Democrats are not rallying behind a president from their party on this issue. This is not what happened when Clinton ordered military interventions in the ’90s, but it is consistent with the reaction of Democrats to Obama’s wars in Afghanistan and Libya. Most Republicans might be expected to support hawkish measures, but Syria they have been almost as reluctant to intervene in Syria as everyone else.
As recently as five months ago, polls showed that a plurality or majority of Americans would support strikes on Syria if Assad used chemical weapons. It’s unclear whether even the most effective public campaign could lead a majority of the public to support an upcoming attack on Syria. But prior support, even if only in theory, suggests that the public might become substantially more supportive if they’re more aware of Syrian behavior and the Obama administration’s limited objectives.