Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 5:15 PM ET, 01/17/2011

Partisan reactions to Tucson shootings

By Peyton Craighill

Evaluations of President Obama's handling of the shootings in Tucson are highly positive across the political spectrum. But reactions to Sarah Palin's handling were more measured. There is a good measure of blame to go around for the state of political discourse.

Click here for the full story.

Q. Do you approve or disapprove of the way ... has responded to this shooting incident?

                 ---- Barack Obama ---
                 All   Dem   Rep   Ind
Approve NET      78    91    71    72   
 Strongly        51    75    33    44
 Somewhat        26    16    39    28
Disapprove NET   12     5    18    13
 Somewhat         6     3     8     6
 Strongly         7     2    10     7
No opinion       10     3    10    14

                 ---- Sarah Palin ----
                 All   Dem   Rep   Ind
Approve NET      30    15    48    32   
 Strongly        14     6    26    12
 Somewhat        16     9    22    20
Disapprove NET   46    72    25    38
 Somewhat        14    17    12    13
 Strongly        32    54    14    25
No opinion       24    13    26    30

Q. For ... please tell me if you think its tone in the political discourse recently has (stayed within acceptable boundaries), or has (crossed the line in terms of attacking the other side)?

                    -- Crossed the line -
                    All   Dem   Rep   Ind
Cons commentators   51    60    39    51
Lib commentators    51    38    65    53
Tea Party           49    70    32    44
Rep Party           45    62    21    44
Dem Party           39    21    55    44   

By Peyton Craighill  | January 17, 2011; 5:15 PM ET
Categories:  Barack Obama, Republican Party, Sarah Palin, Tea party  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: About a third of Americans say Obama's presidency has improved race relations
Next: Public support for what's next on health care

Comments

People who aspire to positions of leadership -- whether in politics or the media -- need to recognize the inherent potential hazards of extreme hyperbolic commentary. Claims that Obama and the Democrats are trying to destroy the nation, assertions that left-of-center members of Congress are guilty of unAmerican activities and beliefs, commentaries equating progressivism with communism or Marxism, and inflammatory calls to "take back the country" , "take up arms", "lock and load", and resort to "Second Amendment remedies" will only serve to boil the blood and embolden the irrational thinking of a handful of the most disturbed, violence-prone residents of the nation.

We need to see the larger picture. It's not whether or not a specific comment by a specific pundit or politician led Loughner to commit these heinous acts.

It's the recognition that these types of incendiary, fear-mongering statements have the potential to incite such violence, and that this event should be a wake-up call to tone down the histrionics.

Simply because one has the First Amendment Right to say a thing does not mean it is the right thing to say.

Posted by: labman57 | January 17, 2011 6:46 PM | Report abuse

Here's a prediction:

In 2016 a young Ivy League computer coder will create a website where a user can type in a forum 'user name'. With that user name an algorithm will go to work triangulating it against all public posts, user names, related aliases, passwords, etc - and give clear concise information about the identity of the forum poster.

Your children, grandchildren, ... all posterity will know exactly who you were - what you said - how eloquent and well reasoned you were - and you will be remembered accordingly.

Muhahahahahhahahaaaa ! - Mark my words.

Internet archeology will not be kind to us - perhaps it's time to bring the level of discourse up a bit - to match the expectations of our posterity - at the very least.

Posted by: PulSamsara | January 17, 2011 7:51 PM | Report abuse

We just west through 8 years of the left saying the most horrific things about Bush & Cheney,and endorsing movies like "The Assassination of George W. Bush".
Now, all of a sudden a misogynistic nut job seeks revenge for what he perceived as a disappointing encounter with a Congresswoman in 2007.
And it's just now that the discourse has been uncivil?

It's all a matter of perception...and, in this case, hypocrisy There's no evidence this crazy kid was at all influenced by political discourse. He could just as easily been influenced by what he was hearing on his iPod. Too bad some are trying to use this tragedy to score political points. Their motives are the ones that should be questioned..

Posted by: sanitysrest | January 17, 2011 8:11 PM | Report abuse

ANYONE who doesn't believe that O'Reilly's trash attacks on Dr. Tillman didn't influence Tillman's murder....AND that Palin's Rifle Scope Cross Hair figures, and her Red-Neck NRA style BS didn't influence the Arizona slaughter is as Stupid as Glenn Beck, and almost as mean.

Posted by: lufrank1 | January 17, 2011 10:19 PM | Report abuse

interesting, and highly misleading in the article. slightly more independents think that dem commentators are worse than republican counterparts when it comes to political rhetoric, but all parties poll equally. The low score for the tea party is less a reflection of consensus than an indicator of the left's rabid hatred of their opposition. republicans were much more balanced in their response to the question.

Posted by: batigol85 | January 17, 2011 11:08 PM | Report abuse

Seems I remember during Palins Florida rallys that the chant was "Kill Them" and "Kill Him"...the whole time she did nothing but smiled at the chanters.

Posted by: rrowleyarizona | January 18, 2011 2:32 AM | Report abuse

Seems I remember during Palins Florida rallys that the chant was "Kill Them" and "Kill Him"...the whole time she did nothing but smiled at the chanters.

Posted by: rrowleyarizona | January 18, 2011 2:37 AM | Report abuse

The first uncivil war 1861-1865. We are now escalating to the second uncivil war. Plain and her gangs of thugs are doing an admirable job fomenting uncivility. What's coming is inevitable, because Americans are most apathetic and uneducated.

Posted by: yard80197 | January 18, 2011 10:13 AM | Report abuse

ANYONE who doesn't believe that O'Reilly's trash attacks on Dr. Tillman didn't influence Tillman's murder....AND that Palin's Rifle Scope Cross Hair figures, and her Red-Neck NRA style BS didn't influence the Arizona slaughter is as Stupid as Glenn Beck, and almost as mean.

Posted by: lufrank1 | January 17, 2011 10:19 PM | Report abuse
============================================
"Their" speech IS inflammatory but yours isn't. Right, I get it. Another liberal thought patrol member telling us what we can and can not think, say, or do. All the while, sanctimonious liberals like you do the exact opposite.

Thanks Adolph. Now get back to writing that new edition of Mein Kamph.

Posted by: Bcamp55 | January 18, 2011 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Let's face it Palin is the Republican party's appeal to a broad population which finds dumbness a positive trait. She is Bush on steroids if u will. We know we improve with competition, but it needs to improve. There is a basic level of competency which she fails. I know there must be some relevant Republicans who don't rely on backlash so much as wisdom and demeanor who can rant and rage about their racist ethnocentric agenda without stooping to and dwelling in the gutter. She came for money. She got it. The hard way: bragging, demonstrating her failure to achieve, loud mouthing, provoking and screaming. As a woman of conscious I appeal to our democratic principles which are founded not on demoralizing our brethren but inspiring our souls. Enough of leadership by the dumb louts.

Posted by: KraftPaper | January 18, 2011 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Just like the Pope is responsible for every Abortion doctor killed. Hate speech can influence stupid people to action. But is the hate speech person responsible or a society that feels persecution of a group of people is OK. Current example Christians against Gays. Stupid people using God and Religion to persecute people protected by the constitution of the United States. ‘All men’ does not stipulate or exclude sexual preference. Separation of Church and state does not mince words and yet for the most part we completely ignore it. We have problems with bullies in schools, the biggest one being they are generally the most popular. The one everyone wants to hang out with. The playground leader. We idolize the bullies make them our heroes in school. And so it continues as adults. The one that makes fun of the minority, less fortunate, or different from the majority is our hero! Why the Lim bag, La dim, and Pa Lame are popular. They bully! They call people stupid, idiots and otherwise mock the opponent. Not with facts or reality but with name calling and shouting. Just like the little bullies on the playground! Most Americans eat it right up, want to be popular and like bullying. Even going so far as to pick up a gun and kill someone! Bullies, made popular by hateful ignorant people is the real problem!

Posted by: MickPatriot1 | January 18, 2011 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company