A party that built its message around a strong, firm, and unequivocal case to end this war now would very suddenly draw attention to the undoubtedly dozens of congressional Democrats who would not echo this line. So what we get instead is limp process critiques, demanding pointless hearings, and bizarre attacks that Trump is not doing regime change fast enough. Polls repeatedly show the most common criticism of Democrats is not that they are too far left or too anti-war, but that they are too weak, that they don’t stand for anything.
Centering criticism of a deeply unpopular war on those carrying it out for not filling out the right paperwork or producing a satisfactory slideshow — rather than making clear, normative objections to a war of aggression — feeds directly into this perception. But perhaps it’s a perception Democratic leaders, and the pro-war, pro-Israel donors who fund their political careers, would prefer over the alternative.


I mean, what does it look like to “end the war”. Even if they voted to end it, you can’t unilaterally stop it, the time to stop it was before Trump started the war, now it can only end through a deal with Iran.
Why isn’t there a deal yet anyway? After all Trump is the best dealmaker that has ever existed. He’s been making deals his whole life, and they were great, beautiful, amazing deals. The Iranians will really fall in line facing the best, amazing dealmaker in the world.