The Gist Brendan Nyhan: Measuring Political Violence Without Panic
9 snips
Sep 19, 2025 Brendan Nyhan, a Dartmouth government professor and co-director of Bright Line Watch, dives into the nuances of measuring political violence. He highlights how simplistic polling methods can exaggerate support for violence, revealing that true backing is often under 10%. Nyhan discusses the role of elite cues in shaping public fear and warns against using perceived threats as justification for repression. The conversation also touches on the implications of recent media controversies, like Jimmy Kimmel's exit, in the wider context of political narratives.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Survey Framing Inflates Violence Support
- Single-item poll questions overstate support for political violence because respondents often misinterpret or click carelessly.
- Careful follow-ups that define "violence" show explicit felony-level support is consistently under 10%.
Pin Down Meaning With Follow-Ups
- Ask an initial attitude question then follow up with a precise, concrete definition to capture intended meaning.
- Screen for attention and use pinned follow-ups to avoid misclassifying vague endorsements as felony-level violence.
Perception Of Support Drives Escalation
- Perceived widespread support for violence can itself fuel escalation by creating misperceived permission structures.
- Elite cues and sensational social media anecdotes magnify those misperceptions and increase risk.