The establishment spent years throwing the kitchen sink at Donald Trump.
Now the numbers are in, and the naysayers aren’t going to like what they see.
And Karoline Leavitt dropped one polling bombshell that has Trump critics raging.
The Numbers the Establishment Doesn’t Want You to See
Two separate polls tell the same basic story. More than half of likely American voters approve of the memorandum of understanding President Trump signed with Iran. A Quantus survey conducted among 1,000 likely voters found that 43 percent “strongly approve” and another 13 percent “somewhat approve” of the preliminary peace agreement, for a combined 56 percent favorable mark.
A second survey, originally published by top Republican pollster Fabrizio, Lee & Associates, showed that 67 percent of the 1,500 respondents surveyed approved of the memorandum of understanding that both countries signed. That’s not a slim majority. That’s a landslide.
Only 13 percent disapproved of the deal, 8 percent strongly and 5 percent somewhat, while roughly a third of respondents fell outside both camps.
And here’s the part that should make every neoconservative commentator choke on their morning coffee. The gap between the deal’s popularity and Trump’s own standing — 43 percent overall approval versus 56 percent disapproval in the same Quantus survey — tells a story Washington’s permanent class would rather ignore. Voters who don’t even give Trump high marks on everything else are still backing the deal. That’s not a partisan reflex. That’s a genuine mandate for peace.
What the Deal Actually Does
President Trump signed his copy of the memorandum of understanding to end the hostilities with Iran following the G7 at the Palace of Versailles, with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian signing his copy remotely.
On the American side, the administration agreed to lift its naval blockade of Iran, terminate sanctions, and work with regional partners to develop a reconstruction and economic-development plan worth at least $300 billion. In return, Iran agreed to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and, in the MOU’s language, “reaffirm[ed] that it shall not procure or develop nuclear weapons.”
The document reads: “The United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran commit to negotiating and achieving the final deal in maximum 60 days extendable with mutual consent.”
Publicly available ship tracking data showed vessels moving through the Strait of Hormuz shortly after the deal, and the average U.S. gas price fell to just short of $4 for the first time in months. Oil flowing. Gas prices dropping. Ships moving. That’s what results look like.
Trump put it plainly on Truth Social. “OIL IS FLOWING, IRAN CAN NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON (THE WORLD WILL BE SAFE!), THE STOCK MARKETS ARE ROARING, JOBS ARE AT RECORDS, AND PRICES ARE DROPPING (AFFORDABILITY!). OUR COUNTRY IS STRONG, SAFE, AND RESPECTED LIKE NEVER BEFORE. ‘YOU’RE WELCOME!'”
Where Americans Actually Agree
The Economist/YouGov survey that Leavitt promoted dug into the specific provisions of the agreement, and the results on the core objectives are striking. When asked about the Strait of Hormuz being “reopened with toll-free commercial passage for 60 days,” 69 percent agreed and supported it, compared to only six percent who oppose.
On the question of Iran promising not to develop nuclear weapons while the U.S. and Iran negotiate the disposition of Iran’s enriched uranium, the vast majority — 69 percent — agreed with that aspect as well, compared to eight percent who oppose. Notably, there is majority consensus on that aspect among Republicans, Democrats, and independents.
That’s a rare thing in American politics right now. Republicans and Democrats agreeing on anything at 69 percent is not something you see every day.
JD Vance and the America First Case for the Deal
Vice President JD Vance has been out front defending the agreement, and he’s made no apologies for it. “On the one hand, if they continue to try to rebuild their nuclear program, this deal ensures they will never have the resources to do that,” Vance told ABC News’ “Good Morning America.” “On the other hand, if the Iranians are willing to give a long-term commitment — along with proper verification — to giving up that nuclear weapon, we’re willing to welcome them into the world economy, to lift some sanctions and to turn over a new leaf in that relationship.”
After a marathon round of talks in Switzerland, Vance declared: “We laid a very good foundation for a successful final deal. The final deal is the house. We set the foundation. We haven’t built the house, but we’ve laid a successful foundation to get to a good place for the American people.”
And Vance was direct about what separates this from the Obama-era JCPOA. “If you go back to the Obama JCPOA, what it did is it took an Iranian nuclear program that it accelerated, and it basically bribed the Iranians to stop that program. We’re in a totally different position here. The Iranian nuclear program has been completely destroyed, and what we’re saying is: Make the long-term commitment not to rebuild it, and you will get the benefits that come with that.”
That’s not naivety. That’s leverage. The administration destroyed Iran’s nuclear program militarily first, then offered an off-ramp. Bribe-first-ask-questions-later was Obama’s approach. This is the opposite.
The Critics and What They’re Really Asking For
Some voices in Washington have pushed back hard, and it’s worth being clear about where those voices are coming from. Senator Bill Cassidy, a Louisiana Republican, called it “the worst foreign policy blunder in decades” in a post that drew significant attention on X. “Reagan is rolling over in his grave. Iran’s nuclear ambitions were not curbed, and they have learned that threatening the Strait of Hormuz works and will undoubtedly leverage it in the future. Now, Iran gets to build brand-new infrastructure under this deal,” he wrote.
But Cassidy’s critique sounds familiar. The same argument — that any deal short of total capitulation is surrender — was used to justify the Iraq War, the Libya intervention, and every other military adventure that cost thousands of American lives and trillions of dollars and left the region in worse shape than before. The interventionist wing of the GOP didn’t deliver peace through those efforts. They delivered chaos.
Vance pushed back directly on that line of thinking. “I don’t trust anybody,” Vance told CNN. “The benefits of the bargain only accrue, again, if Iran actually complies.” That’s not the language of a man handing Iran a blank check. That’s the language of a negotiator who understands that verification is built into the architecture of the deal.
One Vance supporter close to the White House put it bluntly: “Being criticized by some of the least popular people in the Republican Party only helps JD because it sends a signal to our actual voting base that he has all the right enemies.”
What the Voters Already Know
There’s a reason the polling looks the way it does. Americans watched a conflict that sent gas prices soaring, rattled global markets, and raised real fears about a wider war. They voted in 2024 for a president who promised to end foreign entanglements, not start new ones. Trump signed the MOU at Versailles, the same city where a peace treaty ended World War I more than a century ago. That symbolism wasn’t accidental.
Trump himself made the stakes plain: “The alternative would be a worldwide depression,” he said, citing the economic devastation wrought by Tehran’s closure of the strait.
And the markets agreed. Markets responded immediately. Oil prices fell sharply, and the stock market hit a record high following the announcement.
The foreign policy establishment’s job, for decades, has been to keep America in a state of permanent readiness for the next war. They get funded for it. They get promoted for it. They get television hits for it. What they don’t get credit for is the wars that don’t happen, the soldiers who come home, the gas prices that fall. Donald Trump is delivering exactly what he promised voters, and the polls show Americans see it clearly — even if Washington’s interventionist class refuses to.
The 60-day negotiating window is still open, and the hard details on Iran’s nuclear program remain to be finalized. The Iran MOU lets Washington “dial up and dial down” relief depending on Tehran’s conduct, Vice President JD Vance told CBN News. That’s not a surrender. That’s a pressure valve — and the administration controls it.
But the voters aren’t waiting for the final treaty to render a verdict. Two polls, 56 to 67 percent approval, bipartisan consensus on the core objectives. The American people sent Trump to Washington to end the cycle of endless conflict, and by every available measure, they think he’s doing exactly that.
Sources: Breitbart News; Quantus Insights poll, June 16-17, 2026; Fabrizio, Lee & Associates poll, June 16-18, 2026; Economist/YouGov survey; ABC News “Good Morning America”; NBC News; CBN News; CNN; The Globe and Mail