Don't read the funeral rites for MAGA restraint yet

On the same night President Donald Trump ordered U.S. airstrikes against Iran, POLITICO reported, “MAGA largely falls in line on Trump’s Iran strikes.”

The report cited “Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist and critic of GOP war hawks,” who posted on X, “Iran gave President Trump no choice.” It noted that former Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, a longtime Trump supporter, “said on X that the president’s strike didn’t necessarily portend a larger conflict.” Gaetz said. “Trump the Peacemaker!”

Republican Senator and Trump supporter Tim Sheehy (R-Mont), was quoted as saying that ordering the strikes was the “right decision.”

The first U.S. airstrikes on Iran on Saturday happened at 6:40 p.m. Eastern time. The timestamp on the POLITICO story was 9:48 p.m., a mere three hours after the first bombs were dropped.

In fact, MAGA did not largely “fall in line” with Trump’s airstrikes. The real picture is more complicated, and less categorical than the mainstream media has allowed.

Some have come out loud and clear against the strikes from the first. You don’t get more MAGA than devout Trump loyalist, Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, whose first X post addressing the strikes on Saturday night read, “Every time America is on the verge of greatness, we get involved in another foreign war. There would not be bombs falling on the people of Israel if Netanyahu had not dropped bombs on the people of Iran first. Israel is a nuclear armed nation.”

“This is not our fight,” Greene said. “Peace is the answer.”

On Sunday, Greene followed up with a lengthy anti-war post that asked why the U.S. was fighting abroad instead of dealing with America’s border problems. Greene wrote, “Neocon warmongers beat their drums of war and act like Billy badasses going to war in countries most Americans have never seen and can’t find on a map.”

Other major voices — including non-MAGA conservatives and libertarians — have challenged the legality of the strikes, like Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.). Others, once the ceasefire was put into place overnight Monday, have chosen not to dwell on Saturday’s bombing operations or their efficacy, but have focused on the risk of regime change, U.S. ground action, or being lured into a long war by Israel.

Tucker Carlson, Trump supporter and arguably the most high profile conservative pundit today, reflected this strategy on Monday. He had been out front and center against a possible war with Iran. In his first appearance on Emily Jashinsky’s new show, he did not indicate that his views had changed.

“I don’t want to relive Iraq,” Carlson told Jashinsky in the interview, referring to the dynamics that led to the protracted Iraq war. He said he was grateful that Trump “took this in for a landing” and appeared in no mood to continue strikes or engage in the regime change that neocon voices were demanding.

“I know the people who did it,” he said, referring to the Iraq War architects. “I’ve lived among them, and defended it. I’m not doing that again,” he said. “We came very close to doing that again because of Mark Levin, Laura Loomer and the rest of these morons.”

Former Trump senior adviser Steve Bannon is not criticizing the strikes outright but has supported the president declaring the war over and making sure the ceasefire works. In repeated episodes of his “War Room” podcast, Bannon has warned against getting sucked into a regime change war and has turned his ire on Israel’s role in encouraging Trump’s involvement, saying, “my issue isn’t whether Iran has a nuke. My issue is that (Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu, for his own political dilemma, created a false sense of urgency.”

He called neocon voices like radio host Mark Levin, "town criers for Netanyahu."

For his part Gaetz has shifted his focus to Israel, too, suggesting “Israel doesn’t want peace” but only “regime change.”

Meanwhile, Christian conservative Matt Walsh of the Daily Waite has been a blunt non-interventionist, writing Tuesday that “I want the U.S. to back out of (the Middle East) completely and focus on its own problems. Call that simplistic or ‘isolationist’ if you want. I don't care,” he said.

“Our country is in a state of existential crisis on multiple fronts internally. We don't have the time, resources, manpower, will, or ability to fix problems for other countries right now. We need to focus on ourselves and let them handle their own disputes.”

“America first,” Walsh added.

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., who was not supportive of prospective strikes before Saturday, told Bannon that “the president getting a cease fire is a big deal,” he said, noting he hoped this would be the first step in extricating the U.S. from the region. “We need to have less presence in the Middle East. This is not a sustainable posture for us.”

Joe Rogan, the most popular podcaster in the world, who many might consider MAGA or at least MAGA adjacent, said during an interview with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), “I think the whole MAGA thing right now is very divided, particularly because one of the things they voted for was no war.”

“Well now it seems like we’re in a war,” he added. “And it’s quick. We’re six months in and that’s already popped off.”

Rogan is half right. You can find those who identify as MAGA who outright support the strikes — some early polls appear to bear that out — but there is still a collective resistance to war, especially a long, regime change war that resembles anything like the 20 years of protracted conflict that loomed over the youth of America's youngest generations.

Arguably the truly great divide now is between these aforementioned conservatives — MAGA and those who MAGA support — encouraging Trump’s instincts for restraint, and the neoconservatives who are likely upset that Trump didn’t go further militarily, or better yet, that he had forced Israel into a ceasefire with Iran on Monday.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board certainly wasn’t happy, suggesting Trump was treating Israel and Iran equally, and giving Iran a “reprieve.”

“I hate this word ceasefire, the president hated it a few days ago too,” exclaimed Levin, calling it a “life line” and saying the Iranians should have been “forced to sign a surrender document” instead. “Does this mean the regime survives? I guess so.”

The epitaph for MAGA restraint is not only premature, it is inaccurate. Some would even suggest that meetings that Trump had before the strikes Saturday, particularly with Bannon, had reminded him that his base had certain expectations and would not support an Iraq 2.0. They hope, at least at this moment, that the U.S. has avoided that fate and that it is important to keep pushing Trump in the right direction.