Despite an increasingly volatile and fraught political climate in the United States, researchers have found a “broad decrease” in support for political violence from mid-2025 to mid-2026.
The analysis, published earlier this month by the Centers for Violence Prevention at the University of California Davis, offers an important counterpoint to perceptions that political violence is becoming accepted among Americans.
“These findings are clear,” wrote Dr. Garen Wintemute, the director of the Centers for Violence Prevention and an emergency medicine physician, in a news release for the analysis.
“Entrapment in a spiral of escalating political violence is not inevitable in the United States. Those who promote political violence should recognize that they do not have the public’s support and that promoting violence may exact a political cost,” Wintemute added.
Support remained stronger on the political right than on the political left, according to the analysis.
These findings are important for journalists — especially as the midterm elections draw closer.
Some story angles to consider:
- How is your local election authority preparing for the upcoming elections?
- Are there safety concerns?
- Seek records from your local law enforcement on acts of political violence or reported threats over a certain period of time — has there been an uptick or a decrease?
Survey methodology
The report is based on the Center’s ongoing survey has queried the same group of more than 8,000 respondents each year since 2022. The most recent results were from the fifth wave of surveys.
From 2022 to 2026, the “vast majority of survey participants have rejected political violence,” according to the analysis.
Researchers analyzed participants’ views on whether political violence is justified, their willingness to engage in political violence, and their expectations about firearm use in political violence. They weighted results to reflect the study population and compared changes between 2025 and 2026.
Findings
In the latest survey, researchers found decreases across the political spectrum.
Of those who support political violence in specific situations, the vast majority of people in that group said they weren’t willing to commit political violence themselves. This was more common among MAGA Republicans than most others.
As was the case in past surveys, a small group of non-Republican MAGA supporters had higher levels of support for and willingness to engage in violence.
The only increases the survey found was for the expectation of and perceived need for civil war. But only the increase in expectation was significant.
Earlier this year, the Center released another analysis from the fourth wave of the survey conducted from May 23 to June 13, 2025. During that period, there was only a small overall increase in support for political violence in the U.S.
“These findings run counter to the perceptions that the United States is in a new era of increasing political violence and that the threat of violence arises primarily from the political left,” Wintemute wrote in a news release earlier this year.
He said tracking those views over time is helpful.
“In each iteration of this survey from 2022 to 2025, the vast majority of respondents have rejected political violence,” he wrote. “Of the minority who considered it justifiable under specified circumstances, the vast majority were unwilling to commit political violence themselves.”
What the findings mean for journalists
Not long after that analysis was published, Wintemute joined a panel at AHCJ’s annual conference, Health Journalism ‘26, alongside reporter Natalie Eilbert. Both shared tips for health journalists looking to cover political violence.
Both emphasized that while political violence remains a persistent threat, it’s embraced by only a small minority of Americans.
That distinction may be particularly important for journalists: coverage of individual violent incidents can create a misleading impression about how widespread support for political violence is among the broader public.
“The large majority of us who reject political violence must make our rejection known, creating a climate of unacceptability for violence that will help prevent its occurrence,” Wintemute said.
Resources
- UC Davis Centers for Violence Prevention has been a leading research institution on understanding political violence and Americans’ shifting attitudes toward political violence and authoritarianism.
- Polarization & Extremism Research & Innovation Lab (PERIL) at American University is an applied research lab at American University’s School of Public Affairs focused on preventing radicalization to violent extremism. The lab uses “a public health approach to design, test, and scale-up evidence-based tools and strategies that effectively reduce the threat of radicalization to harmful online and offline content including conspiracy theories, mis/disinformation, propaganda, and supremacist ideologies,” according to its website. The lab’s work supports people and communities in rejecting propaganda and extremist content, and empowers them to intervene and interrupt early radicalization.
