SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
public opinion
How Section 219, the US-Israel Military Merger, Would Thwart American Democracy
The merger would connect the US and Israeli militaries in unprecedented ways and make it exceedingly difficult for any future president to unwind this partnership with a foreign government, no matter what public opinion says.
Jul 13, 2026
It's called Section 219. Tucked away in the massive congressional spending bill known as the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, this provision of the law would effectively require our nation to permanently entangle the American military with the Israeli military.
Among other things, the United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative would require the US to share intelligence with Israel and establish a system of weapons research, development, and production, particularly in the domains crucial to warfare in the modern age: artificial intelligence, autonomous systems, and various other fields of high defense technology.
The House provision, which has a Senate version known as Section 1217, would also forbid the president of the United States from limiting intelligence collaboration with Israel over its human rights abuses. If the President ever wants to limit such collaboration, he or she must tell Congress and can only cite American national security as a basis.
In other words, these bills would connect the US and Israeli militaries in unprecedented ways and make it exceedingly difficult for any future president to unwind this partnership with a foreign government.
There’s a reason why members of Congress are trying to sneak this bill through right now, buried in a massive and must-pass defense spending bill: This might be their best, last chance to thwart the will of the American people.
If these bills pass in their current form, the US military would be more integrated with Israel’s than with that of any other country, including America's NATO allies.
There’s a reason why members of Congress are trying to sneak this bill through right now, buried in a massive and must-pass defense spending bill: This might be their best, last chance to thwart the will of the American people.
Over the past three years, American public opinion has turned sharply against the Israeli government.
Thanks to the modern miracle of social media, Americans were able to directly see the human carnage as the Israeli military slaughtered and starved, by the most conservative estimate, over 73,000 people in Gaza.
Americans were also able to see the consequences of the Israeli military's ethnic cleansing in Lebanon, which has destroyed ancient cities, including Christian towns, and displaced a million people from their homes.
Most recently, the American people watched as the Israeli government openly convinced the Trump administration to launch an unnecessary, illegal and failed war on Iran that has resulted in the deaths of thousands of civilians, over a dozen American soldiers, and a global economic crisis, including a sharp rise in gas prices.
The American people are simply fed up.
Members of Congress who recognize American sovereignty and respect American democracy must join Rep. Smith and others in opposing these provisions, and all Americans should call on their members of Congress to do so.
According to recent Pew data, 60% of American adults have an unfavorable view of Israel, up from 42% in 2022.
Majorities of voters under 50 in both parties feel this way: 57% of young Republicans and 84% of young Democrats.
Most Americans oppose further unconditional US military aid for the Netanyahu government.
Recent election results, in which candidates who staked their campaigns on investing American taxpayer dollars here at home instead of overseas in the Israeli military, have also shown that the tide is rapidly changing.
Even prominent conservatives like Tucker Carlson have decried the Israeli government's influence on our political system while once-dominant conservative voices like Ben Shapiro known for supporting Israel have flailed and bled support.
Instead of respecting the clear will of the American people, members of Congress dedicated to maintaining unconditional US support for Israel have introduced bills meant to ensure changes in American public opinion never become changes in American public policy.
This should be unacceptable to everyone in our nation.
Although the US-Israel merger bills are currently making their way through Congress, the fight to strip these provisions from the NDAA is not over.
Just this week, Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.)—the ranking member on the House Armed Services committee—announced that he was withdrawing his support for the provision.
“I cannot support endless conflict even though I support Israel’s right to exist,” said Smith. “For these reasons, I will vote to remove Section 224 from the National Defense Authorization Act if it comes to the Floor.”
If the joint technology development, intelligence sharing, and weapons production are enshrined in law, they would become extraordinarily difficult for future presidents or Congresses to undo, regardless of changing public opinion or policy priorities.
The United States would be permanently locked into a strategic alignment with a foreign government, taking away the American people’s ability to decide on the future of the relationship.
Members of Congress who recognize American sovereignty and respect American democracy must join Rep. Smith and others in opposing these provisions, and all Americans should call on their members of Congress to do so.
If joint technology development, intelligence sharing, and weapons production are required by law, they would become extraordinarily difficult for another Congress or future presidents to undo, regardless of changing public opinion or policy priorities.
Our nation would be trapped a strategic alignment with a foreign government, taking away the American people’s ability to decide on the future of the relationship.
The US military is meant to protect American interests, and Congress is meant to serve the American people.
That's why Section the US-Israel merger bills must go.
Keep ReadingShow Less
61% of Americans See Trump's Iran War as 'Mistake', Far Outpacing Disapproval of Vietnam and Iraq: Poll
"In Iraq, it took more than three years to reach that high. In Vietnam, it took six years."
May 01, 2026
More than 6 in 10 Americans now say President Donald Trump's war in Iran was a "mistake," according to a poll out Friday from the Washington Post/ABC News/Ipsos.
Within two months, the war—which has inflicted thousands of civilian deaths and caused gas prices to spike worldwide with little tangible gain—has reached levels of unpopularity that previous wars now seen as historic boondoggles took years to reach.
The Post has asked the "mistake" for other major wars. But CNN senior political reporter Aaron Blake explained: "In Iraq, it took more than three years to reach that high. In Vietnam, it took six years."
Despite a massive protest movement, voters overwhelmingly supported President George W. Bush's decision to invade Iraq, with 81% believing it was the "right thing" in April 2003 and just 16% believing it was a mistake.
But the occupation turned into a long, deadly, and costly disaster, and the administration's pretexts for the war were revealed to be lies. Public opinion steadily eroded to the point where 64% viewed it as a mistake by January 2007.
Vietnam never had the overwhelming support of Iraq, but 60% of Americans still supported President Lyndon Johnson's decision to begin direct US military involvement in 1965, while just 24% said it was a mistake.
While the protest movement against the war is as present in Americans' memories today as the conflict itself, public opinion was still split until 1968 and only reached a high of 61% in May 1971, after more than 50,000 US soldiers had been killed in battle.
Trump's war in Iran is unique in history in that it never enjoyed even a moment of consensus support. In a Reuters/Ipsos poll just days after the opening salvo of what the Trump administration dubbed "Operation Epic Fury," just 27% said they approved of the strikes, which killed 555 Iranians, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and several other top Iranian officials.
At this point, 43% of Americans already said they disapproved of the strikes, far eclipsing Iraq and Vietnam. But 30% still said they had not yet made up their minds.
In the coming months, they would. It was revealed that an airstrike on a school, which killed at least 155 people, including 120 children, was a double-tap attack by the United States. Iran retaliated by blocking oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, which sent US gas prices hurtling above $4 per gallon. And Trump took on an increasingly erratic and at times outright genocidal posture toward Iran that made any peaceful resolution appear increasingly impossible, even with the current fragile ceasefire.
Friday's poll shows that while the war still maintains a core base of support—36% of Americans who say it was the right decision, nearly all of them Republicans—it is dwarfed by the 61% who say it was a mistake.
Majorities of respondents across all demographics show that they believe the war has increased the risks of "terrorism against Americans" (61%), "the US economy going into a recession" (60%), and "weakening relationships with US allies." (56%)
Looking beneath the surface shows an even more worrying sign for Trump: The war has almost no constituency outside of his biggest fans. Self-identified Democrats (91%) overwhelmingly say the war was a mistake. But 71% of independents—many of whom were undecided at the war's outset—now disapprove too, with just 24% in support.
Even within the GOP, there is a decisive split: 86% of those who self-identify as "MAGA Republicans" are still baying for blood. But "non-MAGA Republicans" have grown uncertain—50% still say war was the right decision, while 49% say it was a mistake.
They were particularly rattled by Trump's threat last month that "a whole civilization will die tonight" if Iran did not negotiate a deal to his liking. The threat of genocide was too much even for the majority of Republicans, 53% of whom said they viewed it negatively.
What remains to be seen is whether even Trump's most faithful backers will turn against the war as it drags on. If Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's appearance in Congress on Thursday is any guide, the country may soon find out.
On Thursday, when Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) pressed Hegseth about why he has "not sought the support of the American people" and added that "3 out of 5 Americans are against this war today," he appeared in abject denial about the war's unpopularity.
"I believe we do have the support of the American people," he said. "I would remind you and this group that we're two months in to an effort, and many congressional Democrats want to declare defeat two months in."
He specifically invoked lengthy past conflicts, repeatedly emphasizing that this one had only lasted "two months," as if to urge patience with a war Trump had previously said was intended to last only "four to five weeks."
"Iraq took how many years? Afghanistan took how many years? And they were nebulous missions that people went along with," he said.
"This is different," he said of a war that has—depending on the day—been described as one aimed at regime change in Iran, defending protesters, destroying its nuclear program, eliminating its ballistic missile supply, taking its oil, defending Israel, and reopening the Strait of Hormuz, among other objectives.
Keep ReadingShow Less
The US People Don't Want a War on Venezuela
Roughly two-thirds of American adults said they oppose an invasion of Venezuela and only 15% support one. But will this be enough to stop Trump?
Nov 23, 2025
The White House is ready for war.
As the Trump administration’s made-for-Hollywood strikes on alleged drug-smuggling boats have dominated the news, the Pentagon has been positioning military assets in the Caribbean and Latin America and reactivating bases in the region. More recently, the Washington Post reported that high-level meetings were held about a possible imminent attack on Venezuela and the New York Times has learned that the president gave authorization for CIA operations there.
There is one problem: Americans don’t seem to be very enthusiastic.
While voters returned Donald Trump to office in 2024 based on a host of campaign promises, his faithful took his long-voiced complaints about spending on foreign aid and entanglement in overseas wars as vows to focus on the homeland. A range of Americans are in sync with his past statements about avoiding war; opposition to military intervention abroad is common for the left and right. Simply put, the public is not interested in going to war. Indeed, one recent poll found that just 15% of American adults support invading Venezuela.
A 2023 survey found a souring of views of military intervention more broadly, with growing numbers believing that intervention by the US tends to "worsen situations."
Some see Trump's Venezuela moves as an attempt to distract from domestic policy failures or the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, but his actions can't be dismissed as wagging the dog. Trump has shown himself willing to engage with militarism. It's not just "drug boats," and it's not just Venezuela. He has spent 2025 belying the myth, which has persisted over his three campaigns for president, that he is averse to war-making.
What Polls Say About Venezuela
The public has mixed views on some of the Trump administration's specific actions toward Venezuela. Asked in a recent YouGov poll about the US Navy's presence in Caribbean waters, for example, the percentage who approve (30%) was not much lower than the percentage who disapprove (37%).
Framing its actions against the South American nation as narcotics enforcement seems to have benefited the administration: A Harvard/CAPS poll in early October found 71% of registered voters in favor of "the US destroying boats bringing drugs into the United States from South America." Different wording—and perhaps media coverage of the continued boat strikes raising issues of their necessity, legality, and effect—could help explain why a Reuters/Ipsos poll in mid-November found only 29% answered yes to the question, "Should the U.S. government kill suspected drug traffickers abroad without judicial process?"
Importantly, however, in YouGov's survey, roughly two-thirds of American adults said they oppose an invasion of Venezuela and, as noted above, only 15% support one. Over half oppose the US using the military to overthrow the country's president, Nicolás Maduro.
A 2023 survey found a souring of views of military intervention more broadly, with growing numbers believing that intervention by the US tends to "worsen situations." Respondents seem to have based this on more recent examples, including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Syrian and Yemeni civil wars. None of these interventions were seen by the majority of those polled as "successful" uses of US forces abroad.
A Cost-Benefit Analysis
Overall, Americans do not want to get, to use Trump's own words, "bogged down" in foreign wars. Public opinion on intervention appears driven by a cost-benefit analysis as John Mueller, professor of political science emeritus at Ohio State University describes it. This may be why some Americans are more willing to accept action in the form of targeted strikes such as the boat bombings and limited displays of military might.
In the end, Trump may not attack Venezuela, but it likely won't be because the people are against it.
Since the Cold War and especially the 9/11 attacks, the US has become increasingly militarized. One measure of this, of course, is government spending. The Costs of War project at The Watson School of International and Public Affairs estimates that the US has spent $8 trillion as a result of the post-9/11 wars. The $22 billion in support for Israel’s war in Gaza since October 7, 2023 is one of the latest and most egregious instances of the US’ support for a military first approach.
Unfortunately, the official end of the post-9/11 wars was not the end of their financial costs to ordinary Americans. The percent of the discretionary federal budget devoted to the military continues to rise and at the expense of domestic programs. Pentagon spending alone in 2026 will jump to well over $1 trillion. Though many of the economic costs of war are hidden or deferred to an indeterminate future—especially when they are funded through deficit spending—Americans still rightly worry about getting involved in costly conflicts like the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Can Public Opinion Halt Trump's Militarism?
Many have taken note of how Congress' passage of the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force has helped concentrate power in the executive, enabling swifter, unilateral military deployment by the commander-in-chief. With the AUMF, Congress relinquished its constitutionally assigned war powers and ceded to the president its duty to decide whether, when, and where to use the military to combat terrorism. Since then, the executive branch has conducted counterterrorism activities in an astounding 78 countries.
Despite Americans' low trust in Congress, they nonetheless want the president to seek congressional approval before going to war. Feeding their mistrust, Congress has failed to respond to them on this crucial issue.
Look at how a compliant Congress has abdicated responsibility for oversight of the bombings in the Caribbean—which have now killed more than 83 people—as the Pentagon arrays warships, missiles, drones, and jet fighters in the region. Senate Republicans voted down legislation that would have required Trump to get their approval for any attacks on Venezuela, blatantly ignoring the disapproval of a public they are meant to represent.
So the bombings and the buildup continue, with Trump matter-of-factly telling a journalist, "We’re just going to kill people" without seeking congressional approval.
In the end, Trump may not attack Venezuela, but it likely won't be because the people are against it. He is in the process of commandeering all armed capacities of the US government, military, and law enforcement to serve his purposes foreign and domestic. Reasserting the rights of the people, including the right to peace, requires Congress to aggressively reassert its constitutional duty and the citizenry to demand its will be met.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Democratic Leadership Now as Unpopular With Base as GOP Leadership Was When Trump Took Over the Party
"These are conditions for real change," said progressive journalist David Sirota.
Oct 01, 2025
For the first time in at least a decade, a strong majority of Democratic voters now say they disapprove of their party's leadership, according to a new poll.
The survey published Tuesday by Pew Research shows that an astonishing 59% of self-identified Democrats said they disapproved of the performance of their party's leaders in Congress, compared to just 40% who approved.
It is the first time since Pew began asking the question in 2014 that more Democrats have said they disapproved of leadership than approved of it. The last time the question was surveyed, the numbers were basically reversed: 61% of Democrats approved while just 37% disapproved.
(Graphic: Pew Research Center)
Democrats have particularly soured on Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY). In May 2024, when Democrats still held the chamber and Joe Biden was still president, 47% of Democratic voters had a favorable view of Schumer compared to just 26% who were unfavorable. Now, his approval has fallen to just 35%, while 39% of Democrats now say they disapprove of his leadership.
Voters have extended a bit more grace to House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who still enjoys 41% approval compared with just 20% disapproval among Democrats. Though 39% say they've never heard of him.
Following the loss of former Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 election and the subsequent return of President Donald Trump, many Democratic voters have expressed displeasure at what they view as the leadership's failure to stand up to an increasingly lawless and authoritarian president.
This was perhaps best encapsulated by the overwhelming backlash Schumer faced in March after he voted to help Republicans advance a funding bill that expanded Trump's ability to override Congress' control over spending. In the latest shutdown fight, many progressives expressed fears that Schumer would "cave" once again.
Despite his warmer approval rating, Jeffries has not been insulated from criticism either, with commentators and activists growing increasingly frustrated by his tendency to respond to Trump's abuses of power with little more than "strongly worded letters."
A Reuters/Ipsos poll of nearly 1,300 Democratic voters released in June showed that nearly two-thirds believed that “the leadership of the Democratic Party should be replaced with new people."
Policy was at the core of the disagreement: While voters overwhelmingly expressed support for populist agenda items like universal healthcare, affordable childcare, and higher taxes on the rich, many of them—especially younger voters—expressed skepticism that party leaders shared those priorities.
Nick Field, a correspondent for the Pennsylvania Capital-Star, observed that "Democratic approval of their congressional leadership now resembles Republican approval of their congressional leadership in 2014, which historians might remember as the year before Donald Trump took over that party."
At that time, congressional Republicans languished with just 38% support from their voters while Democrats remained largely happy with theirs.
In 2025, the roles have essentially reversed. Republicans now have historic reverence for their leaders, with a record 69% approval for the duo of House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD).
The progressive journalist and founder of The Lever, David Sirota, said the fact that Democratic voters now have their pitchforks out for leadership "is good."
"These are conditions for real change," he said. He noted that there have been previous times when he believed such a change was possible, including 2007, when public opinion had turned against a newly Democratic-led Congress that had struggled to counter then-President George W. Bush.
"That might have been the moment for real change, but the problem was Democratic voters still worshiped their party leaders," Sirota said. "We're at a similar moment now, only Democratic voters are mad at their leaders now. Good."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Clear Majority of US Voters, Including 3 in 4 Democrats, Want to End Weapons Support to Israel: Poll
"Democratic politicians who continue to support sending weapons to Israel are acting in direct defiance of their own constituents' wishes," said one progressive commentator.
Aug 28, 2025
As its genocidal actions in Gaza become more brazen by the day, support for Israel among Americans has reached a record low.
According to a Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday, 60% of voters across all parties now say they oppose the United States sending more military aid to Israel, while just 32% say they support it. The pollster said it was the greatest amount of opposition it has recorded for the US-Israel alliance since it first asked the question in November 2023.
Opposition is even stronger among Democratic voters: 75% of them now oppose sending military aid to Israel, compared with just 18% who still support it.
Also for the first time ever in a Quinnipiac poll, more voters, 37%, said they sympathized with the Palestinians—an all-time high—compared with just 36% who said they sympathized with the Israelis—an all-time low.
In recent months, Israeli politicians have begun moving forward with a plan to fully occupy the Gaza Strip and permanently empty it of its inhabitants, which international humanitarian organizations have described as an "ethnic cleansing."
On Wednesday, every member of the United Nations Security Council, with the exception of the United States, joined in a statement backing the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification's declaration that Israel was creating a "man-made" famine in Gaza.
Meanwhile, even Israel's leaders have found it impossible to defend its "double-tap" strike on Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis on Monday, in which the Israel Defense Forces launched a strike on the medical facility before launching another attack shortly afterward on the journalists and medical personnel who came to respond to the destruction.
That attack killed at least 20 people, adding to the potentially well over 100,000 Palestinians who experts estimate have been killed over the course of the nearly two-year military onslaught.
According to the Quinnipiac poll, 50% of Americans now agree with the international community's assessment that Israel is perpetrating a genocide in Gaza. This includes 77% of Democrats and 51% of independents.
When Democrats were polled last month by Gallup, just 8% of them said they supported Israel's military actions in the Gaza Strip, a dramatic decline from October 2023, when 36% expressed support.
In recent weeks, as the images of death and starvation coming out of Gaza have grown increasingly heinous and ubiquitous, some Democratic politicians have begun to take a harsher stance against Israel.
Last month, a majority of Democrats in the Senate, for the first time, voted in favor of resolutions introduced by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to suspend US assault weapons and 1,000-pound bombs to Israel.
Twenty-seven Democrats voted for the resolution halting assault rifles, and 24 voted for the resolution to stop the sale of bombs. Notably, the top Senate Democrat, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), voted against both resolutions.
Despite overwhelming support from their voters, the Democratic National Committee on Tuesday voted down a resolution calling for the US to suspend military aid to Israel.
"Democratic politicians who continue to support sending weapons to Israel are acting in direct defiance of their own constituents' wishes," said Nathan J. Robinson, the editor-in-chief of Current Affairs Magazine, in response to news of the latest polling numbers.
Previous polls have indicated that opposition to former President Joe Biden's arming of Israel was a primary reason why Democratic voters chose to abandon the Democratic Party in 2024, potentially costing then-Vice President Kamala Harris the election.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) said the poll showed that "Democrats continuing to ignore their base on the Palestine issue is insane," adding that if they continue down this path, "they will continue to lose."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Head of College Dems, Progressive Groups Back DNC Resolution for Israel Arms Embargo, Palestinian State
"Young Americans have made their voices clear," said the national president of the College Democrats. "A modern Democratic Party must stand against global injustice."
Aug 21, 2025
The national president of the College Democrats is co-sponsoring a Democratic National Committee resolution calling for party members to support an arms embargo and the suspension of military aid to Israel, as well as the recognition of a Palestinian state.
The resolution comes after just 8% of voters in the Democratic Party said in a July Gallup poll that they support Israel's military actions in the Gaza Strip, a dramatic sea change from October 2023, when 36% expressed support.
According to an Economist/YouGov poll from mid-August, 69% of Democratic voters said they believed Israel was committing a genocide against Palestinian civilians.
Disapproval of Israel's actions is most staggering among young voters. Among Democrats ages 18 to 49, Pew Research found that unfavorable views of Israel have shot up to 71% from just 62% in 2022. Just 6% of Americans under 35, across all parties, said they had a favorable opinion of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
"Young Americans have made their voices clear," said the national president of the College Democrats, Sunjay A. Muralitharan. "A modern Democratic Party must stand against global injustice."
The College Democrats were joined by a trio of activist groups—Progressive Democrats of America, RootsAction, and Our Revolution—who signed on in support of the proposal Thursday.
"This resolution is a critical step toward aligning our foreign policy with our values," said Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution. "By calling for an arms embargo and suspending military aid to Israel, the DNC would be recognizing what grassroots movements have long demanded: that American taxpayer dollars must not bankroll human rights abuses."
The resolution is one of two dueling proposals that will be considered at the DNC meeting on August 26. Another, backed by DNC chair Ken Martin, expresses support for long-held Democratic Party policies of a "two-state" solution and a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.
RootsAction political director Sam Rosenthal describes it as a "watered-down resolution that stops far short of calling for an end to arms shipments to Israel."
That proposal closely mirrors the one put forward during the 2024 Democratic National Convention, which stopped short of calling for the suspension of weapons sales to Israel and emphasized the importance of maintaining Israel's "qualitative military edge."
Allison Minnerly, the 26-year-old DNC member from Florida who introduced the embargo resolution earlier this month, told The Intercept that Martin offered his resolution as a compromise in the face of her more ambitious one.
Though her resolution now has the support of the College Dems and delegations from Maine, California, and Florida, it nevertheless faces an uphill battle to pass. If it fails, Minnerly says, it will further exacerbate the yawning rift between the Democratic Party and its supporters.
"Our voters, our base, they are saying that they do not want US dollars to enable further death and starvation anywhere across the world, particularly in Gaza," Minnerly said. "I don't think it should be a hard decision for us to say that clearly."
Though the vote is largely symbolic, Matt Duss, a former foreign policy adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), said that "the position of the DNC does matter" because "it sets the tone for the entire party."
"There are two Gaza-related DNC resolutions," said Prem Thakker, a reporter and commentator at Zeteo. "A status quo one. And one that recognizes public opinion and events in the past 22 months."
"We have a moral obligation to do what we can to stop the slaughter, but most people feel powerless," said Alan Minsky, the executive director of Progressive Democrats of America. "However, it is well understood that Israel would not be able to maintain the siege of Gaza without the steady flow of US weapons."
Update: This article has been updated to include comments from Our Revolution, RootsAction, and the Progressive Democrats of America and note their endorsement of the resolution.
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Israeli Genocide Intensifies, Majority of Americans Support Palestinian Statehood
"Israel has lost the support of the world, including the American people," said policy analyst Jeffrey Sachs.
Aug 20, 2025
As the US backs Israel's plans to occupy Gaza and expand illegal settlements in the West Bank, a solid majority of Americans say the world should recognize a Palestinian state.
According to a Reuters/Ipsos poll published on Wednesday, 58% of Americans believe that every country in the United Nations should recognize a Palestinian state, compared with just 33% who said they should not and 9% who said they were unsure.
In recent weeks, as Israel's blockade of humanitarian aid has inflicted mass starvation across the enclave, many American allies—including Canada, the UK, and France—have broken with the US by indicating their intent to recognize the State of Palestine. In total, 147 of the UN's 193 member states—over 75%—now recognize Palestine as a sovereign nation.
Last week, the foreign ministers of 26 states signed onto a statement that the crisis in Gaza has reached "unimaginable levels" and called on Israel to allow unrestricted humanitarian aid into the strip. As of Tuesday, the Gaza Health Ministry reported that 266 people, including 122 children, had been starved to death as a result of the blockade.
In Gaza City, where Israel has begun a devastating campaign of bombing, shelling, and shooting civilians and demolishing their homes, the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) reported Friday that malnutrition has reached 21.5%, "meaning nearly one in five young children is now malnourished."
Amnesty International says the rise in malnutrition is the result of a "deliberate campaign of starvation" by Israel aimed at "systematically destroying the health, well-being, and social fabric of Palestinian life." Israeli human rights groups, including B'Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, have described their nation's military actions as "genocide."
While the administration of US President Donald Trump, the Republican Party, and many Democrats continue to back Israel's actions to the hilt, they are increasingly out of step with the views of the American public.
In a July 29 Gallup poll, just 32% said they approved of Israel's military actions in Gaza, while 60% disapproved. The decline in support among Democrats is especially striking: Where 36% said they supported Israel's actions in October 2023, that number has plummeted to just 8%.
But unlike elsewhere in the world, this has not resulted in a sea change among politicians. Just 13 House Democrats signed onto a letter earlier this month calling on the Trump administration to recognize Palestinian statehood.
Israel has meanwhile moved forward with actions explicitly aimed at making a Palestinian state impossible.
On Wednesday, Israel gave the final approval for a massive new illegal settlement in the West Bank known as E1, which slices the Palestinian territory in two and cuts off Palestinian communities between Jerusalem and the Jordan Valley.
Finance minister Bezalel Smotrich has championed the proposal, saying it "buries the idea of a Palestinian state."
Trump and US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee have reportedly given approval to the plan, as part of a reversal in the decades-old US policy opposing Israel's settlements in the West Bank, which violate international law.
International business professor Avraham Shama argued in The Hill on Wednesday that Israel's "increasingly brutal" actions will only continue to galvanize the world toward the plight of the Palestinians.
"Soon, the Palestinian people will be recognized as a sovereign nation in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank by most countries. They now have the political and moral momentum toward achieving this goal," Shama said. "The case for Palestinian independence has been getting clearer and more urgent with every Israeli bombing of mostly innocent Gazans, and with every death from starvation caused by Israel's withholding of food."
Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, told Common Dreams that through its continued support for Israel, the US government is increasingly isolating itself.
"Israel has lost the support of the world, including the American people," Sachs said. "Israel's genocide has made it a pariah state, propped up by the White House over the objections of the American people."
"The only way to peace, and to rescue Israel from its murderous ways," he said, "is to implement the two-state solution immediately, as almost all of the world demands. It's now up to Trump to end US complicity in the genocide and to recognize Palestine."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The American People Do Not Want Oligarchy': Poll Shows Trump's Approval at Historic Low at 100-Day Mark
A whopping 72% of respondents said that they believe it is "likely" that Trump's policies will cause an economic recession in the short term.
Apr 28, 2025
As U.S. President Donald Trump nears the 100-day mark of his second term, a recent ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll shows that his approval rating now sits at a historic low of 39%, a nadir that prompted one prominent progressive to remark that the negative public sentiment comes as "the resistance is just beginning."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who has mounted a highly successful "Fighting Oligarchy" tour across America in recent months, highlighted the findings of the poll on Sunday and wrote: "The American people do not want oligarchy, authoritarianism, or attacks on Social Security, Medicaid, or the VA," speaking of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.
The poll, which conducted a random national sample of 2,464 adults in English and Spanish between April 18-22, found discontent among voters when it comes to Trump's handling of multiple policies issues, particularly on the economy.
A whopping 72% of respondents said that they believe it is "likely" that Trump's policies—such as sweeping tariffs—will cause an economic recession in the short term.
What's more, 53% say the economy is worse since Trump took office and 62% said that the prices for things they rely on have gone up.
Trump's overall approval on immigration policy, one of his core campaign issues, is also less than 50%. When it comes to his handling of immigration—an area where Trump has moved to roll back birthright citizenship, deported U.S. citizens, and invoked a rarely used wartime authority to deport Venezuelan nationals to a megaprison in El Salvador, among other measures—his approval rating sits at 46%, according to the ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll.
Additionally, over 55% of Americans say Trump is "going too far" when it comes to seeking to expand the power of the presidency, closing federal agencies, laying off federal employees to reduce the size of government, and taking measures agains this political foes.
Overall, his approval among Americans has dipped from 45% positive in February to 39% positive on the eve of the 100-day mark, which is on Tuesday.
According to The Washington Post's analysis of the poll results, Trump's approval at 100 days in both of his terms is lower than any other president's at or near the 100-day mark "since polls began." Polling data on this question stretches back to former President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's (FDR) third term, per the Post, when his approval rating was at 68% at the 100-day point. ABC News' write up of the poll results says that "Trump has the lowest 100-day job approval rating of any president in the past 80 years."
Some have drawn parallels between Trump and FDR, whose first 15 weeks in office in 1933 were dominated by a push to work with Congress on economic recovery and relief for working people, the first phase of what's known as the "New Deal." However, historians have noted that in substance the two could not be more different.
In reporting piece published Monday, the Post noted that Roosevelt's push in the first 100 days led to major new laws, while Trump largely relies on executive order.
"Roosevelt spent an awful lot of time trying to craft constitutional justifications in legislation, and draft it in such a way that the courts might accept it," Anthony Badger, a historian and author of FDR: The First Hundred Days, told the Post. "He wasn't trying to do it by executive order."
The historian and author Eric Rauchway told CNN recently that substantively Trump's policies are the "opposite of the New Deal."
Trump "seems to be taking apart regulatory mechanisms. He seems to be drawing down public investment in a variety of areas, including the arts and so forth. He seems to be, as far as I can tell, diminishing resources sent to the Social Security Administration, which of course is the central piece of the New Deal’s proto-welfare state," Racuhway told the outlet.
In a similar vein to Sanders, former Labor Secretary Robert Reich wrote Monday that Trump's actions in his first 100 days serves as a call to mobilization and to "loudly and boldly sound the alarm."
"The U.S. Constitution is in peril. Civil and human rights are being trampled upon. The economy is in disarray," wrote Reich. "At this rate, we won't make it through the second hundred days."
Reich suggested that that answer is for Americans to speak out and urge lawmakers in Congress, both chambers of which are currently GOP-controlled, to launch impeachment proceedings against Trump.
"Americans must be mobilized into such a huge wave of anger and disgust that members of the House are compelled to impeach Trump (for the third time) and enough senators are moved to finally convict him," he concluded.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy