Approximately one-third of Democratic-leaning respondents said they would have a positive reaction to the president of the United States being murdered. This 32% cohort matched the “very negative” group, which also accounted for 32%. An additional one-quarter told the pollster that this outcome would engender a “neither positive nor negative” sentiment. That’s a substantial majority who would feel good, conflicted, or neutral about this president being intentionally killed.
A certain amount of this is not new. I know people who threw a party to celebrate the death of Rush Limbaugh. But a substantial majority admit to this is concerning. This makes it easy to for people to believe their bubble is reality. It becomes ever more likely that more people think they can be a hero or at least not be shamed for violent behavior of all types.
Political violence for democracy! Yeah. That makes total sense.
North Carolina Democrat state legislative candidate Shelly Headen posted a Facebook story from a vacation showing her in front of ovens in a German concentration camp memorial, saying, “Visiting Dauchau [sic] Concentration Camp in Germany… This is where Trump supporters belong.”
I visited Auschwitz. I think people should visit and consider the implications for the right to keep and bear arms. But that isn’t what Ms. Headen had in mind.
It is genuinely upsetting how many people celebrated Charlie Kirk’s death with “Kirkiversary” posts. Some here, tons more on TikTok. The message is clear; if you disagree with progressive orthodoxy, they want you dead and will celebrate your murder too. That includes a young father like Charlie Kirk whose major “crime” was engaging in civil debate with them.
And these posts have thousands or hundreds of thousands of likes, these aren’t fringe edgelords, this is a major view at least among the progressive base. Violence and intimidation has become an accepted strategy for them.
I hate that I have to share a country with these broken people, they must be defeated and marginalized just as much as the brainrotted elements of the Candace Owens right.
I just can’t grasp their mindset. If some leftist commentator I despised was murdered for their views, I can confidently say I would not celebrate it, and you should really do some serious soul searching if that is who you have become. This shouldn’t even need to be debated.
Celebration of assassination and poltical violence is a very dark road to go down. But after Kirk, and their celebration of Mangione, and all the cheering for Trump assassins, it is safe to say it is what a significant portion of the progressive/DSA left now believes. This is who they are.
Oh, and they want to take your guns still. You know, for “safety.”
It is especially upsetting because this woman debated Charlie Kirk. He was nice to her. Didn't matter. Because he disagreed with her views, she apparently thinks his life was fair game. pic.twitter.com/iEvcwoIU2L
He says, “I just can’t grasp their mindset.” I think I can.
My hypothesis is there are two different ways to model their behavior. At a more basic level they are close to the same.
1) They are unable to think rationally. As I have explained before this is a process failure (Peterson Syndrome). It is psychologically uncomfortable for there to be many other people which believe differently from them. Being part of the “one true tribe” is important to them. Other tribes are a threat to them.
2) They are able to think rationally. They know they are unable to rationally refute the opposition. They cannot tolerate the public humiliation of being wrong. Silencing their opponent is more comfortable than admitting they were wrong.
In both cases they have an investment in their beliefs. It could be an emotional investment. Or it could be a political or power investment that is being threatened. Threats need to be neutralized.
It now makes sense when they say they feel unsafe because you express an opinion different from them.
It makes sense when people call themselves “gun safety advocates.” Taking your guns makes it safer to neutralize these sorts of threats to their investments.
I believe that being shot should be requirement for gun ownership in America. It’s very simple. You need to have gun, like taking selfies with pistols, can’t live with out it? Then take a bullet and you will be granted the right to purchase the firearm of your choice.
…
So if you love guns, if they make you feel safe, if you hold and cuddle with them at night, then you need to be shot. You need to feel a bullet rip through your flesh, and if you survive and enjoy the feeling––then the right to bear arms will be all yours.
Black woman from South Africa: “Black people have been patient enough for more than 400 years of colonialism. We are coming for you, and we are going to get everything that you own.”
White people are facing racism, hatred, and brutal violence in South Africa. This is not… pic.twitter.com/3a5R93TzOs
I have to wonder what the political left thinks of the blatant racism. Will they demand divestment like they did because of apartheid in South Africa 40 to 60 years ago? Or will they cheer the hatred, confiscation of property, and the murders?
Despite his website promising “compassionate leadership for a just future,” Smeltzer vowed in a recent post to “round up EVER [sic] SINGLE red hat wearing MAGA and put them in hard labor camps for the rest of their lives.”
While locking up those with whom he disagrees appears to be one of his key objectives, Smeltzer told the Washington Free Beacon that he is running a “health care and tax-the-rich campaign” and would use a role in Congress to advocate for his fellow “furry” fetishists.
He certainly has the attitude I would expect from a socialist. The compassion part may not seem obvious in the current context. But if he really thinks all “red hat wearing MAGA” should be lined up in front of a ditch to be shot, then I suppose hard labor for life could be considered compassionate.
This is why we have the Second Amendment. This is why I created Boomershoot.
I suspect, that in most cases, it is a little more complicated than that. I think it is more likely they think of the worst possible insult, that in their warped sense of reality sort of fits, and they come up with “Nazi.” Then after using that insult without much effect the homicidal thoughts percolate to the surface. The Nazi label lets them feel justified in having the murderous urges.
And, of course, there will be people a little further left on the bell curve will seek approval/self-esteem/etc. by killing a “Nazi” or two.
Still, the end result is the same. When you start getting called “Nazi” you know they want you dead and it is time to plan appropriately.
In a world full of structural R@cism Sexism H0m0phonia Transph0bia And millions of cishet gendered Facists burning thru our limited resources, well Death kinda makes sense , doancha think?
It should come as no surprise to anyone that President Trump does not have much respect for anything Democrats say or think about him. Which, of course, inflames them even more.
It is difficult to back down from this level of rhetoric.
Ah yes, blue-collar workers who stash 20 compensating peashooters that have been gathering dust in their basements longer than they had been diagnosed with diabetes will definitely be at the front lines for a Civil War should the country go to shit.
Delusions are often functional (Heinlein). In this case the functionality works for everyone. Jensen gets to feel superior and gun owners get a good measure of the caliber of their political opponents.
Ban assault rifles not books Ban assault rifles not voting rights Ban assault rifles not gay marriage Ban assault rifles not abortion Ban assault rifles not TikTok Ban assault rifles not trans rights Ban assault rifles not women’s rights Ban assault rifles not the day after pill
Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.
And in yet another example of Markley’s Law he had no choice but demonstrate the best they can do in defense of their beliefs is childish insults. What else could you expect?
This is a really far-out alternative hypothesis, but I’ll throw it out anyway. Twitter moderators did not see anything controversial with statements like this one.
No. That’s just too far out there. The time travel explanation makes more sense.
This is the attitude that lost the election. They will not compromise they will not convert they will not be human. They must be defeated – and any chance to bruise or batter them psychologically must be exploited
I know someone who hosted a party to celebrate the death of Rush Limbaugh. I also know someone who told me they would celebrate the death of President Trump.
This is what they think of you. They want you dead.
Try to heal the division, but prepare appropriately.
women are the only hope for this wretched world. But even women have been brainwashed by moids for too long theyve internalized the patriarchy and turned on each other, always begging for for male approval and validation. Its disgusting. I realize the truth men are iredeemable. radfem hitler was is fucking vindicated now. They cant be reformed or redeemed. Theyre a fucking scourge upon the earth. The only solution is to total exterminate them and every foid who worships these fucking parasites. Every single male must be wiped out, from babies to the elderty. Only then can women be free to create a new world, ill be a pioneer, ill be the first to take the first step. i dont care if theyr fathers, brothers, husbands, sons, teachers, police, and especially niggers or politicians.ive been craving to kill them all. This is my mission. only when their parasitic sludge has been expunged from this earth is when Then the world will be clean and women can start over. It’s the only way. in aproximately 10 mintue si should be dead, its strange but it feels good.
The very individuals who have long championed gun control as a solution to gun violence are now celebrating the tragic killing of a CEO by someone who was radicalized and used a 3D-printed firearm. These same voices once lauded an attacker who nearly assassinated Donald Trump. Such reactions reveal obvious inconsistency, suggesting that their stance on gun violence are politically motivated rather than rooted in principle.
“… politically motivated rather than rooted in principle.” is a good hypothesis. I would like to contribute another hypothesis.
These are people who decide right from wrong almost entirely based on their emotions. Children who are victims of a mass shooter causes them to feel bad and this means guns must be bad. If someone they don’t like is murdered with a gun, then they feel good. This associates guns with their good feelings, and they have no wish to condemn the gun.
I think there is a more important point to be made here. There is a nothing but a thin veneer of civilization over these people. The threshold for them to accept the murder of someone is shockingly low. This can explain riots, lynch mobs, and genocide. Blood lust is a real thing and only barely suppressed in some people.
This is what they think of you. They want you dead.
And, of course, they want someone else to do their dirty work for them. They want the state to kill the people they don’t like. Also, note that it is an entire class of people they want dead. Considering people as individuals on a case-by-case basis would take too long.
We’re going to have to stop treating health care access, affordable housing, and taxing the rich as mere theory or political talking points and start rolling out plans district by district, state by state, until they become federal policy. We’re going to have to confront our elitist tendencies and recognize the intrinsic value of all professions and the rich experiences of those without formal degrees. And we’re going to have to show what we’re made of as the strong, reliable, and authentic leaders voters crave.
I believe we can still rebuild trust with Americans. I believe we can still reinforce our commitment to representing the needs and values of all citizens. We just have to get out of our emotional, hypersensitive, politically correct way and focus on the labor of changing our public image. Unless we’re too afraid, too good, or just too damn late.
What I find most interesting is she has a clue but still doesn’t get the big picture. She understands they have been condescending and out of touch with people in the “fly over” states. But she thinks the products they have to sell are still the right products. They just need be better salespeople. It apparently is beyond her comprehension that people exist who just want to be left alone. Less government is not an item in her sales catalog.
Related:
The people voting different from the “coastal elites” are a nothing but a problem. It is not possible they have some valid points.
