SPLC poll re: civil war, political assassinations, and "Replacement Theory"

Occam's Banana

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 5, 2010
Messages
40,023
(h/t Michael Malice)

Polling for this was conducted by the SPLC (for whatever that is - or isn't - worrth).

The browser page title for the article is "Majority of Republicans believe U.S. headed toward civil war".

Here is a summary of the reported results:

Civil war:
  • 53% of Republicans said the U.S. “seems headed toward a civil war in the near future.”
  • 39% of Democrats said the U.S. “seems headed toward a civil war in the near future.”
  • 44% of all respondents said the U.S. “seems headed toward a civil war in the near future.”
Assassination of politicians:
  • 44% of young male Democrats polled said they could countenance political assassination.
  • 40% of young female Republicans polled said they could countenance political assassination.
  • Those 50 and older were not fans of assassination, no matter their party or gender.
Replacement theory:
  • 48% of all respondents said they believe that “progressive and liberal leaders” are “actively trying to leverage political power by replacing more conservative white voters.”
  • Two-thirds of Republicans said they believe that.
  • 35% of Democrats said they believe that.
  • 42% of independents said they believe that.


‘Distressingly’ high level of support for assassinating politicians among young Democratic men
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/jun/1/majority-republicans-believe-us-headed-toward-civi/
Stephen Dinan (01 June 2022)

More than half of Republicans believe the U.S. is drifting toward another civil war, according to a new poll released Wednesday by the Southern Poverty Law Center, which said it detected evidence of radicalization among both Democrats and the GOP.

The survey, taken in late April and covering 1,500 adults, also found a distressingly high level of support for assassinating politicians whom the respondents believed were “harming the country or our democracy.”

Young Democratic men were the most agreeable to the idea, with 44% saying they could countenance such an assassination. Younger Republican women ranked second, with 40% approving of the idea. Older folks — defined as those 50 and older — were not fans of assassination, no matter their party or gender.

That could explain why 44% of all respondents said the U.S. “seems headed toward a civil war in the near future.” That included 53% of Republicans and 39% of Democrats.

“The mood, overall, is pessimistic,” the SPLC concluded, warning that it saw particularly worrying signs that Republicans, if they make political gains, could erode rights of the “marginalized in our society.”

“No political outcomes are inevitable. But our results show that a substantial effort, on the part of activists, institutions, and government, will be required if we hope to secure a multiracial democracy and prevent partisan violence,” the SPLC wrote in its analysis of its findings.

The group, founded in the early 1970s to combat hate against Black Americans, now serves as one of the chief critics of what’s known as “Replacement Theory” — a belief that there’s an intentional effort to shift demographics to alter the country’s culture or political power structure.

SPLC’s polling found widespread acceptance of the tenets of the theory, with 48% of respondents believing that “progressive and liberal leaders” are “actively trying to leverage political power by replacing more conservative white voters.”

That included two-thirds of Republicans, but also a surprising 35% of Democrats, and 42% of independents. Young Democrats were particularly inclined to believe the demographic changes are being orchestrated by liberal leaders for political power.

Democrats in Washington, as well as activist groups like the SPLC, say those beliefs are racist, and have fueled recent mass shootings including the one at a Buffalo supermarket in a predominantly Black neighborhood last month.

But the widespread belief, including by many young Democrats, could challenge the racism narrative.

SPLC’s findings on Replacement Theory are somewhat higher than other polling, including a major survey late last year by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, which found about a third of the country believed in “aspects” of the theory.

At the same time, though, the SPLC’s polling found a decreasing worry over immigration, with just 50% saying they are “concerned” about it. That’s down from 64% who professed concern in SPLC’s August 2020 polling.

“The decline is perhaps a result of President Trump — who relentlessly stoked anti-immigrant hysteria — no longer being in office. But that decline could also, in part, mean that those on the right are less concerned with immigration specifically than they are with the supposed progressive and liberal plot to use immigrants to erode the power of more conservative whites,” the SPLC said.
 
Last edited:
It's odd that it's mostly young democratic men and young republican women contemplating assassination. I guess the young republican men and young democratic women have decided to make love not war.
 
“The mood, overall, is pessimistic,” the SPLC concluded, warning that it saw particularly worrying signs that Republicans, if they make political gains, could erode rights of the “marginalized in our society.”

“No political outcomes are inevitable. But our results show that a substantial effort, on the part of activists, institutions, and government, will be required if we hope to secure a multiracial democracy and prevent partisan violence,” the SPLC wrote in its analysis of its findings.

O7r6NJn.jpg
 
Last edited:
It's odd that it's mostly young democratic men and young republican women contemplating assassination. I guess the young republican men and young democratic women have decided to make love not war.
Hopefully they are making love with people that share their political views and not each other.
 
Young Democratic men were the most agreeable to the idea, with 44% saying they could countenance such an assassination.

No surprise there. This is the same demographic that roughly half of which were perfectly OK with throwing people in concentration camps for refusing the COVID clot shot.

Older folks — defined as those 50 and older — were not fans of assassination, no matter their party or gender.

But I'm the threat...the greatest threat the nation faces, according to the Thing and the Soviet Propaganda Lies Center.

Biden-Thing-233x420.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Hopefully they are making love with people that share their political views and not each other.

Meh. As an independent conservative I'd take democrat Tusli Gabbard's politics over Elizabeth Cheney's any day of the week. And there's no question on who's hotter. Anyway, the republican women and democratic men anxious to go whack somebody should all be committed.
 
Rules for Radicals. By Any Means Necessary. Lie, Cheat, Steal and Kill. This is the creed and dogma of the radical left.
 
"People should not fear their governments. Governments should fear their people."

Note that the concept of "political violence" as it is employed in this article only ever denotes or connotes violence (or threats of violence) directed at the State or its agents - never violence (or threats of violence) perpetrated by the State or its agents.

And, of course, Republicans and "the right" get the lion's share of the blame, while Democrats and "the left" (with the exception of a minuscule few bad apples) are innocent as lambs - and just never you mind Antifa/BLM rioters trying to burn down cities, and the like.

US faces new era of political violence as threats against lawmakers rise
Members of the House will now get up to $10,000 to upgrade their home security as experts warn such threats endanger the health of US democracy
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/31/us-political-violence-threats-against-lawmakers
Joan E. Greve & Lauren Gambino (31 July 2022)

Members of the US House of Representatives will now receive up to $10,000 to upgrade security at their homes in the face of rising threats against lawmakers, the House sergeant at arms announced last week, in yet another sign that American politics has entered a dangerous, violent new phase.

As support for political violence appears to be on the rise in the US, experts warn that such threats endanger the health of America’s democracy. But they say the country still has time to tamp down violent rhetoric if political leaders, particularly those in the Republican party, stand up and condemn this alarming behavior.

The announcement over increasing security for people in Congress came days after a man attacked Lee Zeldin, a New York congressman and Republican gubernatorial candidate, with a sharp object during a campaign event [see this thread - OB],

Two weeks before that, a man was arrested outside the home of Pramila Jayapal, chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, for allegedly shouting racist obscenities and threatening to kill her. Last month, authorities filed federal charges against a man who they say traveled from California to Maryland with the intent of murdering the supreme court justice Brett Kavanaugh [see this thread - OB].

Public service has clearly become an increasingly dangerous endeavor in America.

Recent polls show an increasing number of Americans are comfortable with political violence, although there is a wide range of opinions on the type of violence that is acceptable.

According to a mega-survey conducted by researchers at University of California, Davis, and released this month, one in five US adults say political violence is justified at least in some circumstances. A much smaller portion of survey respondents, 3%, believe that political violence is usually or always justified. [see this post in this thread - OB]

Liliana Mason, a political science professor at Johns Hopkins University and co-author (alongside Nathan P Kalmoe) of Radical American Partisanship: Mapping Violent Hostility, Its Causes, and the Consequences for Democracy, said the phrasing of survey questions on political violence can drastically affect results. But having studied such polling since 2017, Mason said it is clear that support for political violence is indeed on the rise in the US.

“I think of it as pretty low numbers of people who actually approve of violence at all,” Mason said. “The problem is that, if you go from 7% to 20%, that means that there are certain social spaces where the norms around anti-violence are eroding.”

The impact of that trend can be seen at every level of American government, from the halls of Capitol Hill to local polling places.

The US Capitol police reported 9,625 threats and directions of interest (meaning concerning actions or statements) against members of Congress last year, compared to 3,939 such instances in 2017.

The members of the House select committee investigating the January 6 insurrection have frequently been the targets of violent threats, requiring them to get personal security details.

One member of the committee, Republican Adam Kinzinger, recently shared a threatening letter sent to his wife last month. The sender vowed to execute Kinzinger, his wife and their newborn son. He is not seeking re-election in 2022.

Even those who help administer elections in the US have reported an increase in threats against them. According to a poll conducted by the Brennan Center for Justice this year, one in six election officials have received threats because of their job, and 77% believe threats against them have increased in recent years.

Jennifer McCoy, a political science professor at Georgia State University whose research focuses on polarized democracies, said: “The kinds of threats and intimidation to … election administration officials and poll workers is very concerning and is also new.”

The apparent increase in threats against public servants has sparked broader concerns about the health of American democracy, particularly in the wake of the January 6 insurrection.

“There is simply no place for political violence in a healthy democracy. The increase in threats and harassment being leveled at people across our government is deeply concerning,” said Jennifer Dresden, policy advocate for the group Protect Democracy.

“To be clear, we’re not yet at a point where political violence has fundamentally undermined our democracy. But when violence is connected to other authoritarian tactics, like disinformation and efforts to corrupt elections, that sets a dangerous path for our democracy that we cannot ignore.”

While threats and harassment against lawmakers and political candidates appear to have increased across many government institutions, they are not evenly distributed.

One study of online messages sent to 2020 congressional candidates found that women, particularly women of color, were more likely to be the target of abusive content. Of all the candidates reviewed, the progressive congresswoman Ilhan Omar, who is Somali American, received the highest proportion of abusive messages on Twitter. Fellow progressive congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who is Puerto Rican American, saw the most abusive comments on Facebook.

Women of color serving in Congress have spoken publicly about the threats they face, which have become a regular part of their lives on Capitol Hill.

Congresswoman Jahana Hayes, who is Black, told PBS Newshour last year: “I remember, at the beginning of the 116th Congress [in 2019], when we were just spotlighting and highlighting the beautiful diversity of this incoming Congress, but then, on every caucus call, we had members who were getting death threats on a daily basis.”

The acts of political violence carried out in the US are also unevenly distributed across the ideological spectrum. According to a study conducted by the Anti-Defamation League, rightwing extremists have committed about 75% of the 450 political murders that occurred in the US over the past decade. In comparison, Islamic extremists were responsible for about 20% of the murders, while leftwing extremists were blamed for 4% of the killings.

Expert argue the frequency of rightwing violence compared with leftwing violence can be partly explained by Republican leaders’ failure to condemn threatening rhetoric.

“We see justifications for violence that are similar on the left and right,” said Rachel Kleinfeld, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace who studies political conflict. “But we see incidents of violence that are vastly higher on the right and that has to do with all of the normalization of violence from leaders on the right.”

That normalization has been on vivid display over the past couple of years in the US. Donald Trump infamously referred to his supporters who carried out the deadly January 6 insurrection as “very special”, telling them: “We love you.” Trump was impeached by the Democratic-controlled House for his role in the 6 January riot, but acquitted in the Senate.

Last year, House Democrats, over near-unanimous Republican opposition, voted to strip the far-right congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene of her committee assignments, after it was discovered that she had previously expressed support for assassinating Barack Obama and the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi.

In November, Congressman Paul Gosar received the same punishment, as well as a House censure, after he shared an animated video depicting violence against Joe Biden and Ocasio-Cortez. Only two Republicans supported the censure.

Most recently, the Senate candidate Eric Greitens was widely criticized for airing a campaign ad that appeared to encourage violence against more moderate Republicans. In the ad, Greitens, who resigned as Missouri governor over allegations of sexual harassment, is seen carrying a shotgun and bursting into homes as he urges the “hunting” of Rinos, meaning Republicans in Name Only [see this thread - OB].

Research indicates that the messages supporters receive from their political leaders have a large impact on whether they actually carry out violent acts, several experts said. In experiments conducted by Mason and her colleagues, some participants were asked to read a quote from Biden or Trump condemning violence while others read nothing. Those who had read the quote were significantly less approving of violence.

“Leaders are actually uniquely powerful in being able to tamp down violence,” Mason said. “Republicans in particular are not using that power. And they could, but they’re not.”

Although political leaders are particularly powerful when it comes to reducing violent rhetoric, Mason’s research indicates that average people may have some leverage of their own. Mason’s team saw some positive results when they asked participants to read messages from random Twitter users condemning political violence. For the overwhelming majority of Americans who oppose such violence, the findings could offer some hope.

“For Americans in general, I think it’s sort of empowering to know that every single one of us has the potential to reduce violence by simply rejecting it,” Mason said. “We can all do that. All the 80% of us who don’t think violence is acceptable have a real voice, and it’s important to use it.”
 
Bump for relevance:

 
https://x.com/charliekirk11/status/1926750880440693042

The SPLC has added Turning Point to their ridiculous “hate group” list, right next to the KKK and neo-Nazis, a cheap smear from a washed-up org that’s been fleecing scared grandmas for decades. They somehow still rake in over $100 million a year peddling their “hate map” nonsense, sitting pretty in their Montgomery “Poverty Palace” while crying about “hate” to line their pockets. Even former staffers called their racket a “con.”

Their game plan? Scare financial institutions into debanking us, pressure schools to cancel us, and demonize us so some unhinged lunatic feels justified targeting us. Remember the Family Research Council? An SPLC-inspired gunman went after them. They’d love nothing more than to see TPUSA in the crosshairs.

But it’s 2025, and nobody with a functioning brain buys their garbage anymore. The SPLC is a laughingstock, a hollowed-out husk of an organization that’s been exposed as a grift time and time again. They’re not just irrelevant—they’re a cautionary tale of how to torch your own credibility. Maybe someone should take a hard look at where all that “nonprofit” money’s really going?

Being on their list is a badge of honor. It means they’re terrified that we’re so effective. Keep crying, SPLC—America’s done with your scam.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Chad Crowley @CCrowley100

Charlie Kirk is dead, shot down in public view. We may not yet know the name of the man or the group behind the rifle, but the reaction of certain circles to his death tells us more than any investigation ever could.

The laughter, the cheers, the ghoulish delight in murder reveal something darker than politics. They expose a spirit that exults in cruelty, that rejoices in the suffering of wives and children, that finds triumph not in creation but in destruction.

We have seen this spirit before. During the Spanish Civil War it unearthed the bodies of nuns, paraded their remains through the streets, and mocked the dead as though holiness itself could be desecrated even after burial. The same impulse that once set fire to churches and slaughtered priests now dances on the grave of a political opponent. It is not the spirit of debate or dissent, but of the vilest hatred, unleashed and unmasked.

We are no longer dealing with political adversaries. We are confronted with those who despise dialogue itself and who glorify violence as the only language they recognize. We are dealing with those who, in celebrating murder, renounce their own humanity. They align themselves with what is evil, with what is demonic. And when men give themselves over to that power, they cease to be neighbors or fellow citizens in any meaningful sense.

This is more than politics. It strikes at the foundations of morality and at the fate of civilization itself. A society that celebrates murder reveals what it has already become and what it is willing to endure. The line has not only been crossed, it has been erased. What remains is the choice of whether we allow the descent to continue, or whether we finally recognize it for what it is and respond accordingly.

If we choose silence, then the grave they celebrate today will be ours tomorrow.

 
Rules for Radicals. By Any Means Necessary. Lie, Cheat, Steal and Kill. This is the creed and dogma of the radical left.

Once lying, cheating and stealing has been justified by their "group" and in their minds, murder is just a heartbeat away.
 
Back
Top