By Saqib S. Qureshi
WASHINGTON — Republicans heading toward November’s midterm elections are confronting a political problem they have limited power to solve themselves: some of the issues increasingly hurting their candidates — the Iran war, gasoline prices and public anxiety over how long the conflict will last — are tied directly to decisions controlled by President Donald Trump.
That dependence is becoming more consequential as several warning signs that once could have been treated separately begin moving in the same direction.
Trump’s job approval has fallen to 33%, the lowest level of his presidency, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released Monday. Sixty-four percent of Americans disapprove of his performance, while 80% believe the conflict with Iran will continue for a long time.
For Republican candidates, however, the more politically dangerous development may be happening beneath the president’s topline approval number.
The Iran conflict appears to be weakening two advantages Republicans have traditionally expected to carry into an election: national security and the economy.
A Reuters/Ipsos survey earlier this month found registered voters preferred Democrats over Republicans 37% to 36% on handling war and terrorism. The one-point margin itself is statistically narrow, but the movement behind it is striking: when Reuters/Ipsos began asking the question in December 2024, Republicans held an 11-point advantage, 39% to 28%.
The same polling found Democrats moving ahead on management of the economy for the first time in roughly a decade.
That combination helps explain the anxiety now emerging inside the Republican Party.
The political cost of the war is increasingly being felt not only through arguments over foreign policy, but at American gas stations and in household budgets.
The conflict has disrupted energy flows through the Strait of Hormuz, a route normally responsible for roughly a fifth of global oil trade. Oil prices have remained elevated and gasoline costs have become an increasingly visible domestic consequence of a war that Trump initially presented as a relatively short military undertaking.
That creates a particularly difficult contradiction for Republicans.
Trump returned to office promising both to avoid prolonged foreign wars and to reduce Americans’ cost of living. The Iran conflict is now placing pressure on both promises simultaneously.
And Republican lawmakers cannot independently determine when that pressure ends.
Trump has repeatedly indicated that his Iran strategy will not be dictated by the midterm calendar. For vulnerable Republicans, that leaves their electoral fortunes partly dependent on whether the president can produce an acceptable end to the conflict and bring energy costs down before voters begin casting ballots.
The political timetable is becoming increasingly unforgiving.
Early voting in parts of the country will begin well before November 3, shortening the period available for a dramatic improvement in public sentiment.
Signs of Republican discomfort have already reached Congress.
In June, the Republican-controlled House voted 215-208 for a resolution directing Trump to withdraw U.S. forces from the Iran conflict unless Congress authorised the war. Four Republicans joined Democrats.
The vote did not end the conflict, but it demonstrated something politically important: concern over Trump's Iran strategy had grown sufficiently strong for members of his own party to challenge presidential war powers publicly.
Similar divisions resurfaced in July as Congress debated war funding and another effort to restrict Trump's authority.
At the same time, Democrats are widening the congressional battlefield.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee recently added 12 Republican-held House seats to its target list — including districts Trump carried less than two years ago.
That does not mean Democrats are guaranteed control of the House. Midterm races remain highly localised, candidate quality matters and Republicans retain advantages on some issues, including immigration.
But it indicates that Democrats increasingly believe the national environment allows them to compete beyond the narrow collection of districts traditionally considered vulnerable.
Primary-election participation offers another warning.
Associated Press analysis found Democratic turnout in several 2026 primaries reaching levels not seen in more than two decades, evidence of voter enthusiasm that Republicans will need to counter in November.
The Iran war did not create every Republican vulnerability.
Independent election analysis had already identified affordability, Trump's approval rating and the historical difficulty faced by a president's party in midterm elections as serious GOP challenges. Cook Political Report has argued that even an Iran-war off-ramp would not eliminate the party's underlying political problems.
But the war may be acting as an accelerant.
It links foreign policy to gasoline prices, federal spending and household finances while forcing Republican candidates to defend decisions over which they exercise relatively little control.
The political danger becomes even clearer when compared with the beginning of the conflict.
Early in the war, Republican leaders largely rallied behind Trump. Months later, House Republicans have crossed party lines on war-powers votes, candidates are confronting higher gasoline prices, and polling shows the GOP's once-large advantage on war and terrorism has effectively disappeared.
That is the deeper significance behind one Republican strategist’s observation that “one person kind of controls our fate.”
Republican candidates can campaign on taxes, immigration, crime and their own records. They can distance themselves from individual White House decisions or emphasise local issues.
But they cannot independently end the Iran war.
Nor can they guarantee when oil markets will stabilise or whether Trump’s approval rating will recover.
With the midterm clock running down, Republicans increasingly face an unusual electoral dependency: their ability to retain control of Congress may hinge less on what individual GOP candidates do between now and November than on whether Trump can change the trajectory of a war he chose to fight.