Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TexasTowelie

(126,705 posts)
Sun Mar 1, 2026, 06:10 PM 7 hrs ago

Let's talk about reactions to Trump's Iran attack.... - Belle of the Ranch



Well, howdy there Internet people. It's Belle again. So, today we're going to talk about reactions to Trump's Iran attack.

News outlets are putting out their polls and the social media reaction to them is mixed because the polls are showing inconsistent results. Well, the polls that seem contradictory are asking different questions. Do you support Trump stopping Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is not the same as do you support the US initiating an attack. So they're producing mixed results.

Aside from polling questions, there's a sad fact of American politics. Early on in conflicts, the public reaction is generally easily shaped. The old saying is that all wars are popular for the first 30 days. Generally, the support an elective war obtains is short-lived, but a lot of that depends on how well politicians muster support. So, we're going to take a look at how political figures are talking about the war.

To start, let's check in on our America First Barometer, Marjorie Taylor Greene. She posted to social media, "The Trump admin actually asked in a poll how many casualties voters were willing to accept in a war with Iran. How about zero, you bunch of sick effing liars? We voted for America first and zero wars." Well, that's not a glowing recommendation. Okay.

Well, let's check in on Representative Tim Buchett of Tennessee. He posted, "Save me your outrage. Obama bombed eight countries without congressional approval, and Clinton bombed an aspirin factory to cover up his affair."

Okay, this needs a fact check, but skipping over that, what an odd thing to say. Trump didn't get congressional approval for his war. That's an open fact. So, I get the what-aboutism of suggesting Obama did the bad thing, too. But what is Burchett suggesting by saying Clinton bombed a country to hide an affair? Certainly, he isn't suggesting this is a giant distraction from something Trump did. I doubt he's talking about the Epstein files. This is one of Trump's loyalist foot soldiers. There is no way he's calling this Operation Epstein Fury.

Okay, let's get away from the normal politicians. Surely the combat vets who became politicians are supporting the troops. Checking in on West Point grad and Representative Pat Ryan of New York. We see, "I served two combat tours in Iraq. I've seen what happens when a lying chicken hawk president beats the war drums." Oh wow. We'll stop quoting and just say from here he talks about flag draped coffins and announces he's joining with other representatives for a war powers resolution to stop the elective war.

Surely Marine Corps combat vet Ruben Gallego is out there encouraging Americans to tie a yellow ribbon on the old oak tree. He says Trump has jumped into war without a thought to the consequences. His social media is full of phrases like cadet bone spurs and the “draft dodger is willing to sacrifice working-class kids. How charitable of him.”

It doesn't look like the dog wants to be wagged.

Anyway, it's just a thought. Y'all have a good day.
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Liberal YouTubers»Let's talk about reaction...