president faced headwinds: His popularity had begun to decline again. More than half of Americans (52%) disapprove of his actions, compared with 46%, according to the average compiled by Nate Silver. Even when accounting for his supposed strongholds – economy, immigration – his approval ratings do not exceed 50%, well below those of his predecessors after six months in office.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
38 minutes ago
- Euronews
Oil prices rise despite fragile ceasefire between Iran and Israel
Investors kept an eye on the Middle East on Wednesday as a fragile ceasefire between Iran and Israel appeared to hold after initial shakiness. Both sides claimed victory; Iran's president said Israel had suffered a 'historic punishment', while Israel's prime minister argued the offensive had removed 'the Iranian nuclear threat'. A new US intelligence report nonetheless found that Tehran's nuclear programme had only been set back by a few months by US strikes. Washington denied the findings of the leaked report. Early in Europe, Brent crude had risen around 1.15% to $67.91 a barrel, while WTI was 1.21% higher at $65.15. The prices suggest the market has still not fully calmed after the conflict in the Middle East, with investors continuing to monitor the shaky ceasefire. US President Trump rebuked both countries for violating the announced ceasefire on Tuesday. 'Israel, as soon as we made the deal, they came out and they dropped a load of bombs, the likes of which I've never seen before, the biggest load that we've seen,' he said. On his social media platform, Truth Social, he wrote: 'Israel, do not drop those bombs. If you do, it is a major violation. Bring your pilots home, now!' Trump claimed that neither Iran nor Israel "know what the f*** they're doing". Stocks, meanwhile, rose modestly on Wednesday. Dow Jones futures rose 0.06% to 43,452.00, while S&P 500 futures gained 0.05% to 6,149.25. In Asian trading, the Shanghai Composite index climbed 0.44% to 3,435.60, the Nikkei 225 rose 0.31% to 38,910.93, Hong Kong's Hang Seng jumped 0.78% to 24,364.79, while South Korea's Kospi was almost flat, rising 0.01% to 3,104.20. Australia's S&P/ASX 200 notched up 0.09% to 8,563.20. The US Dollar Index was up 0.13% at 97.98 although the currency has still failed to recover from losses seen earlier this year. The euro rose less than 1% against the dollar while the Japanese Yen dropped around 0.12% against its US safe-haven alternative. 'The situation in the Middle East is fluid. While the downside risks have subsided, the situation can change quickly and the balance of risks remains weighted toward higher oil prices,' said Ryan Sweet, Chief US Economist at Oxford Economics, on Tuesday.
Euronews
an hour ago
- Euronews
Will Trump really pull US troops out of Europe?
History may repeat itself, but not always with the same impact. In 2012, when then-US defence secretary Leon Panetta announced the withdrawal of two combat brigades - roughly 8,000 troops - from Europe in order to reduce military spending, western European governments shrugged it off. When US president Donald Trump mused this year about withdrawing US forces from Europe, it sent barely concealed shockwaves through European chancelleries. The difference: Panetta at the time said America's security commitments to Europe and to NATO were "unwavering". By contrast, Trump has threatened not to protect NATO members that spend too little on defence. And his own vice president and defence secretary made disparaging comments about European allies in a now-infamous group chat earlier this year, with defence chief Pete Hegseth expressing his 'loathing of European free-loading', according to the Atlantic magazine. Get the difference? On the eve of the NATO summit in The Hague this week, the chatter about the US military leaving Europe for good has somewhat subsided. Yet, European diplomats do fear an announcement by Trump after the summit. The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a Euronews request for comment. Reason enough to hear from top US military experts whether they think a massive US troop withdrawal is on the cards and what the impact of such a move would be for the United States – logistically, financially and politically. First in line is the US ambassador to NATO, Matthew Whitaker, a lawyer by education, whose task has increasingly tended to soothing nervous European allies. 'Look, European security is on top of my mind,' he said at a recent public forum in Brussels. 'America needs allies, we can't do it all alone. And the reports on the US drawing down its troop presence are absolutely not true. Everything else we will discuss with our allies.' Right now, the US has nearly 84,000 active service members in Europe, according to the US European Command (EUCOM) in Stuttgart. The total number varies due to planned exercises and regular rotations of troops in and out of the continent. For example, following Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, some 20,000 were deployed to states neighbouring Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine to support Ukraine and contain the conflict. Over the course of the war, the total number of troops has ranged between approximately 75,000 and 105,000 military personnel, primarily from the Air Force, Army, and Navy. The bulk of those troops is stationed in Germany (40,000), Poland (14,000), Italy (13,000) and the UK (10,000) with the rest scattered across the continent from Norway to Turkey. The practical logistics of a US withdrawal from Europe, such as redeployments to the US or elsewhere, would be significant and time-consuming. 'If this were to happen in a systematic manner, it would take many months, probably at least a year,' Mark Cancian, a retired colonel and senior advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, told Euronews. 'The entire equipment, every tank, needs to be prepared and shipped. Then the families of the soldiers need to be shipped and finally the service members themselves,' he added. 'All in all, a quarter of a million people might be impacted, maybe more.' The biggest problem would be where they might go. 'Current bases in the US could absorb 5,000 people, maybe 10,000,' Cancian said. 'But the rest? It would take years to build new facilities.' Whether Trump would decide something of that strategic and political magnitude the effects of which would only almost certainly be seen beyond his presidential term is more than doubtful, according to Ian Lesser, a senior political analyst at the German Marshall Fund (GMF), a transatlantic think tank. 'We already saw an attempt by Trump to withdraw a sizable force from Europe during his first term, which only met considerable resistance from the security community in the US and was eventually shelved by President Biden,' Lesser told Euronews. The US Congress would also have to approve the withdrawal, which is not certain given the number of defence hawks, especially in the Senate. A recent bipartisan draft proposal by Republican Lindsey Graham and Democrat Richard Blumenthal on tougher anti-Russian sanctions reportedly has the backing of up to 90 of the 100 senators. 'Trump has no desire to look weak. But a dramatic reduction of the American military footprint in Europe would do exactly that to him,' Lesser said. In addition, a large part of the US forces in Europe are not members of combat brigades, which typically consist of about 5,000 soldiers each, but support troops who man a huge military infrastructure, especially in Germany. Historically, Ramstein Air Base, for instance, and its neighbouring Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, the largest American hospital outside the United States, played a key role in supporting forward military operations, especially in the Middle East. 'It would make little sense to announce plans to withdraw US troops from Europe the moment there is an escalating war happening between Israel and Iran,' former US ambassador William Courtney told Euronews. 'And it would probably lead to massive criticism,' added Courtney, an adjunct senior fellow at the RAND Corporation, a global think tank. And then there are Trump's efforts to mediate in the war in Ukraine. 'Trump viewed a US troop withdrawal in connection with his strong hopes for an end of the war and improved relations with Moscow. Yet, it turned out there is no basis for that, no possibility, the negotiating positions of Russia and Ukraine being too far apart,' Courtney said. Were US troops to be withdrawn, Europe would have to replace the entire military infrastructure currently provided by the US at all levels, according to a study by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) based in London. That means bases, training areas, weaponry and ammunition, administrative and organisational architecture, intelligence provisions and much more. This comes with a hefty price tag: the nine authors of the IISS study estimate that replacing the US contribution to NATO with European assets would amount to approximately $1 trillion (€870 billion). It's not clear what the cost of a US troop withdrawal would mean for the US taxpayer. None of the experts quoted in this article was ready to advance a number. That's one reason none of them considered such a decision as very likely. 'No way,' Daniel Runde told Euronews, a senior advisor with Washington-based consulting firm BGR Group and author of The American Imperative: Reclaiming Global Leadership through Soft Power. 'Trump will absolutely not do it. His aim is to get the Europeans to spend 5% of their GDP on defence. Then he will move on.'
France 24
2 hours ago
- France 24
Israel-Iran war live: Trump slams claim that strikes only set back Iran nuclear programme by months
President Donald Trump on Tuesday rejected reports of a preliminary US intelligence assessment that found the strikes carried out on Iranian nuclear facilities this weekend have set back Tehran's nuclear programme by only a matter of months. Trump claimed the nuclear sites in Iran were 'COMPLETELY DESTROYED' on Truth Social. Follow our live blog for the latest developments. Iran 's president announced 'end of 12-day war ' as ceasefire holds through its first day. Israel said Iran's nuclear programme set back 'by years', campaign 'not over'. Iran Revolutionary Guards said it arrested a European person accused of spying on 'military' sites. A US intelligence assessment suggested US strikes on Iran did not destroy the country's nuclear sites, only setting back Iran's nuclear program a few months.
