Why Trump doesn’t get a ‘patriotic bounce’ in polls following Iran strikes

President Trump’s lack of a “patriotic bounce” in the polls from the successful strikes against Iran can be attributed to a mix of factors, including lopsided anti-Trump news coverage.

Other factors that have deprived Mr. Trump of the surge in support typically shown to presidents during times of war include mixed messages from the White House, fears over rising gasoline prices, Americans’ war-weariness after 20 years in Afghanistan and the perception that Iran was not an imminent threat.

Polls following the joint U.S.-Israeli attacks on Iran have been deeply divided, largely along party lines.

A new Quinnipiac Poll found that more than half of registered voters (53%) oppose military action in Iran, compared to 40% who support it. That mirrors myriad other polls.

Voters typically rally around a president during the start of a conflict. In the first few days of the 1991 Gulf War, more than 80% of Americans supported the decision to go to war and 75% backed the decision to use force instead of sanctions, according to Gallup.

After the terrorist attack of Sept. 11, 2001, 92% of Americans approved of President George W. Bush’s decision to launch air strikes against Afghanistan. Just two years later, nearly 80% of voters supported Mr. Bush’s Iraq invasion during the first few weeks of the invasion, Gallup found.

President Obama’s 2011 military action against Libya, which didn’t have the popularity of previous military strikes, outpolled Mr. Trump’s war in Iran. At the time of Mr. Obama’s strikes on the African country, 47% of Americans approved of it compared to 37% that did not.

Media bias

Steve Mitchell, a Michigan pollster who has been conducting polling for more than 40 years, said he noticed bias in the questions posed to voters. He said voters are asked if they support the attack on Iran, but few, if any, polls ask if they support preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb.

“I think we’re seeing questions that are being posed specifically to get the result they’re getting,” he said. “I know that’s always a function of every poll, but you are seeing that more frequently here. Polls seem to be phrased to elicit a certain response,” he said.

Others say the bias extends beyond the polls, with some allies of the president calling out major media outlets for negative coverage of the war.

Sen. James Lankford, Oklahoma Republican, called out ABC “This Week” host George Stephanopoulos for repeatedly saying the attack on Iran was “unprovoked” and criticized the network for airing anti-American remarks from Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi.

Mr. Lankford questioned whether Iranian television would broadcast that many remarks from Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

ABC News also has come under fire for twice leading newscasts last week with economic blowback from the war, including higher oil prices, rather than highlighting the success of the U.S. military. Meanwhile, NBC News’ chief foreign correspondent dismissed Mr. Trump’s explanation for the military actions as “a theoretical future threat” and “past grievances from the Iraq War.”

A PBS News Hour contributor on Monday described Iran’s leadership as “projecting resilience, toughness” after being attacked “without warning.” On Thursday, the Guardian, a British newspaper, ran a headline calling the war “An American Failure.”

Mark Penn, who served as President Clinton’s pollster and worked as an adviser on Hillary Clinton’s Senate campaign, blasted the overwhelmingly negative coverage of the war.

“The press is a drumbeat of negativity favoring the Iran regime. It’s puzzling at this point how any success is buried,” he wrote on X. “The reality is likely the regime is being pummeled on all sides and has no ability to provide for its people. Maybe it can put on a good show for another week or two, but its leadership is under immense pressure. But that’s not what the American public is getting from the mainstream media.”

Media outlets have also hyped what it’s referred to as a fissure among the MAGA movement, highlighting the criticism lobbed by former Trump allies Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, Matt Walsh and former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Stories abound that their condemnation of the war signals the end of the MAGA movement.

But polling data shows that among Republicans who identify themselves as MAGA, support for the war effort remains high. An NBC News poll found that 90% of Republicans who identify themselves as MAGA support the Iran strikes compared to 54% of Republicans who say they are not part of the MAGA movement.

“During the first Gulf War, the media talked about how well everything was going, but here all they do is talk about the seven [U.S. soldiers] dead and that Iran is still firing rockets. They don’t talk about the successes of it,” said GOP pollster Jim McLaughlin.

Mixed messages

Others say Mr. Trump’s varying explanations for the strikes on Iran and what the U.S. ultimately hopes to achieve with its mission may have left voters confused. After the first wave of strikes, Mr. Trump declared Iran an “imminent threat” to U.S. forces in the region.

The rationale later shifted to preventing Iran from reviving its nuclear program, then to demolishing a regime that has backed terrorists killing Americans for decades. Mr. Trump also cited protecting Iranian demonstrators who protested against the regime in January.

A Quinnipiac poll released this week found that 55% of respondents did not think Iran posed an imminent threat to the U.S., compared to 39% who thought it did. The poll also found that 62% of voters did not think Mr. Trump provided a clear explanation of the reasons for the military action, while 35% thought the president explained it clearly.

“I think the 55% is not overwhelming, but that’s the majority of Americans that think, despite the way it was built up, that there was no imminent threat and perhaps the mixed messages they’ve been getting play into that,” said Tim Malloy, Quinnipiac University polling analyst.

“There’s no perceived imminent threat like when the World Trade Towers were knocked down, so Trump isn’t getting a rally around the flag. But I wouldn’t say the support for [the Iran strikes] isn’t there. It’s almost 50/50.”

Voter exhaustion

Another explanation is Americans are weary of foreign entanglements after the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost the U.S. trillions of dollars, thousands of U.S. lives and did not achieve the stated goals. The wars were so unpopular that Mr. Trump made campaigning to end overseas conflicts a cornerstone of his reelection campaign.

A Pew Research poll in 2022 found that 62% said the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan weren’t worth it.

Mr. Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have not ruled out deploying troops to Iran, which also worries voters. About 75% oppose sending ground troops into Iran, according to Quinnipiac, while 20% support it.

The poll also found that 90% of respondents are concerned that the Iran action could risk the lives of American military personnel, including 86% of Republicans and 93% of Democrats.

Seven U.S. service members have been killed in the war.

Voters are also predicting a long war against Iran, with 39% saying it will last a year or longer, while 32% said months and 21% said days or weeks, the Quinnipiac poll found.

“How long will it last? Not days, not weeks, but months, maybe longer. Perhaps compelled by memories of long wars, Americans see no early end to the enormous upheaval in the Middle East,” Mr. Malloy said.

Mr. McLaughlin pointed to the war’s successes, including decimating Iran’s military capabilities and killing Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the initial strikes. He predicts the war will no longer be on voters’ minds by November’s midterm elections.

“After Labor Day, the focus is going to be on Democrats, their extremism and failures, and when it comes down to a choice between that and Donald Trump’s successful agenda on the economy and national security, I think it’s a really good fight for the Republicans to have,” he said.

At the same time, the high cost of living has worn out Americans. Now gas prices, which had fallen below $3 a gallon for the first time in years, are again soaring because of the war. The national average price for gasoline is now $3.59 per gallon, up from $2.94 a gallon a month ago.

Still, the White House has argued that Iran strikes will lower energy costs in the long run.

“Once the national security objectives of Operation Epic Fury are fully achieved, Americans will see oil and gas prices drop rapidly, potentially even lower than they were prior to the start of the operation, and we will live in a world where Iran can no longer threaten the United States or our allies with a nuclear bomb,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said.