Charlie Kirk S Assassination And The Chilling Effect Of Political

A majority of Democrats, Independents and Republicans agree that “extremist political rhetoric” contributed to the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, according to a new poll. The survey from NBC News found that 54% of Democrats agree that extreme rhetoric from “some in the media and by political leaders” was a major factor in Kirk’s killing. An overwhelming majority of Republicans, 73%, expressed the same sentiment, while 53% of Independents agreed. Across all respondents, 61% of Americans said they believe rhetoric contributed to Kirk’s death. Meanwhile, 28% said they believed Kirk’s killing was caused more by the lone actions of a disturbed individual than the broader political climate. Another 4% said it was a combination of the two.

The poll marks the first time in 15 years of NBC News polling that majorities of all major American political groups agree that extreme rhetoric was a major factor in causing a violent incident. Arie Perliger, The Conversation Arie Perliger, The Conversation Alfonso Serrano, The Conversation Alfonso Serrano, The Conversation The fatal shooting of prominent conservative activist Charlie Kirk on Sept. 10, 2025, has brought renewed attention to the climate of political violence in America. Kirk’s death reflects a sizable increase in threats against officeholders and politicians at the local and federal level.

Alfonso Serrano, a politics editor at The Conversation, spoke with University of Massachusetts Lowell scholar Arie Perliger after Kirk’s shooting. Perliger studies political violence and assassinations and spoke bluntly about political polarization in the United States. ALFONSO SERRANO: What were your initial thoughts after Charlie Kirk’s fatal shooting? The killing of Charlie Kirk and the political violence haunting America, the deadly ‘kissing bug’ disease spreading across the U.S., and more Charlie Kirk was doing what he so often did—working a college crowd, prodding and provoking students in debate. The 31-year-old founder of Turning Point USA was at Utah Valley University near Salt Lake City on Sept.

10, surrounded by thousands of students gathered in an outdoor courtyard. It was the first stop of Kirk’s fall campus tour, and he was seated beneath a tent emblazoned with the words “The American Comeback.” Kirk became a star in these settings. Since founding his right-wing advocacy organization at 18, he proved peerless at channeling youthful discontent into political energy, shaping a movement with national reach. As Kirk fielded questions from the audience, a shot rang out, striking him in the neck. Panicked students scattered. Kirk was rushed to the hospital.

Grisly footage of the shooting rocketed across social media. Inside the West Wing, staff sat in shocked silence, scrolling to see the latest updates of news on their phones and messages on their computer screens. At 4:40 p.m., Trump announced Kirk’s death on Truth Social. “No one,” the President wrote, “understood or had the Heart of the Youth in the United States of America better than Charlie.” He leaves behind a wife and two young children. Click here to buy your copy of this issue In recent years, the prospect of a political assassination such as this, carried out before a stunned crowd in broad daylight, has hung over a nation riven by factional fury.

Elected officials whispered about it in green rooms and on campaign buses. When the moment arrived, it unfolded with chilling precision: a campus stage, a microphone, a single burst of gunfire. Where it will lead now is an ominous question with no obvious answers. Wide-open gun culture and hyper-polarization are bringing the “years of lead” to the USA. Charlie Kirk hands out hats before speaking at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah, Wednesday, Sept. 10, 2025.

The assassination of Charlie Kirk, the 31-year-old right-wing activist who led Turning Point USA, in Utah on Wednesday was horrifying and upsetting. Kirk was fatally shot in the neck while speaking at Utah Valley University. His death was confirmed hours later by President Donald Trump and others. He was the father of two young children. Yet, as shocking as Kirk’s killing was, the fact that there was this kind of assassination is sadly not that unexpected. After all, America is awash in violence, political or otherwise, every day of the year.

Responding to the initial reports of the shooting, Representative Jaime Raskin wrote: “Condemning another absolutely disgraceful act of gun violence.” The word “another” captures the disturbing truth of the news: Gun violence, whether in... This violence is a product of a political system that refuses to implement gun control even as the social fabric frays. <iframe width="100%" height="124" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://player.wbur.org/onpoint/2025/09/15/charlie-kirk-assassination-political-violence"></iframe> Charlie Kirk helped shape conservative politics over the last decade. His assassination raises a question for all Americans: Can anything turn back the rising tide of political violence in America? Emily Anderson Stern, a Salt Lake Tribune Statewatch reporter.

She was at Charlie Kirk’s speaking event at Utah Valley University, and has been reporting on the assassination. Kyle Spencer, journalist and former New York Times contributor. Author of "Raising Them Right: The untold story of America’s ultraconservative youth movement – and its plot for power." Andrew Egger, White House correspondent at The Bulwark. The fatal shooting of prominent conservative activist Charlie Kirk has brought renewed attention to the climate of political violence in America. Kirk’s death reflects a sizable increase in threats against officeholders and politicians at the local and federal level.

Alfonso Serrano, a politics editor at The Conversation, spoke with University of Massachusetts Lowell scholar Arie Perliger after Kirk’s shooting. Perliger studies political violence and assassinations and spoke bluntly about political polarization in the U.S. Perliger: It was a bit unusual that the attack was not against an elected official. Rarely have we seen political assassinations that are aimed at the nonprofit political landscape. Usually those people are not deemed important enough. Secondly, and it’s something I see a lot in my research, political assassinations come in waves.

We see that not only in the United States but other countries. I’ve looked at political assassinations in many democracies, and one of the things I see in a fairly consistent manner is that political assassinations create a process of escalation that encourages others on the... And that is my main concern. That this process creates legitimization and acceptance, that it provides the sense that this is an acceptable form of political action. This will not end here. The data shows that there’s a substantial increase in the level of threats against officeholders at the local and federal level.

What’s different now is we see an increased support in political violence from both sides of the political spectrum. Consistently, almost a quarter of the public is willing to support political violence in some form, or see that as a legitimate form of political action.

People Also Search

• Charlie Kirk's assassination and the chilling effect of political ...
• Charlie Kirk's assassination was driven by 'extremist political ...
• Analysis: Why Charlie Kirk's killing could embolden more political ...
• Kirk assassination has chilling effect on campaign trail
• Charlie Kirk assassination has chilling effect on campaign trail - MSN
• Charlie Kirk's Death and the Rise of Political Violence | TIME
• Charlie Kirk's killing follows a disturbing pattern of political violence
• The Killing of Charlie Kirk Is Part of a Terrible New Era of Political ...
• What Charlie Kirk's assassination reveals about political ... - WBUR
• Charlie Kirk's Killing and the Rise of Political Violence in the U.S.