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.
35 Comments
Regna@lemmy.world · 175 pts · 281d
Yeah, Kirk’s own political rhetoric was pretty extreme and violent.
givesomefucks@lemmy.world · 30 pts · 281d
Not as violent or extreme as the groypers who killed him for not being violent and extreme enough tho...
village604@adultswim.fan · 22 pts · 281d
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Last I heard that theory had been retracted because it was based on a misidentification of the markings on the shell casings.
givesomefucks@lemmy.world · -46 pts · 281d
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!
I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world · 43 pts · 281d
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.
village604@adultswim.fan · 12 pts · 281d
You mean like this article?
Why People Fell for an Outlandish Charlie Kirk Theory
givesomefucks@lemmy.world · -37 pts · 281d
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
village604@adultswim.fan · 20 pts · 281d
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.
SGforce@lemmy.ca · 15 pts · 281d
Do you know what the word "evidence" means?
TrickDacy@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 281d
Always gotta assume they're your enemy. Because why be any other way on the Internet? It's just helpful!
wizbiz@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 26 pts · 281d
He basically killed himself
TheFogan@programming.dev · 11 pts · 281d
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.
givesomefucks@lemmy.world · -16 pts · 281d
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.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 279d
and got killed by someone more extreme than he is.
9point6@lemmy.world · 79 pts · 281d
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.
AshMan85@lemmy.world · 34 pts · 281d
he was killed by a conservative
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 0 pts · 279d
a more RIGHT wing conservative than he is, aka fuentes is who is ultra right wing. Kirk is more akin to TRUMPs leaning, than a groypers.
AshMan85@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 279d
Nazi trash, is nazi trash and always will be
TheBat@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 281d
gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 281d
Yeah, ask these people to define what they mean by "rhetoric" and I bet this common ground dissolves pretty quickly
Formfiller@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 279d
Extreme RIGHT WING rhetoric please be honest for once
gustofwind@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 281d
How about asking what they think about white wing terrorism
pilferjinx@piefed.social · 1 pts · 280d
"if you take away the mentally ill you'll find that white wing terrorists don't exist." - probably
gustofwind@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 280d
Wrong, you’ll just be left with the evil ones
pyria@kbin.melroy.org · 11 pts · 281d
Sho@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 281d
Who?
Witchfire@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 281d
Just another gang shooting at a school. Don't worry about it
titanicx@lemmy.zip · 10 pts · 281d
Just another school shooting victim. No need to know his name.
rumba@lemmy.zip · 10 pts · 281d
In same way that water is contributing to drowning.
Sunflier@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 279d
It's his own fault he is dead. Yeah, someone shot him, but he was basically advocating for mass extermination. So, the shooter basically defended third parties with his divine bullet of holy judgment.
Rot in hell Kirk.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 279d
its also someone more right wing than he is. hes practically the left compared to FUENTES team.
Sunflier@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 279d
Wouldn't it be something if Fuentes was ne. . ..
Nah, I don't want to accidentally violate a rule on Lemmy
vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 279d
Pretty sure the mods have half given up on that front. But yeah it'd be a right shame if Fuentes was the next one, after all it'd stop me from possibly giving him permanent paralysis and locked in syndrome. :D
Captainautism@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 10 pts · 281d
Say stupid shit, get popped.
phutatorius@lemmy.zip · 7 pts · 280d
He who sows the wind shall reap the whirlwind.
RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 280d
So then polling indicates he committed suicide?
frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io · 3 pts · 281d
I wasn't aware that guns responded to violent rhetoric! Perhaps they should be more carefully restricted if they just go off like that.