On June 14, 2025, the United States was rocked by the targeted assassination of Minnesota House Democratic Caucus leader Melissa Hortman and her husband at their Brooklyn Park residence. State Senator John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, were also critically wounded. The attacker, Vance Boelter, had a ‘hit list’ of 45 Democratic officials, making this not just a personal tragedy but an echo of a rising tide of political violence directed at elected representatives in America.

Yet, reflecting a troubling new reality, this attack—like many before it—quickly faded from public consciousness. Media coverage was fleeting, and national attention shifted almost immediately to other headlines. This pattern is now familiar. The attempted arson and break-in at Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro’s residence in April, the 2022 assault on Paul Pelosi, and even the 2023 attempted assassination of Donald Trump at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, have all been followed by a wave of initial shock, then rapid public amnesia.

Political Violence: A Growing Threat

Historically, America has endured acts of political violence—from the high-profile assassinations of Lincoln and Kennedy to the shooting of Ronald Reagan in 1981. However, a disturbing trend has emerged: politically motivated attacks are occurring with greater frequency, and the collective outrage is increasingly short-lived.

Recent data deepens this concern. According to a 2023 Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) survey, almost one in four Americans agreed that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country,” up from 15% in 2021. By 2024, the U.S. Capitol Police reported a record number of threats against members of Congress, their families, and staff. Federal judges and election officials have also been targets, facing harassment ranging from threats to direct violence, such as the 2020 murder of a federal judge’s son in New Jersey.

Election workers, too, have seen their roles become increasingly perilous. In the lead-up to the 2024 general election, reported threats and security concerns caused a surge in resignations among frontline democracy stewards—threatening the smooth execution of basic democratic functions.

Toxic Political Culture and the Role of Rhetoric

The rise in violence isn’t a coincidence. It’s fueled by increasingly divisive rhetoric and a political landscape that rewards outrage and demonization. High-profile figures—including former President Donald Trump—have contributed by refusing to consistently denounce violence and, at times, legitimizing or excusing those who use it. Trump, for example, has often called for his supporters to “fight,” publicly downplayed violent acts, and, in some cases, praised those who participated in the January 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection. A recent academic analysis found that his violent rhetoric has grown dramatically over the years.

But the problem is bigger than any one person or party. Misinformation and conspiracy theories, amplified by social media and certain broadcast outlets, have normalized extreme views and made consensus nearly impossible. Disinformation campaigns, often fueled by foreign actors as well as domestic groups, drive a wedge between communities. The resulting culture is one where political rivals are seen not just as opponents but as existential threats, making violence a more conceivable—if still unacceptable—outcome in political disputes.

Politicians’ responses to violence frequently reflect this polarization. Instead of unified, meaningful denunciations, their statements often devolve into point-scoring. In the aftermath of Hortman’s assassination, former President Trump declared the violence intolerable but quickly pivoted to partisan critique, declining to call affected leaders and offering only perfunctory condolences. Meanwhile, some Republican lawmakers made insensitive remarks on social media, only deleting them after backlash from colleagues.

The Erosion of Democratic Norms

Underlying the wave of violence is a more insidious risk: the erosion of democratic norms. The United States was once held up as a model of peacefully resolving even fiercely disputed elections, as in 2000 when both political leaders and the public followed the rule of law rather than resorting to violence. But with each forgotten attack, the country risks setting new—and lower—expectations for what is tolerated in political discourse, threatening the stability of the democracy itself.

Research shows that failure to strongly and consistently denounce political violence enables its normalization. A 2021 MSNBC analysis noted that both sides need to address hostile speech and commit to keeping disputes within the bounds of law and civil debate.

The Path Forward: Reclaiming Public Discourse

To restore American democracy’s resilience and security, several steps are critical.

1. Bipartisan Leadership: Both parties must unequivocally condemn all forms of political violence, regardless of the victim, and refrain from rhetoric that might fuel further division.
2. Civic Education: Schools and communities should re-emphasize civics and the peaceful transfer of power as foundational democratic values.
3. Media Responsibility: News outlets and social media platforms should commit to longer, more in-depth coverage of attacks on democracy, counteract misinformation, and resist the urge to move on before the underlying issues are addressed.
4. Engaged Citizenry: Voters must reject political violence by turning out in record numbers and supporting leaders who model respectful, truthful, and positive public discourse.

Examining the responses to past crises offers hope. During the 2000 presidential election standoff, Al Gore’s dignified concession and bipartisan calls for unity kept tensions from boiling over. Broader civic engagement and cross-partisan cooperation can once again serve as a bulwark against the slide toward normalization of political violence.

Conclusion: Memory and Action

The assassination of Melissa Hortman, the attack on Governor Shapiro, and attempts on public figures such as Donald Trump and Nancy Pelosi–all are grim reminders of the stakes. A healthy democracy demands accountability, memory, and resolve. Forgetting these assaults only emboldens future attackers and deepens democratic decline.

To honor victims and prevent further tragedy, leaders and citizens alike must keep the names and stories alive, demand unrelenting commitment to peaceful political processes, and resist the pull toward violence as a solution. The future of America’s democracy depends on whether the nation can reclaim the ideal that disputes are settled at the ballot box, not through bullets.