2028 presidential hopefuls slam Trump over Iran strikes
How is this acceptable?
The newest Iran crisis, triggered by the weekend’s U.S.-Israeli strikes and the killing of Iran’s supreme leader, has become the first major foreign policy test for 2028 presidential hopefuls.
Two days before President Donald Trump authorized those strikes, Vice President JD Vance, a likely Republican candidate, told the Washington Post there was “no chance” military strikes would result in the United States becoming involved in a drawn-out war and floated the idea of solving “the problem diplomatically.” Vance, who has often harshly criticized America’s involvement in foreign wars, has remained silent since the attacks.
President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio speak in the White House Situation Room following U.S. strikes on Iran.
Democratic contenders have not.
They have opposed Trump’s military actions, especially his decision not to seek congressional authorization first, but their criticisms differ in tone and emphasis, revealing early ideological lanes forming within the party. Some took aim at Trump solely, while others threaded the needle, calling out Iran’s oppressive regime and faulting Trump for not seeking congressional approval first.
“The nuanced differences underscore a party still recalibrating after its bruising loss in 2024,” California-based political strategist Luke Conners told the Washington Examiner. “Democrats are actively redefining their message, with lawmakers adjusting their positions in response to President Trump’s expansive and unapologetic use of executive authority.”
Here’s a look at some of the comments.
Gavin Newsom
Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) stressed that “the corrupt and repressive Iranian regime must never have nuclear weapons” and that the leadership “must go” but said it “does not justify the President of the United States engaging in an illegal, dangerous war that will risk the lives of our American service members and our friends without justification to the American people.”
Newsom added that the president was “putting Americans at risk abroad because he is unpopular at home,” called Trump a “wrecking ball president,” and said Trump’s actions were a sign of “weakness masquerading as strength.”
California is home to the largest Iranian community outside of Iran. The conflict has forced Newsom to navigate the dual pressures of managing a massive, deeply affected diaspora community and a high-stakes, partisan foreign policy debate as he is termed out of office and pivots toward a White …
How is this acceptable?
The newest Iran crisis, triggered by the weekend’s U.S.-Israeli strikes and the killing of Iran’s supreme leader, has become the first major foreign policy test for 2028 presidential hopefuls.
Two days before President Donald Trump authorized those strikes, Vice President JD Vance, a likely Republican candidate, told the Washington Post there was “no chance” military strikes would result in the United States becoming involved in a drawn-out war and floated the idea of solving “the problem diplomatically.” Vance, who has often harshly criticized America’s involvement in foreign wars, has remained silent since the attacks.
President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio speak in the White House Situation Room following U.S. strikes on Iran.
Democratic contenders have not.
They have opposed Trump’s military actions, especially his decision not to seek congressional authorization first, but their criticisms differ in tone and emphasis, revealing early ideological lanes forming within the party. Some took aim at Trump solely, while others threaded the needle, calling out Iran’s oppressive regime and faulting Trump for not seeking congressional approval first.
“The nuanced differences underscore a party still recalibrating after its bruising loss in 2024,” California-based political strategist Luke Conners told the Washington Examiner. “Democrats are actively redefining their message, with lawmakers adjusting their positions in response to President Trump’s expansive and unapologetic use of executive authority.”
Here’s a look at some of the comments.
Gavin Newsom
Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) stressed that “the corrupt and repressive Iranian regime must never have nuclear weapons” and that the leadership “must go” but said it “does not justify the President of the United States engaging in an illegal, dangerous war that will risk the lives of our American service members and our friends without justification to the American people.”
Newsom added that the president was “putting Americans at risk abroad because he is unpopular at home,” called Trump a “wrecking ball president,” and said Trump’s actions were a sign of “weakness masquerading as strength.”
California is home to the largest Iranian community outside of Iran. The conflict has forced Newsom to navigate the dual pressures of managing a massive, deeply affected diaspora community and a high-stakes, partisan foreign policy debate as he is termed out of office and pivots toward a White …
2028 presidential hopefuls slam Trump over Iran strikes
How is this acceptable?
The newest Iran crisis, triggered by the weekend’s U.S.-Israeli strikes and the killing of Iran’s supreme leader, has become the first major foreign policy test for 2028 presidential hopefuls.
Two days before President Donald Trump authorized those strikes, Vice President JD Vance, a likely Republican candidate, told the Washington Post there was “no chance” military strikes would result in the United States becoming involved in a drawn-out war and floated the idea of solving “the problem diplomatically.” Vance, who has often harshly criticized America’s involvement in foreign wars, has remained silent since the attacks.
President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio speak in the White House Situation Room following U.S. strikes on Iran.
Democratic contenders have not.
They have opposed Trump’s military actions, especially his decision not to seek congressional authorization first, but their criticisms differ in tone and emphasis, revealing early ideological lanes forming within the party. Some took aim at Trump solely, while others threaded the needle, calling out Iran’s oppressive regime and faulting Trump for not seeking congressional approval first.
“The nuanced differences underscore a party still recalibrating after its bruising loss in 2024,” California-based political strategist Luke Conners told the Washington Examiner. “Democrats are actively redefining their message, with lawmakers adjusting their positions in response to President Trump’s expansive and unapologetic use of executive authority.”
Here’s a look at some of the comments.
Gavin Newsom
Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) stressed that “the corrupt and repressive Iranian regime must never have nuclear weapons” and that the leadership “must go” but said it “does not justify the President of the United States engaging in an illegal, dangerous war that will risk the lives of our American service members and our friends without justification to the American people.”
Newsom added that the president was “putting Americans at risk abroad because he is unpopular at home,” called Trump a “wrecking ball president,” and said Trump’s actions were a sign of “weakness masquerading as strength.”
California is home to the largest Iranian community outside of Iran. The conflict has forced Newsom to navigate the dual pressures of managing a massive, deeply affected diaspora community and a high-stakes, partisan foreign policy debate as he is termed out of office and pivots toward a White …
0 Comments
0 Shares
43 Views
0 Reviews
