Executive Summary
This the first in a series of monthly reports on the state of partisan animosity conducted by the Polarization Research Lab (PRL) at Dartmouth College, University of Pennsylvania, and Stanford University. The focus of this report is public support for partisan violence.
Key findings include:
- Evidence of Bipartisan Opposition to Partisan Violence: Across 73,325 YouGov survey interviews conducted over 15 months, including 3,503 interviews in January 2024, we find bipartisan rejection of partisan violence among Americans.
- Support for Partisan Violence is Low Overall: Fewer than 4% of Americans support violent crimes like assault or arson against political opponents, with minimal difference between Democrats (3.5%) and Republicans (3.8%).
- Low Support for Politically-Motivated Murder: Support for extreme actions such as politically-motivated murder is even lower, at around 2%.
- Support Differs Across Demographic Groups: Support for partisan violence concentrates among young, male, wealthy, non-white, and more educated Americans. Among Republicans, it is higher for MAGA supporters.
- Even Low Support Is Dangerous: Four percent of the American public represents millions of Americans. While support for violence does not mean that millions will engage in violence, the problem is not trivial and merits considerable attention.
- Fluctuations in Partisan Violence Support: Levels of support for partisan violence varies over time. Ongoing monitoring is critical to understand when attitudes become dangerous.
Partisan Violence is Opposed by The Vast Majority of Americans
Over the last 15 months we have tracked American support for partisan violence with 74,325 survey interviews on the YouGov platform.
This report looks at trends across this full period and specifically 4,503 interviews conducted between 1/1/2024 and 1/25/2024. We demonstrate that support for partisan violence among the public across both parties is low, but not zero. Our data provides insight into where efforts to reduce support for partisan violence should concentrate (young, male, wealthy, non-white, and more educated Americans). We also show that support for partisan violence is not constant and likely responds to catalysts from media coverage and influential stakeholders. The continuous monitoring provided by these data is thus crucial in identifying any changes in attitudes that could indicate a groundswell of support for partisan violence.
Partisan Violence Is an American Problem and Not a Democrat or Republican Problem
Using precise measures of support for partisan violence (violent crimes against members of the other political party) currently deployed (see 1, 2) we find that Americans uniformly and strongly reject partisan violence.
Domestic terrorists, militias, and lone wolfs pose a serious threat to America, but as a whole, Americans overwhelmingly oppose partisan violence.
The analysis in this section looks at survey data collected in January of 2024, but results are consistent when looking at the full dataset.
Support for partisan violence is not a common attitude in the general public. There are factions that are outside general society who support partisan violence, but they have not polluted the minds of typical Americans.
Americans are increasingly divided along partisan lines, but it is important to recognize that we have no evidence for substantial support for partisan violence among either party in the general public.
A Small, but Non-Trivial Number of Americans Support Partisan Violence
America is a large nation and support for partisan violence among 4% of the population does not a reflect a trivial number of citizens. From our data we estimate that 8,217,600 (+/- 406,500) Americans support some form of partisan violence. These are alarming numbers, but the percentage of Americans willing to engage in partisan violence themselves is a tiny fraction of those who report support for others committing partisan violence. Crime data show that millions of Americans simply do not commit violent political acts. In fact, partisan violence is actually very rare.
We don’t know why support for partisan violence has not caused a tsunami of violent attacks, but there are several logical explanations:
- Individuals who support partisan violence are spread across large swaths of the country and, outside of close peer networks, do not know who supports or opposes partisan violence.
- There is no central coordination between supporters of partisan violence.
- Violent crimes are generally punished with hefty penalties, which disincentivizes all but the most radical.
- Our survey measures are possibly inflated by partisan cheerleading (individuals who don’t actually support violence but who want to signal loyalty to a political party on a survey).
Americans Have a Fundamentally Incorrect Understanding of Support for Partisan Violence
There are deep cracks in American democratic life, but our democratic foundation is stronger than many in the media and academia suggest. These inflated accounts of the level of support for partisan violence seem to have trickled down to the mass public, who widely overestimate support for partisan violence in the opposing party. Unfortunately, these misperceptions may be, in the long-run, self-fulfilling (see 3).
Where Does Support for Partisan Violence Concentrate?
Although support for partisan violence is similar across parties, there are differences in support among other demographic groups in American society. This suggests that to address the threat of partisan violence we must target narrow segments of the American public since the majority of Americans of both parties are already averse to violence. To reduce risks from partisan violence we should be particularly attentive to the segments of American society where political discord has taken deep root.
As we detail below, support for partisan violence is particularly concentrated among those who are young, educated, wealthy, and male. Counter to expectations, we find support is larger among non-white Americans than white Americans.
Notes: 1) We use all 73,325 observations for the calculations below; and 2) all differences are statistically significant.
Age
- Those under 30 support partisan violence at a rate 3 times higher than those over 30.
- Under 30: 5.7%
- Over 30: 1.7%
- Difference: 4 percentage points
Gender
- Males support partisan violence at a rate 2.2 times higher than females.
- Men: 3.9%
- Women: 1.7%
- Difference: 2.2 percentage points
Race
- Non-whites support partisan violence at a rate 1.4 times higher than whites.
- Non-white: 3.5%
- White: 2.4%
- Difference: 1.1 percentage points
Income
- Individuals making above the median household income support partisan violence at a rate 1.4 times higher than those making below the median household income.
- Above the median household income: 3.6%
- Below the median household income:: 2.6%
- Difference: 1 percentage point
Education
- Those who do not have a college degree support partisan violence at a rate 1.4 times higher than those who went to college.
- High school or less: 2.4%
- At least some college: 3.3%
- Difference: 0.9 percentage points
MAGA Republicans
- MAGA Republicans support partisan violence at a rate 1.2 times higher than non-MAGA Republicans.
- MAGA Republicans: 3.2%
- Non-MAGA Republicans 2.7%
- Difference: 0.5 percentage points
Support for Partisan Violence Is Not Constant and Changes Over Time
Differences in support for partisan violence is comparable between Democrats and Republicans on average, but for 7 of the last 15 months Democrats supported violence at levels significantly higher than Republicans (in late 2022 Democratic support peaked at levels approximately 45% higher than Republican support). Democratic support for partisan violence has since decreased to the overall average.
Support for partisan violence changes over time, which makes continued measurement critical. Fluctuations in support, however minimal, may trigger those already predisposed to partisan violence to see momentum in media coverage, social media, or the words of elected officials that could provoke tragedy.
Appendix
About The Polarization Research Lab and our Data
- The Polarization Research Lab works to understand and strengthen democracy by conducting rigorous science, producing public goods, and training the next generation of scholars. The Lab is led by PIs Sean J. Westwood at Dartmouth College, Yphtach Lelkes at the Annenberg School for Communication at University of Pennsylvania, and Shanto Iyengar at Stanford University.
- PRL studies the political attitudes of Americans and the behavior of elected officials. Our goals are to:
- Dispel rumors and show hard data on the democratic attitudes of citizens. We conduct the largest continuous tracking poll on YouGov, collecting 1,000 interviews of Americans a week.
- Identify the behavior of elected officials that contributes to toxic polarization.
- Produce publicly available reports and tools to help stakeholders advance responses to toxic polarization that are based in data and evidence. PRL works directly with journalists, democracy practitioners, and policymakers.
PRL Is Supported by
- The Charles Koch Foundation
- The Hewlett Foundation
- The Knight Foundation
- The Templeton World Charity Foundation
- New Pluralists
Survey Questions: Partisan Violence
As part of our weekly tracking poll through YouGov, PRL asks Americans how they feel about violence perpetrated by a member of their party to support their party and its goals. Poll respondents review a series of political acts–starting with attitudes toward non-violent protests and increasing to support for partisan murder. Survey takers only see the next question if they indicate support for the current crime.
Continuous data on American attitudes toward political violence is publicly available at PRL’s America’s Political Pulse.
1. Assault
(name) was convicted of assault.
He was arrested by police for throwing rocks at peaceful (Democratic/Republican) protesters. Although no one was seriously injured, paramedics bandaged a man with a head wound.
Do you support or oppose (name)’s actions?
2. Arson
(name) was convicted of arson.
He was arrested by police as he attempted to run from a fire he started at the local (Democratic/Republican) headquarters. Although he waited for the building to close for the night, several adjacent buildings were still occupied.
Do you support or oppose (name)’s actions?
3. Assault with a deadly weapon
(name) was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon.
He was arrested by police after driving his car into a crowd of (Democratic/Republican) protesters. Although no one was killed, several individuals were seriously injured and one spent a month in the hospital.
Do you support or oppose (name)’s actions?
4. Murder
(name) was convicted of murder.
He was arrested by police after surveillance footage was found showing him stabbing a prominent (Democrat/Republican) to death. (name) targeted the victim because he believed the victim had prevented him from voting in the last election as part of a conspiracy to stop (Republican/Democratic) voters.
Do you support or oppose (name)’s actions?
Copyright 2024 Polarization Research Lab