Warren warns of endless Iran war as Trump approval falls to 36%

scanx
Reviewed by
Shraddha JScanX News Team
Key Highlights
  • Sen. Elizabeth Warren accuses Trump of signing Americans up for another endless war, citing reports that officials expect the Iran conflict to last until January 2029.
  • This contradicts Trump's public claim that the war will end immediately after the November midterm elections.
  • Trump's approval rating fell to a historic low of 36%, with disapproval rising to 64% in the latest NBC News poll.
  • Support among Republican voters declined to 80%, down from 83% in the spring.
  • WTI crude oil traded at $102.26 per barrel, despite Trump's prediction that prices will drop precipitously post-victory.
powered bylight_fuzz_icon
50650421

*this image is generated using AI for illustrative purposes only.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren accused President Donald Trump of committing Americans to another prolonged Middle East conflict, citing reports that senior officials expect the Iran war to last through the end of his term.

Divergence in War Timeline Estimates

Warren criticized Trump on X after The Wall Street Journal reported that top White House advisers have discussed the possibility of the conflict continuing until January 2029. This internal assessment contrasts sharply with Trump’s public statement on Wednesday that the war would end "immediately" after the November midterm elections.

"Donald Trump signed Americans up for another endless war," Warren said, sharing the report. She noted that while Trump claims the conflict will conclude shortly after the midterms, his officials privately anticipate a much longer duration.

Trump argued that Iran is "desperate" to influence the election and prevent voters from choosing what he described as a "nice, weak group of people." Investor Peter Schiff called Trump’s comments the president’s "latest lie," arguing that an end before the election is unlikely.

White House Advisers Prepare For Prolonged Conflict

According to the Journal, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and other senior officials have privately raised concerns that Tehran could continue resisting U.S. pressure despite a naval blockade and sanctions.

Vance previously declined to offer a timeline for the conflict, stating it would be irresponsible to provide Iran with an "artificial timeline." White House spokeswoman Olivia Wales defended Trump’s strategy, saying he has severely weakened Tehran’s economy through unprecedented measures. Wales added that Trump alone would decide how and when the conflict ends.

Trump’s Approval Rating Hits New Low

In the latest NBC News Decision Desk poll, Trump’s approval rating fell to 36%, down one point from the spring and the lowest in the poll’s history. His disapproval rating rose to 64%, also a new high.

While Trump has faced weak overall ratings before, declining support among his Republican base could be more concerning. His approval among GOP voters fell to 80%, from 83% in the spring poll.

Market Impact and Oil Prices

On Monday, Trump predicted that oil prices will fall "precipitously" after a U.S. victory over Iran, forecasting gas prices will drop to $3 a gallon and eventually below $2. At the time of writing, WTI crude oil was at $102.26 per barrel, while Brent crude reached $107.57 per barrel.

On Thursday, speaking to Fox News host Laura Ingraham, Trump said he would have attacked Iran regardless of the impact on the midterm elections.

How might the widening gap between Trump's public timeline and advisers' private assessments impact investor confidence in U.S. geopolitical stability ahead of the midterms?

Could the projected prolonged conflict and sustained high oil prices ($100+ per barrel) significantly alter consumer spending patterns and inflation expectations for the remainder of the year?

What specific diplomatic or military escalation triggers could force the White House to abandon its 'no artificial timeline' stance before January 2029?

like17
dislike

Pelosi Slams Trump Over Iran War Costs as Democrats Cite Rising Prices

scanx
Reviewed by
Shraddha JScanX News Team
Key Highlights
  • Nancy Pelosi accused Republicans of prioritizing wealthy interests while working families face rising costs and war spending
  • Sen. Elizabeth Warren cited July data showing 23,000 jobs lost and wage growth at a five-year low
  • The Pentagon estimated the Iran war cost $37.5 billion and sought up to $70 billion in supplemental funding
  • Moody's estimated the conflict cost US consumers $100 billion, averaging $750 per household
  • Gov. JB Pritzker blamed Trump tariffs and the Iran war for higher grocery, gas, and medication prices
powered bylight_fuzz_icon
49794904

*this image is generated using AI for illustrative purposes only.

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi accused Republicans of prioritizing wealthy interests while shifting financial burdens onto working families through rising costs and military spending.

Pelosi posted on X on Monday that Republicans were making citizens pay more so the rich could cash in. She highlighted skyrocketing costs, tax breaks for the wealthy, and billions spent on President Donald Trump’s military campaign against Iran.

Democratic Criticism Widens

Other Democratic leaders joined the criticism ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) warned that gas, grocery, and utility prices had risen while the administration focused on projects bearing Trump’s name.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) cited July labor-market data showing 23,000 jobs lost and wage growth at its slowest pace in five years. She argued that rising costs were shrinking workers’ purchasing power.

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) criticized Republican health care proposals, accusing them of gutting programs to give handouts to billionaires. Gov. JB Pritzker blamed Trump’s tariffs and the Iran war for higher grocery, gas, and medication costs.

Economic Impact of Conflict

The Iran war continued to pressure global and US economies through higher energy costs and military spending. Oil prices briefly neared $120 a barrel before easing. The Pentagon estimated the war had cost $37.5 billion and sought nearly $67 billion to $70 billion more in supplemental funding.

Metric Value Source
Pentagon War Cost Estimate $37.5 billion Pentagon
Supplemental Funding Request $67 billion to $70 billion Pentagon
Consumer Cost Estimate $100 billion Moody’s
Per Household Impact $750 Moody’s

Moody’s economist Mark Zandi estimated the conflict had cost US consumers $100 billion, or about $750 per household. He warned that higher energy costs were putting increasing pressure on lower-income families.

How might the Pentagon's request for up to $70 billion in supplemental funding influence the upcoming federal budget negotiations and deficit projections?

What is the potential impact of sustained oil prices near $120 a barrel on the Federal Reserve's interest rate decisions and inflation targets?

Could the Democratic narrative linking military spending to consumer costs gain traction with independent voters ahead of the 2026 midterm elections?

like19
dislike