A large, nationally representative survey of U.S. adults finds that support for, and willingness to engage in, political violence remained largely stable from mid‑2024 to mid‑2025, despite a highly contentious national election and ongoing political polarization, according to a new study published in Injury Epidemiology.
The research, led by the UC Davis Centers for Violence Prevention (CVP), polled more than 8,000 adults nationwide. The survey measured beliefs about democracy, civil conflict and the use of force to advance political objectives.
While the researchers identified small increases in the proportion of respondents who view political violence as justified under at least some circumstances, they found no increase overall in personal willingness to commit political violence or to use firearms in such situations.
"What stands out is not a dramatic escalation, but a pattern of relative stability," said Garen Wintemute, first author of the study. Wintemute is an attending physician in the UC Davis Department of Emergency Medicine and director of CVP. "Across the political spectrum, the large majority of Americans continue to reject political violence, even during a period of intense political strain."
Wintemute's distinguished research has shown violence is not only a public safety issue — it's also a health problem. He launched the annual, nationally representative survey of adults in the United States in 2022 to track year-over-year changes in attitudes toward political violence.
Key findings from new study (mid‑2024 to mid‑2025)
- Justification for political violence: The overall share of respondents who said violence is "usually or always" justified to advance at least one of 20 political objectives increased modestly, from 32.3% to 35.6%.
- Willingness to personally engage in political violence: Measures of personal willingness to damage property, threaten others, injure someone, or kill someone did not increase overall, and willingness to kill someone declined slightly.
- Firearms and political violence: There was no increase in expectations of being armed, threatening someone with a firearm, or shooting someone in a situation respondents believed justified violence.
- Expectations of civil war: A small increase was observed in the belief that the U.S. may experience civil war in the coming years, while support for civil war as "necessary" remained unchanged.
Findings across political groups
The researchers examined responses by political party and by affiliation with the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement.
Some of the key results from 2024 that persisted in 2025:
- A higher percentage of MAGA Republicans (52.2%) than of strong Democrats (32.1%) believed political violence is usually or always justified to achieve at least one political objective.
- The two groups did not differ significantly regarding their stated willingness to personally injure or kill someone, and such willingness remained uncommon across all groups.
From 2024 to 2025, some attitudes moved in opposite directions:
- Strong Democrats showed small increases in some measures of perceived justification for violence.
- MAGA Republicans, on average, showed small decreases on several of those same measures.
"Looking at only one group can be misleading," Wintemute said. "The data show modest movement in multiple directions. What's consistent is that extreme positions and personal readiness to commit violence remain limited to a small minority across all political affiliations. Entrapment in a spiral of escalating political violence is not inevitable in the United States."
Side‑by‑Side Comparison of Attitudes Toward Political Violence
Bold font and an asterisk (*) indicate that the difference is statistically significant.
Measure (2025) |
Strong Democrats |
MAGA Republicans |
*Believe political violence is usually or always justified to achieve at least one political objective |
32.1% |
52.2% |
Believe the U.S. will experience a civil war in the next few years (strong/very strong agreement) |
9.3% |
3.8% |
Believe the U.S. needs a civil war "to set things right" (strong/very strong agreement) |
3.2% |
4.7% |
Very or completely willing to damage property for a political objective |
1.9% |
1.5% |
Very or completely willing to injure a person |
2.0% |
1.4% |
Very or completely willing to kill a person |
1.4% |
1.5% |
*Very or completely willing to commit political violence as a lone actor |
2.8% |
6.3% |
*Very or extremely likely to be armed with a gun in a situation where they see political violence as justified |
5.6% |
16.9% |
Very or extremely likely to shoot someone in a situation where they see political violence as justified |
1.4% |
1.8% |
Public opinion does not suggest slide toward widespread violence
The findings arrive as concerns persist about political unrest, election‑related violence and threats against public officials.
The study's authors emphasize that public opinion does not currently suggest an inevitable slide toward widespread political violence, and that prevention efforts can benefit from recognizing both areas of concern and resilience.
"Even in a period of high political tension, most Americans continue to reject political violence," said Veronica Pear, senior author of the paper. Pear is an epidemiologist and assistant professor at CVP. "This suggests prevention remains both necessary and possible, particularly when efforts build on the fact that support for violence is not the norm."
Additional co-authors are listed in the paper.
Funding
This research was supported by the Joyce Foundation, the California Wellness Foundation, the Heising-Simons Foundation, and the California Firearm Violence Research Center and UC Davis Violence Prevention Research Program.
