Wednesday, 28 January, 2026
London, UK
Wednesday, January 28, 2026 10:12 PM
few clouds 4.0°C
Condition: Few clouds
Humidity: 92%
Wind Speed: 5.5 km/h

Trump is threatening to strike Iran. His supporters wouldn’t mind.

President Donald Trump’s MAGA base, known for its aversion to U.S. involvement in foreign wars, has embraced the administration’s aggressive use of military force abroad and would strongly support more.

A new POLITICO poll reveals 65 percent of Trump voters support the U.S. taking military action against at least one of several potential target countries, including Iran, Greenland, Cuba, Colombia, China and Mexico.

And one stands out: Iran. About 50 percent of Trump voters backed military intervention in the country, the most of any foreign target. That number rose to 61 percent of respondents who described themselves as “MAGA Republican” Trump supporters.

The poll data offers a clear view of a political movement that’s adapting its “America First” views to account for Trump’s expansive use of American military might, from orchestrating the capture of Venezuela’s leader to bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Trump’s latest threats against Tehran only underscore the shift in the GOP. The president said Wednesday on Truth Social that a “massive Armada” was heading toward Iran to “rapidly fulfill its mission, with speed and violence” if Tehran doesn’t agree to nuclear negotiations. A new attack would be “far worse” than the summer strikes on nuclear facilities, he warned.

While Trump campaigned against “endless wars” and pledged to focus on the homeland, his shift toward interventionism hasn’t rankled his supporters — in fact, he’s drawing solid support from the MAGA base.

“If you believe the Trump theory that our goal is to do everything we can to protect Americans, and that includes taking out bad people in certain places, then that’s America first,” said Amy Walter, editor-in-chief of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report.

But she noted Trump loyalists appear to be making a distinction between military action against other countries and long-term nation building efforts similar to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“If he said tomorrow that we’re going to send troops into the Middle East or we’re going to put boots on the ground in Venezuela, that is one thing that would break the coalition apart.”

Democrats are more pessimistic about the overseas plans. Only 18 percent of voters who supported former Vice President Kamala Harris in the last presidential election supported U.S. military action against Iran, according to the poll, which was conducted by Public First.

But not all of Trump’s potential targets are appealing for Republican voters.

Support for using force against Greenland — a target that Trump has at times suggested could be acquired by the United States using military might — is much lower. Only 21 percent of Trump 2024 voters and 26 percent of self-identified “MAGA Republican” Trump voters backed the idea. (The poll was conducted Jan. 16 to 19, after Trump had significantly ratcheted up his rhetoric around Greenland but before he said he would take military action off the table during a Jan. 21 speech in Davos, Switzerland.)

Still, that means that more than one in four of Trump’s most ardent supporters would encourage him to potentially attack a NATO ally to achieve what he views as America’s strategic needs. After publicly toying with the idea of invading the Arctic island, Trump backed down from those threats last week.

Nearly a third of Republicans support military action even closer to home, as Trump has sought to project dominance in the Western Hemisphere.

Thirty-two percent of Trump voters supported military intervention in Mexico, with 30 percent supporting military action in Colombia, while 28 percent said the U.S. should intervene militarily in Cuba.

Among self-described “MAGA Republican” Trump voters, those shares are again even higher.

Much smaller percentages of Harris voters support military action in these countries: 11% in Colombia and Cuba, and 10% in Mexico.

Trump has repeatedly threatened U.S. military intervention in all three. As he wages his battle against the flow of narcotics through the U.S.’s southern border, Trump has floated bombing cartels in Mexico and threatened regime change to oust Colombian President Gustavo Petro.

He’s also sought regime change in Cuba, weighing various tactics to topple the country’s communist government, including imposing a complete blockade on oil imports to the country.

The poll suggests that beyond his base of loyalists, Americans remain divided over Trump’s focus on foreign affairs during his first year back in office. Some worry his emphasis on Western Hemisphere intervention comes at the expense of pressing domestic issues.

Roughly 44 percent of Americans believe that Trump has spent too much time focusing on international affairs instead of on domestic challenges.

But among voters who backed him in the 2024 election, 59 percent believe he has spent the right amount of time on international issues, compared to only 26 percent worried about the overseas focus.

By contrast, 66 percent of Harris voters voiced worries about the overseas focus. More than half of Harris voters (52 percent) opposed the American military operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro; 73 percent of Trump voters supported the action.

The partisan split over Trump’s foreign policy strategy could undermine Democratic plans to make it an issue ahead of the congressional midterm elections this year. Walter said with such firm Republican backing, it may be hard for Democrats to move the electoral needle by focusing on Trump’s interventionist policies.

LP Staff Writers

Writers at Lord’s Press come from a range of professional backgrounds, including history, diplomacy, heraldry, and public administration. Many publish anonymously or under initials—a practice that reflects the publication’s long-standing emphasis on discretion and editorial objectivity. While they bring expertise in European nobility, protocol, and archival research, their role is not to opine, but to document. Their focus remains on accuracy, historical integrity, and the preservation of events and individuals whose significance might otherwise go unrecorded.

Categories

Follow

    Newsletter

    Subscribe to receive your complimentary login credentials and unlock full access to all features and stories from Lord’s Press.

    As a journal of record, Lord’s Press remains freely accessible—thanks to the enduring support of our distinguished partners and patrons. Subscribing ensures uninterrupted access to our archives, special reports, and exclusive notices.

    LP is free thanks to our Sponsors

    Privacy Overview

    Privacy & Cookie Notice

    This website uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to help us understand how our content is accessed and used. Cookies are small text files stored in your browser that allow us to recognise your device upon return, retain your preferences, and gather anonymised usage statistics to improve site performance.

    Under EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), we process this data based on your consent. You will be prompted to accept or customise your cookie preferences when you first visit our site.

    You may adjust or withdraw your consent at any time via the cookie settings link in the website footer. For more information on how we handle your data, please refer to our full Privacy Policy