this is headline is somewhat disturbing but sadly not surprising
Yeah, necessary to save us from them.
I can’t imagine that many fewer democrats would answer the same way. (Can’t read the article to see if that was mentioned, probably a problem on my end.)
“11% of Democrats and 17% of independents agreeing with the statement.”
That’s a lot less than I would have thought.
Maybe it is time to dispose that “Both sides are basically the same” canard.
Much like “Elizabeth from Knoxville”, the number falls sharply with the realisation of being themselves who are on the receiving end of violence to “save” the Republic.
Of course, such self-awareness of civics isn’t a broadly understood concept.
@GreysonCarlisle maybe one of these links works for you?
“Everybody has a plan until they get hit in the mouth.”
Because 11 + 17 makes only 28% of Dems and Independent voters who agree with violence…
But the Pubbies have 30% .
Yes, that\s a big difference.
So if we trust* the accuracy of the poll,:
We have 28 + 30 equals 58% of the population who don’t believe in democracy.
Nothing to worry about here. 
(* which I don’t)
That’s . . . not how math works. By your logic, if 50% of Republicans and 50% of Democrats and 50% of Independents agreed with this, you’d have to say that — 150% of the population was okay with it?
Don’t worry. On the “disagree” side of the poll, we know 89% of Dems, 83% of Independents & 70% of Republicans are opposed to such violence. So that adds up to 242% of the population who do believe in democracy.
Gee thanks, folks!
Sorry for the stupid post.
Brains are allowed to fart once in a while, aren’t they?
Besides, I kinda like the idea of polls adding up to both 150%and 242% of the population. 
I think the other math problem is that you responded to @Czarcasm’s post about “both sides”, but you included both Democrats and independents in your calculation, which adds up to three sides.
If you’ll allow that the State is maintained by the threat of violence* and that the BLM protests (portrayed as America under siege by RW media) was protest against that menace, then it only stands to reason that the threat and application of state violence needs to be increased, and augmented by patriotic citizens of the state.
Young Kyle Rittenhouse, addled of brain and pimpled of face, is this POV come alive, as is a sitting Wisconsin State judge disallowing his victims to be called “victims.”
*I think the State is maintained by schlubs like us who drag ourselves out of bed each day to do our jobs and pay our bills, but that POV lacks the high dudgeon, the tactical swagger, the cool courage under fire against evil-doers both nefarious and marauding.
Perhaps this is the thread to share this news I received this morning:
And a link in the first article led to this one which I found more compelling:
Yeah, they worked. Thanks!
Mod note: Please keep such irrelevant remarks out of your posts. “Addled of brain” is relevant (and doubtless true).
There’s a LOT more interesting stuff in that study than whether or not 30% of Republicans think that violence may be necessary to rescue the US.
On January 6th, 5 people died. 4 of them Trump supporters. 4 of them died of medical issues unrelated to the riot. The only actual homicide was when a cop killed a Trump supporter.
The Antifa riots killed at least 30 people directly. Every city that de-funded its police department has seen the murder rate skyrocket.
So far, the Left has racked up a significantly higher body count than the Right.