Democrats Spend $42M Tying Iran War Votes to Gas Prices

Democratic campaigns and allied groups have spent an estimated $42 million since Sept. 1 airing more than 43,000 television ads that connect Republican votes on the Iran war to rising household costs, according to an Associated Press analysis of AdImpact data. The spending targets 50 competitive House and Senate races ahead of the midterms.

Sixty-one of the 65 unique Iran-themed ads identified by the AP focus directly on fuel, groceries and other consumer expenses. Republicans have largely avoided the conflict in their own advertising, choosing instead to run spots centered on taxes and crime.

The strategy traces back to spring legislative maneuvering. Democrats forced repeated floor votes on war powers resolutions aimed at ending the conflict. The measures carried no practical weight to halt operations. They did, however, compel lawmakers to register a public position. The Senate has now voted 14 times on resolutions seeking to restrict President Donald Trump’s military action against Iran, which began in late February. The House has held six such votes.

Those roll calls are now the raw material for attack ads stretching from Wisconsin to Nebraska. A narrator in one spot blames Rep. Derrick Van Orden for voting for the “costly Iran war and spiking gas prices.” In Nebraska, Democratic candidate Chris Backemeyer accuses Rep. Mike Flood of voting six times for Trump’s tariffs and the war, claiming it costs families “a thousand dollars more a year.” Vote Vets Action Fund targeted Iowa Republican Senate candidate Ashley Hinson with similar messaging about fertilizer and gas prices.

Some targeted Republicans never served in Congress when the war powers votes occurred. The ads frame them as inevitable proxies for Trump’s foreign policy.

Republican strategist Ron Bonjean told the AP that discussing the Iran war is “really not a winning message because you’re playing on the Democratic turf.” His advice to candidates: highlight Democratic vulnerabilities so voters conclude “this guy is worse.” That calculation explains why GOP media buys lean heavily into character attacks, healthcare and immigration rather than defending the military campaign.

A few Republicans have broken ranks. In the most recent House vote, seven GOP members sided with Democrats to end the war. Four face tough reelection fights: Tom Barrett of Michigan, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, and Mariannette Miller-Meeks and Zach Nunn in Iowa. Barrett and Fitzpatrick had previously voted to remove U.S. troops from hostilities. The yes votes were the first for Miller-Meeks and Nunn.

In Michigan, Republican Senate candidate Mike Rogers stated publicly that the “war with Iran needs to end — and end quickly.” His Democratic opponent, Abdul El-Sayed, built ads around the claim that a billion dollars a day funds a war “we have no business fighting.” Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins emphasized during a debate that she voted nine times to end the conflict. Democratic challenger Troy Jackson countered that she voted five times to “make it happen.”

California’s 48th Congressional District saw the heaviest saturation. Roughly a third of the 12,000 ads aired there mention Iran. Democrat Marni von Wilpert attacked Republican Jim Desmond over a remark he made on Real America’s Voice early in the conflict, when he called higher prices “no pain, no gain” and predicted they were just “a spike” that would drop once the U.S. eliminated Iran’s nuclear capability. Desmond and the National Republican Congressional Committee responded with spots attacking von Wilpert’s record on the San Diego City Council, avoiding the war entirely.

Virginia’s 2nd Congressional District, held by Republican Rep. Jen Kiggans, and Maine’s open 2nd District followed closely, with about a quarter of local ads touching on Iran. In Ohio, roughly 4,000 Iran-themed spots accounted for 4 percent of total ad volume in one of the country’s most expensive contests. Nearly all originated from Democrat Sherrod Brown’s campaign.