Poll Watch: Republican Voters Sour On Ukraine

Do you remember Richard Spencer’s hot take on the Russian invasion of Ukraine?

Allegedly, the war in Ukraine had “changed everything.” Populism was over. We were returning to the Cold War. Foreign policy was going to be our top concern moving forward.

CBS News:

Big majorities of Americans continue to support economic sanctions on Russia and sending aid and supplies to Ukraine. A smaller majority also would keep sending weapons.

But Republicans have become increasingly divided over this.

Republicans have become more resistant to sending aid, which they favored back in February, and they have become more opposed to sending weapons, specifically. And most of them say the administration should generally be doing less to help Ukraine. …


In early August, President Biden asked Congress for $24 billion in additional aid for Ukraine. A month earlier, meanwhile, 70 GOP House members voted to cut off military aid. The amendment to the annual defense bill failed, but it signaled a rocky road ahead for the president’s request and for Speaker McCarthy and these recalcitrant GOP House members. …

A year and a half later, Michael Brendan Dougherty is correct that Ukraine has become the liberals’ war. Republicans and Independents have soured on the war. Ukraine’s counteroffensive has sputtered on the battlefield. Ukraine has become a quagmire. It is another endless war owned by Joe Biden.

National Review:

We are often are reminded that among elected Republicans, those who question or oppose additional support for Ukraine in its war effort are a minority. But among those who elect Republicans, skepticism about America’s foreign policy commands a healthy majority. Republican voters are more anti-war than their elected officials, which might explain why the few elected officials who differ from the Atlantic, the Brookings Institution, and the foreign-policy blob in D.C.— people such as Rand Paul and J. D. Vance — are willing to make so much noise about it. Seventy-one percent of Republicans oppose more funding for Ukraine. It was precisely anticipation of this arriving freight train of Republican skepticism that drove House minority leader Kevin McCarthy and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell to give the Biden administration more money than it requested for Ukraine before the last Congress adjourned.

There is also no longer any sign that skepticism about Ukraine will be an electoral anchor for Republicans. It’s something that was obvious to anyone who could detect the forces of political gravity acting over the last 18 months. CNN’s latest polling on the war shows that a majority of Americans oppose giving Ukraine more funding. The public is also skeptical about giving weapons, not a surprise when Ukraine is using them up so quickly that the U.S. is depleting its own stockpiles. …

Will this quagmire drag on through the 2024 election?

Putin has a huge incentive to make the war as painful as possible for Joe Biden. He is probably planning something to help Trump get back into power. Another humiliating setback or outright defeat in Ukraine could further sour Independent swing voters on Joe Biden.

Note: Joe Biden never recovered from the withdrawal from Afghanistan.


  1. “indication that Vladimir Putin has any interest in meaningful diplomacy. ”

    Again, projection and inversion.

    Blinken and Biden have stifled all negotiations.
    Putin has been trying to reach peace terms for years.

    • @Arrian…

      “Again, projection and inversion.”

      I love how you continuously pick your way through a field thick with hog slop – just like a great fullback who, up on the 2 yard line, finds his way through 9 defensive linemen, all crowding the line, because, 3rd and goal, they know he is coming!

  2. Though the three following passages are long, Mr. W., I’ve thought Occidental Dissent’s visitors might find them interesting. I encountered them amid the comments that readers had posted in response to a recent substack article about the war in Ukraine. In none of them, as you’ll notice, is the commenter express as to the identity of the mentioned “leadership,” “western elites,” “rootless cosmopolitans,” or “they.”

    Comment one …

    “There are certainly many ground-level analysts and commentators who spew, and likely even believed these propaganda lines [to the effect that a Ukrainian counteroffensive would succeed]. But the leadership of the west are unsurprisingly not retarded; They have known this outcome was feasible for decades, and have pursued it. They have a very singular goal and have done a pretty good job of seeking the best possible paths to it, without suffering from the delusions that they inflict upon their own masses.

    “For the rootless cosmopolitans that are the western elites, they are entirely okay with an outcome where Ukraine is left with barely any male population and is reduced to a rump state. I imagine that the intersection of ideals and realistic goals had them wanting to end up in a position where Odessa remained in their hands, but Ukraine was depopulated, Russia’s ties with the west were severed, and their fist could be tightened around their vassals under the excuse of war.

    “So far they’re at 3/4 of these goals. Losing Odessa is likely, but not a crippling matter. Far more important are the others: Ukraine has already lost a massive portion of its male population, which suits their ultimate goal of wiping out the European peoples wholesale. Russia has lost its pipeline to Germany and, despite the economic backlash that Europe will suffer, has lost much influence over them, and this may complicate matters for them abroad. And with that loss of influence, the US has managed to exhaust the armories of their allies, and leave them ever more dependent on the US itself.”

    Comment two (from a different commenter) …

    “It’s similar to Afghanistan (and Vietnam, for that matter.) They define winning differently than we do, as they don’t look at it from the PoV of a nation that cares about people and territory. They look at it from the PoV of globalist oligarchs who see an opportunity to expand their markets and their control over units of production and consumption (what some would refer to as ‘people.’)

    “When you say ‘lose’, think about what you mean. Now think about what that means to those who are really calling the shots. It means nothing to them if the entire nation of UKR goes up in flames, or even a few Euro cities get nuked. Sounds like a great way to artificially stimulate demand for decontamination contracts!

    “For example many say they lost in Afghanistan, but what did they lose? They converted trillions of worthless taxpayer dollars into valuable military contracts and political kickbacks, and the CIA took out about $1Trillion in opium. Sure thousands of our troops died, maybe a million afghanis, and the internal cohesion of the US as well as its international standing suffered. But that isn’t a cost for them, only for us.

    “As long as they control most of the West, they can’t lose, only win or tie.”

    Comment three (by commenter who posted comment two) …

    “They don’t care about nations, they are above them. When 1 nation fails, they move on to the next like a cloud of locusts. They’ve been doing this for centuries, perhaps millennia.

    “In 100 years I wouldn’t be surprised to see them ruling from China, with the ruined wastelands of Europe and North America acting as a 3rd world supply of resources and cheap labor.”

  3. “””…Will this quagmire drag on through the 2024 election?…”””

    Probably yes. Putin was recently asked about victory day nex may 9th and Putin said that in year 2025 there will be proper and huge celebration.

    Ukraine is exellent position for Russian Army and Vlad probably want suck as much Nato resources into best place in the world for Russians to destroy.

  4. There is no going back to the Cold War, also known as Reaganism. That was the Indian Summer for the white America Spencer so despises. It presupposed a robust yet pacified white majority, and that is gone forever.

    Biden and the Democrats want Controlled Collapse, as does Spencer. Democrats want it because they correctly understand CC to be the way to hem in whitey for a final denouement, among other things. Spencer wants it for petty revenge. The problem is that Putin threatens to turn that Controlled Collapse into a rather quicker collapse.

  5. @John Bonaccorsi Philly

    The commenter was talking about the Khazarian locust crew. May they burn in hell for the damage they have done to the human race.

  6. I’m fucki*g tired about this war, even my government is sending arms to ukraine…..My government is compose by a people of social right or third position right but in fact they’re acting like liberals……..how power change people…..

    p.s North Korean leader in these days meet Putin

  7. If American boots wind up on the ground, will most Americans revert to some kind of post 9/11 “patriotism”?, complete with car window flags? That a very big question. I’m guessing probably.

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. Government Shutdown Averted For Now – Occidental Dissent

Leave a Reply