As he campaigned on behalf of Rep. Ashley Hinson (R–Iowa) on Sunday, President Donald Trump boasted that he could have "won the Vietnam War in a week."

His solution for that infamous quagmire? Instead of dropping chemical weapons like Agent Orange "in the forest," Trump says he would have advised "going after Ho Chi Minh City." 

That very well may have ended the war more quickly—as it would have meant bombing the capital of South Vietnam, the country American troops were deployed to defend.

Perhaps it is for the best that Trump's medical issues kept him away from that conflict. Unfortunately, they haven't stopped the president from launching a different war that Trump also believed could be won in a short order. These things must be easy when you're brimming with confidence but dangerously ignorant of history, geography, and military tactics. Who could have known that the Iranians would blockade the Strait of Hormuz (aside from everyone who had ever studied the potential conflict)?

Trump is not on the ballot today. Even so, his war with Iran is. The conflict has become a serious political anchor for Republicans, who are facing an electorate that not only dislikes the war itself but is unhappy with the higher prices that have resulted from it.

In many key races, Republicans have wavered between supporting Trump and acknowledging the political and economic costs of the war, as the costs have climbed and promises that victory is just a week away have piled up. 

Take Hinson, for example, who is running for Senate in Iowa. As a member of the House, she voted six times against resolutions that sought to limit Trump's ability to wage war. Only in the late stages of the campaign did she turn against the conflict, saying in September that Iowans "shouldn't have to foot the bill at the pump or the checkout line for the war in Iran."

That is not so much a criticism of the war as it is wishful thinking. Even so, it was newsworthy that she was "diverging" from Trump at all. 

Other Republicans in swing states have been caught in a similar bind. In North Carolina, Republican Senate candidate Michael Whatley has defended Trump's handling of the conflict. In October, he said it should end only when Iran agrees not to develop nuclear weapons. Whatley has emphasized support for military families—North Carolina is home to Fort Bragg, the largest military base in the U.S.

Just one problem: Members of the military and their families don't like the war, either. Among military families and veterans, a plurality oppose the war, according to a poll conducted by Change Research. In that same poll, 55 percent of respondents said "the length of deployments and troops' health, safety, and welfare during the war with Iran" was a top issue they believed Congress should investigate.

That investigation is more likely to happen if Democrats are in charge of Congress. Perhaps unsurprisingly, polls show Whatley trailing North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper, who has called for ending the war.

In Michigan, Republican candidate Mike Rogers called the Iran War a "win-win-win" in May. Only in the latter stages of the campaign did he shift gears, calling for the war to "end and end quickly" in late September.

The story is much the same in Texas, where GOP Senate candidate Ken Paxton told The Texas Tribune in mid-October that he is "supportive of what the president is doing" with regard to Iran. Privately, however, Paxton seems to disagree with his own assessment—Axios obtained and published audio of Paxton admitting the war has caused political damage for Republicans by increasing food and fuel prices.

It should be little surprise that the war in Iran is broadly unpopular with Americans. It was launched without any attempt to justify it to the public, without congressional approval, and in direct contradiction to Trump's own promises to avoid a conflict in the Middle East.

It has been deeply unpopular since it began. By June, the Quincy Institute had labeled it the most unpopular major conflict in American history. A Chicago Council on Global Affairs survey in August found that 68 percent of Americans believe the war "is not worth fighting."

Instead of listening to their constituents, too many Republicans followed Trump's lead. Maybe they believed him when he said the war would be over in a few weeks. One must wonder: Would they have bombed Ho Chi Minh City if he'd suggested that?

The post Will the Iran War Cost Republicans Control of the Senate? appeared first on Reason Magazine.