They condemned. They sidestepped. They offered support.

After President Donald Trump independently authorized military strikes on Iran, Democrats did not establish a unified or clear message in response.

Within Congress, Democrats presented varied opinions on Trump’s actions, while at the state level—where many Democratic hopefuls for the 2028 presidential election are positioned—leaders issued carefully crafted statements that steered clear of politics and policy discussions. This includes those who want to project themselves as the forefront of the “resistance.”

Governors, save for a few, concentrated on the safety of their states in case of Iranian retaliation on U.S. soil. This caution came even as Trump led the country through a tumultuous period, frequently offering conflicting narratives that ranged from sanctions to regime changes in Iran, provoking the country, and then calling for peace, both in his public addresses and on social media.

Over the weekend, the Democratic National Committee declared that former President Joe Biden hadn’t started any wars. On Monday, in the thick of threats from Iran over retaliation, the DNC announced it would hold a media call Tuesday morning — about the 2022 Supreme Court decision that overturned abortion rights protections in Roe v. Wade.

The wide-ranging, disjointed responses from Democrats underscored the fluidity and volatility of a Middle East conflict that has raged since Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. It also demonstrated how the leaderless minority party is struggling to collectively act as an antidote to a president many of them have repeatedly condemned as a threat to democracy.

Congress

On Capitol Hill, some Democrats have blasted the strikes as unwise and unconstitutional, like Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia and Rep. Ro Khanna of California, who are leading efforts to block him from further strikes. Others have hedged on the merits, demanding more information and saying Trump needs approval from Congress first, such as House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York.

And yet other pro-Israel Democrats say they support Trump’s move, like Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania and Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland — although Hoyer also blamed Trump for getting the United States into this situation by reneging on the Iran nuclear deal in 2018.

Kaine told NBC News he’s “nervous” that the United States could make a mistake similar to the one it made with the Iraq War.

“In Iraq, we were misled into the war with intelligence about the Iraqi WMD [weapons of mass destruction] program that proved not to be accurate. And I’m very, very concerned about that here,” Kaine said Monday.

“This isn’t ‘Should the tax rate be 22% or 23.5 %?’ This is a real vote of conscience. Should the United States be in another war in the Middle East?” he added.

Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., who arrived in Congress in 1997 and voted against authorizing military force in Iraq in 2002, said he also saw parallels between the escalating Iran situation and how the George W. Bush administration made the case for the Iraq War.

“I remember how they cherry-picked information and fed it to members of Congress, but at least we had a debate,” said McGovern, the top Democrat on the House Rules Committee, who is calling for a formal debate and vote on military action against Iran. “It’s easy to get into wars; it’s hard as hell to get out.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said she hopes Democrats can, at minimum, rally around the Kaine resolution to require approval from Congress before Trump can strike Iran.

“People can argue all they want about what the election of 2024 meant,” Warren said. “But the one thing I’m very sure about is that no one was voting to attack another nation and involve America’s military in another war.”

But that unity isn’t there. Jeffries declined to say Monday whether he supports the Khanna resolution to require Congress to sign off on military action in Iran, telling reporters, “I haven’t taken a look at it.”

And Fetterman, who urged Trump last week to strike Iranian nuclear facilities, pushed back against fellow Democrats who have labeled U.S. military involvement “unconstitutional” or who called for Trump to be impeached.

“If you throw that word around — ‘impeachment’ — then you continue to cheapen what that word actually means,” Fetterman told reporters Monday.

“I was the first guy in the Senate calling it to strike the nuclear facilities. Of course, I absolutely support that,” he continued. “Now, I know that might cost me politically, but I fundamentally know that’s right.”

Trump administration officials will hold separate classified briefings on the situation in the Middle East on Tuesday afternoon for House and Senate members.

Governors

As sirens blared across Doha warning of incoming attacks on Qatar on Monday, the typically combative California Gov. Gavin Newsom fired off a message on social media condemning the Trump administration.

It had nothing to do with Iran.

“Donald Trump’s America: The father of 3 U.S. Marines is brutally beaten by federal agents,” Newsom said on X, speaking of an immigration arrest in his state that was caught on a viral video.

Absent from Newsom’s typically active and animated feed were any verbal shots at Trump’s strikes on Iran, even though he is among the governors viewed as potential 2028 contenders who has repeatedly taken on Trump.

But after one of the most consequential moves Trump has taken since he became commander in chief in January, he and other governors kept quiet about the United States’ potentially entering a war.

Aides to various governors said they tried to stay in their lanes — speaking specifically about how they were protecting their states from any potential retribution through violence or cyberattacks or by honoring National Guard members based in the Middle East. They stressed they weren’t privy to intelligence that would have helped assess Trump’s decision to order strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities; they couldn’t even independently assess after the fact how much damage was actually done.

Among those who spoke more substantively about the issue was Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, who steered the focus to Trump if there were retaliation to the United States’ strikes.

“Obviously, the Trump ministration holds responsibility for what comes next and ensuring that our American troops and our personnel in the region are safe,” Shapiro said Sunday on X. He made sure to condemn an Iranian possession of nuclear materials.

“I will say, with regard to the Iranian nuclear program, it was obviously very, very dangerous,” Shapiro said. “The idea that Iran, the world’s largest sponsor of terror, would have a nuclear weapon, would not only destabilize the Middle East, but it would create risk for American interests at home and abroad. And so it is good if Iran does not possess a nuclear weapon.”

Newsom did post a message later Monday honoring the 205 California Guard members serving in the Middle East, including at bases in Qatar and Iraq. “Jen and I are praying for their safety — and for the safety of every American service member serving in harm’s way,” he wrote, referring to his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul outlined what she had done to assess potential threats in a video on social media. “As we know, New York is always a target,” she said, noting that she convened her public safety team as soon as she heard of Trump’s strike authorization. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, who has repeatedly railed against Trump on other occasions, had a measured response Saturday, writing on X that after an “escalation in Iran, I’m keeping a close eye in consultation with federal authorities and @ILStatePolice.”

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear wrote at the time of the retaliatory attacks Monday, without specifying what he was referring to: “I know things seem scary right now, but it’s important to take care of yourself. Hug your kids, focus on the things you are grateful for, and take a break from the news when you need it. Keep the faith and remember, we’ll get through this together.”