J.D. Vance Says 26 Percent of Young Liberals Justify Political Violence. Here's What the Data Really Say.
Majorities on the left and on the right denounce political violence and its celebration.

The assassination of Charlie Kirk has elicited egregious reactions across social media. On the left, some have reacted to his murder by calling Kirk a Nazi and likening him to Adolf Hitler. Others callously mocked Kirk and celebrated his assassination. Meanwhile, President Donald Trump has assigned responsibility for the tragedy to those who demonized Kirk, and Attorney General Pam Bondi said Monday that the Justice Department will go after those "targeting anyone with hate speech." The Daily Wire's Matt Walsh has gone so far as to say he "cannot 'unite' with the Left because they want me dead" and "will spit on my grave when I die and laugh in the faces of my wife and children."
On Monday, Vice President J.D. Vance echoed this us-vs.-them mentality while hosting Kirk's podcast, The Charlie Kirk Show. During the episode, Vance said that America must confront the difficult truth that "24 percent of self-described quote, 'very liberals,' believe it is acceptable to be happy about the death of a political opponent" and "26 percent of young liberals believe political violence is sometimes justified."
However, Vance cherry-picks data from a YouGov poll released two days after Kirk's assassination to paint an inordinately bleak picture of the state of American political discourse.
According to that poll, which was conducted immediately following Kirk's murder, the majority (55 percent) of "very liberal" respondents said violence is never justified to achieve political goals. An even larger majority of self-described liberals (68 percent) shared this view. Similar majorities of "very liberals" (56 percent) and liberals (73 percent) said it was always or usually unacceptable for "a person to be happy about the death of a public figure they oppose." (It's possible that at least some of the liberals who answered "yes, violence can sometimes be justified" had in mind edge cases like armed resistance by Jews against the SS, not the assassination of peaceful political pundits with whom they disagree.)
It is true that larger majorities of "very conservatives" (88 percent) and conservatives (83 percent) said political violence is never justified. Likewise, 90 percent and 91 percent, respectively, said it is "always or usually unacceptable" for a person to be happy about the death of a public figure they oppose. While the disparity between American liberals' and conservatives' condemnation of political violence and its celebration is notable, the fact remains that a majority of even "very liberal" Americans reject political violence outright and denounce its celebration.
Concern about political violence is bipartisan: 90 percent of Democrats regard political violence in the U.S. as a problem, as do 89 percent of Republicans. Considering that even more Democrats regard political violence as a "very big problem" following Kirk's murder than they did following the murder of Minnesota's Democratic Speaker of the House Melissa Hortman, it cannot be said that they only care about political violence when it's enacted against their political allies.
In the aftermath of Kirk's murder, it's important to recognize that the majority of Americans are united in denouncing political violence and those who celebrate it.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Dicked magazine’s Matt Welch posted on X that conservative media should all attend an event for a red wedding.
https://x.com/mattwelch/status/1102654202545913857?s=12
They do this purely because that “Past political violence” which has happened since 2017 has been primarily MAGA. Setting shapiro’s house on fire. Killing Melissa & Mark Hortman, the attempted murder of John & Yvette Hoffman on the same day by the same man. Attempted kidnapping of Gretchen whitmer, the 2018 pipe bombs, Solomon Peña’s murder for hire scheme in NM, the murder of Daniel Anderl, the murder of Heather Hayer. A noose for Mike Pence. The vicious beating of Paul Pelosi.
These are all things that have happened since Trump’s first term, and these are all things that MAGA America has relentlessly downplayed, mocked & cheered for.
There’s no justification for what happened to Charlie Kirk, just like there’s no justification for any of those things I mentioned. The left knew about ALL of those incidents, and tried to bring attention to them as they happened, and were laughed at.
The president of the United States has joined in on the mocking on numerous occasions.
The guy who set Shapiro’s house on fire was a pro-Palestinian leftist lunatic.
Pro-Palestinian Trump supporter.
https://apnews.com/article/pennsylvania-governor-mansion-fire-motive-cody-balmer-734827f6c29d7b3064af442e729d10d7
About as believable as Queers for Palestine.
"Mosty peaceful".
Go fuck yourself. The left glories in and defends violence.
The attempted kidnapping of Gretchen Whitmer was entirely FBI setup. They only managed to persuade a couple drunks into joining the fake kidnapping gang with lots of free beer.
F*** the FBI. It needs to be entirely defunded and disbanded. NOW!!
This remains false no matter how much you and the ADL lie about it.
Your including the whitmer kidnapping fbi setup is fucking hilarious though.
The minn shootings have been debunked enough.
Pipe bombs at both rnc and dnc with no interest by bidens doj in solving lol.
Paul pelosi drugged out hippie. Hilarious.
Fake hang Mike Pence narrative.
The free Palestine Shapiro arsonist?
Fucking hilarious the ignorance and lies of the left.
Call me crazy, but I think that any percentage out of the error bar is a bad thing.
One would think, but this is Reason, home of the liberal-tarians.
Especially when it's so huugely out of the error bar.
So ... 45 percent? 35 percent? think violence is justified to achieve political goals? Yet Jack Nicastro thinks JD Vance is wrong.
And sure enough, if you go to that poll link, and scroll down, it says ... "24% of the very liberal think violence is justified for political ends."
I
thinkknow Jack Nicastro is wrong.The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
(D)icked magazine wants you to ignore that evidence.
So it's worse than what JD said. 45% of very liberal and 32% of 'normal' liberals think that violence is sometimes justified. That's a lot.
So, 44% of very liberal people and 27% of 'normal' liberal people do not agree that it is at least 'usually' unacceptable to revel in an assassination? That's horrifying.
'Armed resistance against people who are actively trying to do you harm' is not the same thing as 'killing a public figure to achieve political goals', and it wasn't mentioned in the questions, so why speculate about what these people may have been imagining? The question was 2 days after the assassination of a prominent political figure, and 80 years after the Holocaust.
> So it's worse than what JD said. 45% of very liberal and 32% of 'normal' liberals think that violence is sometimes justified. That's a lot.
Not exactly. The poll had 4 options ("Yes, violence can sometimes be justified", "Not sure", "Prefer not to say", "No, violence is never justified"). There are some people who are not sure (14% VL, 12% L) and some who don't say (6% VL, 4% L). Still concerning that some people are not sure whether political violence can be justified though.
The real problem is " which was conducted immediately following Kirk's murder,";
A poll conducted BEFORE his murder showed about 50% of the 'very liberal' thinking that murdering Trump or Musk could be justified.
I think you've got a significant number of leftists embarrassed to be saying they support political assassination right now, but how long before the numbers revert?
Based on THIS study, I think it's not so much that the willingness to engage in political violence for any given reason is rising, as that 'liberals' are increasingly given to thinking that circumstances that justify it are actually present.
IOW, it's not that people are more inclined to kill 'Nazis', they've just been persuaded that their political opponents ARE 'Nazis'....
Agree; that window has opened so wide that a ship has sailed through it.
They have proved they can shut down cities and that they can silence effective opposition. They can afford less rhetoric for the moment. Yet even for all that, some are still unable to resist threatening more.
The 24% is a literal quote from the poll. Jack Nicastro is (pardon the expression) dead wrong when he says JD Vance is wrong.
Cherry picking data by using the actual numbers from a poll isn't the own of Vance that they seem to think it is. When the polls even make them look bad, they've lost the plot.
Polls are conducted in order to sensationalize, inflate, distort, confuse, manipulate, and oversimplify. To stoke an emotion while pretending that one is drily talking about 'facts'. Not to inform.
Everyone who spreads those results in order to persuade others or to get them to act is simply part of the sociopathic propaganda machine - whether the poll originator, the Veep who passes it on, the journalist who frames the poll results as something significant, or the reader/audience that nods their head in agreement and accepts that as the framing for public discussion.
At core, it is an appeal to popularity. To invoke in an audience their own desire to conform.
You spread Hamas propaganda. What's your excuse?
Operation Arctic Frost
Sen. Chuck Grassley revealed this morning that corrupt FBI agents were TARGETING **92** peaceful conservative individuals and groups like Charlie Kirk’s TPUSA
- Truth Social
Local story. Trump is murdering peaceful fishermen.
I'd buy that large swaths of the Left oppose political violence --- but there are A LOT of normies dancing.
And they do like Luigi Mangione an awful lot.
If 90% think it's unacceptable in any form, but the other 10% are good with it that's millions of them.
The problem is they redefined political violence to include expressing opposing opinions, and retaliatory violence of the real kind is thus justified.
It is odd how a "libertarian" site has so many water-carriers for the Left on its staff.
Not odd since about 2015 when they invited Soros to a conference.
Trump put a Soros guy in his Cabinet as Treasury Secretary. But all of MAGA kowtowed.
Vibe sure did change
JD Vance is wrong agian....
Some 38% of the total respondents said it would be "somewhat justified" to murder President Trump, while 31% said the same about Elon Musk. However, for those self-identifying in that group who were more left-leaning, those numbers grew to 48% and 55%, respectively.
I think it took Ancient Rome ~500 years to reach this point?
We're ahead of schedule.
Not as far off as you’d think. It’s been 416 years since Jamestown.
Yeah, since the very founding of slavery!
^- this guy gets it.
I was just thinking, "JD Vance is wrong when he says exactly what. we've. been saying." (Technically, Emma's one article puts it at 33%, not 25%).
I followed your link Jackie boy and it looks like VP Vance correctly states the percentages. The fact that you don't like the conclusions he makes does not make him wrong. You can dispute the conclusions but the facts are the facts and VP Vance is correct on the facts
Exactly this. I knew there was fuckery afoot when I read the heading and the subhead, which don't fit together in any intelligent way.
*J.D. Vance Says 26 Percent of Young Liberals Justify Political Violence. Here's What the Data Really Say.
Majorities on the left and on the right denounce political violence and its celebration*
26% having one opinion would lead you to believe the majority have an opposing opinion. Which they do. So "what the data really say" is 1) JD was truthful and correct, and 2) Jack is too fucking stupid to be published anywhere about anything.
Are these articles written by homeless people needing smokes or something? The entire premise of the article has nothing to do with the catchy headline that only proves JD to be 100% correct.
Yeah. I'm scratching my head on this one.
You nailed it; this article is a dissembling piece of gibberish. It presents a headline striking doubt, and then [if you take the time to read and actually think about it] confirms the conclusion it argues against.
[Of course we know that vast majority of Americans get all their information from headlines and news bytes, so it did accomplish it's stated purpose]
JD Vance is dead wrong. There is no possible way it's only 26%.
It's the most generous poll for the left. Most show greater support for political violence. Reason itself has published (while also trying to sanitize) similar polls before.
Reason has a history of this... their 75% of Americans support abortion completely ignored the fact that 75% of Americans supported limits to abortion.
1 in 3 College Students Say Violence in a Campus Protest Can Be Acceptable, Survey Finds by Emma Camp
Majorities on the left and on the right denounce political violence and its celebration.
And? Doesn't make what Vance said less true, numbnuts.
What about the Hitler Clause? If someone is Hitler, violence is always justified.
Informal poll:
Santa Clause or Hitler Clause... GO!
And that is the real problem. They villianize the Nazis without any understanding of what the party represented. They would justify killing baby Adolf, not grasping that there was always going to be a war and a scapegoat. And that Jews were hated around the world.
They do this purely because that “Past political violence” which has happened since 2017 has been primarily MAGA. Setting shapiro’s house on fire. Killing Melissa & Mark Hortman, the attempted murder of John & Yvette Hoffman on the same day by the same man. Attempted kidnapping of Gretchen whitmer, the 2018 pipe bombs, Solomon Peña’s murder for hire scheme in NM, the murder of Daniel Anderl, the murder of Heather Hayer. A noose for Mike Pence. The vicious beating of Paul Pelosi.
These are all things that have happened since Trump’s first term, and these are all things that MAGA America has relentlessly downplayed, mocked & cheered for.
There’s no justification for what happened to Charlie Kirk, just like there’s no justification for any of those things I mentioned. The left knew about ALL of those incidents, and tried to bring attention to them as they happened, and were laughed at.
The president of the United States has joined in on the mocking on numerous occasions.
That's just plain dishonest. I'm not going to waste my time looking into your other lies because at this point, burden of proof should be on you for making such ridiculous claims, but the arson/murder attempt on Gov. Shapiro was anti-semitism and not political. The Hortmans were not political either. It is an ongoing case and the reasons are complex, but it has more to do with mental health than politics. Worst case scenario, it was an anti abortion issue, which is political, but only becomes right wing/MAGA if you're a stooge who frames abortion as a straight down the aisle right/left issue. Reason has extensively covered the entrapment scheme around the Gov. Whitmer abduction scheme.
Noose for Pence is fake and gay too and Pelosi beating was also mental illness, not politics.
Stop conflating attacks on politicians with political violence.
Claiming these attacks are because of mental problems is straight up catch-22. Both sides love a good catch-22.
Add into the problem that so many on the Left are incapable of independent living. They rely on experts for everything and are scared to even raise kids without a lot of outside assistance.
Am I missing something? If 50 percent *don't* want to do a thing - 50 percent do want to do it.
Yeah, sorry, no way it's only 26%
Vance should offer a retraction, apology, and then give us the real number.
Of course all left wing groups are mostly peaceful opposition of the radical right wing extremists!
Which includes mostly peaceful ANTIFA, now many of whom are armed with ARs. Just don't walk alone in cities such as Portland and Seattle. Then there's the "Armed Queers" Marxist revolutionaries, now under investigation. https://www.zerohedge.com/political/armed-queers-marxist-revolutionaries-under-investigation-possible-foreknowledge-kirks
Don't forget BLM which rioted for two years, looting, burning, assaulting police and others causing 2$ billion in damage and losses. Yup mostly peaceful but fiery protests.
But of course the Biden administration had the FBI targeted a wide swath of conservative organizations, leaders and even Charlie Kirk's Turning Point USA. The filthy Biden/Obama administration attempted to use Saul Alinsky's Rules For Radicals against conservatives.
But it might be more important to read this:
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/how-left-programmed-young-people-hate
I think whatever side is out of power can determine how much they are ok with political violence. It's probably also when the actual violence by that side mostly occurs.
Who gives a shit what this chump says. He's a liar like everyone else in the administration. Swamp is at capacity.
A majority may oppose political violence, but the minority that believe it is justifiable is not insignificant. And it is supported and well-funded by people who have their own agendas.
Constantly attempting to base one’s arguments by claiming any given position is a leftwing or rightwing plot/conspiracy is dishonest and lame. Yes, it happens but when that is your constant response… it says everything about you; mainly that you’re a dumb smuck.
Facts that contradict the Trump administration are leftist.
The author is either top stupid to understand basic math, or he is a liar. Maybe both.
J. D. is opposed to political violence, but he is a big fan of murdering anyone who looks like a "narco-terrorist" in the Caribbean. I mean, let's face it, those guys are asking for it, and we're just the ones who can give it to 'em.