this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
290 points (95.3% liked)

politics

19238 readers
2670 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A new study has revealed that a specific group of Republicans, known as MAGA Republicans, are more likely than other groups to endorse political violence. The findings, published in PLOS One, indicate that this group, making up approximately 15% of the US adult population, showed distinct beliefs on race and democracy, differing significantly from other Republican factions and non-Republicans.

In recent years, the United States has witnessed a surge in political tensions, culminating in events like the January 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection. This has prompted a growing concern among experts and researchers about the potential for widespread political violence. Such incidents have not only immediate physical repercussions but also long-term societal and public health consequences.

To address this concern, researchers embarked on a study to better understand the attitudes towards political violence among different political factions, with a particular focus on MAGA Republicans – a term often associated with supporters of former President Donald Trump who strongly deny the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election results.

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Sanctus 28 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Its weird that women make up a large portion to me. All the MAGAts at my work talk so much shit about women its insane. Everyday I have to hear twenty false generalizations about women because half of them are divorced.

[–] Jimmyeatsausage 7 points 11 months ago

Internal misogyny is a hell of a drug.

[–] qprimed@lemmy.ml 26 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

In terms of demographics, MAGA Republicans diverged from other Republican groups in several ways. They were more likely to be female and less likely to have a bachelor’s or postgraduate degree or a household income exceeding $150,000. This profile suggests a unique demographic makeup of this political faction.

...interesting.

"...There is good news in the lack of willingness to engage in violence, but it comes with a caveat: support for violence by the unwilling may enable the willing to proceed.”

so, primarily, a group of hateful, apathetic cowards. that tracks and the term "useful idiot" leaps to mind.

original study from the article

[–] superduperenigma 20 points 11 months ago (1 children)

They were more likely to be female

...interesting.

Anecdotally, I feel like a lot of the hardcore anti-vax, anti-science, etc conservatives are women who've been sucked into various conspiracy circles on social media. Seems like they're often undereducated stay at home moms who are somewhat socially isolated. Basically the same demographic that typically gets targeted by pyramid schemes.

That's just one subgroup in MAGA-land, so it's still interesting that women seem to be such a majority in that wing of the party.

[–] agent_flounder 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Looking at the numbers, they're only slightly more likely to be female. E: but yeah, it is hard to fathom. Although religious women tend to take all the misogynistic BS to heart. So maybe that is part of it?

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 17 points 11 months ago (1 children)

True story.

After the pussy grabber tape came out, a Conservative woman when on The View TV show to defend Donnie. One of the panelists kept repeating the phrase 'pussy gabber' over and over. The Conservative woman asked he to stop using that offensive term.

[–] CharlesDarwin 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I remember how they kept acting like the term "pussy" was the issue, too: "locker room talk". And not the fact that he was bragging about sexually assaulting women.

People were not upset over the term pussy. At least not normal people. That gaslighting concern troll on The View sounds like they were moralizing over the term, but the term itself was not the issue. The orange jesus could have said he grabs them by the swim suit area and it's no different.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

He was on Howard Stern's radio show and boasted about walking into the dressing room at the Miss Teen USA pageant. A self admitted perv.

[–] utopianfiat 12 points 11 months ago

Of all sad words of tongue and pen the saddest are these: Hillary was right again.

[–] homesweethomeMrL 10 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Trump: is disgusting, a rapist, demented, a fraud, smells like shit

Everyone-not-MAGA: what the hell is wrong with you people

Science: Something is wrong with those people. We have numbers.

Everyone-not-MAGA: uh, yeah? That’s obscenely obvious?

Science: [repeat]

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

You are missing the point and misrepresenting science. The reason to do science isn't to point things out, and that's not what they're doing here. They're not starting with the conclusion (except that it's perhaps the impetus to form various hypotheses).

Science tries to determine why things happen, and scientists make conclusions (and maybe more hypotheses) based on where the evidence leads. Figuring out why there's something wrong with these people is not a fruitless endeavor, because if we know why, we can potentially rectify it.

Edit: clarification

[–] Introversion@kbin.social 7 points 11 months ago

Well, duh. 🙄

[–] CharlesDarwin 3 points 11 months ago

In other news, Nazis love fascism.

[–] Nomad@infosec.pub 2 points 11 months ago

In other news: water wet.

[–] jordanlund -1 points 11 months ago

"MAGA Republicans much more “delusional” and pro-violence, study finds"

FYFY