卢比奥为特朗普对伊朗战争的辩护与万斯对中期选举败因的归咎形成鲜明反差Rubio's defense of Trump's Iran war draws sharp contrast with Vance's midterm blame

Secretary of State Marco Rubio defended the Trump administration's war against Iran on Sunday, days after Vice President JD Vance blamed the conflict for Republicans' devastating midterm losses, as the White House confronts an unresolved standoff with Tehran. "I think the president took on something that other presidents have failed to do.

Sometimes, when you do the right thing, you don't know whether it's popular or not, but it's still the right thing to do. Presidents are elected to take on the hard things, sometimes difficult things, but necessary things," Rubio said Sunday. Vance made his argument in a post on X last week.

"The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night," Vance wrote last week.

"But everyone knows why we lost. And any honest conversation about where we go from here must start there," he added.

Vance cited an unnamed pollster in the X post who said voters who had abandoned the GOP wanted the administration to end the conflict, address inflation and the cost of living, put America first and change its relationship with Israel.

The vice president's argument that the war was the primary driver of Republicans' losses, however, is complicated by polling. The Fox News Voter Poll found that 89% of voters considered the cost of living a crucial or major factor in their congressional vote, compared with 74% who said the same about the war in Iran. The findings suggest broader economic frustrations were also a major concern among voters, although the two issues may overlap and the polling does not establish which ultimately drove Republican defections.

Fox News Digital contacted Vance's office five times seeking clarification on whether ending the conflict would mean lifting the blockade, withdrawing American forces or securing new concessions from Tehran, but received no response.

The contrasting assessments come as Republicans begin looking ahead to 2028, with Trump naming Rubio as a possible presidential contender during an interview with CBS.

Some longtime Trump donors are reportedly expressing doubts about backing Vance in 2028, fearing his ties to the Trump administration and the GOP’s devastating midterm losses could hurt his presidential prospects, with some floating Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and other Republicans as alternatives, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Meanwhile, Trump and Vance are pursuing another diplomatic opening with Iran, with Qatar mediating talks over a possible agreement that could ease the U.S. blockade and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Trump met with Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani Monday to discuss mediation efforts and potential terms for ending the conflict with Iran.

Rubio expressed skepticism Sunday that negotiations were nearing a breakthrough, arguing that Iran's demands remained unrealistic. Vance has been personally involved in indirect talks with Iranian representatives through regional mediators in recent weeks, according to Axios.

"I’m not in a political office," Rubio told reporters Sunday when asked about the midterm results. "As you know, I just don’t comment on domestic politics." Trump initially projected that Operation Epic Fury, launched against Iran in February, would involve four to five weeks of combat operations. More than eight months later, the broader confrontation continues despite the end of major U.S. combat operations in April.

After a June Memorandum of Understanding with Iran failed to produce a lasting resolution, the Trump administration returned to economic and military pressure, with renewed limited strikes, continued maritime tensions and an unresolved standoff over Iranian missile capabilities and the flow of oil and natural gas through the Strait of Hormuz.

Vance played a role in the administration's negotiations with Iran, helping lead diplomatic efforts that produced the June agreement before it unraveled.

Trump even joked in June that Vance would take the blame if the Iran deal failed.

"If it works out, I'm going to take the credit. If it doesn't work out, I'm blaming JD," Trump said at the time.

The vice president has previously defended the administration's military campaign, crediting U.S. forces with significantly weakening Iran's conventional military and its ability to threaten commercial shipping.

"The VP has let it be known for a few months now that he is not in full agreement with the President on Iran. But [the] social media post is striking, if not shocking," Ludovic Hood, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute's Center for Peace and Security in the Middle East, told Fox News Digital.

Hood also questioned Vance's emphasis on the war as the primary cause of Republicans' losses, arguing that broader economic concerns played a significant role in voters' frustration.

Trump dismissed suggestions that Vance's comments about Iran had strained their relationship on Sunday, defending Vance's remarks while suggesting he should have gone a step further in expressing support for the administration's actions.

"No, not at all," Trump said when asked whether Vance's comments had affected their relationship. "But a lot of people didn't like his comments, but not me. He was right." Trump added that Vance "should have made one other statement," arguing that the administration's actions against Iran were worth repeating.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth also publicly defended the Iran campaign, calling it a "courageous and historic" effort even as Vance questions its political costs. Hegseth also faces questions about his future in the administration, although the president publicly insisted he intends to keep his Pentagon chief.

Beyond the political fallout, assessments differ over whether the administration has achieved its military objectives and what risks remain for the United States.

Retired Army Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis, a veteran of four combat deployments and host of the "Daniel Davis Deep Dive" show on YouTube, offered a sharply critical assessment of the campaign's results, arguing that the administration has failed to accomplish the objectives Trump outlined when the operation began.

On Feb. 28, Trump pledged to destroy Iran's missile capabilities and production facilities, eliminate its navy and prevent Tehran's regional proxies from destabilizing the Middle East.

"Eight months and 9 days later, none of those objectives have been met," Davis told Fox News Digital.

The White House has offered a starkly different assessment. In April, the administration declared that U.S. forces had achieved the military objectives of Operation Epic Fury, pointing to the destruction of Iranian military infrastructure and significant degradation of Tehran's missile and naval capabilities.

Davis said that although American strikes inflicted significant damage on Iran's conventional military, Tehran retains the ability to threaten U.S. forces and regional allies through missiles, drones and naval assets protected in underground facilities. He warned that renewed major combat operations could expose American forces and Gulf allies to further retaliation without eliminating those capabilities.

"First, it should be clear: shooting the same targets, with the same missiles, is not going to produce a different outcome," Davis said.

"Can't put lipstick on this pig: it would be ugly and seen as an admission of defeat," Davis said. "But that is still profoundly better for our interests than going back to combat ops that will only deepen, significantly, the cost of our failure." Hood, however, rejected the suggestion that the United States should abandon pressure on Tehran, arguing that Iran continues to pose a serious threat to regional stability and American interests.

"Trump seems to get that Iran, as currently governed, is a singularly dangerous threat to the region's stability and ability to prosper; is, has long been, a source of international terrorism; and would be even more dangerous with nuclear weapons," Hood said.

Hood said the administration needs to more clearly explain its strategic objectives, including whether Washington is seeking significant concessions on Iran's nuclear program or a political shift in Tehran.

"The administration's messaging to the America people and to international partners needs improvement. What are our strategic objectives?" Hood said. Fox News Digital reached out to the State Department for comment.