US voter support for Iran conflict collapses as fuel prices surge and midterm risks mount

American voter support for the war in Iran is eroding rapidly following the collapse of the ceasefire process, with public opposition reaching historic levels in a remarkably short timeframe.

According to a survey conducted by Reuters/Ipsos, four out of five respondents anticipate that the hostilities will persist for a long time. Meanwhile, nearly half of those surveyed in a The Economist/YouGov poll estimate that the war will last for a year or longer. As public backing for the military campaign disintegrates, Donald Trump’s net approval rating for his decision to attack Iran has plummeted to minus 30%.

While it took six years of active involvement in the Vietnam War for public opposition to reach such a critical threshold, the war in Iran has generated a comparable level of rejection in just six months.

Speaking to The Economist, Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia emphasized that the key takeaway is not merely the depth of the opposition, but the unprecedented speed with which it has formed. Sabato noted that the conflict in Iran has registered the lowest level of public support of any American military engagement since polling on such interventions began, a trend that has remained constant since day one. Warning that a prolonged conflict will inevitably drive up costs, Sabato projected that this dynamic will translate into a severe political penalty for Trump and the Republican Party in the upcoming midterm elections.

Historically, US military interventions have initially enjoyed robust public support before gradually decaying over time. For instance, the US-led operations launched against the Taliban in Afghanistan in 2001 initially secured the backing of approximately 90% of the public.

At the time, President George W. Bush presented a clear, direct justification for the invasion, targeting the Taliban for harboring the terrorists responsible for the September 11 attacks. According to Gallup data, it took 13 years for public support for the occupation—which ultimately claimed the lives of more than 2,000 US service members and wounded another 20,000—to fall below 50%.

Economic consequences directly impact voters

Thus far, 17 US service members have been killed in Trump’s war in Iran. While this figure is low from a strictly military standpoint, the economic ramifications of the conflict have directly and rapidly disrupted the daily lives of American consumers.

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which was fully open prior to the military operations, has triggered a sharp rise in fuel prices. Although Trump has asserted that the US military presence has broken the regional blockade and enabled oil to flow at higher volumes than ever, concrete economic data does not support his claims.

The price of Brent crude oil has climbed from $72 to $88 per barrel since the beginning of July. In the domestic retail market, the average price of gasoline in the US has risen from approximately $3 per gallon before the war to nearly $4 per gallon.

Gallup historical data shows that during the Vietnam War, which involved large numbers of American ground troops, voters consistently identified the conflict as the most important problem facing the nation.

While the war in Iran has not yet been designated in those exact terms, voters consistently identify the high cost of living and a lack of leadership as their primary concerns in current polling. This shift indicates that despite the relatively low number of military casualties, the war in Iran is poised to become a major electoral liability for the Republican Party.

Support for the military campaign is also sharply polarized along political lines. Among Democratic voters, the net approval rating for the war stands at minus 84%, while among independents it rests at minus 52%.

Even within the “MAGA” Republican base—the only major demographic group to back the initiative, with a 72% approval rating—cracks are beginning to appear. According to a Washington Post/Ipsos poll, more than half of Trump’s core supporters indicated for the first time that they approve of his job performance only “partially” rather than “strongly.” Among Republicans who do not self-identify with the MAGA movement, support for the war has swung from a positive net approval of 26% in April to a net negative of 25%.

Budgetary debates in Congress

In response to the shifting public mood, Democratic lawmakers are intensifying their opposition. During the July 14 confirmation hearing for Jules Hurst, the nominee to oversee the Pentagon’s budget, Democratic senators accused the administration of systematically understating the financial toll of the conflict.

The Pentagon has put the cost of the war at approximately $30 billion, asserting that the figure primarily reflects spent munitions and fuel.

However, Senator Elissa Slotkin, a Democrat from Michigan, estimated that the true cost is more than six times that amount when factoring in the repair costs for American bases and the broader economic damages suffered by consumers. Slotkin also criticized the Pentagon’s commercial relationships with companies in which Trump’s sons hold business interests.

Conversely, Representative Mike Lawler, a Republican fighting to retain his seat in a highly competitive district in New York, dismissed the opposition’s criticisms as “nonsense.”

Lawler argued that Trump made a difficult but necessary decision to eliminate the threats posed by Iran’s nuclear program and its active sponsorship of terrorist groups. While acknowledging that he does not know how long the conflict will last, Lawler maintained that the Iranian regime is untrustworthy and only understands the language of military force. His Democratic opponent, military veteran Cait Conley, countered that Trump has dragged the United States into a conflict lacking clear military objectives or a viable exit strategy.

According to The Economist‘s midterm election forecasting model, Lawler faces a 68% probability of losing his seat in November. The same model projects an 82% probability that Democrats will win a majority in the House of Representatives, and a 45% chance of taking control of the Senate.

Aaron David Miller of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace observed that Trump’s compounding difficulties in extricating the US from Iran recall the famous lament of former US President Lyndon Johnson during the Vietnam War: “I feel like a hitchhiker caught in a hailstorm on a Texas highway. I can’t run, I can’t hide, and I can’t make it stop.”