291

A new survey has found that a record number of registered voters in the United States oppose the war on Iran and believe there is no strategy to end it.

A survey published on Thursday by Fox News found that 71 percent of voters believe the Trump administration “lacks a clear strategy” for ending the hostilities, which have helped to raise inflation and send fuel prices soaring.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] 20cello@lemmy.world 60 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Amazingly there's still people in the us who think this war is just...

[-] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 46 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It’s roughly the same percentage of people who blindly support orangeboi no matter what

[-] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 30 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

But it's now below 30%, at least in that one poll (which is a Fox News poll no less). That's kind of amazing. I thought he would never drop below about 33% in any of these polls because of those fanatical cult members.

It having dropped to 29% is actually a big deal. And it's probably what's setting klaxons off in the GOP and seeing the administration frantically try to simultaneously bribe and disenfranchise voters.

There's political blood in the water.

[-] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

From my observation, a quarter to a third of population are always fanatical idiots. This can generally be observed across voting patterns in many countries.

[-] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Yes. And you can rely on those fanatics to turn up on voting day. But when a large percentage of the remainder decides not to vote, you get this crap. Whats the point of fighting for the right to vote if youre just gonna flush it because you dont like the choices?

Americans bewilder me.

[-] vercetti@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Lots of Americans will believe whatever Israel tells them to and get mad at anyone who calls it out.

[-] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 1 day ago

They're here on Lemmy, and they're fucking nuts. I recently saw one say that opposition to the Iran war sounded like something Russia and China would be in favor of 😬

It's actually a good point, ending it probably is something Russia & China would be in favour of, but that doesn't make it wrong...

It's an unjust war started by a narcisstic moronic fascist, but that doesn't make the Iranian leadership any less of a toxic dictatorship.

[-] yucandu@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

Would they? The war is damaging US reputation further worldwide, isn't that good for Russia and China?

[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 8 points 1 day ago

Russia yes, China probably no. Russia exports oil so Hormuz getting blocked is good for them, but China imports oil and would much rather oil prices stay low until they can fully decarbonize. The US squandering its soft power is probably a cherry on top for Russia and a silver lining for China, but the latter would probably still rather have fuel for their factories.

[-] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 day ago

Making decisions based on what Russia and China think and not the effects of those policies and harm to others is honestly baby brained. Not accusing you of that, but that’s definitely what the original comment I was referencing was doing. All people everywhere deserve to be free, including the Iranian people, but the terror campaign initiated by the US and Israel against Iran makes nobody safer and senselessly kills many.

[-] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 3 points 1 day ago

There are always people who will support ANY war. They are cowards who only feel safe when America is lashing out.

this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2026
291 points (99.0% liked)

News

39243 readers
2574 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS