Were the midterms really lost because of the war with Iran? Vice President Vance, along with the wok

Were the midterms really lost because of the war with Iran?

Vice President Vance, along with the woke-right podcasters and groypers pushing that simplistic explanation, owes Americans something better than another excuse to blame Israel.

Voter polling highlighted economic hardship, concerns about corruption, and weak Republican candidates. Reducing the outcome to one convenient explanation avoids the soul-searching Republicans need to do. (ap.org⁠)

And before condemning the war, let’s examine why it was fought.

Senator John Kennedy explained why President Trump returned to military action against Iran in 2026 after Operation Midnight Hammer in June 2025. He said classified intelligence he personally reviewed showed Iran building a missile and drone arsenal intended to shield a renewed nuclear weapons effort. He described the danger of allowing that buildup to reach the point where Iran could threaten London, Paris, and Germany. (thejc.com⁠)

Did you catch that? The stakes extended far beyond Israel’s security. European capitals were part of the threat he described.

And even apart from that danger, there was the IRGC-directed assassination plot.

On March 6, 2026, a federal jury convicted Asif Merchant of terrorism and murder for hire. According to the Justice Department, he admitted that the IRGC sent him to America to arrange political assassinations. Trump was among the potential targets, and Merchant testified that he understood Trump would be the target. He even paid $5,000 to supposed hitmen who were actually undercover officers. (justice.gov⁠)

American law enforcement stopped the plot. That does not erase the intentions of those behind it.

In my view, that plot alone justified decisive action against the IRGC and its ability to threaten American lives.

But here is the question these podcasters should address: Was confronting Iran the mistake, or was stopping short of a decisive outcome the mistake?

I believe the vice president’s push for ceasefires, alongside Qatar and Pakistan, undermined the effort to finish the job. Those blaming the decision to fight should also examine whether repeated pauses allowed the threat and uncertainty to persist.

Oil prices matter. Their impact on transportation, food, and household bills matters. But pointing to those costs does not settle the argument. We must also ask whether leaving the conflict unresolved prolonged the economic pain.

You can criticize how the war was conducted. You can question its costs and the administration’s decisions. But if you claim to put America first, explain how America should respond when a foreign regime sends an operative to arrange political assassinations on American soil.

Explain how allowing that regime to rebuild its ability to threaten America and its allies serves American interests.

Mockery, slogans, and blaming Israel are no substitute for answers.

If you want to discuss the cost of fighting, be honest enough to discuss the cost of leaving the job unfinished.