Veterans back the administration’s Operation Epic Fury in strong numbers, a split CNN analyst highlighted, and that difference reshaped recent electoral math according to Fox News polling cited on air.
CNN analyst Harry Enten pointed out a clear split: the general public is divided on Operation Epic Fury, while veterans overwhelmingly back the Trump administration’s actions in the Middle East. That distinction matters because veterans make up a distinct voting bloc with outsized influence in tight races. The conversation on television made the gap impossible to ignore.
“Take a look at this Fox News poll that came out during the past week. Net approval rating of the current U.S. military action against Iran. Look at that. Overall, Fox News shows a dead-even split,” Enten said. “But look at those who served in the military. Significantly higher support for the U.S. military action currently going on in Iran. It plus 20 points. That should not be so much of a surprise because take a look at how they view Trump’s foreign policy overall. Again, look at those who served in the U.S. military versus overall. If you look at Trump’s foreign policy overall, the net approval rating on that, per Fox News, those who served in the military, they like what’s going on on average. Look at that. The net approval rating plus eight points for Trump’s foreign policy.”
“But look at those overall. Way, way down there at minus 20 points,” he said. “We’re talking about a nearly 30-point gap between those who served in the military and overall.” Those lines made clear the size of the divide: veterans are tracking differently on national security than the rest of the electorate. That gap helps explain why public debate about conflicts often feels mismatched with the mood among people who served.
Enten went on to note that veterans have consistently leaned toward Donald Trump since 2016, making them a reliable constituency on security issues. He traced the pattern forward and tied it directly to the 2024 outcome, arguing their backing was decisive in the last presidential race. That framing puts the current policy debate into immediate political context.
“And this split, when it comes to those who served in the military and overall, dates back to Trump’s elections, all the way back to 2016. But let’s look at the 2024 numbers,” Enten continued. “Look at this. 2024 results. Those who served in the military, Trump won them by, get this, 31 points. Kamala Harris actually won all other voters by two points. And that means, Johnny Berman, that means that Donald Trump only won in 2024 because of support from those who served in the military.”
Those figures are striking: a 31-point margin among veterans versus a two-point edge for the Democratic ticket among other voters. When you stack those numbers together, the case that veterans were decisive becomes straightforward. For Republicans watching closely, the data reinforces why staying connected to the veteran community is both politically smart and strategically critical.
Meanwhile, much of the mainstream media and many Democratic leaders are framing Operation Epic Fury as another prolonged conflict bound to cost lives and money without clear gains. That narrative is familiar, but it collides with the reality that veterans—people with direct experience of war and its stakes—are showing strong approval for the current approach. Skeptics should reckon with that inconsistency.
The broader takeaway for Republicans is straightforward: on national security, veteran opinions matter in policy and at the ballot box. When a chunk of the electorate with firsthand experience supports an administration’s actions, that support should carry weight in both public debate and electoral strategy. Observers on all sides will be watching whether this split reshapes coverage and messaging going forward.
Editor’s Note: For decades, former presidents have been all talk and no action. Now, Donald Trump is eliminating the threat from Iran once and for all.
