Iran war shapes voter decisions ahead of midterms as economic concerns mount

For some voters, the Iran war is shaping their choices ahead of the Nov. 3 midterms. For others, it may be a reason not to vote at all.

With early voting underway, rising fuel prices have become an important campaign concern. The election will decide which party controls Congress, the branch that can declare war and fund it. But whether frustration with higher costs will change votes is still uncertain.

An October AP-NORC poll found that 64% of registered voters considered the Iran war one of the most important issues when deciding how to vote, compared with 84% who cited the cost of living.

Nearly three in four adults were extremely or very concerned about gas and fuel prices rising as a result of the war, including 61% of Republicans and 85% of Democrats, according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted Sept. 28 through Oct. 4.

Democrats have built those concerns into their campaign messaging. Of 65 Iran-themed advertisements in competitive congressional races, 61 focused on household costs, an Associated Press analysis found.

“People at home are hurting because of skyrocketing costs, and our troops’ lives are in danger in a war that never should have happened,” Democratic Rep. Seth Moulton of Massachusetts said in September.

Republicans have mostly avoided the conflict in their advertising. Republican strategist Ron Bonjean told the AP that talking about the war is “really not a winning message.”

President Donald Trump has instead defended the war. At the United Nations General Assembly in September, he said oil prices “will come plummeting down even lower than they were at the start of the conflict.”

The election will decide which party controls Congress — the branch that can declare war and fund it.

Jesse Richman, a political scientist at Old Dominion University who studies electoral behavior, said the war reinforces existing Democratic views while producing a more mixed reaction among Republicans.

“The high gas prices and some of the other consequences from the war have some Republican voters less excited, less comfortable with the president and the administration,” Richman said.

Those voters could switch parties, stay home or stick with Republicans. Richman said it’s too early to know which will matter more.

Nathan Busch, a political science professor at Christopher Newport University, said the war’s immediate electoral consequences center on oil and gas prices rather than congressional war powers.

But those constitutional questions could intensify after the election, Busch said. He also argued that Iran’s nuclear ambitions provided security justifications for military intervention.

Congress has already challenged the administration. On Sept. 15, the House voted 220-204 to direct an end to U.S. hostilities in Iran, with seven Republicans joining Democrats, though the resolution did not become law.

Busch doubted that a change in congressional control would significantly alter the administration’s policy.

“Even if they lose Congress, they’re not gonna say, ‘Well, okay, we give up on Iran,’” Busch said.

Richman also said lawmakers could increase scrutiny but might struggle to impose meaningful restrictions. “It will be easy to do symbolic things,” he said, while cutting war funding would be harder.

Eric Cedrone, a retired history teacher who describes himself as a moderate conservative, plans to support candidates who favor the conflict.

“During these midterm elections I plan on voting for candidates that support the current Iran conflict,” Cedrone said in a written response, arguing that diplomatic efforts had fallen short.

Jonathan Brookshire, a Virginia voter, said the war may discourage him from voting altogether.

“It probably pushed me into not voting this cycle because it was so unwise,” Brookshire said.