More say ‘patriots may have to resort to violence’ to save US in new poll

[ThatRobGuy]

Looks like some people don't wike it when folks don't vote the same way as them.

They should go pout somewhere.

It seems that way... however, neither party here in the US has done a particularly good job of "extending the olive branch" so to speak...at least not in a sincere way. People talk about "we need to come together"...but most don't really mean it lol.

It's been more of a "we'll welcome you all back into the fold and bury the hatchet, just as soon as you admit that we're smart and you're stupid, and you agree to bend a knee and abandon 3/4 of your principles and agree to only pick moderate or squishy candidates so that any compromise that happens will land on our half of the spectrum"

I think this is evidenced by who the partisans in each party label as "the good ones" from the other side. If you talk to staunch republicans, they'd have said that "Joe Manchin is one of the good democrats", if you talk to progressives, they'd say that someone like Susan Collins is "one of the tolerable republicans"... the reason for that is because they voted the same way as (or didn't stand in the way of) their opponents more than half of the time.

The 2 major US parties have tribalized to the point where each have produced their own Overton Windows, and those two windows have very little overlap.



US politics has been somehing like this:

 

[rambot]

It seems that way... however, neither party here in the US has done a particularly good job of "extending the olive branch" so to speak...at least not in a sincere way. People talk about "we need to come together"...but most don't really mean it lol.

It's been more of a "we'll welcome you all back into the fold and bury the hatchet, just as soon as you admit that we're smart and you're stupid, and you agree to bend a knee and abandon 3/4 of your principles and agree to only pick moderate or squishy candidates so that any compromise that happens will land on our half of the spectrum"

I think this is evidenced by who the partisans in each party label as "the good ones" from the other side. If you talk to staunch republicans, they'd have said that "Joe Manchin is one of the good democrats", if you talk to progressives, they'd say that someone like Susan Collins is "one of the tolerable republicans"... the reason for that is because they voted the same way as (or didn't stand in the way of) their opponents more than half of the time.

The 2 major US parties have tribalized to the point where each have produced their own Overton Windows, and those two windows have very little overlap.



US politics has been somehing like this:
View attachment 345198

I can appreciate that it is like that....NOW. I DO think that pre 2016, democrats did MORE to be bipartisan (to the chagrin of more than a few supporters). But yeah, they've given up now.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I can appreciate that it is like that....NOW. I DO think that pre 2016, democrats did MORE to be bipartisan (to the chagrin of more than a few supporters). But yeah, they've given up now.

Oh I would agree 100%.

Obama is what I would consider to be a respectable, compromising candidate... Obviously he his idealistic nature probably made him want to go further than what he did with healthcare and gay marriage, but he reigned it in a bit to stay within certain boundaries "I support civil unions" and "Insurance companies shouldn't be able to toss you for pre-existing conditions" probably wasn't his ideal scenario, but he tamped it down to find compromise.

I guess the difference is that the two parties had overton windows that were more narrow, and had a lot of more overlap.

Things like "let's support people who storm the capitol if our guy loses and let's back a guy who's under a bunch of indictments" and "this is why we think 15 year olds should be allowed to consent to procedures without parental knowledge or approval" would've been unthinkable (and political suicide) for either party in 2008. Any candidate looking to be viewed as respectable (from either party) wouldn't have touched either of those things with a 10 foot pole.

Can you imagine Bill Clinton and Bob Dole having those kinds of conversations on a national debate stage? I can't...

Or even Obama vs. Romney for that matter... Obama and Romney (who partisans at that time thought were extreme because Obama admitted to smoking pot and Romney made an off the cuff 47% comment) are closer to each other (politically) than the types of people we have in there today.

 

[Fantine]

We have four chances in the upcoming year to put civility back into politics. The first trial will begin April 15th.

We will never have civility back in politics without removing Trump from the political arena.

While I would prefer he abide by gag orders, it seems that only conviction and incarceration will successfully accomplish that, and from my extensive reading about these cases, I think that it is likely juries of his peers will convict in at least two.

 

[AlexB23]

More in new poll say ‘patriots may have to resort to violence’ to save US​

According to a new survey by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI), support for the use of violence has gone up in the past two years, peaking in its most recent survey at 23 percent.

One-third of Republicans surveyed believe “patriots” may have to resort to violence, up from 28 percent in 2021. In 2023, 13 percent of Democrats believe violence may have to happen, compared to 7 percent who said so in 2021. Twenty-two percent of independents now say violence may be an option, up from 13 percent two years ago.

--

In a previous poll early this year, PRRI found that 40% of people it characterized as "adherents" of Christian Nationalism supported political violence.

I got seven words to say about this, after this colon: Violence is never the answer, nuff said.



Seems that Christians are not following Matthew 5:38-39, which is "You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth. But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also" (NIV). Here is a summary of the article:

The article by Lauren Irwin, published on October 25, 2023, discusses the rising support for political violence in the United States and how it relates to the ongoing struggle for American democracy. The article begins by reminding readers of the U.S. Capitol breach that occurred on January 6, 2021, and the subsequent attempts by former President Donald Trump to overturn his election defeat.

Biden is described as viewing this issue as the most significant challenge of his presidency, and the criminal charges against Trump serve as a reminder of the stakes for next year's presidential campaign. The article then goes on to discuss a new poll by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) which found that 23% of respondents believe "patriots may have to resort to violence" to save the United States. This is a significant increase from previous surveys, with support for political violence rising across all political affiliations.

Republicans were found to be more likely than Democrats or independents to agree that violence may be necessary, with 33% of Republicans who hold a favorable view of Trump and 41% of those who believe the 2020 election was stolen being particularly likely to agree. The survey also found that opinions on violence had risen for each religious preference, with white evangelical Protestants and non-Christians seeing the largest increases.

Other surveys, such as one conducted by the University of Virginia Center for Politics, have found similar results, with a significant number of voters from both major parties expressing a belief that it is acceptable to use violence to stop their political opponents. The PRRI poll was conducted among 2,525 adults from August 25-30, 2023 and has a margin of error of 2.19 percentage points.