How Ya Like Me Now? Barack Obama Enjoys Surge in Popularity

The lives of Barack Obama and Donald Trump will forever be linked. Trump spent years trolling Obama about not being an American despite being born in Hawaii. That saga came to an end at the 2011 White House Correspondents’ Dinner when Obama ridiculed Trump with both his birth certificate and a comparison of the significance of their responsibilities. The following night, Obama announced the successful raid in Pakistan, resulting in the death of Osama Bin Laden. There’s a famous picture from the situation room with President Obama and his staff awaiting news of the raid. In the Trump administration, the situation room has been reduced to a place to discuss how to hide what’s in the Epstein Files.

Two events have brought the comparison of the two men into the news. The recent Memorandum of Understanding, which supposedly brings an end to the Iran War, compares unfavorably to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), finalized in 2015 by the Obama administration. Trump famously exited the JCPOA in 2018, and has been ranting ever since about how bad a deal it was:

1. “The worst deal ever negotiated.”

Trump used this line repeatedly during the 2016 campaign and throughout his presidency. Example: “The Iran deal is one of the worst deals I’ve ever seen negotiated.” — Aug. 2015 rally

2. “A horrible, one‑sided deal that should have never, ever been made.”

From his official withdrawal announcement: “The Iran deal is defective at its core… a horrible, one‑sided deal that should have never, ever been made.” — May 8, 2018, White House

3. “It didn’t bring peace. It didn’t bring anything.”

Trump argued the deal failed to change Iran’s behavior: “It didn’t bring calm, it didn’t bring peace, and it never will.” — May 8, 2018

4. “We gave them $150 billion and got nothing.”

A frequent talking point (experts dispute the number): “We gave them $150 billion, we gave them $1.8 billion in cash — and we got nothing.” — multiple speeches, including Oct. 2017

5. “It was a giant fiction that a murderous regime desired only a peaceful nuclear energy program.”

From the same 2018 withdrawal speech: “At the heart of the Iran deal was a giant fiction — that a murderous regime desired only a peaceful nuclear energy program.”

6. “The deal allowed Iran to continue enriching uranium.”

Trump often framed the JCPOA as enabling, not restricting, Iran: “The deal allowed Iran to continue enriching uranium and, over time, reach the brink of a nuclear breakout.” — 2018 remarks

7. “We will not allow a regime that chants ‘Death to America’ to gain nuclear weapons.”

A line he used repeatedly to justify withdrawal: “We will not allow a regime that chants ‘Death to America’ to gain access to nuclear weapons.” — May 2018

Fast forward to 2026, and Trump is harping on the same old message:

1. “We ended that horrible Iran deal, the worst deal ever made.”

A line he repeated in early 2026 speeches when discussing foreign policy.

2. “If we hadn’t terminated the Iran nuclear deal, they’d be a nuclear power already.”

Said during a 2026 rally while defending the 2018 withdrawal.

3. “Obama gave them a path to the bomb. I shut it down.”

A recurring 2026 talking point linking the JCPOA to nuclear risk.

4. “We got out of that disastrous deal, and thank God we did.”

Used in several 2026 stump speeches when discussing Middle East policy.

5. “The Iran deal was a total surrender. We don’t surrender.”

A 2026 line framing the JCPOA as a weakness.

On February 28, 2026, the United States launched a large‑scale strike inside Iran, targeting what the administration described as an IRGC‑linked military site near Minab. Within hours, reports emerged that a Tomahawk cruise missile had struck the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls’ school, killing students and teachers. President Trump immediately asserted that Iran had fired the missile, calling it an example of Iranian “barbarism” and “incompetence.”

However, within days, independent analysts, including Bellingcat, and later U.S. intelligence leaks, indicated that the weapon used was a U.S. Tomahawk, not an Iranian missile. Despite this, the administration continued to frame the strike as a justified response to Iranian aggression.

During the first week, Trump offered three core explanations for why the United States “had to” attack Iran:

1. Claim: Iran bombed the girls’ school

Trump repeatedly stated that Iran had launched the missile that hit the school, calling it “proof” that Iran was targeting civilians. He described the strike as a retaliatory act, saying the U.S. had “no choice” but to respond.

2. Claim: Iran was escalating across the region

Trump argued that Iran had been “testing” the United States and its allies, citing attacks by Iranian‑backed militias in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. He framed the February 28 strike as part of a broader effort to “restore deterrence.”

3. Claim: The U.S. was acting to prevent a larger war

Trump insisted that a decisive strike would “stop Iran before they do something worse,” portraying the attack as a preemptive stabilizing action rather than the start of a war.

These explanations dominated the administration’s messaging during the first seven days.

By the second week, as evidence mounted that the missile was American, Trump’s rationale shifted noticeably:

1. Claim: The strike was based on “bad intelligence”

Trump began suggesting that the Pentagon had provided flawed targeting information, implying the U.S. believed the site was an IRGC facility. He did not retract earlier claims that Iran fired the missile.

2. Claim: Iran “forced our hand”

Trump argued that Iran’s “long history of terrorism” justified the attack regardless of the Minab incident. He broadened the justification to decades of Iranian behavior.

3. Claim: The U.S. was already at war because of Iran’s actions

Trump said Iran had been “at war with us for years,” citing attacks on shipping, proxy militias, and nuclear activity. This reframed the February 28 strike as simply the moment the U.S. “finally responded.”

4. Claim: The strike was a message to the world

Trump emphasized that the attack demonstrated American strength, saying the U.S. would “hit back harder than anyone.”

After the first two weeks — when the administration’s explanations were dominated by the Minab girls’ school strike, deterrence, and claims of Iranian escalation — the rationale shifted several times, each reflecting new political pressures, battlefield realities, and public scrutiny.

Below is the evolution in four distinct phases.

PHASE 1 — “Bad Intel” → “Necessary Strike” (Mid‑March to Early April 2026)

Once independent analysts and leaked intelligence made it impossible to sustain the claim that Iran fired the missile that hit the school, the administration pivoted.

“We acted on the intelligence we had.” Trump began framing the strike as a tragic but unavoidable consequence of flawed Pentagon assessments.
“Iran forced our hand.” The justification broadened from the Minab incident to Iran’s overall behavior.
“We were already in a shadow war.” Trump argued that Iran had been attacking U.S. interests for years, and Feb. 28 was simply the moment the U.S. “finally responded.”
Purpose of this phase:

Shift blame for the school strike, maintain moral justification, and reframe the war as long overdue.

PHASE 2— “Stopping a Nuclear Iran” (April–May 2026)

By April, the administration’s messaging moved away from the Minab incident entirely.

Key themes:

Iran was “weeks from a bomb.” Trump repeatedly claimed U.S. intelligence showed Iran nearing nuclear breakout capability.
The JCPOA was “dead” and “never worked.” He argued that the 2015 nuclear deal had failed and that military action was the only remaining option.
“We’re preventing World War III.” Trump framed the war as a preemptive strike to stop a nuclear‑armed Iran from destabilizing the Middle East.
Purpose of this phase:

Replace the discredited Minab narrative with a broader national‑security rationale.

PHASE 3— “Regional Stabilization” and “Protecting Allies” (Summer–Fall 2026)

As the conflict expanded into operations in Somalia, Yemen, Iraq, and the Gulf, the administration reframed the war as a regional stabilization effort.

Key themes:

“Iran is behind every attack in the region.” Trump portrayed Iran as the central node of all anti‑U.S. and anti‑ally activity.
“We’re protecting Israel and the Gulf states.” The war was framed as necessary to defend partners.
“We’re restoring American strength,” Trump emphasized deterrence and American credibility.
Purpose of this phase:

Justify widening the war beyond Iran’s borders and maintain domestic support.

PHASE 4— “Finishing the Job” (Spring 2026 → Present)

As the war dragged on and casualties mounted, the administration shifted again to a more open‑ended rationale.

Key themes:

“We can’t stop halfway,” Trump argued that withdrawing now would embolden Iran and make the U.S. look weak.
“Victory is close.” Despite contradictory reporting, Trump repeatedly claimed the U.S. was “winning.”
“This is about American strength.” The war became part of a broader narrative about restoring U.S. dominance.
Purpose of this phase:

Sustain public support for a prolonged conflict and frame the war as a test of national resolve.

Not a week has gone by without Trump making claims that the war was “almost over,” and now he has a signed Memorandum of Understanding that can be directly compared to the JCPOA negotiated by Obama in 2015. Fifteen dead American service members and up to $60 billion later on the war of choice started by Trump, we can compare his MOU with the JCPOA, and it doesn’t look good for Trump.

Brief Comparison: Trump MOU vs. JCPOA

1. Structure

JCPOA (2015) — A formal, multilateral nuclear agreement negotiated between Iran and the P5+1 (U.S., U.K., France, Germany, Russia, China, plus the EU).
Trump MOU (2026) — A unilateral memorandum of understanding drafted by the Trump administration without multilateral negotiation or Iranian participation.

2. Purpose

JCPOA — Limit Iran’s nuclear program through inspections, caps on enrichment, and dismantling of key facilities.
Trump MOU — Justify U.S. military posture and outline U.S. expectations for Iran’s behavior; not a negotiated nuclear framework.

3. Enforcement

JCPOA — Enforced through the IAEA, with detailed verification mechanisms and phased sanctions relief.
Trump MOU — Enforced solely by U.S. policy decisions; contains no verification regime and no reciprocal obligations.

4. International Standing

JCPOA — Recognized by the UN Security Council (Resolution 2231).
Trump MOU — Has no international legal status; not recognized by allies or adversaries as a binding agreement.

5. Reciprocity

JCPOA — “Sanctions relief in exchange for nuclear limits.”
Trump MOU — “U.S. demands without negotiated concessions.” Iran is not a party to it.

6. Practical Effect

JCPOA — Successfully reduced Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile and extended breakout time while in force.
Trump MOU — Serves primarily as a political and strategic justification document for U.S. actions during the 2026 conflict.

The JCPOA was a negotiated, verifiable nuclear agreement; the Trump MOU is a unilateral U.S. policy document with no reciprocal commitments, no inspection regime, and no international legal standing.

After a January 2026 attack on Iran’s nuclear stockpiles, after which Trump claimed Iran’s nuclear capacity was “obliterated,” starting a war without justification, and providing Iran access to far more money than the JCPOA ever did. Trump gave away more money than Obama and got less in return.

The JCPOA restored access to about $100–$120B of Iran’s own assets; the Trump MOU potentially unlocks $150–$200B+ of Iran’s frozen assets and escrowed oil revenue — far more than the JCPOA — but without any nuclear restrictions or verification regime. The Iran deal includes a $300 billion private investment fund, which looks to me like a slush fund, but who am I to say? Trump’s actions in Iran, along with his endless Truth Social updates, make him look like an idiot when compared to Barack Obama.

The second item in the news that provides a stark comparison between the pair is the grand opening of the Obama Presidential Center in Chicago. Trump’s birthday celebration on the White House Lawn, the UFC Freedom 250, was notable for one of the winning fighters, Josh Hokit, announcing in front of Trump and the world that, “Michelle Obama is a man! Am I right, America?” Trump has yet to denounce the remark.

Will You Join Me in Unsubscribing From Paramount+? | by William Spivey | Jun, 2026 | Medium

The UFC Freedom 250 is also known for the musical artists who refused to perform once they knew it was a Trump event. Performers and celebrities who refused to attend the event include:

1. Morris Day & The Time

Morris Day posted that he was never booked and said, “It’s a no for me.”

2. Young MC

He publicly announced: “I will NOT be performing at the Freedom 250 event.” He also said artists were not told about the political nature of the event.

3. Milli Vanilli (Jodie & Linda Rocco)

The current performers said they were never contacted and were shocked to see their names listed.

4. Martina McBride

She stated she would not perform, calling the event “misleading.”

5. The Commodores

William King said the group would not perform and does not affiliate with political events.

Celebrities Who Declined to Attend

Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson — A source close to The Rock told Vanity Fair he will not be attending.
Adam Sandler — His representatives confirmed he will not be there.
Jared Leto — His team also said he will not attend.
Mario Lopez — His representatives confirmed he will not be attending’

On the other hand, the Obama Presidential Star is booking all the top stars with many celebrities on hand. Here’s an abbreviated list of performers:

Headliners & Major Performers

Bruce Springsteen
Stevie Wonder
Christina Aguilera
John Legend
The Roots
Common
Jennifer Hudson
Marc Anthony
Tems
U2’s Bono and The Edge
Eddie Vedder

Celebrities in Attendance at the Obama Presidential Center Opening

Actors & Entertainment Figures

Tom Hanks
Oprah Winfrey
Tyler Perry
Steven Spielberg
Stephen Colbert
Conan O’Brien
Dave Chappelle
Quinta Brunson
David Letterman
Mark Hamill
Chrissy Teigen (attending with John Legend)
George Lucas
The opening of the Obama Presidential Center drew one of the most star‑studded guest lists of any presidential library event in U.S. history, and nearly every living president and first lady except Donald and Melania Trump, who weren’t invited.

Barack Obama left office with high poll numbers — a 59% approval rating — and he remains broadly popular today. Donald Trump’s current approval rating sits in the mid‑to‑high 30s to around 40%, and the trend is clearly downward across every major polling series. Those numbers were taken even before Trump surrendered to Iran.

Representative Andy Ogles of Tennessee introduced the bill that went nowhere, which would allow Donald Trump to run for a third presidential term while explicitly blocking Barack Obama (and any other two‑term president) from doing so. Ogles knew what everyone else did: that Barack Obama, or Michelle Obama, would beat Trump in a landslide. Barack Obama’s public image rises by the day, while Trump’s is steadily sinking.

—

This post was previously published on The Polis.

***