Voters Fired the Epstein Class, But the War Machine Stays /Col Doug Macgregor

Summary

Daniel Davis and retired Army Colonel Douglas Macgregor discuss the recent Republican electoral defeat and what it may mean for the war with Iran. Macgregor says the war likely contributed to voters’ dissatisfaction, alongside inflation, spending, and other economic concerns. He doubts the election will produce a major change in foreign policy, arguing that powerful political and institutional interests may keep the war going despite public opposition.

The discussion highlights a reported shift among younger voters: Davis cites analysis suggesting voters under 30 moved sharply away from Trump, while Macgregor says younger people are more attentive to the risk of the conflict expanding. They contrast Trump’s defense of the decision to attack Iran with Vice President Vance’s acknowledgment that the war hurt Republicans politically. Macgregor criticizes commentators who argue the war should have been fought more decisively and contends that the conflict could encourage Iran to pursue nuclear weapons for its own security.

The interview also focuses on US support for Israel. Davis raises questions about whether Democrats will try to cut war funding and about proposals to reshape US security assistance to Israel. Macgregor doubts that promised cuts will happen and argues that defense-industry interests, political donors, and lobbying influence policy. He goes further, portraying US policy as excessively subordinate to Israel and using broad, conspiratorial rhetoric about Jewish influence. These are Macgregor’s assertions, not independently established facts in the interview. The hosts also discuss conflicting public accounts of who initiated the Iran war, including a statement by Israel’s UN ambassador that the decision was the United States’.

On Ukraine, Macgregor is skeptical that prospective US-Russia-Ukraine talks will produce an agreement, citing Russia’s distrust of past negotiations. He claims Russia has the military advantage and predicts it may eventually seize additional territory, including Odesa; these are his forecasts, not settled outcomes. Davis presents figures on territorial control and battlefield gains, while both argue that Ukraine faces serious manpower and air-defense shortages. Macgregor also makes sweeping claims about Ukrainian military capacity and alleged abuses by the Azov corps, and says European governments are politically fragile and unlikely to intervene directly.

Overall, the interview presents a strongly anti-interventionist argument: the speakers say voters are rejecting costly foreign wars, but question whether political leaders and media institutions will respond. Their discussion includes disputed battlefield claims and sharply polemical assertions about Israel, US policy, and Ukraine.

Presenters and Contributors

• Daniel Davis — host
• Douglas Macgregor — guest, retired colonel and former Defense Department adviser