Will the war in Iran impact the results of the parliamentary elections in the United States?

By: Beatrice E. Rangel - 21/04/2026

Many analysts argue that the war in Iran will have electoral consequences for the government, and could even become the factor that leads to its defeat.

However, I believe there is no conclusive evidence in recent decades that any single international event has decisively tipped the electoral scales for or against a particular political option in the United States. American voters tend to base their decisions on predominantly domestic issues, while international events serve more as context than as a determining factor.

Since its inception, domestic issues have dominated electoral decisions in the United States. In fact, surveys by organizations such as the Pew Research Center consistently show that voters' top priorities are, first and foremost, the economy (jobs and inflation), followed by healthcare, immigration, and security. Foreign policy—wars, alliances, or global strategy—typically ranks far lower on these issues. In practical terms, for most voters, international affairs constitute a backdrop, not the central focus of their decisions.

However, foreign policy takes on greater relevance in specific contexts: when the United States is directly involved in an armed conflict (such as Iraq after 2003), when a major international crisis occurs (such as terrorist attacks or tensions between major powers), or when there are direct economic effects resulting from these events (such as increases in oil prices or disruptions in supply chains).

Thus, for example, after the September 11 attacks, national security dominated the electoral agenda. Similarly, the strain associated with the Iraq War helped shape the political climate that favored Barack Obama's victory in 2008. In times of crisis, therefore, international factors can gain weight in the voter's decision.

Another relevant factor is the generational difference. Younger voters tend to show less interest in traditional foreign policy and greater concern for issues such as climate change (including its global dimension), human rights, and avoiding military interventions. Older voters, on the other hand, tend to prioritize national security, military strength, and geopolitical stability.

Even so, even among older voters, foreign policy rarely surpasses economic conditions as the primary criterion for electoral decision-making.

However, foreign policy serves an additional function: it acts as a prism through which voters evaluate the quality of leadership. It allows them to gauge the judgment, prudence, and management skills of those in power. Through it, citizens assess whether a leader prioritizes the use of force or consensus-building, as well as their inclination toward moderation or more extreme positions.

In this sense, a war—like the one currently involving Iran—can indirectly influence electoral behavior by shaping the perception of presidential leadership, the strength of the government team, and the ability to take or avoid risks.

In short, in normal times, foreign policy issues have limited weight in voters' decisions. In contexts of crisis or war, they can become a relevant and even decisive factor. In the specific case of a conflict with Iran, if its economic effects—such as increased fuel and imported goods prices—persist, or if attacks occur against U.S. interests abroad, foreign policy could acquire significant weight in the election of the new Congress.

But, in general terms, the American voter continues to vote primarily with his wallet and only secondarily with his eyes on the world.

«The opinions published herein are the sole responsibility of its author».