President Donald Trump has governed throughout his second term like a man who wields unconstrained power. It tends to prompt frustrations for him later when the approach runs headlong into reality.

His gaffe this week, when he said he didn’t consider Americans’ finances while trying to resolve the Iran war, epitomizes the problem.

When asked Tuesday how much Americans’ economic concerns were motivating his push for a peace deal, Trump responded: “Not even a little bit.”

“The only thing that matters when I’m talking about Iran [is] they can’t have a nuclear weapon,” Trump said. “I don’t think about Americans’ financial situation. I don’t think about anybody. I think about one thing: We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon. That’s all.”

Trump is no stranger to dismissive comments about the economic plight of everyday Americans. But this suggested he just didn’t care — as if it wasn’t even on his radar.

That risks sounding particularly tone-deaf given how bad the president’s economic numbers are and how much Americans already perceive him to be neglecting the issue.

Predictably, Republicans quickly tried to explain away Trump’s comments.

While retiring Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina told CNN that Trump’s comments were “concerning,” others have sought to downplay them.

Sen. John Cornyn of Texas told CNN that it was “just a sort of a throwaway line.” Sen. Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming declined to comment to a MeidasTouch reporter, “mostly because I think he actually does care.”

Others like House Speaker Mike Johnson and Rep. Troy Nehls of Texas fell back on the idea that the “context” of Trump’s comment might not be so bad. Nehls also encouraged people to “relax.”

And then there was Vice President JD Vance. He claimed Wednesday that Trump’s comments had been misrepresented. But he also sounded a much more conciliatory, feel-your-pain note on the economy than Trump did.

He said twice that the administration cares about Americans’ finances. He swore three times that it was focused on the issue. He also acknowledged “we have a lot of work to do” on delivering prosperity and acknowledged “the inflation number last month was not great.”

It was the kind of nuanced response that plenty in Trump’s political operation probably wish the president himself had delivered.

But, of course, this is Trump.

There is a plausible explanation for his dismissiveness toward the financial impacts of the war: that he’d simply like to pretend they don’t exist.

The financial effects are, after all, the main constraint on him holding out for a peace deal with Iran that meets all his demands. Higher gas prices especially are the primary cost of the war that Americans are feeling, especially given the US military strategy has kept casualties low on its side.

And crucially, those domestic repercussions are something that his foe, the Iranian government, doesn’t have to worry about as much. While the war and the US blockade on the Strait of Hormuz are unquestionably causing more damage to Iran’s economy than the United States’, the authoritarian government in Tehran simply isn’t as responsive to complaints of its citizens.

That, like many aspects of this conflict, creates a kind of asymmetric warfare where the opposition has a much larger built-in pain tolerance — and more leverage because of it.

There’s even a valid argument that this is the kind of thing Trump should be telegraphing to Iran. By saying that he’s not considering Americans’ economic pain, he’s signaling that he’s not overly anxious to cut a deal to end the war. In short, that he’ll hold out for his demands.

(Of course, there are already myriad other data points to suggest Trump is actually quite anxious for a deal to bring the war to an end.)

But by speaking dismissively about Americans’ finances, Trump could actually be hurting his leverage.

The war is already unpopular, and Trump’s approval rating on the economy keeps dropping. To the extent his dismissiveness exacerbates both, it could increase the pressure on the US president to get out of the war. Not to mention, if the war drags on past the midterms and Democrats gain control of the House, Trump will have to deal with a less cooperative Congress.

And there is reason to believe his comments could hurt Republicans come November. Polls, after all, show Americans writ large simply don’t see the point of the war and don’t view it as worth the economic costs. Another shows three-quarters of them think Trump hasn’t paid enough attention to Americans’ cost of living.

And no issue looms larger over this election — and most elections — like the economy.

There was an easy way for Trump to prevent this, though: Build the case for the war ahead of time. Lay out discreet and consistent goals and make sure the American people were bought-in and ready to sacrifice personally for the greater good.

But Trump didn’t even try to make that case.

He instead launched the war suddenly and then spent weeks backfilling the justifications for what he had just done.

It was almost like he didn’t even think he had to explain himself to the American people and do the legwork to build support — as if that were an unnecessary nuisance.

That sensibility existed on Day One of his second term and the day the Iran war began, and it persists to this day.

And it’s still doing him and the Republican Party no favors.