Iranians on Wednesday struck a defiant tone, celebrating U.S. voters’ rebuke of President Donald Trump in the midterm elections while many in the Middle East waited to see how the results could affect the Iran war.
Concerns about the war, particularly frustration over rising prices for fuel and other goods in the U.S., helped Democrats win control of both chambers of Congress in Tuesday’s vote, a sharp setback for Trump and his Republican Party.
But Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, whose father and predecessor was killed in the opening strikes of the war in February, dismissed the prospect of any major change in the U.S. approach to the Islamic Republic.
“If there are still those who harbor even a slight hope for a change in behavior or partisan and factional shifts within the system of domination, or who imagine that by giving concessions to America they can dissuade it from hostility toward the Iranian nation, they are gravely mistaken,” he said on his social media account.
It also shows Americans rejecting Israel.
When they’re sworn in, this will be the most anti-zionist, least AIPAC affiliated Congress in my lifetime.
The majority are still AIPAC funded and, at a minimum, Liberal-Zionist. But the message is clear. The DSA candidates and especially El-Sayed prove to Zionist Dems that they better reign in Israel or their asses are gone too, no matter how much money Israel spends.
Not by much, but you’re right. Every little bit helps.
yeah and I can say aipac funded shell pacs were pretty prominent in the primaries in my area and their canidates lost. really shady trump with naming the shell pacs with progressive in the names. pissed me off. not sure about other voters but I would see the commercial and the pac name and was like. how is this person progressive. of course I then looked up the particular pac and low and behold its funded by aipac… I did not even think much about aipac before the primaries other than it was mentioned a lot here but for me it was basically talk until they became active in this area.
I’d say Iran’s leaders are correct.
How fucked are we that Iran is the sane and reasonable one in this conflict?
J.D. Vance is saying the same thing: https://x.com/JDVance/status/2118004988433641835
It’s obvious, even to Republicans.
He’s just saying that because he doesn’t want it to be about ICE, data centers, Epstein, Gaza, the economy and billionaires. It’s all those things and Iran.
Putting it all on the Iran war gives them an exit strategy because they can’t/won’t fix the other things.
He does say it is also about the economy and Israel - the other stuff, he does not mention. Trump has been polling quite well on immigration, so I don’t know that ICE has been such a big deal for most American voters, unfortunately :\
Shh. Let him think it’s all about the war…
Vance is a sociopathic piece of shit, positioned by a psychopathic megalomaniac billionaire implementing totalitarianism. He is only saving face and vying for the 2028 presidency. He has no honor or virtue. He’ll say whatever he thinks will benefit him. He’s a nazi traitor.
So Iran’s goal of US regime change has succeeded.
also rejected the massive datacenters/layoffs that are ruining peoples lives.
Removed by mod
Separately, three-quarters of voters (74%) said the conflict was a crucial or major factor in their vote for Congress and a quarter (26%) said it was a minor factor or not a factor.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c39wz0970eypo
Both Iran and Gaza, the former moreso, were definitely part of the general mass of discontent directed at Trump.
Removed by mod
To add, a majority of those voters discontent isn’t gas, too. They murdered school children, y’all.
It’s not a majority of all Americans, but murder of Iranian civilians and Gazan civilians does break through to many people not on a 24/7 propaganda loop. That mattered in 2024 as it mattered in 2026, to obviously different outcomes.
Also the double tap air strikes on South American boats. And the extrajudicial detentions and murders of foreigners and citizens alike. And the Epstein stuff and . . .
It’s nearly impossible to hit a regime like Iran without any civilian casualties. The school jumps out but overall the ratio of collateral deaths was very low
It was the deadliest US attack on civilians since 91. It was also a deliberate double tap meant to maximize casualties, and none of it had to happen at all.
Do you mean in a single (double) missile strike?
I’m sure they whacked a lot more civilians in the battles against ISIS, for instance
It’s a cost-benefit balance. You want to have a minimum amount of collateral damage to achieve the goal. The goal also needs to be worth the damage. Finally, you need to have exhausted non military options.
America effectively achieved nothing, for a lot of damage. Trump also ripped up the carefully negotiated, internationally backed, treaty that was working to bring Iran back into the fold. They didn’t even competently argue that Iran was in breach.
The end result, a large loss of life, a lot of money wasted, and peace set back decades. It will also have knock on effects for years (fertilizer being a big issue).
How would you argue that the treaty “was working to bring Iran back into the fold”?
It was basically them promising to postpone their nuclear proliferation to 2031 in exchange for all sanctions being dropped.
They do when the conflict affects oil prices.
