In the span of twelve months, the United States has witnessed the assassination of Charlie Kirk, the attempted murder of President Donald Trump, and the fatal shooting of Minnesota State Representative Melissa Hortman and her husband—all acts rooted in political grievance. These are not isolated tragedies. This is not just political extremism. It is civic collapse.
Kirk’s murder sent shockwaves through both conservative and liberal circles, with Trump ordering flags lowered to half-staff and calling Kirk “a great guy from top to bottom”. Democratic leaders, including California Governor Gavin Newsom and Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs, condemned the violence, emphasizing the need for civility and rejecting political violence.
“Extreme political violence is increasingly becoming the norm in our country, and the shooting of Charlie Kirk is indicative of a far greater and more pervasive issue: acts of violence are becoming more common, even without any clear ideology or motive,” said Jon Lewis, a research fellow at the Program on Extremism at George Washington University. “There's really a concern about what the blowback to something like this will look like.”
Lewis’s warning echoes a growing chorus of experts who study political violence and polarization. Among them is Lilliana Mason, a political science professor at Johns Hopkins University, who emphasized the retaliatory nature of recent attacks. “People are reluctant to engage in violence first, but they're much more willing to engage in violence as retaliation,” Mason said. “No one wants to be the one to start it, but lots of people want to be able to finish it.
Mason also warns that such violence reflects “the existential stakes of our politics” and signals a breakdown in democratic norms. If the people who lead us are using violent or dehumanizing rhetoric, then it’s a signal to their supporters that violent action might be acceptable.
Following the killing of Kirk, President Trump chose not to issue a call for unity or denounce political violence. Instead, he intensified his rhetoric, telling reporters on Thursday, “We just have to beat the hell out of radical left lunatics.” The statement drew sharp criticism from across the political spectrum and reignited concerns about the role of incendiary language in fueling division and unrest.
Critics argue that Trump has helped fuel this collapse. Political scientists analyzing his speeches from 2015 to 2024 found a sharp rise in violent vocabulary—from 0.6% in 2016 to 1.6% in 2024, surpassing nearly all other democratic politicians and approaching the levels seen in authoritarian regimes. In March 2024, Trump warned of a “bloodbath for the country” if he wasn’t reelected. Such language, while galvanizing to some, has been condemned by others as dangerously incendiary.
"For years, those on the radical left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis and the world's worst mass murderers and criminals," Trump said in a video message. "This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we're seeing in our country today, and it must stop right now."
Representative Seth Moulton (D-MA) recently stated, “If the president is serious about stopping political violence, then maybe he should start by rescinding the pardons for all the domestic terrorists who came to the Capitol on January 6th”. Moulton cited data showing that 76% of political violence in the U.S. comes from right-wing extremists.
This rhetoric doesn’t exist in a vacuum. It circulates through social media algorithms, cable news cycles, and influencer platforms that reward outrage and dehumanization. As Cynthia Miller-Idriss, author of Man Up: The New Misogyny and the Rise of Violent Extremism, told PBS, “We now see a 2,000 percent increase in targeted violent plots over the past 20, 25 years”.
We are now a nation where election workers wear bulletproof vests, where fentanyl-laced threats arrive in mailboxes, and where public officials—especially women and people of color—face daily harassment. And yet, a UC Davis study found that one in four Americans still believes violence is justified to advance at least one political goal.
Let that sink in.
As the nation prepares for the 2026 midterms, civic leaders face a daunting challenge: how to restore faith in democratic processes while protecting those who serve them. “We don’t settle our differences at gunpoint,” Governor Walz said. “Peaceful discourse is the foundation of our democracy”.
We cannot normalize this. We cannot shrug off assassinations as partisan footnotes or treat threats as the cost of public service. Democracy is not a spectator sport—it is a shared covenant. And when violence becomes a viable political tool, that covenant shatters.
We must recommit to peaceful participation. We must protect those who serve. And we must reject the rhetoric—on all sides—but especially from Trump that dehumanizes opponents and inflames division.
Because if democracy bleeds unchecked, it may not survive the next election.
Meacham: Political Violence in America Linked to Deep Questions of Identity and Inclusion
"Who is an American? Who deserves to be included in \u2018We the people" - Jon Meacham AI generated illustration
Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network.
A view of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on June 25, 2026. President Donald Trump jolted Republicans during a fiery appearance at the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, scrapping a housing bill signing ceremony and clashing behind closed doors with a party rebel who challenged him over the Iran war. Trump had been expected to sign the bipartisan housing.
Only Trump doesn’t care about housing
It was August 15, 2024. Then candidate Donald Trump stepped out of his Bedminster, New Jersey, golf club’s columned clubhouse to a gaggle of reporters. He was flanked by tables of groceries and signs showing the rising cost of food. Also on one of the tables was a dollhouse, meant to represent the equally alarming rise in housing prices.
It was a speech about the economy, the single most important issue of the 2024 election cycle, full of promises that went right to the heart of Americans’ anxieties. While former President Joe Biden and then Vice President Kamala Harris were contorting themselves to posture a good economy that just needed more time to recover from the pandemic, Trump was preying on voters’ very real fears of unaffordable gas, groceries, and homes. It was obviously a winning message.
In that speech, Trump promised, “We’re going to open up tracts of federal land for housing construction. We desperately need housing for people who can’t afford what’s going on now.”
As of mid-2023, there had been a housing shortage of nearly four million homes, according to the National Association of Realtors. Americans all over the country were either priced out of buying new homes due to low inventory, trapped in their existing homes by sky-high mortgage rates, or facing exorbitant rent hikes thanks to corporate investors buying up rental properties. Americans needed help, and Trump promised it.
Cut to March of 2026, when Trump reportedly told House Speaker Mike Johnson, “No one gives a sh*t about housing.”
That kind of thinking may explain why Trump this week suddenly announced he was canceling a signing ceremony for the bipartisan “21st Century ROAD to Housing Act,” a housing bill co-sponsored by Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Tim Scott that passed the House 358-32 and was approved in the Senate on Monday.
Trump instead demanded Congress pass the SAVE America Act, his controversial election grievance bill that doesn’t have enough Republican support to get passed in the Senate.
It’s just the latest in a line of policy self-owns where Trump has seemingly intentionally made life more difficult for Republicans hoping to keep their majority. Despite midterm elections occurring in the midst of a blistering economy and an unpopular war, they were surely hoping the housing bill would give them something — anything — to brag about when they returned home to their districts.
And very much to the contrary, Americans do give a sh*t about housing. According to a recent survey by the Bipartisan Policy Center, a whopping 79% say the cost of housing is extremely or very important to them. Eighty-three percent say Congress should take action on the issue — like it just did. Eighty-nine percent say the House and Senate need to work together to pass affordable housing legislation — like they just did. And 63% say they would be more likely to vote for a lawmaker if they helped pass legislation to build more affordable homes and lower housing costs — like they just did.
There aren’t many issues that unite Americans like housing does, and very few bipartisan policy wins Congress can point to, and yet, Trump is holding that bill hostage in order to get his pet project — which doesn’t even have the support of his own party — pushed through.
If you’re trying to make sense of something so nonsensical, as I’m sure many Republican lawmakers are, it’s certainly sad but not actually all that complicated. Trump said what he needed to get reelected and then promptly abandoned his promises in order to pursue his own self-interests, even if those interests are bad for Republicans and bad for voters.
That’s just the kind of guy he is.
S.E. Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.