MESSAGING MEMO: VENEZUELA, ESCALATION, AND PUBLIC OPINION

 

National Security Action is sharing messaging guidance in partnership with Navigator Research, which is out with new polling on American views on Donald Trump’s policies toward Venezuela, Greenland and beyond. Navigator’s new polling makes clear that Americans are deeply skeptical of Trump’s aggressive, expansionist approach to foreign policy. And the messaging guidance below uses that data to effectively frame an argument against Donald Trump’s recklessness.

Executive Summary:

Voters are divided about the Trump Administration’s military actions in Venezuela, but increasingly skeptical of a broader pattern of expansion and escalation abroad. While views on Maduro’s capture are polarized, the public consistently recoils from open-ended U.S. control of Venezuela, rising costs, and the prospect of new conflicts. 

Critically, voters do not see Venezuela in isolation. Large shares worry this action opens the door to further costly interventions across the hemisphere and beyond, including Greenland. Opposition to the U.S. taking control of Greenland is broad and bipartisan, with even Republicans rejecting the idea by a clear margin.

Across questions, the strongest messaging connects Trump’s actions to recklessness, misplaced priorities, and the risk of dragging the U.S. into conflicts Americans do not want and cannot afford.

Key Findings:

Voters Reject Open-Ended U.S. Control – especially of Greenland

While attitudes toward the Venezuela operation itself are mixed, voters strongly oppose the idea of the United States taking control of other countries.

  • A majority of voters oppose the U.S. taking control of Venezuela and running the country: 53% oppose; 37% support.

  • Opposition is overwhelming among Democrats (80%) and independents (56%). Only one-in-five independent voters support taking control of Venezuela.

  • Even Republicans are divided, with 25% opposing U.S. control of Venezuela and 9% not sure.

Resistance is even clearer when voters are asked about Greenland:

  • 57% of voters oppose the U.S. taking control of Greenland, compared to just 23% who support it. Just 41% of Republicans and 17% of independents are supportive of Trump’s proposal. 

  • Opposition includes: 84% of Democrats; 49% of independents; 34% of Republicans.

KEY TAKEAWAY: The idea of U.S. territorial control or expansion is deeply unpopular, and this unpopularity extends to Trump’s own party. Greenland serves as a powerful shorthand for overreach and excess that cuts across partisan lines.

Slippery Slope Concerns Are Real and Salient

Voters are not reassured that Venezuela is a one-off action.

  • Voters believe by a 2:1 margin (54%) that Trump will attempt to take control of Greenland.

  • When asked to rank their concerns about Trump’s intervention, fears that the Venezuela operation could lead to additional invasions, including countries like Colombia, Cuba, or Greenland, topped the list. This concern was especially prevalent among independents (40%) and Hispanic voters (39%).

KEY TAKEAWAY: Messaging that frames Venezuela as part of a broader pattern of escalation, rather than an isolated event, aligns with voter intuition and anxiety.

Cost and Priorities Drive Persuasion

Effective messaging draws a sharp contrast between Trump’s misplaced focus on costly foreign interventions and Americans’ desire for him to lower costs at home.

  • 52% of voters – including 85% of Democrats – agree that the U.S. cannot afford to remove every bad leader in the world and should instead focus time and money on helping Americans at home.

  • Independent voters – who tend to prioritize immediate economic concerns over ideology – respond strongly to framing issues as a waste of the president’s time and resources. They prefer the U.S. focus time and money on helping Americans at home by a 24-point margin.

KEY TAKEAWAY: Voters want restraint and focus, not global policing. Economic framing is essential given that voters want to see the government focused on reducing costs at home. Trump’s emphasis on overseas engagement is widely seen as inconsistent with that priority.

Oil and Corporate Motives Resonate With Persuadables

When forced to choose between Trump’s justification for capturing Maduro and a critique focused on oil and corporate interests:

  • 53% side with the argument that Trump’s actions are about oil and enriching corporations – not holding Maduro accountable for drug trafficking and tyranny. 

  • Independents favored this argument by a 16-point margin – and even one-in-five Republicans found it more persuasive than Trump’s rationale.

  • Voters of color strongly favor this argument, including 66% of AAPI voters and 62% of Hispanic voters.

KEY TAKEAWAY: This frame reinforces distrust of Trump’s motives without defending Maduro.

Escalation and Cost Drive Voter Concern

When voters are asked what concerns them most about Trump’s military action in Venezuela, their top worries are not about legality or process, but about escalation, cost, and being pulled into additional conflicts.

  • The most frequently cited concerns – each named by 32% of voters – are that Trump’s actions give China and Russia justification to invade other countries and that this could lead to even more foreign conflicts, with voters explicitly pointing to places like Cuba, Colombia, and Greenland.

    • Arguments centered on Russia and China are particularly effective with Republican voters, while focusing on a slippery slope is most convincing with independents. 

  • Economic concerns closely follow, with 30% of voters saying they worry this becomes another costly foreign conflict that spends billions overseas instead of helping Americans at home.

  • By contrast, concerns about legality and congressional approval, while highly resonant with Democrats, are less motivating factors for others than arguments focused on real-world consequences.

KEY TAKEAWAY: Voters are forward-looking and consequence-driven. Messaging that emphasizes escalation, cost, and war fatigue will resonate more than arguments centered on legality or abstract norms.

Messaging Guidance:

What Works

  • Frame Venezuela as part of a pattern of escalation and overreach.

  • Emphasize costs, risks, and lack of a clear endgame.

  • Use Greenland as a vivid, and unpopular, example of how far voters believe Trump is willing to go.

  • Contrast foreign policy decisions directly with a lack of focus on economic issues at home. A focus on foreign intervention does not align with Americans’ priorities.

What to Avoid

  • Restating obvious facts about Maduro or relitigating the operation itself.

  • Overreliance on legal or process arguments.

  • Framing the debate as pro- or anti-intervention in the abstract.

Talking Points:

  • A pattern of escalation and overreach. Trump has repeatedly shown a willingness to push the U.S. further and further without a clear plan for how conflicts end. Venezuela isn’t an isolated decision either – it’s part of a broader pattern of escalation and overreach that increases the risk of dangerous confrontations.

  • The operation diverts attention and resources away from Americans’ real needs. At a time when families are struggling with rising costs, housing pressures, and economic uncertainty, this intervention pulls focus and funding overseas. There’s no clear benefit to working Americans, only more distraction from fixing problems at home.

  • There are no guardrails – and this won’t stop with Venezuela. Trump’s chaotic approach signals he’s willing to keep pushing—whether it’s Colombia, Cuba, or even Greenland. Voters already see how far he’s prepared to go, and they don’t support more reckless and costly adventures abroad.

  • This wasn’t about democracy or national security. In reality, Trump’s intervention was all about oil and corporate interests. The intervention serves the priorities of major corporations and billionaires looking to secure access to resources, not the needs of working families. Once again, Trump chose special interests over the public interest.

Bottom Line:

Voters are open to hearing critiques of Trump’s actions in Venezuela, but the strongest arguments are forward-looking, not backward-looking. Americans are worried about where this goes next, how much it will cost, and whether the U.S. is being pulled into conflicts and commitments they never asked for which distract from addressing economic issues at home. Greenland, in particular, crystallizes fears of overreach and helps underscore that this is not just about one country, but about a dangerous direction.

Published: January 2026