It’s the first time in NBC News polling across five different violent incidents that there has been bipartisan agreement blaming extreme rhetoric from political and media figures.
More than 6 in 10 registered voters said they think “extreme political rhetoric” was an important contributor to the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk earlier this year — including majorities of Democrats, Republicans and independents, according to the latest NBC News poll.
The findings represent a grim milestone in America’s reckoning with growing political violence and its root causes. The survey marks the first time, across questions about five different violent incidents over 15 years of NBC News polling, that there has been cross-partisan agreement that rhetoric played an important role in an attack, as opposed to the incident having been more about the actions of a single disturbed person.
Overall, 61% of respondents said they feel that “extreme political rhetoric used by some in the media and by political leaders was an important contributor” to Kirk’s killing.
Yeah, Kirk’s own political rhetoric was pretty extreme and violent.
He basically killed himself
Not as violent or extreme as the groypers who killed him for not being violent and extreme enough tho…
Did I miss credible evidence coming out that he was a groyper?
Last I heard that theory had been retracted because it was based on a misidentification of the markings on the shell casings.
Yes, you did
And if you ask someone else politely they might even take the two seconds to type it into a search engine for you.
Best of luck!
In the ranking of helpfulness of comments:
-Providing a source
-Providing an explanation
-Just not commenting at all
-Making a snarky reply that contains no useful info and tells people to look things up themselves.
You mean like this article?
Oh…
So I was right, you can use a search engine, you’re just JAQing off…
That article says he’s not because… They actually don’t give a reason, just call the idea stupid.
Check out their other articles:
https://www.theatlantic.com/author/graeme-wood/
They’re pro-israel, worried about the “plight” of white south Africans, and call Kirk getting shot “one of the worst moments in American history”…
But they agree with you, that’s all that matters, right?
Otherwise you’d have linked something that shows evidence, instead of just calling it “stupid”.
But I’m sure as shit never wasting time on you JAQing off again
How can I link to something that shows evidence that doesn’t exist?
You’re more than welcome to provide a source to counter mine instead of moving the goalposts, though.
Do you know what the word “evidence” means?
Always gotta assume they’re your enemy. Because why be any other way on the Internet? It’s just helpful!
I mean yeah, there’s no question that extremist rhetoric got him killed. and yeah I’d have to say it’s far more of his own style of it. The part that baffles me is how it’s only 60%, unless they somehow posed it as rhetoric against him. To me that question is as basic as saying “did gun violence have anything to do with his death?”, uhh yeah.
I have feeling the question is vaguely worded so that they can then try and tear it to say “is it people saying he supports facism the reason for the violence”. So that they can push to criminalize describing reality and pointing out real problems, because some people might try to solve problems with violence.
You do realize that if you click the headline it takes you to an actual article with more details?
Like, you could have read the article and gotten answers to your questions instead of typing out all those assumptions and hoping someone answers.
And I would copy/paste most of the time, but really people need to just learn to read the fucking articles.
Reminder that 99% of terrorism this century has been right wing
The day people stop hearing right wing voices is the day most political violence ends.
In same way that water is contributing to drowning.
he was killed by a conservative
Extreme in which direction?
Yeah, ask these people to define what they mean by “rhetoric” and I bet this common ground dissolves pretty quickly
Republicans blamed rhetoric by the widest margin, 73%-19%, but independents (53%-28%) and Democrats (54%-34%) were also much more likely to blame extreme political rhetoric as a factor than to discount it.
Root causes, huh, like instilling a president that has had a history of actively rooting for his voterbase to “fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore”. Among other violent rallying cries.
I wasn’t aware that guns responded to violent rhetoric! Perhaps they should be more carefully restricted if they just go off like that.
How about asking what they think about white wing terrorism
