CHRIS CRUCIAL: Why I am *very* worried about political violence 😟

PLUS: A scary debate moment in New Jersey

We are only 73 paid subscribers from 3,700!!! A paid subscription is $6 a month/$60 for the year — and comes with loads of perks including a 15-minute Zoom call with me! Join the movement today!👇

1. A(nother) violent election?

I spoke to a group of Finnish folks today and, after my speech, one of them pulled me aside and almost sheepishly asked me this: Is there going to be violence in the streets after the November election? (Interestingly it’s a question I get virtually any time I give a talk — especially to European audiences.)

In truth, I didn’t — and don’t — have a good answer to it. I want to say “No, of course not — we pride ourselves on the peaceful transition of power.” But then I remember that January 6, 2021 happened — and that day proved, at least to me, that we are a lot closer to political chaos (and violence) than we like to admit.

It wasn’t just January 6 either. (And for those who insist the riot that day was peaceful, you need to watch this.). There’s plenty of polling data out there — post-January 6 — that suggests that some decent-sized chunk of Republicans believe violence might be justified to deal with an adverse election result.

The most recent is a PRRI national survey in which 16% of the overall public said that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country” and/or that “if the 2024 presidential election is compromised by voter fraud, everyday Americans will need to ensure that the rightful leader takes office, even if it requires violent actions.”

Which isn’t great! But, among self-identified Republicans, the numbers are considerably higher. Among that cohort, 27% say that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country” and 24% agree with the statement that “if the 2024 presidential election is compromised by voter fraud, everyday Americans will need to ensure that the rightful leader takes office, even if it requires violent actions.”

Those numbers are not anomalous. A late March NPR/PBS/Marist College poll found that 20% agreed with this statement: “Americans may have to resort to violence in order to get the country back on track.”

Again, digging into the numbers among partisans is eye-opening. Almost 3 in 10 (28%) of self-identified Republicans said that violence might be necessary to get things back on track — more than double the number of Democrats (12%) who said the same.

Now, pro-Trump forces will, rightly, note that their candidate is the one who has been the subject of two assassination attempts over the past few months. And that Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise was badly injured in a shooting in 2017 by a gunman who was upset that Trump had won the 2016 election.

But this doesn’t change the fact that violence as a means to express political discontent is on the rise in the United States. And that, according to polling, Republicans are much more likely than Democrats to believe that violence may be the only answer when faced with election result with which they disagree.

I also think it’s impossible to overlook Trump’s role in all of this. Trump’s muscular form of conservatism and his repeated assertions that the solution for what ails this country is to be, well, tougher seems to me to be directly correlated to the rising acceptance of political violence as means of protest.

Trump — and his vice presidential running mate JD Vance — like to emphasize that the former president told the rally-goers on January 6 to protest “peacefully and patriotically.”

Which he did say! But, he also said this: “We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore.”

So….

In this election, Trump has repeatedly cast the stakes as absolutely catastrophic. If he loses, America will be in World War III and another Great Depression. America — and the American Dream — will be dead and buried.

As the New York Times’ Peter Baker put it in a a must-read piece last month about Trump and political violence:

At the heart of today’s eruption of political violence is Mr. Trump, a figure who seems to inspire people to make threats or take actions both for him and against him. He has long favored the language of violence in his political discourse, encouraging supporters to beat up hecklers, threatening to shoot looters and undocumented migrants, mocking a near-fatal attack on the husband of the Democratic House speaker and suggesting that a general he deemed disloyal be executed.

When you cast the choice in that way — and you actively work to undermine the results of the 2024 election as Trump has already done — you are creating a very toxic brew.

If you are looking for some solace amid this bleakness, it’s this: Unlike in 2020, Trump is not the sitting president of the United States. His ability to use the levers of the federal government to attempt to bend the election outcome in his favor is, therefore, much reduced. No matter what happens on November 5, Joe Biden is the president of the United States until January 20, 2025. And Kamala Harris is the vice president.

But even if the mechanisms of the official power transfer work well — and given House Speaker Mike Johnson’s recent refusal to say Trump lost the 2020 election that may be too big a leap of faith — it does not rule out the possibility of major protests and even violence in that event that the election does not go the former president’s way.

(Sidebar: Yes, it is possible we see protests if Trump wins as well. It happened after 2016. But these protests were largely peaceful — although not entirely.)

When asked in the spring by Time magazine about the possibility of political violence in November, Trump responded: “I think we're going to win and there won't be violence.”

Pressed on what happens if he loses the election, Trump added this (bolding is mine):

Well, I do think we're gonna win. We're way ahead. I don't think they'll be able to do the things that they did the last time, which were horrible. Absolutely horrible. So many, so many different things they did, which were in total violation of what was supposed to be happening. And you know that and everybody knows that. We can recite them, go down a list that would be an arm’s long. But I don't think we're going to have that. I think we're going to win. And if we don't win, you know, it depends. It always depends on the fairness of an election. I don't believe they'll be able to do the things that they did the last time. I don't think they'll be able to get away with it. And if that's the case, we're gonna win in record-setting fashion.

Which isn’t exactly reassuring.

Whether or not you like Kamala Harris — or will vote for her — it’s hard for me to imagine that she wouldn’t immediately condemn any and all political violence if she lost the election to Trump.

Now, ask yourself if Trump would do the same if the shoe was on the other foot.

So, yeah, I’m worried.

The next month is a critical time for democracy. I hope you consider supporting the important work I am doing here by becoming a paid subscriber. It’s $6 a month or $60 for a year. Thank you.

2. A scary moment in New Jersey

In a Senate debate in New Jersey on Sunday night, Republican nominee Curtis Bashaw trailed off in the middle of an answer and then appeared on the verge of collapsing before Rep. Andy Kim, his Democratic opponent, came over to his podium to check on him.

The moderator quickly threw to a commercial, explaining: “I think maybe we need to take a commercial break and address some issues here on the stage.”

The debate was paused for 10 minutes. Bashaw, who is 64 years old, returned to the debate stage and sought to downplay the incident. “I got so worked up about this affordability issue that I realized I hadn't eaten so much food today," Bashaw said. “So I appreciate your indulgence.”

Later, on social media, Bashaw continued to make light of the situation:

Bashaw’s freezing episode evoked similar incidents experienced by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in recent years. McConnell has insisted the episodes were not signs of any more-worrisome condition but decided to step down as GOP leader after the 2024 election.

Bashaw is an intriguing candidate. He is gay and married to a man. He is pro-abortion rights. He is also a successful businessman who had donated almost $2 million to the contest.

But, Kim, who bested Tammy Murphy, the First Lady of New Jersey (is that a thing?) for the Democratic nomination, is a very solid candidate and is heavily favored to win. The Cook Political Report with Amy Walter rates the race as solidly Democratic.

In truth: Had the race been more competitive, Bashaw’s freeze-up might have been a bigger story nationally — and would have led to lots more follow-up questions about his overall health.

3. Porn stars against ‘Project 2025’

Well, I will admit I did not see this one coming.

“Project 2025,” the 800+ page blueprint for a 2nd Trump term put forward by the Heritage Foundation, has made for some, um, strange political bedfellows.

Witness the latest move against it: Seventeen porn, um, actors paying for a $100,000 ad campaign to run on porn websites warning of the dangers to the industry if the provisions of “Project 2025” are put in place.

And, they are exactly right! Here’s MSNBC on “Project 2025” and porn:

Just five pages into the foreword by the president of the far-right Heritage Foundation think tank, the proposal stakes out an uncompromising position that porn should be banned, porn producers and distributors should be sent to prison, and tech companies that circulate it should be shut down.

Porn actress Holly Randall, in a release announcing the ad buy, said that “I have been in this industry for over 25 years and have witnessed many attacks on our industry, but Project 2025’s ban on pornography is the most extreme proposal I have ever seen, and voters have to take that threat seriously.”

Donald Trump, for what it’s worth, has insisted that he has nothing to do with “Project 2025,” despite a number of past Trump administration officials being involved in its construction.

“I have no idea who is behind it,” Trump said over the summer.

NOTABLE QUOTABLE

“Kamala was trying to reach out, and we didn’t answer.” — An aide to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who says he is dodging the calls about hurricane relief because they “seemed political.”

ONE GOOD CHART

The storm track on Hurricane Milton looks likely to cut directly through central Florida. Fox news hurricane expert Bryan Norcross said of the storm this morning: “Unless we get extremely lucky, Milton will be one of the biggest hurricane disasters in history.”

SONG OF THE DAY

I LOVED Yasmin Williams’ 2021 album “Urban Driftwood.” The follow-up is called “Acadia” and it’s out now. Yasmin plays guitar — incredibly well — and this new album feels uplifting to me. Here’s “Hummingbird” off the new album.

Thanks for reading! This nightly newsletter brings you ALL of what you need to know from the world of politics. Think of it as a daily cheat sheet! If you want to get it in your email inbox every night at 7:30 pm, become a subscriber today!