US Attacks Iran

We simulated the American population through 5 weeks of war with Iran. The gas prices alone redraw the midterms.

Two carrier strike groups sit off Iran's coast. B-2 bombers are on standby at Diego Garcia. The President has given Tehran a 10-day deadline. Every analyst in Washington is debating whether strikes will happen and whether they're justified.

Almost nobody is asking what happens to ordinary Americans when the missiles fly and gas hits $6.

We built a simulation to find out. We constructed a nationally representative synthetic population of 5,000 individuals spanning every income bracket, commute distance, political identity, employment sector, military connection, and media diet in the country. Each person reasons individually through the crisis from their own circumstances: their savings account, their commute, their kids, their job security.

Then we hit them with five weeks of escalating conflict and watched who breaks.

The Scenario

Week 1: US strikes 47 targets across Iran. Nuclear facilities, missile production, IRGC infrastructure. Iran retaliates with ballistic missiles against Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. Three US service members killed, 47 wounded. Gas jumps from $3.40 to $4.80 overnight. The Dow drops 1,400 points.

Week 3: Iran blockades the Strait of Hormuz. Two commercial tankers hit by anti-ship missiles. Lloyd's suspends Persian Gulf insurance. Oil reaches $140/barrel. Gas hits $6.20 nationally, over $8 in California. Airlines add $75-150 fuel surcharges. Walmart, Target, and Amazon warn of supply chain disruptions within 30-60 days.

Week 5: Unemployment claims up 40%. Trucking companies impose 25% fuel surcharges. Food prices rise 15%. Iran strikes Saudi oil infrastructure, temporarily knocking 4 million barrels/day offline. Oil touches $180. The Pentagon calls up 30,000 reservists.

We stopped the simulation at Week 5. We didn't need to go further.

Meet Manuel

Manuel Renault, 49, white, married, rural Southeast, private sector, paycheck-to-paycheck with a 60-mile commute and a 15-year-old son named Peter. Strong Republican who voted Trump in 2024. Has an immediate family member in the military. Watches cable news, goes to church, and considers Iran an existential threat.

He strongly disapproves of the strikes.

Week 1, the day after the bombs drop:

"This was a reckless, unnecessary move that will crush ordinary people like me and risks dragging us into a wider war. I'm worried about our family's safety and finances now that gas and food prices are jumping and reservists are being called up."

His first move is to call his wife Dorothée to go over military notifications and build a 30-day emergency budget, then sit Peter down and reassure him.

Week 3, Strait of Hormuz blockade, gas over $6:

"I'm angry and I'm not changing my mind. The strikes were reckless and the economic pain they've caused ordinary people like me is unacceptable. Even if Iran is a real threat, leaders should have planned for the oil shock and protected working families before pulling the trigger."

He's already called his Congressman. He and Dorothée have locked in their emergency budget. He's telling Peter what to expect. His conviction is hardening, not softening.

Week 5, food prices up 15%, reservists being called:

"I still strongly disapprove. The strikes were reckless and have slammed people like me with higher gas and grocery bills. No plan to protect ordinary families, no cushion for the shock, and now more troops and reservists are being pulled in. I won't pretend this was handled responsibly."

Manuel is a Strong Republican in a safe Republican district who voted Trump, considers Iran an existential threat, goes to church, and watches cable news. By Week 5 he's threatening to vote Democrat.

Not because he became a liberal. Because he drives 60 miles to work, lives paycheck-to-paycheck, and nobody in his party offered him a plan for $6 gas. He's going to hold elected officials accountable at the ballot box, and right now that means crossing the aisle.

That's what a 60-mile commute at $6/gallon does to party loyalty.

Meet Charlotte

Charlotte Robin, 31, white, married, suburban Midwest, private sector, in debt with a 37-mile commute. True Independent who voted Trump in 2024. Devout. No kids. Her top issue is the economy. She somewhat approved of hitting Iran when it happened.

Week 1:

"I'm pissed off and scared. I voted for strength, so on some level I approve of hitting Iran, but this is already wrecking my wallet and that's the only thing I can think about. Leaders wanted a show of force; I wanted competence and a plan to protect people like me who are living paycheck to paycheck."

She calls her husband Whitney to make a plan to cut driving and expenses, sets up a carpool with a coworker, and messages her Representative demanding emergency relief for gas and food prices.

Week 3:

"I still think stopping Iran from getting nukes mattered, but this economic carnage is unacceptable and the administration hasn't protected people like me. I meant to act last week but got overwhelmed; now I'm calling my Representative and actually cutting driving with a real carpool plan."

She's not an activist. She's not organizing. She meant to call her rep the week before and didn't get around to it because life is already too much. That's what being in debt during a crisis looks like: you know what you should do and you can barely keep up with what you have to do.

Week 5:

"I still think stopping Iran's nuclear program mattered in principle, but the administration and our leaders have been incompetent about protecting people like me. The economic fallout is already wrecking my household: gas and food are eating our budget and unemployment is rising. I followed through on what I said I would do: I called my Representative, left a voicemail and an email demanding emergency relief, set up a carpool with Emanuelly starting next week, and cut discretionary spending immediately."

Charlotte still believes the strikes were right in principle. She's just furious about the execution. By Week 5 she's in serious financial strain, vocally critical, deeply distrustful of the government, and starting to track candidates' positions on economic relief before the midterms.

Her intended midterm vote? Third party. She voted Trump in 2024, still agrees with hitting Iran, and is so disgusted by the handling that she can't bring herself to vote for either side.

Manuel is a Strong Republican intending to vote Democrat. Charlotte is a Trump voter leaning third party. Both of them supported confronting Iran in some form. Both are being financially destroyed by it. Neither one is going back to where they started.

The Numbers Behind Them

Manuel and Charlotte aren't outliers. They represent a pattern the simulation surfaced across all 5,000 agents.

The single strongest predictor of who gets crushed is how much money you had in the bank the day the bombs dropped.

Financial margin is the fault line. By Week 5, 73% of Americans already in debt reported serious financial strain. Paycheck-to-paycheck: 68%. Comfortable savings buffer: 24%. A 48-point gap from the same war and the same gas prices creating completely different experiences of it.

The commute makes it worse. A 50-mile rural drive at $6/gallon is a different crisis than a 2-mile walk in Brooklyn, and rural Americans reported serious strain at 55%, five points above urban, simply because they drive more.

Support for the strikes was thin from the start, only 2% strongly supportive even in Week 1, and it eroded every week. By Week 5: 44% vocally critical, 29% disengaged, 10% actively protesting.

The midterms story is where it gets strange. The crisis doesn't push people toward Democrats, it pushes them away from everyone. The plurality response at 46% is a protest or third-party vote, while only 26% channel anger into voting Democrat and 16% vote Republican despite reservations. People aren't switching teams. They're losing faith in the game.

The crossover voters cut the deepest. Adrienne, 62, a self-employed Strong Republican, shifts to intending to vote Democrat purely on war costs. Mai, 74, a Republican veteran, does the same. Their ideology didn't change. Their grocery bill did.

79% of the simulated population expressed deep distrust in the government's handling, and that number held across almost every demographic segment. When four out of five people arrive at the same conclusion regardless of party, income, or geography, it stops being an opinion and starts being a structural observation.

Caveats

While exact election day percentages will naturally fluctuate, the true power of this simulation lies in exposing the structural mechanics of a crisis.

Extropy maps the exact fault lines that matter. The simulation shows precisely which populations break first and why. It proves how rapid economic pain drives massive voter disillusionment completely outside standard partisan shifts.

Traditional polls and prediction markets miss these underlying dynamics. Extropy spots the exact vulnerability patterns long before anyone launches a missile. It gives you the unvarnished ground truth on how a population actually adapts and reacts under intense pressure.