There should be no place for political violence in the United States, and there should be no stronger defender of that principle than the president. But after the shooting of two Minnesota Democratic lawmakers, one of whom died, in targeted attacks over the weekend, the best that President Trump could offer was a short social media post before pivoting to his usual regimen of partisan cheap shots.
Trump isn’t to blame for the shooting itself. A suspect, Vance Boelter, was arrested Sunday after a huge manhunt. Investigators are still probing his motive, but according to the Associated Press, they found a list of “prominent state and federal lawmakers and community leaders, along with abortion rights advocates and information about health care facilities” in his vehicle.
But as president Trump should consider it part of his job to lower the level of political vitriol that has turned political violence into an all-too-common phenomenon in the country he leads. Indeed, nobody should understand that problem better than Trump himself, who came within a few inches of losing his life to an assassin’s bullet last year.
The Minnesota shootings, like the assassination attempts against Trump last year (another would-be assassin was caught on one of Trump’s golf courses), are part of a deeply disturbing uptick in political violence in the past two decades. Democrats (e.g., Gabby Giffords) and Republicans (Steve Scalise) alike have been targeted. The assassination attempts against Trump came a few years after the FBI broke up a plot to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan.
After the attempts against Trump’s life, right-wing commentators were indignant about the venomous tone of national politics, just as Democrats lamented the climate at the time of Giffords’s shooting. But if you can only perceive the problem when the violence is perpetrated against people on your side of the political divide, you’re part of the problem.
What a president should be saying from the bully pulpit now is that there is no excuse for political violence, and that federal law enforcement will do everything in its power to prevent it, no matter what group or individual is targeted. The place to settle differences is at the ballot box.
He would also be setting an example of rhetorical restraint and making the case that demonizing political opponents, while it may be protected free speech, is dangerous in a democracy. Even though there is almost never a direct connection between inflammatory comments and specific acts of violence like the Minnesota shootings, it can’t be a coincidence that political violence and political polarization have surged at the same time. In this environment, political leaders have a responsibility to watch their words.
Trump, though, practices that kind of politics so extensively himself that it’s difficult to imagine him denouncing it with a straight face.
But with or without presidential leadership, that remains the country’s task. We have to expect more from our leaders and care enough about the health of democracy to vote against demagogues who threaten it. The partisan echo chambers and social media cocoons in which many Americans now live make it harder than ever to spread any sort of moderating message. But the more Americans who denounce political violence without equivocation or excuse-making, and the more who insist on dialing back demonizing and divisive rhetoric, the more likely we are to overcome this dangerous moment in the country’s history.
Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us @GlobeOpinion.