Trump supporters divided on Iranian strikes: A look at the reactions from MAGA voters
Shreeaa Rathi | TIMESOFINDIA.COM | Jun 24, 2025, 16:44 IST
( Image credit : AP, TOIGLOBAL )
The recent US military action against Iranian nuclear facilities has ignited a spectrum of responses among Trump supporters. While a faction applauds the decisive move as a demonstration of strength, others condemn it as unnecessary foreign meddling. A recent survey highlights this divide, with some expressing confidence in Trump's judgment, while others voice concerns about potential escalation.
Following U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites on June 22, 2025, reactions from Trump voters are varied, with some supporting President Trump's actions as aligned with his America First agenda, while others, including some high-profile supporters like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, accuse him of betraying the MAGA movement by engaging in foreign military intervention, according to interviews and polls conducted before Iran launched missiles at Qatar on Monday. Many Trump voters expressed trust in his leadership and access to national security intelligence, while a few voiced disappointment and fear of escalation, but most defended his decision to act without congressional approval, citing the need for swift action.
Stephen Caraway, a 40-year-old Republican from Ohio, applauded President Trump on his “decisive leadership” after the strikes.
ABC News interviewed more than a half dozen Americans who voted for Trump in the 2024 presidential election after U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites on Saturday but before Iran launched missiles at Qatar on Monday, targeting the American Al-Udeid Air Base.
Most Trump voters indicated support for Operation Midnight Hammer and trusted Trump to protect American interests, including preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, while keeping the U.S. out of a prolonged regional conflict.
“I am not concerned about a long-term war, because President Trump will not put up with it,” Caraway explained.
A Washington Post poll conducted Wednesday indicated that 46% of Trump voters supported the airstrikes, while 26% opposed them, and 28% were unsure.
Throughout his 2024 campaign, Trump emphasized that he was “the only president in generations who didn’t start a war” and highlighted the importance of avoiding “never-ending wars.”
Some prominent lawmakers and conservative figures opposed to military action criticized the strikes.
“I didn’t sleep better after neocons and warmongers talked this administration into entering a hot war that Israel started,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., said in an interview on former Trump strategist Steve Bannon’s “War Room” program Monday.
“MAGA is not for foreign wars. We are not for regime change. We are for America First,” Greene said.
Two voters expressed disappointment with Trump’s decision to attack.
“Trump broke his promise,” said Sean Savage, 81, from Illinois. “I’m fearful this could turn really big.”
However, Savage still supported his vote for Trump in 2024.
“There was no other choice for me. I like most of what Trump has done, but this is one thing that I do not approve,” he said.
Other Trump voters believed the airstrikes did not conflict with his America First agenda.
“I think you can also see it as putting our military interests and our foreign assets and strategic interests first as well,” explained Andre Boccaccio, a 19-year-old from Arizona.
Lauren, a 59-year-old from California, stated that Trump “wants peace, and I think our country has to back him.”
Lauren also told ABC News that Iran’s nuclear program could lead to even greater threats to the U.S. in the future.
“Am I fearful for the future? Well, yes. But I think that if we don't disarm countries that have the ability to create destructive warfare … it can escalate, and our country and our growth will be in big trouble,” she said.
According to the Wednesday Washington Post poll, 22% of Americans viewed Iran’s nuclear program as an immediate and serious threat, and 48% saw it as a somewhat serious threat.
Elana Pritchard, a 43-year-old Texan, viewed the weekend strikes as preventative, not provocative.
“I really do think that he was just throwing a big punch,” she said. “They were trying to preemptively stop what could have been more of an escalating crisis between Iran and Israel, which probably would have dragged the United States into the conflict anyway.”
Nearly everyone contacted by ABC News defended Trump’s decision to proceed without Congress’ approval.
Ronald Barron, a 46-year-old voter from Georgia, said that “the process of declaring wars is outdated,” adding that “it’ll be way too late” by the time Congress finished voting.
“There's a very clear precedent that has been set by commanders-in-chief” who need to “act promptly and swiftly” to protect American safety, said Caraway, the Ohio Republican.
“And let's be honest with one another, Congress doesn't do anything promptly and swiftly.”
Trump’s supporters defaulted to trusting the president to do what was best for the country, pointing to his access to national security intelligence.
While Boccaccio described the action as “unexpected,” he said he believed “there is a reason behind what we're doing.”
Before the strikes, Barron, the Georgia voter, said that the Trump administration had been “horrible on the foreign side” in the early months of the president’s second term, and described Trump’s demands for Iran to surrender last week as “warmongering.”
In a followup interview after the strikes, he was more optimistic about Trump’s strategy.
“He's going about it in like a mafioso, \"American Gangster\"-type way,” he said. “For the last 150 years, they've been having company guys that have been toeing the company line ... So maybe we try something unconventional, something that's not even in the books, that might work.”
Freddie, a 65-year-old from Virginia, had mixed feelings about the attack.
“I don't know what the leaders know, and I’m not meant to know what the leaders know, so I can only wait and see,” she said.
She explained that her view of Trump was shaped more by his domestic agenda rather than the conflict in Iran.
“When the war comes to your soil, you get a little bit more involved in it,” Freddie elaborated. “But that’s halfway around the world. It’s easy for me to say I don't care about that.”
Stephen Caraway, a 40-year-old Republican from Ohio, applauded President Trump on his “decisive leadership” after the strikes.
ABC News interviewed more than a half dozen Americans who voted for Trump in the 2024 presidential election after U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites on Saturday but before Iran launched missiles at Qatar on Monday, targeting the American Al-Udeid Air Base.
Most Trump voters indicated support for Operation Midnight Hammer and trusted Trump to protect American interests, including preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, while keeping the U.S. out of a prolonged regional conflict.
“I am not concerned about a long-term war, because President Trump will not put up with it,” Caraway explained.
A Washington Post poll conducted Wednesday indicated that 46% of Trump voters supported the airstrikes, while 26% opposed them, and 28% were unsure.
Throughout his 2024 campaign, Trump emphasized that he was “the only president in generations who didn’t start a war” and highlighted the importance of avoiding “never-ending wars.”
Some prominent lawmakers and conservative figures opposed to military action criticized the strikes.
“I didn’t sleep better after neocons and warmongers talked this administration into entering a hot war that Israel started,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., said in an interview on former Trump strategist Steve Bannon’s “War Room” program Monday.
“MAGA is not for foreign wars. We are not for regime change. We are for America First,” Greene said.
Two voters expressed disappointment with Trump’s decision to attack.
“Trump broke his promise,” said Sean Savage, 81, from Illinois. “I’m fearful this could turn really big.”
However, Savage still supported his vote for Trump in 2024.
“There was no other choice for me. I like most of what Trump has done, but this is one thing that I do not approve,” he said.
Other Trump voters believed the airstrikes did not conflict with his America First agenda.
“I think you can also see it as putting our military interests and our foreign assets and strategic interests first as well,” explained Andre Boccaccio, a 19-year-old from Arizona.
Lauren, a 59-year-old from California, stated that Trump “wants peace, and I think our country has to back him.”
Lauren also told ABC News that Iran’s nuclear program could lead to even greater threats to the U.S. in the future.
“Am I fearful for the future? Well, yes. But I think that if we don't disarm countries that have the ability to create destructive warfare … it can escalate, and our country and our growth will be in big trouble,” she said.
According to the Wednesday Washington Post poll, 22% of Americans viewed Iran’s nuclear program as an immediate and serious threat, and 48% saw it as a somewhat serious threat.
Elana Pritchard, a 43-year-old Texan, viewed the weekend strikes as preventative, not provocative.
“I really do think that he was just throwing a big punch,” she said. “They were trying to preemptively stop what could have been more of an escalating crisis between Iran and Israel, which probably would have dragged the United States into the conflict anyway.”
Nearly everyone contacted by ABC News defended Trump’s decision to proceed without Congress’ approval.
Ronald Barron, a 46-year-old voter from Georgia, said that “the process of declaring wars is outdated,” adding that “it’ll be way too late” by the time Congress finished voting.
“There's a very clear precedent that has been set by commanders-in-chief” who need to “act promptly and swiftly” to protect American safety, said Caraway, the Ohio Republican.
“And let's be honest with one another, Congress doesn't do anything promptly and swiftly.”
Trump’s supporters defaulted to trusting the president to do what was best for the country, pointing to his access to national security intelligence.
While Boccaccio described the action as “unexpected,” he said he believed “there is a reason behind what we're doing.”
Before the strikes, Barron, the Georgia voter, said that the Trump administration had been “horrible on the foreign side” in the early months of the president’s second term, and described Trump’s demands for Iran to surrender last week as “warmongering.”
In a followup interview after the strikes, he was more optimistic about Trump’s strategy.
“He's going about it in like a mafioso, \"American Gangster\"-type way,” he said. “For the last 150 years, they've been having company guys that have been toeing the company line ... So maybe we try something unconventional, something that's not even in the books, that might work.”
Freddie, a 65-year-old from Virginia, had mixed feelings about the attack.
“I don't know what the leaders know, and I’m not meant to know what the leaders know, so I can only wait and see,” she said.
She explained that her view of Trump was shaped more by his domestic agenda rather than the conflict in Iran.
“When the war comes to your soil, you get a little bit more involved in it,” Freddie elaborated. “But that’s halfway around the world. It’s easy for me to say I don't care about that.”