Enquanto os republicanos dão início à autópsia após a acachapante derrota nas eleições de meio de mandato dos Estados Unidos, cada vez mais dedos apontam para o secretário de Defesa, Pete Hegseth. Apesar do apoio de Donald Trump, o ex-militar é o principal encarregado da guerra contra o Irã, apontada tanto pelo presidente americano quanto seu vice, J.D. Vance, como a causa maior do fiasco nas midterms.
“O motivo da nossa derrota foi a guerra. O próprio presidente disse isso ontem à noite”, disse Vance, referindo-se ao conflito desencadeado pelos ataques ordenados por Trump e pelo primeiro-ministro de Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, contra o Irã em fevereiro. Na publicação no X, ele também questionou se os combates valeram a pena.
One of the things the data analysts on our side obsessed over was “composition”—whether the electorate looked close enough to 2024 for Republicans to win. And despite polls that showed a Democrat blowout, the data kept on telling us the same story: in some states turnout was merely OK, in other states it was downright amazing, and in no state was it catastrophic. There was a genuine sense of optimism on our team: our people were showing up. So, I asked the smartest data guy I know, does that mean we’re going to shock the world? “No,” he told me. “We might do better than the polls suggest. But the data is telling us that a lot of Trump/Vance 2024 voters are pissed and planning to vote for the other guys. Our voters are turning out, but they may not vote for us.” Well, that looks prophetic now. Our voters did show up. In Florida, for example, the electorate was 9 points more Republican than Democrat, just a couple points worse than 2024. Undoubtedly there were places we could have done better on turnout. But the main problem is not turnout. The main problem is that many people who voted for Trump/Vance in 2024 voted for Democrats in 2026. There will be a lot of infighting and arguing over what happened and why that is. One of the pollsters I really respect told me that our economic messaging wasn’t sharp enough down the stretch. I’m sure that’s true. But the real reason we lost is obvious to almost everyone. Another pollster—one of the smartest people I know in politics, told me yesterday we’d lose the generic ballot by 13 points. I felt negative going into Tuesday, but even I was shocked by this. In his polling, he saw that a lot of Trump 2024 voters were angry and planning to vote for Democrats. He asked those voters who had abandoned us what would cause them to come back on our team. The top four answers, accounting for nearly all of the responses were: 1) End the war 2) Focus on cost of living/inflation 3) Put America First 4) Change our relationship to Israel Our voters showed up. And the above four reasons are why many of them voted for Democrats. This is according to a pollster who nailed the results. While many spent Monday attacking Rachel Campos Duffy for calling for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict, it turns out her political advice was sound. (She’s also a great person.) In the next few months, there’s going to be a lot of gaslighting. Expect to hear any number of establishment politicians say the solution to our woes is amnesty. I’m open to the idea that we should change enforcement—by focusing more on businesses that hire illegal labor, for instance. But anyone pushing amnesty is lying to you. The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night. If you’d like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next 6 years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay. Agree or disagree, that’s at least honest. But everyone knows why we lost. And any honest conversation about where we go from here must start there. I remain hopeful about our country. To the people who are pissed off and want to say, “I told you so”: you’re right, you did tell us so. Take that energy into electing Republicans who share your worldview. To the people who are just pissed at the results, you should be. Let’s take that anger and get back to the work of saving our country.
— JD Vance (@JDVance) November 4, 2026
Em entrevista à emissora americana CNN, um ex-alto funcionário do Pentágono afirmou que, como as operações no Irã foram conduzidas pelo Departamento de Defesa (renomeado “Departamento de Guerra” no governo Trump), Hegseth deveria assumir a responsabilidade pelos resultados eleitorais da terça-feira 3. “A mudança de narrativa está começando”, disse a fonte.
“Se o presidente realmente quer que alguém assuma a responsabilidade por isso, essa pessoa é Pete Hegseth”, acrescentou um republicano próximo à Casa Branca em entrevista à CNN. “Desde o início, Pete tem sido desonesto ou, no mínimo, impreciso — e nenhuma das duas coisas é aceitável — no que diz respeito a cronogramas, metas e objetivos.”
Impeachment e investigações
Hegseth tem sido uma figura polarizadora na política americana, chegando a criar inimizades até mesmo dentro do próprio Partido Republicano. Um de seus correligionários, o senador Thom Tillis afirmou ao canal CBS News na noite de terça-feira que o secretário enfrentaria um “acerto de contas” e que sua relação tensa com os parlamentares prejudicou os esforços do governo Trump para aprovar, no Congresso, um pacote de gastos com defesa de US$ 1,5 trilhão.
O deputado Thomas Massie, republicano do Kentucky, já apresentou oito acusações para um processo de impeachment contra Hegseth e planeja forçar, em breve, uma votação na Câmara sobre o afastamento do secretário. Segundo a CNN, deputados do Congresso americano podem votar o impeachment do chefe do Pentágono já na próxima semana.
Além disso, os democratas, quando tomarem a maioria no Congresso em janeiro, prometeram investigar Hegseth e sua gestão à frente do Pentágono. Estão à mesa diversos temas: desde a condução do conflito com o Irã até o expurgo de altos oficiais militares, incluindo o presidente do Estado-Maior Conjunto, além da política em relação à Ucrânia e os ataques do Exército contra embarcações suspeitas de narcotráfico em águas latino-americanas.
Trump tem defendido Hegseth repetidamente. Ao ser questionado por repórteres, na quarta-feira, se cogitava substituí-lo, respondeu: “Não. Acho que ele está fazendo um trabalho muito bom”. A reportagem da TV CNN indicou que o presidente disse a assessores que tentaria resistir às tentativas de impeachment de seu secretário e de eventuais aberturas de investigações contra ele.
Leave a Reply