undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjmyeet2mo ago0 comments

Democratic politicians have been remarkably silent on the war as a policy issue. The complaints are primarily around process. Even the milquetoast War Powers Resolution, which was doomed to fail anyway, was just process.

Back in the presidential election, Kamala called Iran our greatest threat. Today’s leaders are variations of this.

The most prominent race in this time has been the Michigan Democratic Senate primary where Al-Sayed is against it but I’ve honestly seen more hit pieces about Piker campaigning with him than anything about Iran as an issue in the race.

Look past all the stories like “this is the Strait of Hormuz”, “it’s open/closed”, “rising gas prices” and peace talks. Those are just telling you what’s going on.

What Democrats have you really seen that have talked about being against the actual policy? It’s surprisingly little.

0 comments

1 comments · 1 top-level

SpicyLemonZest2mo ago

On March 2, three days after the beginning of the war, Hakeem Jeffries went on CNN to explain his objections to the actual policy (https://jeffries.house.gov/2026/03/02/leader-jeffries-on-cnn...). He said that the bombing was justified by claims that aren't true, that there's no justification for a regime change war in any case, and that the practical consequences of the war will be bad for both American strategic interests and the American people.

As he mentions, while you may consider a war powers resolution "milquetoast", it's important to understand that this is the best lever he has available to try and stop the war. It's easy for Hasan to be mean and dunk on hypocritical Republicans, because Hasan's not the one who has to convince hypocritical Republicans to cross the aisle and vote for his bills.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse