Will Gianforte's win encourage future acts of violence by Republican candidates?

[Shadows]

Since Gianforte won by 6%, would this comfortably win decrease the sensitivity & outrage over potential negative political fallouts due to an assault? Trump has already banned reporters & in rallies/press conferences, his people have dragged reporters away, called them fake news/enemy of the people !

Would future Republican candidates be encouraged to do smaller acts of violences - Maybe Bully, push & shove reporters around for no good reason. Bullying or intimidating so-called liberal reporters could be a new thing !

Trump, if his ratings fall & he gets hard question may seriously consider hitting a CNN reporter calling him fake news & his base will lap it up & will all be happy ("Bash those liberal reporters" !)

[Ronnie]

I don't know if violence against reporters will be ubiquitous, but I do think that hostility towards the press will be more common if Republican candidates perceive it to be a tactic that energizes their base.  We shouldn't expect anything less from a party that's becoming increasingly intolerant of dissent.

[pbrower2a]

I expect Republicans to stop at nothing to win. 

[JA]

I don't know if violence against reporters will be ubiquitous, but I do think that hostility towards the press will be more common if Republican candidates perceive it to be a tactic that energizes their base.  We shouldn't expect anything less from a party that's becoming increasingly intolerant of dissent.

We've seen it coming, but it just didn't seem really real, despite the mounting evidence - at least to me. Yet, it appears one party (and yes, one party) is embracing or at least dismissing political violence and threats by candidates and elected officials. If this is triggered by cultural angst, which seems increasingly likely, then this is being caused by a conscious or subconscious realization that this group is at the end of their grip on American cultural and political dominance. Thus, they are lashing out and embracing whatever tactics are necessary, even strong-arming their way into office, in order to secure their tenuous position.

No matter how you look at this situation, it will likely only get worse. Republican politicians can win elections despite mocking the disabled, ridiculing POWs, spreading blatant lies and propaganda, encouraging violence at rallies, bragging about being able to shoot someone and not lose support, openly scapegoating groups of people, assaulting journalists, talk of "alternative facts," and countless other authoritarian tactics. Not to mention their unprecedented degree of gerrymandering, what they did in North Carolina to the Democratic Governor-elect, discussions of changing the First Amendment to use libel laws against opponents, chants during the campaign of "lock her up!," and on and on... The Republican Party has openly embraced right-wing authoritarianism at this point, despite its establishment generally trying to tame a beast they helped to unleash. How do you change this situation when one side is at the point of rationalizing, justifying, excusing, or even embracing and encouraging political violence, intimidation, suppression, and scapegoating?

[Hammy]

Trump's election already encouraged future acts of violence by Republican candidates. Gianforte was simply the first visible case.

[President Johnson]

Trump's election already encouraged future acts of violence by Republican candidates. Gianforte was simply the first visible case.

Agreed. But we also have to keep in mind that there was a lot of early voting.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Question is, will gun ownership among journalists spike in the coming years?

[HAnnA MArin County]

I see this as vindication that those good old fashioned family values Republicans are quite fine with attacking members of the press, especially since the Dear Leader has called the media "the evil enemy of the American people" (or something along those lines). It'll be open season on the media before long. Of course, if/when a Democrat attacks a Republican, there will be outrage to the familiar chants of "lock him up! lock him up!" It's clearly what Jesus would do.

Remember Michael Grimm saying he would throw a reporter over the balcony and Sharron Angle suggesting that people resort to "Second Amendment remedies" if a Democrat wins? Hillary was too kind calling these people deplorable. They are dangerous and mentally unstable and need professional help.

[AtorBoltox]

Republicans don't need encouragement to be violent

[Brittain33]

Trump's election already encouraged future acts of violence by Republican candidates. Gianforte was simply the first visible case.

I think Gianforte's attack can be completely explained by anger issues and a very tense situation in a bad political environment without pinning on Trump.

[MasterJedi]

If it happens get someone to go on Hannity and choke slam him to the ground after getting him to admit there's nothing wrong with doing that.

[SoLongAtlas]

They will go on WWE and fake body slam for more coverage just like Trump in 2007.

[Dr. Arch]

It's clear that a good portion of our country's national culture is ill. I'm not even sure how to address such a thing.

[Inmate Trump]

It wasn't really that comfortable of a win.

Yes, 7%....but it should've been A LOT more than that.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

I see this as vindication that those good old fashioned family values Republicans are quite fine with attacking members of the press, especially since the Dear Leader has called the media "the evil enemy of the American people" (or something along those lines). It'll be open season on the media before long. Of course, if/when a Democrat attacks a Republican, there will be outrage to the familiar chants of "lock him up! lock him up!" It's clearly what Jesus would do.

Remember Michael Grimm saying he would throw a reporter over the balcony and Sharron Angle suggesting that people resort to "Second Amendment remedies" if a Democrat wins? Hillary was too kind calling these people deplorable. They are dangerous and mentally unstable and need professional help.

A violent approach to politics isn't at all new for modern Republicans.

This is the party that used this:



Those of us who oppose Republicans need to realize that no matter what label we give them, they are not going to yield power peacefully or democratically, and come to a decision about the best way to oppose a deplorable group that doesn't hesitate to resort to violence.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I see this as vindication that those good old fashioned family values Republicans are quite fine with attacking members of the press, especially since the Dear Leader has called the media "the evil enemy of the American people" (or something along those lines). It'll be open season on the media before long. Of course, if/when a Democrat attacks a Republican, there will be outrage to the familiar chants of "lock him up! lock him up!" It's clearly what Jesus would do.

Remember Michael Grimm saying he would throw a reporter over the balcony and Sharron Angle suggesting that people resort to "Second Amendment remedies" if a Democrat wins? Hillary was too kind calling these people deplorable. They are dangerous and mentally unstable and need professional help.

A violent approach to politics isn't at all new for modern Republicans.

This is the party that used this:

Those of us who oppose Republicans need to realize that no matter what label we give them, they are not going to yield power peacefully or democratically, and come to a decision about the best way to oppose a deplorable group that doesn't hesitate to resort to violence.

I could make the same argument about the left, looking at the violence in Berkely.

[EnglishPete]

Republicans don't need encouragement to be violent

Given all the violence from left wing 'protestors' over the past year or so in the US that's rich. We've had all kinds of people condoning and excusing violence against Trump supporters and other people of the right (e.g. all the 'punch a nazi' memes, excusing protester violence at Trump rallies in Chicago, San Jose etc, excusing violence outside Milo and other speeches on College campuses etc).

Now when a left wing blogger gets in someone face, gets shoved back and then starts whining with a pre planned exaggerated assault narrative ("you body slammed me, you bloke my glasses" spoken loudly into the audio recorder) designed to let him play the victim, all the other lefties start whining.

[Brittain33]

I could make the same argument about the left, looking at the violence in Berkely.

Notice you had to say "the left" rather than the Democrats, because you're talking about one band of anti-fascists that's outside the party vs. a major component of the Republican base and punditocracy.

[Beet]

The right wing brags about violence and whines about it at the same time.

[Dr. Arch]

The right wing brags about violence and whines about it at the same time.

It's most certainly the party of Trump now.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I could make the same argument about the left, looking at the violence in Berkely.

Notice you had to say "the left" rather than the Democrats, because you're talking about one band of anti-fascists that's outside the party vs. a major component of the Republican base and punditocracy.

But people make excuses for them.  Go to a Conservative campus and argue for left-wing policies and people might be mad at you, but they'll let you speak.

[Brittain33]

I could make the same argument about the left, looking at the violence in Berkely.

Notice you had to say "the left" rather than the Democrats, because you're talking about one band of anti-fascists that's outside the party vs. a major component of the Republican base and punditocracy.

But people make excuses for them.  Go to a Conservative campus and argue for left-wing policies and people might be mad at you, but they'll let you speak.

Not always the case, sadly. Have you heard of Larycia Hawkins, a Christian who lost her position at evangelical Wheaton College because donors found her speech in support of Muslims uncomfortable? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larycia_Hawkins

[EnglishPete]

I could make the same argument about the left, looking at the violence in Berkely.

Notice you had to say "the left" rather than the Democrats, because you're talking about one band of anti-fascists that's outside the party vs. a major component of the Republican base and punditocracy.

And yet when Dems are asked to disavow these violent protests they usually wriggle around the question or go silent when they're not actually making excuses.

[This account no longer in use.]

I could make the same argument about the left, looking at the violence in Berkely.

Notice you had to say "the left" rather than the Democrats, because you're talking about one band of anti-fascists that's outside the party vs. a major component of the Republican base and punditocracy.

And yet when Dems are asked to disavow these violent protests they usually wriggle around the question or go silent when they're not actually making excuses.

Isn't that exactly how your cult's leader reacted to David Duke endorsing him?

[EnglishPete]

I could make the same argument about the left, looking at the violence in Berkely.

Notice you had to say "the left" rather than the Democrats, because you're talking about one band of anti-fascists that's outside the party vs. a major component of the Republican base and punditocracy.

And yet when Dems are asked to disavow these violent protests they usually wriggle around the question or go silent when they're not actually making excuses.

Isn't that exactly how your cult's leader reacted to David Duke endorsing him?

Trump repeatedly disavowed David Duke's support.

By contrast here's an example of Bernie Sanders refusing to disavow violent supporters

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrmymUwmBNY

That's just one example but its all to typical of Dem politician's response to violence from their supporters.