1. Iran is the exception in an otherwise solid approval picture. Among parents with children 17 or younger — a cohort that has trended Republican decisively since November of 2024 — the War in Iran stands out as an issue where President Trump is underwater and this could likely play a pivotal role in the Midterms. The President’s overall job approval sits at +10 net among parents. Crime is +17. Immigration is +19 Iran is −3. On the surface, the numbers may not look alarming themselves, but consider the complexity and impact this region of the world can have, and parents are already trending negative on the issue.

2. Take note of the speed of shift in opinion. In February 2026, parents approved of Trump’s handling of Iran by a 16-point margin — 53% approve to 37% disapprove. By April, that margin had collapsed to negative territory: 48% approve, 50% disapprove—an 18-point swing in net approval in under two months.

3. Parents with young children in 2026 don’t rally around foreign wars — they feel it in their budget. The classic wartime rally around the flag is challenging in the 2020s environment where parents raising children have increasingly become calculating about rising costs (see article “Two Charts That Signal a Global Revolution Ahead”). Moreover, rising fuel costs for voters in general, let alone parents, could very well mean going back to the drawing board with an already stretched budget.

4. The Generic Ballot is picking up on the signal. This same parent cohort moved from R+10 in February to R+19 in March on the Congressional Generic Ballot — a striking Republican surge. But that surge came before the April Iran data showed disapproval breaking majority and our April 18 poll had parents R+7. The question is can Iran erode what Republicans have built with this cohort? Or will they maintain that Trump is their fierce warrior fighting numerous battle fronts for them?

5. The undecided are becoming decided. In February, 10% of parents expressed uncertainty on Iran — the highest undecided share of any issue. By April, that dropped to 2%. Opinions are no longer soft and the net shift went toward disapproval.

“Parents are not pacifists. They gave Trump strong numbers on crime, on immigration, and on the economy. But on Iran, something different is happening — the math they’re using to calculate the war costs involves impact on their family, a much different metric than what the White House is using.”

— Pollster Jeremy Zogby · May 2026

Issue Scorecard · Aril 2026 · Parents w/ Children 17 & Under

What the Data Means & What To Look For

Republicans face a coalition management problem. The Iran numbers should be eye-grabbing because they emerge from a cohort that is otherwise one of the most reliable Republican-leaning groups in the current cycle. A Generic Ballot at R+19 is extraordinary — but it is built on crime and immigration, not foreign policy. There is currently no argument for what a victory in Iran means for a family’s security and cost of living.

Democrats will go on the offensive, but how much success will they have? The collapse from +16.6 net approval to −2.8 net in two months is the sharpest single-issue shift in this entire tracking series. A strategy would likely include a swing vote approach rather than mobilizing the base because Parents are still firmly with the President.

⚑ Watch the Economy-Iran convergence. President Trump approval rating onthe economy stands at a precarious +3.0 net — the thinnest positive margin of any domestic issue. If tariffs, defense spending, or supply chain disruption from the Iran conflict begin to show up in household costs before November, the two softest issues will converge simultaneously. That scenario — Iran disapproval plus economic disapproval crossing into negative territory simultaneously — could signal a major shift.

Bottom Line

Parents with children 17 or younger are not necessarily anti-war. They are anti-cost. The Iran data does not show ideological opposition to the conflict — it reflects sentiment about the reality of parents navigating 2026.

The 18 point swing in net Iran approval over the past two months is the most consequential single number in this entire series tracking approval among this key cohort. Both parties are reading it in the numbers. Neither can execute a strategy to date.

John Zogby Strategies Analysis—National Survey of Likely Voters · Cohort: Parents with children ≤17 · 3 rounds, Feb–Apr 2026 · MOE ±6.4 pp

Taking the long view of history (via a swift comprehensive chart) allows us to go deeper beyond analysis offering greater perception and clarity of events, especially amid constant ideological noise and intensity in politics.

Utilizing this chart, we’ll dive into the history of national elections and reveal major cycles to help us understand what will happen in 2026.

First, a briefing on what drives voter turnout cycles and their surges and collapses over our 235 year history will provide context.

What Drives Voter Turnout Surges & Collapses

The Overarching Pattern · 235 Years of American Electoral Participation

Across 235 years of American electoral data, voter turnout does not move randomly. It rises and falls in recognizable cycles — each shaped by identifiable historical forces and patterns. The pattern, consistent from the founding era through the present polarization surge, can be stated simply as Pollster Jeremy Zogby puts it:

This pattern holds across party lines, centuries, and radically different political contexts. And six major cycles define the full arc of American democratic participation, from the founding era to the present polarization surge.

Elections Cycles Since 1789

Six Major Turnout Cycles

US Voter Participation · 1789 – 2024 · A 235-Year Pattern of Surge and Collapse

1st Cycle: The Early Republic Surge — 1790 – 1840

Turnout rises from the single digits of the founding era — 11.6% in 1789 as Washington ran unopposed and fewer had the right to vote — to the dramatic threshold of mass democratic participation in 1840. The rise of Jacksonian party politics, the expansion of white male suffrage across the states, and the emergence of a competitive two-party system created the infrastructure for sustained civic mobilization. The 1840 presidential election at 80.3% marked the moment America became a decisively mass democracy (however, still only among those legally permitted to participate back then).

2nd Cycle: The Gilded Age Peak & Progressive Era Collapse — 1840 – 1920

High Civil War-era engagement peaked at 82.6% in 1876 — the all-time record in American electoral history. Intense Gilded Age partisan competition kept presidential turnout above 75% for four decades. Then, paradoxically, Progressive Era reforms — voter registration requirements, the secret ballot, direct primaries — suppressed participation by reducing party machine mobilization. The collapse continued sharply after 1900, and culminated in 1920 when women’s suffrage instantly doubled the denominator of eligible voters.

3rd Cycle: The Interwar Trough & New Deal Recovery — 1920 – 1944

With turnout bottoming out at 49.2% in 1920 — the 1920s initially saw low engagement as a new electorate adjusted, parties rebuilt coalitions, and the economy boomed. Then, the Great Depression changed everything: FDR’s New Deal coalition rebuilt civic engagement through economic crisis mobilization, with turnout reaching 62.4% by 1940. The Midterms partially recovered to 46.6% in 1938 before wartime logistics suppressed participation in 1942. This cycle demonstrates that economic catastrophe, not just political competition, can drive mass mobilization.

4th Cycle: The Postwar Civic Era — 1948 – 1968

Strong party identification and genuine institutional confidence sustained robust turnout through the postwar boom. Presidential participation peaked at 63.8% in 1960 with Kennedy vs. Nixon — still the second-highest in the modern voter turnout era. The 1966 midterm reached 48.7%, a record that stood until 2018. This era reflects broad democratic faith: Americans trusted institutions, identified strongly with their parties, and turned out accordingly. It is the benchmark against which modern engagement is measured.

5th Cycle: The Long Disengagement — 1968 – 2000

Then came the longest sustained disengagement of the modern era. Watergate, Vietnam, stagflation, the savings and loan crisis, and deepening cynicism about politicians of both parties drove a 30-year decline. Presidential turnout fell from 62.5% in 1968 to a modern low of 51.7% in 1996. Midterms bottomed at 36.4% in 1986. Crucially, the decline is non-partisan — it accelerated under Republican and Democratic administrations alike — suggesting structural rather than political causes: the erosion of party identification and the rise of the independent voter, the decline of civic institutions, and the rise of political cynicism as a cultural norm.

6th Cycle: The Polarization Surge — 2004 – Present

Then came the rise of hyper polarization — arguably taking root during the Clinton Presidency, but certainly by the 2000 election. Post-9/11 mobilization in 2004 saw Presidential turnout at 60.1%, accelerating through Obama’s 2008 election with 61.6%, and exploding in the Trump era: the 2018 midterms reached 50.1% (highest since 1966), the 2020 presidential hit 66.4% (the modern record), and 2022 and 2024 hold at historically elevated levels. The engine of this cycle — the belief by majorities on both sides that the opposing party poses an existential threat.

A Closer Look at Modern Cycles (4, 5, & 6)

The Sixth Cycle & the Question of its Durability

The current cycle’s engine comprises of digital engagement and hyperpolarization — fueling the psychological tendency to view political opponents not merely as wrong, but as genuinely threatening. Unlike external crises, hyperpolarization is self-reinforcing: media ecosystems, social networks, and political incentives all reward intensification rather than resolution. It has helped to drive high turnout. Until it doesn’t, as all cycles reach a peak and decline.

On the one hand, the 2018 and 2022 midterms, turnout was above 46% back to back — something that hadn’t occurred since the 1960s — is the clearest evidence that a new, elevated baseline has been established.

Whether that baseline holds, rises further, or eventually collapses under its own weight is precisely the big question we’re trying to answer in this article.

On the other hand, persisting intensity and consecutive Armageddon elections could eventually lead to disengagement or a bust in voter turnout.

Looking at our current cycle (number 6), the modern chart above shows peak turnout in 2020, followed by decline into 2024.

Bottom Line

Pundits widely recognize a Democratic surge in key local and state elections starting in 2025 and through the present. Meanwhile, we’re two months into a war that happens to be located in one of the four most key choke points and most critical to modern civilization, for which Americans are undeniably feeling the effects already.

Yet Democrats still quietly fear the President could pull a rabbit out of his hat and MAGA holding out enough to offset a blue wave come November.

Because the party with momentum and minus a real vision, guarantees nothing.

Another factor to consider is the law of diminishing returns - with respect to hyperpolarization, or the warring tribes political messaging.

Is our current cycle still in it’s high turnout phase, or is it staring down a cliff?

One thing for sure is, it’s about to get real interesting. So buckle up either way.

I’ll be updating this series as events unfold.

For parents, there is economic anxiety, job anxiety, a mental health epidemic among children, raging culture wars, etc.

Why focus on parents? Everyone’s stressed to the max. But as nearly one-quarter of the electorate, with a stake in the future and important roles in the 2022 and 2024 elections, demonstrates, this generation of parents has a momentous effect. They’re a voting group worth getting a firm understanding of their worldview and playing field.

For those with school-age children, the reality is a shrinking trust horizon with institutions, accelerated during Covid and continuing today. Numerous events since then have shaped many parents’ views, leading them to believe increasingly that previously trusted systems do not always work for them, including public education, healthcare, food, and money. And little by little, more of them take their trust elsewhere.

So, what do they look like, and what are their views on politics?

The following graphs and subsequent analysis will depict who this really important group of voters is, and we’ll be sure to keep this series going as events such as the Iran War, the road to midterms, and others unfold. The following charts are an aggregate based on 10 waves of national surveys of likely voters, totaling 2,200 parents since May of 2025.

Initially, the data was coded with age groupings such as 18-29 years, 30-44, 45-64, and 65+. Because those age groups line up well with generations (but not perfectly), I’ve relabeled them.

When we think of parents carting kids all over the place in 2026, we’re mostly talking about Millennials (those born roughly between 1982 and 1996), who make up nearly half of this group.

Followed by just under one-third being Gen X (here we have born 1962 - 1981, not perfect but good enough), and with Gen Z (1997 – 2008) represented one in five parents with children 17 or younger.

In terms of race, they’re three-fifths white and two-fifths non-white. For context, Generation X lived through the first wave of racial integration in public schooling, Millennials and Gen Z are entirely products of it. Their children today are the most diverse ever with data reporting as much as has white and half non white.

When it comes to their most trusted source, half say legacy media, which includes national newspapers (print and online), national networks (online and television), and national radio.

Still, one-third opt for new media, which includes social media and podcasts. Moreover, those who seek information in this new digital realm played a role in the 2024 turnout, both in terms of driving increased Republican and independent turnout, and arguably depressed Democratic turnout.

Today’s parents are decisively Republican, with 44% identifying as Republican and one-third as Democrat, leaving under one-quarter (23%) independent.

In our recent April 17-18 national poll, parents with school-aged kids ranked the deciding issues as follows: 38% cited inflation/affordability crisis, 24% immigration and the border, 20% America’s health and the state of healthcare, and in fourth place, both at 14% - the Iran War and what is taught in public schools.

What about their views towards President Trump?

Our 2024 Election Eve poll had Trump leading Harris 51% to 38% among Parent voters. As charted above, even five months into his job, Parents gave the President high approval ratings. Then in July, following the Epstein fallout, Trump’s rating fell to parity at 50/50. The graph shows Trump weathered similar moments through the rest of the year and into 2026. However, the charts show attrition among Parents following the War in Iran, though, overall they still remain with the President.

In the first month most parents approved if the Iran war, and 37% disapproved. Then in mid March, parents were split. Today, half disapprove while 47% approve. Can the situation unfold in their favor leading parents to swing back largely in favor of the Iran war?

Trump had parents convinced he’d provide not only safety but also prosperity. Here we see the following pattern over the months - a high 50s approval rating for The President’s handling of the economy into the summer of 2025, and then a drop in July, a surge in in September, then a steady decline into March. Today, he is slightly above water, 51% to 48% on the economy according to Parents. But what concludes in the Strait of Hormuz will ultimately determine that.

Immigration gets the number two spot again for parents in our top two issues tracker. For a while, the second highest rated issue was American’s health and the state of healthcare (today in third place). Still, immigration has remained a top issue, especially for this generation of Parents, and the President scores well with this group, despite controversy in Minnesota. For a better understanding of why Parents side with the President’s stance on the border, keep in mind their approval of the President’s job handling crime in large cities is at 55% to 37% disapproval.

For many voters, the border and crime fit hand in glove with a strong desire for law and order, which has a lot of appeal for Parents with little kids in a world of chaos.

It’s important to remember that the 2024 election for most voters was simply about voters feeling safe on a variety of fronts - personal safety, safety in public, and safety in their pockets. And Parents with little ones expected Trump would deliver on all fronts.

So how does this all add up in the current moment? We’ve polled the Congressional Generic Ballot three times since early February – enough to get an early look at the trend line.

In three months, we’ve seen a 10-point lead turn into an 18-point lead, then a 7-point lead. If the War in Iran either goes South or drags on with increased disruption to the global economy, you’ll likely see further attrition from this dedicated group. Why? Because Parents already navigate their own complex field of landmines.

Our most recent polling shows the war has impacted Parents (as well as voters in general), as most (54%) say they’ve already been significantly impacted by rising costs at the fuel pump. Meanwhile another 30% say somewhat impacted, leaving 16% not impacted or were unsure. Tracking this metric will be key in determining how loyal this group will stay to the President.

Concluding Chart for Long-term Perspective on Parents with Young Kids

I depicted a similar chart in my previous Substack, but this one is epic as it allows us to zoom in on the last few years as key to understanding going into 2030. Keep in mind that the importance of tracking gold’s price is that as an international benchmark it provides a neutral signal amid a world increasingly polluted with noise. It’s not the only one, but a good one.

The chart below encapsulates the story of Millennials who reached adulthood in 2000, at the Millennium, and came of age and treaded turbulent waters into the opening two decades. The two and a half decades unfold with three waves of price surge, with the recent two increasingly parabolic.

In terms of strictly turning out to vote, parents with young kids today (most of whom are Millennials), represent nearly one-quarter of the electorate, which is why you should get to know this intriguing voter profile.

Unfortunately, trying to understand the events unfolding is challenging, and mainstream political discourse shapes many of the story angles, thereby offering only a partial picture.

There have to be ways to look at Trump’s second Presidency to date with clear context and universal benchmarks to tell the real story of his Presidency in general, and, in particular, what has been occurring in the Persian Gulf.

Here are two charts displaying Presidencies going back to Reagan, alongside the prices of Brent Crude Oil and the London (LBMA) gold price. Two long-standing global benchmarks that tell stories from the perspective of two key markets. One is a commodity that powers modern civilization, and the other is increasingly playing a role again in global finance (and has since the earliest civilizations).

In this context, we can see the Trump Presidency and the global headwinds he faces (or, as some could argue) he generates.

A 40 Year Look at Gold and US Presidencies Since 1987

The chart begins with 1987 because it allows us to see more clearly how President Trump’s second term fits alongside modern Presidencies going back forty years to the end of the Reagan era.

Notice below how the price of gold signaled the world entered an age of turbulence following 9/11 under Bush Jr.’s Presidency, which saw gold’s price spike the most since the Iranian revolution two decades prior.

Gold’s story is straightforward. Basically, from the founding of our nation until 1973, the price went from $20 per oz to $100 per oz. After the Iranian Hostage Crisis, it shot up to $850. It surpassed $1,000 after the Global Financial Crisis and has not fallen below that level since. It has sustained above $2,000 after the Ukraine war, and it went parabolic with record highs right after Trump’s second inauguration.

The 40-year chart appears to signal we’ve entered a next-level phase of turbulence. Obviously, the price can crash, but that would require a genuine ceasefire and some agreement to be reached between the US/Israel and Iran, et al. As we’ve seen since February 28, that window is closing fast, which means markets will eventually price in the chaos and disruption further.

A 40 Year Look at Brent Crude & US Presidencies Since 1987

The next chart, however, provides a more nuanced look at Presidencies over the last 40 years. Beginning with Bush Jr., the price action swings chaotically from high to low, from 9/11 through the Great Recession/Global Financial Crisis. Followed by a brief recovery and an oil glut due to the shale revolution occurring during Obama’s second term and into Trump’s first term. The series of events displayed in the Brent Crude chart below, no doubt, shows a turbulent phase.

Then, under Biden, the Ukraine War sparked panic in the oil markets once again, pushing prices to a near-record high.

To put this all in context, Ukraine, whose war with Russia and is supported by the EU, remains unresolved. Additionally, throw Iran into the mix, and the US is now actively involved in two major powder kegs, and a $200 barrel of oil is not off the table. As I write this, Reuters reports $150 per barrel on April 13. That would be an all-time high. This further illuminates the point that the Trump Presidency is at the threshold of a major period of turbulence.

Recall that Iran is the only nation in the region to have avoided revolution or regime change since the US aggressively embarked on nation building following 9/11. Since 2001, regime changes have occurred in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria. Now that a major war in Iran has been raging for over a month, should we expect a return to normalcy? The chart suggests otherwise.

So it appears to be an epic showdown between Iran, backed by resource-rich Eastern nations. The US and remaining allies, debt-based nations, are battling over arguably the most important port of entry for modern civilization.

And we happen to be facing that exact moment under Donald Trump’s second Presidency.

As of now, Brent Crude prices remain at a level near the highest range, and we’re about to find out if they’ll test new highs. It certainly feels like they can and will at this moment.

The Implications Of It All — The President’s Approval Rating One Year In & Going Into the Midterms

Meanwhile, the US midterms will soon heat up around mid to late summer.

How has Donald Trump’s second Presidency fared? Here is a chart outlining the President’s post-honeymoon approval ratings alongside a timeline of key events.

Our first poll of the Trump Presidency, January 31, 2025, following the inauguration, showed Trump’s approval rating at 49% and disapproval at 47.7%. It stayed net positive into our next round, which was late February 2025. Looking at the average approval-disapproval rating for his First 100 Days, it is 47.8% - 48.5%.

The Tariff wars that began in February took their toll after a few months, as evidenced by the dip in the President’s approval rating in late February, and then reached a new low around the time of the Federalizing troops in DC (though our polling showed the issue more favorable among those living in urban centers than in other location cohorts).

Then, a bump in approval ratings for the President followed Maduro’s capture and trial. Today, the President stands below 45% approval and 54% disapproval, with 43% strongly disapproving of the President’s job in the White House.

In short, the charts show how Trump’s second Presidency coincides with a potential Global Revolution, especially with regards to US status on the world stage. A close look at two global benchmarks make clear both the US and the globe are treading uncharted territory.

Regarding the 2026 midterms, it certainly doesn’t help Trump and Republicans if oil prices move higher than they already have.

To sum it up, if you want an idea of the future ahead, look at the dramatic movement of two global benchmarks and their response to the second Trump Presidency in comparison with previous ones.

Couple that with declining approval ratings among the overall electorate, as shown in the third chart above, and among various key cohorts, as outlined in my previous Substack titled “From Trump’s Winning Coalition 2.0 Back to 1.0,” and it looks increasingly like the President has created two quagmires, one internationally and one domestically (politically).

As the exit polls came in, it became clear his winning coalition went well beyond his 2016 victory, with stronger support from diverse voting blocs, including those under 30 years of age (particularly men), Hispanics, Blacks, parents with a child living at home, first-time voters, union voters, and more. For many of these cohorts, the President’s approval ratings generally held strong during his first 100 days.

From May 2025 to March 2026, John Zogby Strategies has launched 9 waves of national polls targeting likely voters in the 2028 general election.

Here, we chart approval/disapproval ratings of the President’s job performance over one year among key voting blocs, given both their importance in election turnout and their significance as bellwether groups.

According to 2024 exit polling, 34% of the electorate identified as independent on Election Day, outnumbering Democrats – a very rare occurrence in modern electoral history. Moreover, our polling over the years shows that a plurality of independent voters have voted for both Democratic and Republican candidates, which makes this group a wild card and why they’re so important to track and understand.

According to the chart above, we can see that, following President Trump’s first 100 days in office, independent voters were already decisively turning away from the President. And that trend has solidified. The question remains: can Republicans regain enough independent voters as we head towards the midterms? I can’t think of an example in modern polling when a political figure went so far into negative territory with a key group and managed to recover a significant percentage.

While more white voters still approve of the President than disapprove, he is only net positive 1 percentage point among his typical base and the nation’s largest voting bloc. That is the first major indicator flashing red for the President when looking at race demographics.

Equally important is the collapse of support from Hispanic voters who helped to carry the President to a sweeping victory in November of 2024. Less than a year ago, Trump was double-digit net positive with this growing and increasingly important voting bloc; today, the President finds himself underwater by nearly 20 percentage points.

Although Donald Trump barely won the under-30 vote in November, it was still surprising to many, given how this cohort voted in 2020 (largely for Biden). In 2024, while the gender gap was enormous between how men and women under 30 voted, the President turned out more young men than young women. For a while during his presidency, Trump had net-positive approval ratings among the under-30 vote. They were with Trump because of the expectations that he’d kickstart an economy hit by inflation, and because a negative outlook had increasingly paralyzed young voters throughout the Biden Presidency. Then, within just a few months into the Trump Presidency, came tariff wars, an explosive re-emergence of the Epstein files, Venezuela, and a major escalation of war with Iran in a geostrategic area that holds the key to modern life and the global economy. Today, the President is significantly underwater with young voters. As is typically the case with this cohort during the Midterms, they will play a significant role by either turning out or staying home. In either case, they have moved away from the President, and may be unreachable according to the data. Meanwhile, for baby boomers, the opposite has happened. In part 2, we’ll chart older millennials and Gen X.

Parents and union voters made a decisive break with the Democratic Party in 2024, aligning themselves with President Trump throughout his 100 days and into the summer. Both groups, driven by deep concerns about work, the cost of living, raising children, etc., strongly supported Trump. While parents generally still approve of the President’s job in the White House, they’ve fallen significantly. The same is basically true among Union voters, though note the President is now underwater with them.

While the President didn’t have strong support among suburban voters by May of 2025, he did have strong ratings from voters in small cities – perhaps seeing themselves as an extension of the so-called forgotten America, looking to the President to strengthen the economy and bring back factories. As of today, that is no longer the case, as they’ve made it clear that a strong majority disapproves of Trump’s job performance.

In the final analysis, there are still seven months until the Midterm Elections. But a little over one year into a Presidency that continues to generate controversy and bold actions, coinciding with the brevity of collapse among decisive voting blocs, raises serious concerns about how President Trump can rally Republicans to victory come November.

In Part 2, we’ll look at men, women, veterans, Evangelicals, Catholics, and beyond.