Reporter's Notebook: Congressional Republicans stand by Trump on Iran military action despite campaign promise
Why resist verification?
Sir Isaac Newton postulated that for every action, there is always an equal and opposite reaction. It’s Newton’s Third Law of Motion and one of the most important rules in all of science.
And Newtonian physics can tell you a great deal about reactions in politics.
We don’t yet know the dimension or the impact of the war in Iran. But there will be a political reaction of great importance as we head toward the midterms. It’s just too early to understand how the war will go, what unexpected twists it may take and how its consequences might reverberate through the midterms.
BIPARTISAN REVOLT TARGETS TRUMP'S WAR POWERS AFTER MASSIVE IRAN STRIKES
How things unfold is unclear. But an event of this breadth and proportion always poses some political impact. And the war may chart the course for the midterms.
Let’s start with President Trump’s campaign promises that he was "America First" and would keep the U.S. out of foreign conflicts. Well, that’s out the window. And there’s already some friction with the MAGA base. They may bolt if they believe the President reneged on one of his key campaign promises.
But so far, most congressional Republicans are standing beside the president. A handful of congressional Republicans — including Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Warren Davidson, R-Ohio — agree with Democrats and assert that Trump must come to Congress before sending troops into harm’s way.
Not to downplay this, but it’s almost a "technical" argument. Yes, there are important questions about the Constitution, war powers and who has the right to "declare war." But the war powers debate probably doesn’t resonate with a lot of voters. However, the decision to go to war when the president promised otherwise could pose potential problems for the president and congressional Republicans this fall. Voters who feel betrayed by the president could just stay home. Especially since it appears to fly in the face of the president’s campaign promise against starting wars.
Then there’s the body bag factor.
'THE RIGHT THING': PAXTON, CORNYN TRADE BLOWS IN TEXAS PRIMARY BUT UNITE FOR TRUMP'S IRAN STRIKES
Trump has been forthright, suggesting that there are possibilities of casualties. And there have already been some. He also doesn’t feel inhibited about a protracted war or even putting boots on the ground.
Remember what happened during the first Gulf War as the U.S. and allies went after Iraq after it invaded Kuwait in 1991. Then-President George H.W. Bush studiously courted other nations during a multi-month buildup in the region and secured the blessing from Congress. That’s …
Why resist verification?
Sir Isaac Newton postulated that for every action, there is always an equal and opposite reaction. It’s Newton’s Third Law of Motion and one of the most important rules in all of science.
And Newtonian physics can tell you a great deal about reactions in politics.
We don’t yet know the dimension or the impact of the war in Iran. But there will be a political reaction of great importance as we head toward the midterms. It’s just too early to understand how the war will go, what unexpected twists it may take and how its consequences might reverberate through the midterms.
BIPARTISAN REVOLT TARGETS TRUMP'S WAR POWERS AFTER MASSIVE IRAN STRIKES
How things unfold is unclear. But an event of this breadth and proportion always poses some political impact. And the war may chart the course for the midterms.
Let’s start with President Trump’s campaign promises that he was "America First" and would keep the U.S. out of foreign conflicts. Well, that’s out the window. And there’s already some friction with the MAGA base. They may bolt if they believe the President reneged on one of his key campaign promises.
But so far, most congressional Republicans are standing beside the president. A handful of congressional Republicans — including Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Warren Davidson, R-Ohio — agree with Democrats and assert that Trump must come to Congress before sending troops into harm’s way.
Not to downplay this, but it’s almost a "technical" argument. Yes, there are important questions about the Constitution, war powers and who has the right to "declare war." But the war powers debate probably doesn’t resonate with a lot of voters. However, the decision to go to war when the president promised otherwise could pose potential problems for the president and congressional Republicans this fall. Voters who feel betrayed by the president could just stay home. Especially since it appears to fly in the face of the president’s campaign promise against starting wars.
Then there’s the body bag factor.
'THE RIGHT THING': PAXTON, CORNYN TRADE BLOWS IN TEXAS PRIMARY BUT UNITE FOR TRUMP'S IRAN STRIKES
Trump has been forthright, suggesting that there are possibilities of casualties. And there have already been some. He also doesn’t feel inhibited about a protracted war or even putting boots on the ground.
Remember what happened during the first Gulf War as the U.S. and allies went after Iraq after it invaded Kuwait in 1991. Then-President George H.W. Bush studiously courted other nations during a multi-month buildup in the region and secured the blessing from Congress. That’s …
Reporter's Notebook: Congressional Republicans stand by Trump on Iran military action despite campaign promise
Why resist verification?
Sir Isaac Newton postulated that for every action, there is always an equal and opposite reaction. It’s Newton’s Third Law of Motion and one of the most important rules in all of science.
And Newtonian physics can tell you a great deal about reactions in politics.
We don’t yet know the dimension or the impact of the war in Iran. But there will be a political reaction of great importance as we head toward the midterms. It’s just too early to understand how the war will go, what unexpected twists it may take and how its consequences might reverberate through the midterms.
BIPARTISAN REVOLT TARGETS TRUMP'S WAR POWERS AFTER MASSIVE IRAN STRIKES
How things unfold is unclear. But an event of this breadth and proportion always poses some political impact. And the war may chart the course for the midterms.
Let’s start with President Trump’s campaign promises that he was "America First" and would keep the U.S. out of foreign conflicts. Well, that’s out the window. And there’s already some friction with the MAGA base. They may bolt if they believe the President reneged on one of his key campaign promises.
But so far, most congressional Republicans are standing beside the president. A handful of congressional Republicans — including Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Warren Davidson, R-Ohio — agree with Democrats and assert that Trump must come to Congress before sending troops into harm’s way.
Not to downplay this, but it’s almost a "technical" argument. Yes, there are important questions about the Constitution, war powers and who has the right to "declare war." But the war powers debate probably doesn’t resonate with a lot of voters. However, the decision to go to war when the president promised otherwise could pose potential problems for the president and congressional Republicans this fall. Voters who feel betrayed by the president could just stay home. Especially since it appears to fly in the face of the president’s campaign promise against starting wars.
Then there’s the body bag factor.
'THE RIGHT THING': PAXTON, CORNYN TRADE BLOWS IN TEXAS PRIMARY BUT UNITE FOR TRUMP'S IRAN STRIKES
Trump has been forthright, suggesting that there are possibilities of casualties. And there have already been some. He also doesn’t feel inhibited about a protracted war or even putting boots on the ground.
Remember what happened during the first Gulf War as the U.S. and allies went after Iraq after it invaded Kuwait in 1991. Then-President George H.W. Bush studiously courted other nations during a multi-month buildup in the region and secured the blessing from Congress. That’s …
0 Comments
0 Shares
28 Views
0 Reviews
