Americans Oppose Trump Joining Israel-Iran War and Do Not See the Iranian Nuclear Program as an Immediate Threat

Polling from the Economist/YouGov and the Washington Post shows that contrary to President Donald Trump’s demand for Iranian unconditional surrender, most Americans oppose involvement in the conflict between Iran and Israel and do not see the Iranian nuclear program as an immediate threat to the United States. Even Republicans who normally fall in lockstep behind Trump break from him on the issue of war with Iran.

The Economist/YouGov polling finds that 60% of respondents believe that the “US military should not get involved in the conflict between Israel and Iran”. Democrats (65%) and Independent voters (61%) are especially disapproving of US involvement in the Israel/Iran conflict.

Most significantly for the Trump team, 53% of Republican voters don’t not want to see the US get involved in the developing conflict.

Given the current polarised state of American politics, the fact that Democrats, Republicans, and Independent voters all oppose American involvement in the conflict is incredibly significant.

Americans aged 65-plus, who are most likely to turn out in next year’s midterm election, are especially opposed to US involvement at 69%.

In Washington Post polling, a 45% plurality say they “oppose the US military launching airstrikes against Iran over its nuclear program,” while one in four (25%) say they support military strikes.

Almost a third (30%) are unsure how the US should respond. Two-thirds (66%) of Democrats oppose military strikes on Iran as do 44% of Independents. A 47% plurality of GOP voters support military strikes.

The bottom line in the Washington Post data is that military action against Iran is not even supported by a majority of GOP voters.

While Americans are opposed to US involvement in the Israel/Iran conflict, how do they feel about the Iranian nuclear program and is there a reservoir of fear and distrust that Trump could tap into to support American involvement in the conflict?

The short answer is, no.

Just under one in four (24%) of respondents in the Economist/YouGov polling see the Iranian nuclear program as an immediate and serious threat to the US. Republican voters are more likely (32% immediate and serious threat) to feel threatened by the Iranian nuclear program, though the number is far short of a majority. 

The data from the Washington Post poll confirms what the Economist/YouGov polling finds: a majority of Americans do not see Iran’s nuclear program as “an immediate and serious threat”. Just over one in five (22%) do; 48% view it as a “somewhat serious threat”. 

Complementing reluctance to get involved militarily in the Israel/Iran conflict, in the Economist/YouGov polling, 56% support the US engaging in negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program. Significantly, 63% of those who said they voted for Trump in 2024 support negotiation with Iran. 

When asked in the Economist/YouGov polling what options the US should pursue in dealing with the Iranian nuclear program, 28% say that the United States should threaten Iran with harsher economic sanctions, 26% say incentivise Iran with resumption of diplomatic relations, and 24% support incentivising Iran by the easing of economic sanctions.

Less than one in five (18%) say that the US should threaten Iran with the use of military force. Incentivising Iran with a guarantee of no use of military force is the preferred option for 14%. Just under a third (30%) are not sure what option to pursue. 

While Republicans in the Economist/YouGov polling are more likely to support threatening Iran with military force (29%) than respondents as a whole (18%), the number is far from a majority.  The most popular option for dealing with Iran among Republicans is threatening Iran with harsher economic sanctions (38%).

Only one in five voters (20%) earning under $50,000 a year, who have been some of Trump’s strongest supporters, support threatening Iran with military support.

Trump’s policy on Iran has been vacillating on Iran from one option to another. As the New York Times reports:

Mr. Trump began his second term trying to hold back the push by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel for an assault on Iran’s nuclear program. But after the Israelis launched a major attack on Iranian facilities, nuclear scientists and military leaders last week, Mr. Trump has shown a new openness to deepening the United States’ involvement in the onslaught — potentially by sending American aircraft to help refuel Israeli jets, and by deploying American warplanes and bunker-busting bombs against Iran’s best-protected nuclear site.

Against all the developments of recent days, we must remember that Trump ran for the White House in 2024 as the candidate of peace, casting his opponent Vice President Kamala Harris as the “candidate of endless wars”.

Whether we like it or not, Trump is an adroit politician. He has remade one of America’s two major political parties in his image. In doing so he has brought together those so called “neoconservatives” who supported American involvement in Iraq with staunch opponents of American intervention like Tulsi Gabbard, Trump’s own director of National Intelligence.

 In what is an amazing development, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, one of Trump’s staunchest and most vehement defenders, recently broke with the president on the issue of war with Iran saying that intervention in theconflict was not “America First”.

Greene’s willingness to turn Trump’s signature phrase “American First” against him shows the cracks in the Make American Great Again (MAGA). 

The cracks in Trump’s base over intervention in the Israel/Iran conflict are clear in both the political debate and in polling numbers for the Economist/YouGov and Washington Post.

Trump is equally well-attuned to his political base and polling data. Both indicators should steer him away from confrontation with Iran, but his most recent comments indicate that he has not decided what course to pursue, and he’s anything if not unpredictable.