Source: Politics<\/p>\n
Democrats are scrambling to respond to President Donald Trump\u2019s unilateral attack on Iran\u2019s nuclear facilities.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s another high-stakes move by the president that could present a major political opening \u2014 but the party has, so far, appeared fractured in its public messaging.<\/p>\n
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) quickly called for Trump to be impeached<\/a>, but most House Democrats on Tuesday voted down Rep. Al Green\u2019s (D-Texas) resolution<\/a> to do so. Other Democrats have supported Trump\u2019s strike, including Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine), who said the president was \u201cright\u201d to bomb Iran<\/a>. Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin posted \u201cno new wars\u201d on X<\/a>, while House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries vented that Trump \u201cfailed to seek congressional authorization.\u201d<\/p>\n It\u2019s the kind of disjointed and, at times, contradictory message that\u2019s become emblematic of the Democratic Party that\u2019s been locked out of power in Washington, cut out of the loop, and left without clear party leadership during Trump\u2019s second term. Where Democrats were once reflexively #Resistance-driven during the president\u2019s first term, giving them clear anti-Trump positions on much of what he did, they\u2019re now more nuanced, sometimes circumspect, on Trump\u2019s controversial moves on trade<\/a>, immigration<\/a> and now, foreign policy.<\/p>\n Democrats often unify on arguments about process and rules, including on the Iranian strikes, when they\u2019ve primarily attacked Trump for failing to seek congressional approval. Multiple War Powers Resolutions \u2014 which would prevent Trump from further engaging in hostilities against Iran without congressional approval \u2014 are in the works.<\/p>\n But that response, so far, is \u201ca classic Democratic messaging problem,\u201d said Morgan Jackson, a top Democratic strategist based in North Carolina, who said that Democrats \u201cshould be making two points, clearly and consistently that\u2019s broadly adopted: Trump is dragging us into a war, which he said he\u2019d never do, and he\u2019s making Americans less safe.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWhen we debate the process, war powers vote, impeaching him because he didn\u2019t ask Congress \u2014 voters don\u2019t care about that,\u201d Jackson added. \u201cWhen we have a message about process versus a president who took action, [then] that\u2019s a losing message.\u201d<\/p>\n Or as a Democratic consultant said when granted anonymity to speak frankly about the party: \u201cOur response is to push our glasses up our nose and complain about the illegality of it? Come on. We can\u2019t just bitch about the process.\u201d<\/p>\n Democrats\u2019 jumbled answer to the United States\u2019 strikes in Iran, so far, is also the product of a specific challenge, several House Democrats said: They\u2019re operating without much information.<\/p>\n The Trump administration postponed a closed-door congressional briefing<\/a> on the Iran strikes Tuesday afternoon, drawing the ire of Democrats who questioned whether the administration was trying to obfuscate its intelligence, and Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, said he first heard about the attack<\/a> on social media.<\/p>\n \u201cThere\u2019s no official party line\u201d because \u201cyou need the facts,\u201d said Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.).<\/p>\n That\u2019s left Trump and Republicans to dominate the public messaging around a rapidly changing situation.<\/p>\n After Trump signed off on a trio of bombings on Iran\u2019s nuclear sites on Saturday, he claimed the strikes \u201cobliterated\u201d<\/a> Iran\u2019s nuclear capabilities, but his own military leaders walked back that assessment. Trump floated the possibility of regime change<\/a> in Iran, then backtracked by Tuesday,<\/a> telling reporters he wants \u201cto see everything calm down as quickly as possible.\u201d The president helped to broker a ceasefire deal between Iran and Israel, but it\u2019s already been tested and it\u2019s unclear how long it may hold<\/a>.<\/p>\n That constant uncertainty is at the core of Democrats\u2019 defense for their constitutionality argument. Himes, who has introduced one of the War Powers Resolution measures, warned that he \u201cwould be willing to bet my next paycheck that a ceasefire is not likely to remain in effect for very long,\u201d so \u201cI think the Constitution to which we all theoretically subscribe should be enforced.\u201d<\/p>\n House Democratic Caucus Chair Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) said it was \u201ccompletely unacceptable that Congress has not been briefed on this in a timely fashion,\u201d adding that \u201claunching an attack without congressional authorization is wrong\u201d and \u201claunching a potentially unsuccessful attack without congressional authorization would be an administration-defining failure.\u201d<\/p>\n Potential 2028 Democratic presidential contenders, from California Gov. Gavin Newsom to former Secretary Pete Buttigieg to Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, have largely focused their responses to the Iranian strikes on public safety and concern for military personnel. Otherwise, they\u2019ve largely stayed quiet.<\/p>\n \u201cOur challenge is, yes, we have no clear leader but, just as important, everyone is still trying to figure out what\u2019s going on,\u201d said a Democratic operative who is advising a potential 2028 candidate and was granted anonymity to describe private conversations. \u201cDonald Trump sows so much chaos and confusion into the process that Democrats can sometimes get distracted and respond to all of it, rather than having a coherent overall message.\u201d<\/p>\n The muddled Democratic message on the Iran strikes is particularly notable because there is a clear political opening. A majority of Americans disapprove of the president\u2019s decision to bomb Iran\u2019s nuclear sites, while six in 10 said the strikes will increase the Iranian threat to the United States, according to a CNN poll released Tuesday<\/a>.<\/p>\n The DNC has urged Democrats to capitalize on that opening, even if it\u2019s not yet the loudest message emanating from their own party. A messaging guidance memo from the DNC, and obtained by POLITICO, described Trump\u2019s actions as “unconstitutional, dangerous and hypocritical.”<\/p>\n Of the six messaging points detailed as pushback to it, only the last one focused on process, arguing that Trump \u201cmust bring his case before Congress immediately.\u201d The other five ticked through safety, broken campaign promises and lack of public support for the strikes.<\/p>\n Republicans have also been divided on Trump\u2019s actions, with some explicitly urging Trump not get involved further in the conflict. Trump ally Steve Bannon cautioned against the United States pushing for regime change<\/a> in Iran, warning it could lead to more American military involvement. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) had initially joined Democrats in pushing for a measure to block American involvement, but he said he wouldn\u2019t back it<\/a> if the ceasefire between Israel and Iran held.<\/p>\n It\u2019s frustrated some Democrats who wish the party would take better control of the moment, but Pete Giangreco, a longtime Democratic consultant, said Democrats might end up benefiting politically regardless of their current messaging.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019re a party without a head. We don\u2019t have a Speaker, we don\u2019t have a nominee for president yet, so we have this cacophony of voices in these moments. \u2026 But that matters less here because we just need to get out of the way because the story here is MAGA is at war with MAGA,\u201d Giangreco said. \u201cDonald Trump did something that only 17 percent of Americans agree with, so the Democratic response, even if it is messy, doesn\u2019t matter this time.\u201d<\/p>\n