Democrats are at odds over the Israel-Iran war as Trump considers intervening
After nearly two years of stark divisions over the war in Gaza and support for Israel, Democrats are now finding themselves at odds over U.S. policy toward Iran as progressives demand unified opposition to President Donald Trump's consideration of a strike against Tehran's nuclear program while party leaders tread more cautiously.
U.S. leaders of all stripes have found common ground for two decades on the position that Iran cannot be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon. The longtime U.S. foe has supported groups that have killed Americans across the Mideast and threatens to destroy Israel. But Trump's public flirtation with joining Israel's offensive against Iran may become the Democratic Party's latest schism, just as it is sharply dividing Trump's isolationist 'Make America Great Again' base from more hawkish conservatives.
While progressives have staked out clear opposition to Trump's potential actions, the party leadership is playing the safer ground of demanding a role for Congress before Trump could use force against Iran. Many prominent Democrats with 2028 presidential aspirations are staying silent, so far, on the Israel-Iran war.
'They are sort of hedging their bets,' said Joel Rubin, a former deputy assistant secretary of state who served under Democratic President Barack Obama and is now a strategist on foreign policy. 'The beasts of the Democratic Party's constituencies right now are so hostile to Israel's war in Gaza that it's really difficult to come out looking like one would corroborate an unauthorized war that supports Israel without blowback.'
Progressive Democrats use Trump's ideas and words
Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., has called Trump's consideration of an attack 'a defining moment for our party' and has introduced legislation with Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., that calls on the Republican president to 'terminate' the use of U.S. armed forces against Iran unless 'explicitly authorized' by a declaration of war from Congress.
Khanna used Trump's own campaign arguments of putting American interests first when the congressman spoke to Theo Von, a comedian who has been supportive of the president and is popular in the 'manosphere.'
'That's going to cost this country a lot of money that should be being spent here at home,' said Khanna, who is said to be among the many Democrats eyeing the party's 2028 primary.
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who twice sought the Democratic presidential nomination, pointed to Trump's stated goal during his inaugural speech of being known as 'a peacemaker and a unifier.'
'Very fine words. Trump should remember them today. Supporting Netanyahu's war against Iran would be a catastrophic mistake,' Sanders said about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Sanders has reintroduced legislation prohibiting the use of federal money for force against Iran, insisted that U.S. military intervention would be unwise and illegal and accused Israel of striking unprovoked. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York signed on to a similar bill from Sanders in 2020, but he is so far holding off this time.
Some believe the party should stake out a clear anti-war stance as Trump weighs whether to launch a military offensive that is seemingly counter to the anti-interventionism he promised during his 2024 campaign.
'The leaders of the Democratic Party need to step up and loudly oppose war with Iran and demand a vote in Congress,' said Tommy Vietor, a former Obama aide, on X.
Mainstream Democrats are cautious, while critical
The staunch support from the Democratic administration of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris for Israel's war against Hamas loomed over the party's White House ticket in 2024, even with the criticism of Israel's handling of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Trump exploited the divisions to make inroads with Arab American voters and Orthodox Jews on his way back to the White House.
Today, the Israel-Iran war is the latest test for a party struggling to repair its coalition before next year's midterm elections and the quick-to-follow kickoff to the 2028 presidential race. Bridging the divide between an activist base that is skeptical of foreign interventions and already critical of U.S. support for Israel and more traditional Democrats and independents who make up a sizable, if not always vocal, voting bloc.
In a statement after Israel's first strikes, Schumer said Israel has a right to defend itself and 'the United States' commitment to Israel's security and defense must be ironclad as they prepare for Iran's response.'
Sen. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., was also cautious in responding to the Israeli action and said 'the U.S. must continue to stand with Israel, as it has for decades, at this dangerous moment.'
'It really seems like the Trump and Iran war track is kind of going along like a Formula 1 racetrack, and then the Democrats are in some sort of tricycle or something trying to keep up,' said Ryan Costello, a policy director for the Washington-based National Iranian American Council, which advocates for diplomatic engagement between U.S. and Iran.
Other Democrats have condemned Israel's strikes and accused Netanyahu of sabotaging nuclear talks with Iran. They are reminding the public that Trump withdrew in 2018 from a nuclear agreement that limited Tehran's enrichment of uranium in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions negotiated during the Obama administration.
'Trump created the problem,' said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., on X. 'The single reason Iran was so close to obtaining a nuclear weapon is that Trump destroyed the diplomatic agreement that put major, verifiable constraints on their nuclear program.'
The progressives' pushback
A Pearson Institute/Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll from September 2024 found that about half of Democrats said the U.S. was being 'too supportive' of Israel and about 4 in 10 said their level support was 'about right.' Democrats were more likely than independents and Republicans to say the Israeli government had 'a lot' of responsibility for the continuation of the war between Israel and Hamas.
About 6 in 10 Democrats and half of Republicans felt Iran was an adversary with whom the U.S. was in conflict.
Democratic Rep. Yassamin Ansari, an Iranian American from Arizona, said Iranians are unwitting victims in the conflict because there aren't shelters or infrastructure to protect civilians from targeted missiles as there are in Israel.
'The Iranian people are not the regime, and they should not be punished for its actions,' Ansari posted on X, while criticizing Trump for fomenting fear among the Iranian population. 'The Iranian people deserve freedom from the barbaric regime, and Israelis deserve security.'
___
Associated Press writers Mary Clare Jalonick and Linley Sanders in Washington contributed to this report
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
an hour ago
- Globe and Mail
President Trump's Plan to End Taxes on Overtime Pay Could Become Reality Sooner Than You Think
President Trump made a lot of attention-grabbing promises during his campaign for a second term, and in his five months since retaking office, he's met with varying degrees of success in enacting them. Ending taxes on Social Security benefits, for example, appears no nearer than it was on Trump's first day in office. But he's made considerable headway with some of his other agenda items, including ending taxes on overtime pay. We could see this enacted yet this year, but there are still some important details to be ironed out. The "One, Big, Beautiful Bill" could end taxes on overtime as soon as this year House Republicans recently drafted the "One, Big, Beautiful Bill" that incorporates several of President Trump's key campaign promises, like an end to taxes on tips and overtime pay. It would create an above-the-line deduction for these items, so you wouldn't owe any income taxes on them. The House version of the bill clarifies that the tax deduction for overtime pay would apply only to overtime compensation that is paid to an individual in excess of the regular rate they receive for their work. This deduction wouldn't be available to highly compensated employees (HCEs) and those without a work-eligible Social Security number. The bill narrowly passed the House, and lawmakers initially hoped it would make it to the president's desk by July 4, 2025. But the Senate is determined to make its mark on the legislation as well, and at least some senators, like Ron Johnson (R-WI), feel the July 4 deadline isn't realistic. The Senate is already making changes The Senate's version of the "One, Big, Beautiful Bill" isn't finalized yet, but we've already had a peek at some of the changes it hopes to make. While the general idea of no taxes on overtime pay remains in the latest version of the bill, the Senate has added one important restriction. The tax deduction for overtime pay would be limited to $12,500 per person or $25,000 for married couples filing a joint return. While this should be adequate for most people, it may be disappointing if you earn a lot of money from overtime. The House version of the bill didn't have any restrictions on the overtime tax deduction. There are also income phaseouts that reduce the deduction by $100 for every $1,000 your modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) exceeds $150,000 for a single adult or $300,000 for a married couple. Individuals with MAGIs of $275,000 or more and married couples with MAGIs of $550,000 or more wouldn't be eligible to claim the deduction. It's not a done deal yet Senate Republicans can only afford to lose three Republican votes if they want the bill to pass, and right now, there are several who are voicing concerns about the bill in its current state. This means that it likely won't be passed in the next couple of weeks at least. There isn't a vote scheduled currently. If it does pass, the overtime tax deduction will take effect for the 2025 tax year, according to the current bill. However, it would only remain in place through the 2028 tax year. After that, it would be up to lawmakers to decide whether to continue the deduction or not. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known "Social Security secrets" could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. Join Stock Advisor to learn more about these strategies.
CTV News
an hour ago
- CTV News
‘It's serious' former Israel ambassador on Houthis warning on entering Israel-Iran conflict
'It's serious' former Israel ambassador on Houthis warning on entering Israel-Iran conflict Former ambassador for Israel Jon Allen explains how serious the situation is if Houthis enter the Israel-Iran conflict and the risks if U.S. gets involved.
Globe and Mail
3 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
'Roadblock': Paramount Stock (NASDAQ:PARA) Surges as the Trump Settlement Sputters
As it turns out, entertainment giant Paramount (PARA) was actually fairly close to a deal with President Trump over the 60 Minutes lawsuit. But, when the deal was fairly close, a 'roadblock' emerged and put a halt to the whole matter, at least for now. Investors reacted with surprising strength, and perhaps even more surprising positivity. Paramount shares gained nearly 2.5% in the closing minutes of Friday's trading. Confident Investing Starts Here: The settlement had reached $35 million, reports noted, when Paramount suddenly found itself paralyzed by indecision. That delay caused Trump lawyers to pivot and pull back to their original demand, calling for a $50 million settlement. The biggest problem seems to be that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is also involved in this, and needs to sign off on the merger with Skydance as well. Reports suggested that Paramount brass believes that the FCC's sign-off on the deal needs to be contingent on settling the case, but by like token, the idea that requiring FCC approval as part of the settlement looks a lot like a bribe. Trump's legal team, reports note, has already been clear that the Trump suit and the FCC case are two separate matters. But with outside organizations looking to launch their own lawsuits should the settlement go through, looks may count for more here than anyone expected. South Park Losses Mount Meanwhile, as Paramount faces the prospect of losing South Park exclusivity, it quietly pulled another old episode from the field. The pull this time showed up in the Canadian and Australian markets, reports noted, and this time, featured Butters' Very Own Episode pulled from Paramount+. Why, however, is a bit of a mystery. Several South Park episodes are apparently a bit too spicy for streaming, in retrospect, with around a dozen classic episodes set to be pulled from the catalog and relegated to a 'ban list', reports noted. The reports got stranger as an Australian viewer noted that the Paramount+ listing had been pulled, but the episode could still be watched by watching through Paramount+ on Amazon (AMZN) Prime Video. Is Paramount Stock a Good Buy Right Now? Turning to Wall Street, analysts have a Hold consensus rating on PARA stock based on two Buys, eight Holds and five Sells assigned in the past three months, as indicated by the graphic below. After a 18.62% rally in its share price over the past year, the average PARA price target of $12.08 per share implies 2.23% downside risk. See more PARA analyst ratings Disclosure Disclaimer & Disclosure Report an Issue
