Supporters of Donald Trump attending the Conservative Political Action Conference expressed strong loyalty to the US president while voicing concern about the impact of the war with Iran.

Get today's headlines by email

Many activists said they trusted Trump’s decision to launch military action but hoped the conflict would end quickly and avoid deeper US involvement.

Attendees said the best outcome would involve a short campaign, falling fuel prices and no deployment of American ground troops. Some also said they hoped the Iranian public would overthrow the country’s leadership.

Support for Trump mixed with unease

However, several participants acknowledged uncertainty over how the conflict might develop.

Kyle Sims, a Republican strategist from Texas, said he supported Trump’s handling of the war but had mixed feelings about the broader consequences.

He said economic pressures, including high grocery prices, remain a major concern for many Americans.

Sims added he opposed sending US troops into Iran and warned against repeating long military campaigns similar to those in Iraq and Afghanistan.

War exposes divisions among Republicans

The conflict has also highlighted differences within the Republican Party, where some factions question the risks of military escalation.

Participants at CPAC said internal divisions could affect the party’s prospects in the upcoming midterm elections.

Ron Eller, a Republican congressional candidate from Mississippi, said rising fuel costs were already causing political tension.

He noted that filling his truck recently cost about $120, reflecting the economic strain many voters are experiencing.

According to Eller, economic concerns could influence voting behaviour in the midterm elections because many voters prioritise their household finances.

He said stabilising energy markets and reopening shipping routes such as the Strait of Hormuz would help ease pressure.

Calls to avoid a prolonged war

Several speakers warned that an extended conflict could erode public support.

Mercedes Schlapp said Americans do not want a prolonged war, raising the issue during a panel discussion about Iran.

Some participants argued that the preferred outcome would be a domestic uprising inside Iran rather than direct US intervention to change the government.

Former White House adviser Steve Bannon told conference attendees that Americans should support Trump but also weigh the potential costs of the conflict.

Bannon said the war could escalate to the point where US forces might be required to operate near strategic areas such as the Strait of Hormuz.

Strong backing remains among activists

Despite the concerns, many activists voiced unwavering support for the president.

Douglas Hoyt, a Trump supporter from West Virginia, said he fully trusted the president’s decisions and would continue backing him.

Public figures also defended the administration’s actions. Actor Dean Cain argued that Iran had long been hostile toward the United States and said military action was necessary to address the threat.

Another speaker, Reza Pahlavi, urged continued pressure on Iran’s leadership and called on supporters not to abandon the campaign.

Pahlavi, the son of Iran’s last monarch, said the current leadership in Tehran was weakening and urged Western supporters to maintain their approach.

Some attendees acknowledged that higher fuel prices could test public patience.

Angela Paxton, a state senator in Texas, said voters may tolerate economic pressure temporarily if they believe the conflict serves a broader national purpose.

But she warned public backing could weaken if the war drags on.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?

Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 29 March 2026

View full article

The most astonishing part of this whole story is how effortlessly some people suspend critical thinking the moment their “chosen one” speaks.

You’ve got folks cheering on a war they barely understand, convinced it’ll be quick, clean, and cost‑free because that’s what they want to believe, not what the facts suggest.

The cognitive dissonance is wild. Blind faith in the man, but fear of the very real consequences staring them in the face.

4 hours ago, Jim Waldron said:

The most astonishing part of this whole story is how effortlessly some people suspend critical thinking the moment their “chosen one” speaks.

You’ve got folks cheering on a war they barely understand, convinced it’ll be quick, clean, and cost‑free because that’s what they want to believe, not what the facts suggest.

The cognitive dissonance is wild. Blind faith in the man, but fear of the very real consequences staring them in the face.

The Yanks as usual dont understand that they have voted in a dictator !! they will not be able to get rid of him !! you reap what you sow !!

1 minute ago, MikeandDow said:

The Yanks as usual dont understand that they have voted in a dictator !! they will not be able to get rid of him !! you reap what you sow !!

I’m understanding how Trump is a dictator. Can you explain yourself?

2 minutes ago, TedG said:

I’m understanding how Trump is a dictator. Can you explain yourself?

An elected dictator, or

elective dictatorship, is a leader who gains power through legitimate elections but subsequently consolidates absolute authority, often by eroding democratic institutions, manipulating laws, and restricting opposition. These leaders leverage initial popular support to justify authoritarian methods,

google is your friend

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elective_dictatorship

2 minutes ago, MikeandDow said:

An elected dictator, or

elective dictatorship, is a leader who gains power through legitimate elections but subsequently consolidates absolute authority, often by eroding democratic institutions, manipulating laws, and restricting opposition. These leaders leverage initial popular support to justify authoritarian methods,

google is your friend

Does Trump have absolute authority?

2 minutes ago, MikeandDow said:

An elected dictator, or

elective dictatorship, is a leader who gains power through legitimate elections but subsequently consolidates absolute authority, often by eroding democratic institutions, manipulating laws, and restricting opposition. These leaders leverage initial popular support to justify authoritarian methods,

google is your friend

And google in itself is not a form of dictatorship?

He must have reduced oil consumption dramatically.

I wonder when Greta and the rest of the eco Nazis will thank him.

10 hours ago, Jim Waldron said:

The most astonishing part of this whole story is how effortlessly some people suspend critical thinking the moment their “chosen one” speaks.

You’ve got folks cheering on a war they barely understand, convinced it’ll be quick, clean, and cost‑free because that’s what they want to believe, not what the facts suggest.

The cognitive dissonance is wild. Blind faith in the man, but fear of the very real consequences staring them in the face.

"hope" is not a plan....the cult "hopes" it will be a quick easy war and they "hope" it will not involve ground troops and they "hope" it will result in lower gas prices and they "hope" that dear leader has some super secret plan other dropping a bunch of bombs and threats and "hoping" that Iran will say "yes dear leader whatever you want"....how did all those hopes work out in iraq , afganistan, vietnam, and other "excursions" that were sold to the public with "wishes and a prayer"?

I hope that someday we will have a POTUS without bone spurs that understands war is serious business and should involve congressional debate and approval and a real plan as to what the objectives are along with credible intelligence as to what the obstacles will be along with a clear exit plan consultation with allies and that diplomacy is not a TV game show.

13 hours ago, webfact said:

Attendees said the best outcome would involve a short campaign, falling fuel prices and no deployment of American ground troops. Some also said they hoped the Iranian public would overthrow the country’s leadership.

Are they living in the past? I think that unicorn has truly bolted.

6 hours ago, TedG said:

Does Trump have absolute authority?

When no significant Republican politician willing to step up, go on the record and point out that he doesn't, he will carry on selling the myth that he does to his MAGA hard core. So far, the most significant challenge that some disaffected Republicans have come up with is to declare how they won't be seeking re-election.

6 hours ago, pomchop said:

I hope that someday we will have a POTUS without bone spurs that understands war is serious business and should involve congressional debate and approval and a real plan as to what the objectives are along with credible intelligence as to what the obstacles will be along with a clear exit plan consultation with allies and that diplomacy is not a TV game show.

Maybe congress can end the war powers act.

The vast majority of Americans are opposed to this war mainly because it was forced on us without any debate and not bothering to enlist any allies….it was obviously done in a shambolic way without in-depth planning or goals for that matter.It also goes against everything the fraud promised to his base.It has adversely affected each and every country on the planet in a negative way……as an American that really really pi$$es me off.it’s also costing all of us money……it’s a hot mess of the first order no doubt about it.

Can't cure stoopid! Kool-Aid is 100% artifical colours and flavours. Yum!

13 hours ago, NanLaew said:

When no significant Republican politician willing to step up, go on the record and point out that he doesn't, he will carry on selling the myth that he does to his MAGA hard core. So far, the most significant challenge that some disaffected Republicans have come up with is to declare how they won't be seeking re-election.

You failed to address the question.

1 hour ago, TedG said:

You failed to address the question.

This one?

21 hours ago, TedG said:

Does Trump have absolute authority?

No he doesn't.

6 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

This one?

No he doesn't.

The problem is that he thinks he does and the Supreme Court has given him reason to believe he can get away with it.sad

38 minutes ago, Tug said:

The problem is that he thinks he does and the Supreme Court has given him reason to believe he can get away with it.sad

Agreed. My earlier point was not only has he almost got SCOTUS in his pocket, nobody of significance in the Republican party has called him out, so it bolsters Trump's overblown idea of what he can do.

What makes it worse is when foreign leaders and diplomats have to pander to him. They are pandering to his office, but his narcissism doesn't see it like that. Things like the King's invite delivered the obsequious British PM for an unprecedented second UK state visit, the NATO chief calling him "daddy" and King Charles visiting the US. All cringeworthy.

Hopefully, the Hungarian PM will lose their election next month and deprive him of a pro-Putin ally in Europe. I just read that Trump has "fully endorsed" Orbán and JD Vance will be visiting Budapest next month, before the election. Foreign interference in plain sight.