Posted on 09/16/2025 7:33:25 AM PDT by EBH
It is true that liberal Americans are more likely than conservatives to defend feeling joy about the deaths of political opponents. 16% of liberals say this is usually or always acceptable, including 24% of those who say their ideology is very liberal and 10% who say they are liberal but not very liberal. That compares to 4% of conservatives and 7% of moderates.
But even among the very liberal, the share who say it's unacceptable to feel joy about the deaths of political opponents outnumbers those who say it's acceptable by a ratio of more than 2 to 1 (56% vs. 24%).
Younger Americans are also about twice as likely as older Americans to defend feeling joy at political opponents' deaths, but even among this group most people say this is unacceptable.
Another question tells a similar story: whether Americans think political violence can ever be justified. Overall, most Americans say violence to achieve political goals is never justified (72%), while just 11% say it can be.
Younger and more liberal Americans are more likely than older or more conservative Americans to say political violence can sometimes be justified, but this remains a minority opinion among these groups. Among the very liberal, 25% say political violence can sometimes be justified and 55% say it can't; among adults under 30, 19% say it can be justified and 51% say it can't.
(Excerpt) Read more at today.yougov.com ...
That's not a Free Speech crowd there guys.
“Liberals” say they are against the death penalty, but seem to be fine with innocent blood spilled for their political views.
I just heard fox talking heads like Bair dodge the question whether the violence comes from the left. They are still playing the “both sides are guilty “ and the standard gaslight “we all need to get along.”
They’re not liberals.
They’re communists.
Two truths side by side:
You can’t lock up 25% of the other party just for holding ugly opinions or answering a poll the “wrong” way. In a democracy, even abhorrent beliefs are protected thought.
But political violence — or speech that directly incites it — is not protected. The First Amendment stops at incitement, at true threats, at material support for violence.
That’s the distinction Pelosi danced around with her hedge. And it’s the very line Vance and Miller are signaling they’ll enforce: you’re free to think, but the moment you move money, networks, or rhetoric into action that fuels violence — you’ve crossed into terrorism.
Notice only around 50% say it can’t be condoned. A curious result suggesting to me that the real level of support among democrats for political murder is closer to half.
Was listening to Glenn Beck try to thread this needle too. And honestly, I think he’s wrong this time.
I don’t know how it could be done, but the Democrat Party needs to be outlawed/disassembled/ unable to hold office...
This plank in the eye of the right was put there by Satin.
Satan not Satin.
The key to having your cake and eating it, too: Yes— have a wish list of those you’d love to see their mortality completed. Yes — rejoice inwardly when it happens. And yes — keep your dang mouth shut about it, and certainly don’t go public.
Going yakkety-yak about it is not only counterproductive, it’s also uncivilized.
That’s the logical approach to the matter. But, alas, too few people are logical. Most are quite emotional
Depends on the definition of political violence.
1. If you are being literally fired upon by the political left it is acceptable to return fire?
2. What about when the left is using the power of the government to strip you of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness?
3. When your opponents verbally attack you and threaten you and your family with physical harm?
But I believe all of us here at FR believe physical violence against those that hold different views is unacceptable.
Being ex-military my view is that right to self defense is never denied.
Understand this & never forget that the Democrats will joyfully put you in a modern day version of Auswictz to be killed and the FBI would enthusiasticly round you up for a one way train ride that end in a mass grave.
Because the Democrats are no different than communists. And you know what they always do when they get absolute power.
And apparently while another 29% of them think political violence is unacceptable they still get a tingly feeling down their leg when it happens.
Absolutely think what you want but remember loose lips sink ships Or in modern American English keep your mouth shut!
YEP!!!
The article skips over the most interesting aspect, which is to compare strong conservatives and strong liberals on political violence. It’s 3% versus 24% — a huge difference. In fact, strong conservatives are the least accepting of political violence of any ideological group in the poll. And strong liberals are the most accepting, by far.
Also interesting is that strong conservatives are less accepting of political violence than just plain conservatives (3% vs. 4%). OTOH strong liberals are more than twice as likely to accept political violence than regular ol’ liberals (24% vs. 10%)
Israel cannot accept a Palestinian state on its border because Israel knows they have refused to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist. . . the Palis want them all dead and have proven it over and over.
We conservatives have a similar situation with the Commie left . . . they want us dead. Is it political violence to practice self-defense? I think not. And we cannot wait until they pull the trigger to act. Good luck to President Trump in cleaning out the commie left cesspool.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.