American Thinker

by Sally Zelikovsky

    In the wake of what was a disheartening election, President Trump responded to questions about JD Vance’s post-mortem that we lost because of the Iran War by agreeing that “it’s largely true...because it drove the gasoline up a little bit short term and...probably...it’s true but...if I had to do it again, I’d have to do it again because long term, uh, it’s the only answer. You can’t let Iran have a nuclear weapon.”

    Vance then, without White House approval, posted a lengthy comment on X that included “The reason we lost is the war. The President himself said so last night.”

    Marc Thiessen and many listeners were incensed by his X post and rightly accused Vance of disloyalty to President Trump for failing to clarify that it was the right thing to do and that they’d do it again.

    I immediately suspected the Veep was trying to distance himself from Trump to position himself as the successor to MAGA in a bid for the presidency in 2028—something Thiessen alluded to as well. That’s not altogether far-fetched and will be a problem for anyone in the Trump administration who seeks a run, much as it was for Kamala Harris in 2024.

    Vance continued his lengthy X post, claiming “an unnamed pollster” told him voters targeted four issues Republicans would have to correct before they could win back support:

1.  End the war against Iran;

2.  Improve the cost of living and deal with inflation;

3.  Put America First; and

    4.  Change the U.S. relationship with Israel.

    Those last two requirements reveal more than most might realize. I don’t think there is a Trump supporter in all of America who would characterize Trump as weak on “America First.” It’s foundational to his MAGA strategy.

    But there is a small, loud collection of disaffected Trump supporters—like Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, Megyn Kelly, and Candace Owens—who criticize Trump for not putting America First and adamantly oppose Israel. Changing the U.S.-Israel relationship is a fundamental demand of theirs, and they are growing at an alarming rate.

    The thing is, no one should be surprised that Vance would say something like this because he has a history of being openly hostile toward Israel and never renounced Carlson’s anti-Israel views—suggesting he agrees with Carlson, to the dismay of Jewish and Christian conservatives. Moreover, he did not support the attacks on Iran. And we know he wants to run for president in 2028.

    What Vance did by posting this fourth requirement about Israel was to put Israel front and center in this election, responsible for the Democrat massacre when, in fact, there is no evidence that issues relating to Israel (because of October 7, Gaza, its status as our ally, or its receipt of U.S. funding) motivated Republican voters to cast votes for radical Democrats. I haven’t found one poll, one exit poll, or any post-mortem where Israel is to blame for the election.

    What Vance did is exactly like the pro-El-Sayed commercial on the eve of the election blaming funding to Israel for increasing the price of our food! For those of you in Rio Linda, this is a classic antisemitic trope or blood libel—the Jews kill Christian babies and use their blood in their matzoh; the Jews are responsible for Germany’s economic problems, taking all of the jobs and hoarding all of the money; things aren’t going well in our Russian or Polish village. Blame the Jews, and let’s have a pogrom to teach them a lesson.

    Thiessen made another poignant observation: Gas prices are high not so much because of the conflagration Trump started with Iran, but because Vance—who oversaw negotiations on the MOU with Iran—failed to get the job done. That caused endless delays, which drove gas prices higher.

Could it be (and I hope not) that Vance intentionally failed to negotiate a settlement with Iran because the longer the conflict dragged on, the worse it would be for Trump, giving Vance a way in 2028 to differentiate and distance himself from Trump

    To think that way, Vance would have to believe he doesn’t need Trump’s endorsement to run in 2028. Maybe he feels he has enough support from disaffected Trump supporters who, exit polls would have you believe, voted for rabidly radical Democrats, setting Texas back into the Dark Ages of Democrat rule, putting reliably red states like Florida and Tennessee in jeopardy of turning blue, and securing the Senate for six years, thereby threatening the Electoral College, the Supreme Court, the filibuster, and every policy from economics, taxes, and border enforcement to parental rights.

    If so, in my opinion, that would be a wild miscalculation. While Trump might be toxic in the general election, Vance needs Trump’s endorsement for the primaries, where he will undoubtedly face competition from Rubio and DeSantis in 2028—both of whom have far more political experience than Vance, who was barely an Ohio senator before becoming VP.

    For Vance to think he doesn’t need Trump, he’d have to believe that most Trump supporters are aligned with his views about Israel and are in the Tucker-Vance camp versus the Rubio-DeSantis-Trump camp—a camp I am confident has a very different attitude toward Israel.

    While Iran is celebrating in the streets and fomenting riots in Europe, JD Vance’s counterpart in the negotiations and the Speaker of the Parliament, Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, said, “Conscience or the cost of living, Americans said NO TO WAR, and we endorse this message.” Saber-rattling, he added that any return “to open conflict...comes with a Nightmare.”

In the wee hours of the election, I had a chilling thought. What did the Iranians know months ago that convinced their leaders the best course of action was to stall negotiating a settlement with the U.S. until after the midterms?