Politics

Trump keeps extending the Iran war. Republicans are losing patience.

Published

3 months ago

June 12, 2026

Republicans keep lengthening President Donald Trump’s leash on Iran.

First, they hoped he would stick to his initial four- to six-week timeline for the war. Then, they gave him 60 days; then, until summer.

Now, battleground GOP party chairs, campaign officials and strategists are coalescing around Labor Day as their hard deadline, according to interviews with more than a dozen people.

It’s different this time, they say: September is the unofficial kickoff of general election season, when more voters tune in and the stakes get higher. Amid rising U.S. casualties, gas prices and fertilizer costs, these Republicans indicated the political risk of the ongoing war is heightening as the midterms draw near.

“By the first of September … it needs to be resolved,” said Dan Naylor, who runs the Lackawanna County GOP in a critical House battleground district in Pennsylvania. “You get more focused on the election at that point in time, and we need to be able to point to falling prices.”

Still, Naylor said he and many other Republicans believe Trump is doing what “needed to be done” in Iran and acknowledged the president is unlikely to “draw a line in the sand” for an end date given the complexity of the situation.

“I believe that voters need some time to see prices coming down before Election Day,” said a Nevada GOP strategist working on battleground House races, who – like others in this story — were granted anonymity to speak candidly about the midterm landscape. “If we can get this normalized with some time, we’ll be okay. But if we’re looking at Labor Day coming up on us, and we still have $5 a gallon gas, we’ll be in big trouble.”

A senior White House official said Friday that a preliminary deal with Iran to end the war is close but not final, putting the chances of success at 80 percent to 85 percent, as lingering skepticism hangs over the negotiations. A deal would bring a sigh of relief to war-weary Republicans — and they expressed faith that it would come to fruition. But this is not the first time an agreement seemed imminent, only for the war to continue.

The cracks within the GOP have started to spill into public view, with some candidates emphasizing the need for the war to wrap up soon, even if they agreed with its initial goals.

Rep. Ashley Hinson, the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate in Iowa, acknowledged at a campaign event at the end of last month that the war would become a “political liability” if it drags on beyond “the next couple of weeks.” Sen. Jon Husted, who is running for a full term in battleground Ohio, said earlier this month he’s not sure how the war is going to come to an end but “it needs to,” referring to the stalled and uncertain negotiations with Iran. And Sen. Pete Ricketts, who is running for reelection in Nebraska, said on local radio this week that he wants to see “a diplomatic solution” to the war “as quickly as possible.”

In May and June, eight Republican lawmakers sided with Democrats to vote against Trump’s war powers — extraordinary breaks from the president that included some of the most at-risk Republicans on the House and Senate battlemaps, like Maine Sen. Susan Collins, Pennsylvania Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick and Michigan Rep. Tom Barrett. (Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie and Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, who also supported the measure, lost their reelections to Trump-backed challengers earlier this year.)

Most of those Republican members, including Reps. Warren Davidson, Barrett and Fitzpatrick, defended their defections as standing up for Congress’ authority to decide the length and scope of military action taken. Massie has long been opposed to American military intervention.

“It would be nice to see some more progress on the negotiations,” said a national Republican operative working on Senate races. “The goals are worthy, but obviously, if this is continuing to go on into late summer, into the fall, it’s going to continue to present issues.”

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Republican hand-wringing about the war’s impact on the midterms comes at a moment when Trump has shown little interest in off-ramps in the Middle East. The president has been vocally frustrated with Iran’s unwillingness to sign on to his administration’s demands. On Thursday morning, he vowed to strike the country “VERY HARD TONIGHT,” before reversing course later that afternoon.

He also said his goal was to seize Kharg Island, a key Iranian oil hub, in an operation that could imperil American troops, but that he doesn’t believe “America has the stomach for it.”

Conservative commentator Tucker Carlson, who holds significant influence over the young, anti-interventionist wing of the GOP, said on his show Thursday that the president “is a spotty commander-in-chief and certainly no diplomat and obviously not a dealmaker.”

“What we’re beginning to understand, unfortunately, for the rest of us, are not just the limits of Trump, but the limits of American power,” said Carlson, who has emerged as one of the most prominent anti-war voices.

Even if the war ends soon, it could take months for gas prices to return to pre-war levels, Republicans and economic analysts have warned, increasing the urgency on Trump to exit before the last primaries wrap up.

“Veterans support Trump and what he’s doing overall, but the longer it drags out, the economic impact is a reality that we’re seeing on the ground,” said Mark Lucas, a Trump ally and founder of Veterans Action. “And that’s why we’re very supportive of President Trump getting to a peaceful resolution.”

“What good does it do us if September 15 rolls around and prices come down, but people are about to start voting?” the Nevada-based GOP strategist said.

Polling shows that support for the Iran war is weak among Americans — and many say it is making their financial situation worse, a warning sign for Republicans staring down a November election that will likely hinge on voters’ cost-of-living concerns. A recent POLITICO Poll found a majority of Americans, including a sizable share of Trump’s own voters in 2024, say he has not done enough to protect them from the economic fallout from the war.

A majority of Republican voters still approve of the conflict, underscoring their ongoing trust in the president,but that support could slip the longer it continues.

“People have short-term memories, but if challenges lag on and it starts becoming the thing heading into the fall, there’s a liability there,” said Tyler Campbell, an Iowa-based Republican strategist unaffiliated with the major races. “Urgency is kind of important right now, so hopefully it will come to a resolution.”

Since the start of the war, Republicans have offered conflicting deadlines about how long it should last. In March, Trump said the war would be a “short-term excursion”; later, he criticized Americans’ lack of patience and boasted that the Iran war was significantly shorter than World War II or the Iraq war.

Republican lawmakers and candidates, dealing with an increasingly frustrated base, have been telling voters for months that the conflict would resolve sooner rather than later, only to be proven wrong.

In March, Rep. Juan Ciscomani, running for reelection in his battleground Arizona district, told a local reporter that “everybody wants it to end as soon as possible, and that’s my objective as well.” In April, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, up for reelection in Florida, told a podcaster that “everything should be wrapped up shortly.” And in May, Rep. Brad Finstad of Minnesota told local radio he hopes the war “is addressed and ended as soon as possible.”

“We cannot be fighting everybody else’s wars,” said Susan Ruch, the Carson City, Nevada GOP chair. “I do not want it to be a forever war, and I think the Iranians, if they do not want this form of government, at some point they have to figure out how they’re going to do it.”

Politics

Stephen A. Smith has some words for Democrats as he makes his 2028 plans clear

Published

55 minutes ago

September 3, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Sports broadcaster Stephen A. Smith has been bouncing around cable TV but insists he’s staying out of one arena: the political one.

The outspoken ESPN personality isn’t staying away from talking politics — far from it. But Smith told Blue Light News in an interview airing Thursday that he’s not running for president in 2028 in his firmest rejection yet of speculation that has surrounded him for the past year.

“The minute I announce that I’m running, I would be taken off the air,” Smith said in an interview on The Conversation with Dasha Burns. “I wouldn’t be able to work, and I would lose a contract that I worked my entire career for, you know, and I’m not giving that up.”

He left no wiggle room: “As long as the rules are what they are and they can’t be circumvented, it’s not something that I’m going to think about.”

That didn’t mean Smith, who is famous for his brash takes, didn’t have a few about Democrats and Republicans.

Smith, who has repeatedly doled out criticism of both parties, offered blunt advice for Democrats seeking a path back to power: Purge the Democratic Socialists of America and restrain the party’s progressive flank.

The Democrats, he said, should only welcome people who “march lockstep” with the party. “We should never want to hear anything about the Democratic Party being a ‘big tent,’” he said.

Asked how Democrats should handle the progressives, Smith said: “Tell them to sit their ass down and get with the program.”

He also warned that Democrats’ association with left-wing streamer Hasan Piker would “come back to haunt” the party. Smith said he would have Piker on his show “if necessary,” and then “grill him about the things that he said and why.”

Smith’s remarks come as Democrats have been distancing themselves from Piker, who played an active role in supporting Abdul El-Sayed for Senate in Michigan and has come under fire for commentary that has included suggesting that American Jewish support for Israel could lead someone to “take action” against Jews in the U.S.

The ESPN star also had some praise for President Donald Trump, crediting him for recognizing “that most voters believe our politics and our politicians are full of shit” in a way that Democrats have been unable to articulate as well.

“He speaks a language that the electorate, no matter who they are or what side of the aisle they are on, can relate to, even if they despise him,” Smith said, adding that there are millions of voters out there who “want chaos” and “the evisceration of rules and decorum and regulations.”

Looking ahead to 2028, Smith named Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro as his top prospect for Democrats, calling him “big time,” and saying “[his] record is head and shoulders above anybody right now.”

Smith also praised Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, but thinks electing him could be a challenge following Barack Obama’s presidency.

On the Republican side, Smith dismissed a potential run by media personality Tucker Carlson, noting he doesn’t think the former Fox host could secure enough support from independents.

On the other hand, Smith argued that Secretary of State Marco Rubio would be a stronger candidate than Vice President JD Vance.

Vance is “an individual that tries to be too like Trump,” Smith told Blue Light News. “And I don’t think there’s — the level of authenticity that you’re wishing to see from candidates; I don’t think he’s that guy. I think that Marco Rubio is an authentic individual.”

Smith even noted he would consider voting for Rubio himself, saying it depends “on the candidate on the left.”

Watch the whole interview on the latest episode of “The Conversation.”

Politics

Stephen A. Smith on Trump, Democrats and the politics of chaos

Published

6 hours ago

September 3, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Stephen A. Smith on Trump, Democrats and the politics of chaos

lead image

Politics

Elon Musk unleashes first wave of spending on key races in the midterms

Published

7 hours ago

September 3, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Elon Musk’s super PAC disclosed its first independent expenditures of the 2026 general election in a filing released late Wednesday, detailing roughly $800,000 across key House and Senate races.

Musk’s America PAC targeted several key Senate contests, including races in Texas, Maine, Ohio, New Hampshire, Iowa, Michigan and Alaska.

The largest amount went to Texas — over $247,000 — where Republicans are expected to deploy a wave of party resources to bolster Attorney General Ken Paxton against Democrat James Talarico.

Musk’s super PAC also put nearly $90,000 into eight House races:

Rep. Derrick Van Orden in Wisconsin; Rep. Mike Lawler in New York; Rep. Jen Kiggans in Virginia; Rep. Tom Kean Jr. in New Jersey; Rep. Scott Perry in Pennsylvania; Rep. Rob Bresnahan in Pennsylvania; Rep. Ryan Mackenzie in Pennsylvania; and Scott Singer in Florida.

The independent expenditures — Musk’s first of the general election — were disclosed days after he met with Speaker Mike Johnson in Texas last week.

Republicans already hold a significant fundraising advantage over Democrats, buoyed by President Donald Trump’s roughly $400 million in his MAGA Inc. super PAC. Trump is under growing pressure from Republicans to tap into that money as the midterms near. A major investment from Musk would further widen the GOP’s financial edge heading into November.

Musk has reportedly considered spending at least $100 million for the GOP through America PAC to help Republicans in this year’s midterms, but the full scope of that effort remains unclear.

A spokesperson for America PAC declined to comment.

Musk spent roughly $290 million to support Trump and the GOP during the 2024 cycle, predominantly through his super PAC, making him the largest individual donor to any political committee that cycle, before he took on a major role in the White House’s DOGE effort.