Am I wrong in thinking this guy isn't/wasn't a very influential person, outside of Twitter and the people that stay on there 24/7? If so, why even target the poor guy? What change was the person who shot him hoping to elicit? Either way, I hope he makes it, even though it looks like it was a fatal blow

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turning_Point_USA

> TPUSA has been described as the fastest growing organization of campus chapters in America, and according to The Chronicle of Higher Education, is the dominant force in campus conservatism.

They've been quite influential, and those campus efforts likely contributed to the Gen Z turnout that helped win in 2024.

Im not american, but consume american media because you guys are the world leaders. But charlie had the number 1 youth conservative movement in the country , he is pretty influential

I saw his videos occasionally on youtube/facebook. I didn't really agree with his stances on immigration most of the time, though I thought some of his other arguments on other topics were thought provoking at least, and I also thought it was cool that he always had an open mic for anyone that wanted to debate him. Seemed like he had an encyclopedic memory when it came to things like SCOTUS cases or historical events.

At the moment he was shot, he was answering for questions about transgender shootings. If the timing was calculated, it could be a political message or very strong personal hatred in this context.

He was just made fun of on the new season on South Park, if you consider that to be influential.

You are wrong. As well as organizing a large conservative movement on college campuses, he organized a large chunk of financing for the January 6 2021 riots in DC, north of $1m. This report outlines the financial infrastructure, you'd have to delve into the investigative commission documents for testimony about how he raised the money, I can't remember the name of his wealthy benefactor offhand.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/...

Also an enthusiastic proponent of military force (against other Americans)

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/charlie-kirk-calls-full-...

>why even target the poor guy

There are plenty of dangerous mentally ill people out there who don't use any type of logic or reason as a basis for their decision-making.

He ran a very large conservative organization that operates on college campuses across the country. He's definitely an influential figure.

> What change was the person who shot him hoping to elicit?

I think a difficulty in searching for such answers is assuming that it was a well reasoned decision. I'm not sure how often attempting to take a life is a purely rational decision, devoid of intense emotional motivations (hatred, self-preservation, fear, revenge, etc.). And that's all assuming the assailant was of somewhat sound mind.

I think one of the dangers of more and more extreme divisions in society is that those divisions cloud our mental processes, threaten our emotional health, and take away opportunities for meaningful civil discourse. All of which can lead to more heinous acts that we struggle to make sense of. One of the scariest parts for me is that this can all be too self reinforcing ("Their side did this bad thing to our side, let's get them back!!!" repeat/escalate...). How do we break the cycle?

In naive political terms he wasn't all that important but I think two points in response to that:

1. He was influential in a influential circle of people who roughly speaking drive what gets discussed and shown to a wider audience. In a favourite-band's favourite-band sense. His jubilee video just recently got 31 million views on youtube and probably a billion more on tiktok and reels.

2. If he wasn't killed by some nut who thought the flying spaghetti monster told him to do it then this is a really clear example of online politics and discourse jumping violently into the physical world. That's a real vibe shift if I have it right that it's basically the first assassination of that kind.

It wouldn't shock me at all if the driving topic here was actually gaza rather than domestic politics.

Charlie Kirk never really presented him this way but he was the founder & head of one of the largest think-tanks that is up there with Heritage Foundation. TPUSA was responsible for translating conservative values to Gen-Z/YA who were an all-but-forgotten demographic by mainstream GOP.

He drew a massive college crowd and was shot at that event. That's your answer.

His assassination is making the front page across the world. I'd call that influental.

As a practical question: it would be useful to have a transcript of his final speech, on a page without any graphic images of his death.

> What change was the person who shot him hoping to elicit?

We don't know yet, but we can infer these possible changes "the person who shot him [was] hoping to elicit":

- stop an effective communicator from further moving the needle of public opinion in his side's favor

- intimidate other effective communicators with similar views

- intimidate other future possible effective communicators with similar views

- cause more violence (some people love chaos and violence)

The Economist did a briefing on him in July which explains his increasingly large influence pretty well.

https://www.economist.com/united-states/2025/07/18/charlie-k...

Almost all politicians have tweeted about him now. There’s no way he’s not influential.

I think he was more influential to the younger generation. I saw Gavin Newsom interview Kirk, and Newsom opened by saying his son followed Kirk to a certain extent.

I think you're out-of-touch. It felt like he was the single most popular non-politician non-podcaster political commentator on social media for Americans under 30, and I'm not even in the target demographic that he's popular with.

> Am I wrong in thinking this guy isn't/wasn't a very influential person, outside of Twitter and the people that stay on there 24/7?

Yes, you're wrong there (no offense). He's quite popular beyond X (formerly Twitter), particularly amongst the young (~20s) conservative movements. For example, he has almost 4 million subscribers on YouTube and similar on TikTok.

I'd say X isn't even his most popular platform. He's much more popular on video platforms, due to his open campus debates.

I attended one of Charlie's debates this past year and they pretty much let anyone walk up to the mic. It wasn't scripted or censored, that I saw.

I think his clips were consistently viral on platforms like Tiktok, YouTube shorts, Instagram reels, etc., both by those who agreed with him and those who were doing reaction videos against him.

>> Twitter and the people that stay on there 24/7

That is a lot of people

He gave an invited speech at the Republican National Convention on its first night, and is credited with helping Trump get elected. “Very influential” might even be an understatement.

The problem is that that kind of influence often goes under the radar for people outside the circles in question, because influence is no longer mediated as centrally as it used to be, it’s more targeted and siloed. That’s a big part of how the current political situation in the US arose.

> Am I wrong in thinking this guy isn't/wasn't a very influential person, outside of Twitter and the people that stay on there 24/7?

Yes, you are wrong, he was the leader of the most powerful campus conservative movement group in the country, was an extremely prominent figure in right-wing media, to the point where he is a central figure in pop culture images of the right, and a central target for being too soft of organizing figures for even farthe-right groups.

> What change was the person who shot him hoping to elicit?

Motives for assassinations (attempted or actual) of politicial figures are often incoherent. Political assassins aren’t always (or even often) strategic actors with a clear, rationally designed programs.

He’s a martyr now.

Yes, you're wrong. He was very influential and a leader of the youthful conservative movement in our country. TPUSA is extremely popular. This was an abhorrent, horrifyingly public assassination of a very popular figure -- one who has been honestly quite milquetoast in terms of conservative ideology compared to other well-known figures. He wasn't even running for political office, he simply encouraged political participation, open debate, and the free exchange of ideas in a public forum. He grew TPUSA into a bastion of grassroots revitalization in community-first politics. Truly truly sickening.

Twitter has an estimated monthly active users in excess of the population of the United States by nearly a factor of two.

Even if we assume those numbers are inflated, that's quite a bit of influence if someone is influential only on Twitter.

He's being martyred on purpose. I wonder what people both sides-ing it on HN would do in the 1940s....

> Am I wrong in thinking this guy isn't/wasn't a very influential person, outside of Twitter and the people that stay on there 24/7?

I’d heard of him-I’ve lived my whole life in Australia, and although I have a Twitter/X account, I almost never use it, and that’s not a new thing, I dabbled with it but never committed.

Do most Australians know who he was? I don’t have any hard data, but my “No” to that is very confident. But I remember briefly discussing him (in person) with one of my old friends from high school, who is deep into right-wing politics (he’s a member of Australia’s One Nation party, which a lot of people would label “far right”, yet mainstream enough to have a small number of seats in Parliament)

Benjamin Netayahu and Trump tweeted support for Kirk within half an hour of the shooting.

> If so, why even target the poor guy?

Crazy people murder all the time, hell he probably did it for a girl. See the movie Taxi Driver.

Why do so many school shootings happen in the US? Often its simply that people who should never have access to lethal firearms are able to get them easily.

Paranoid time: Target him because he's notable for being willing to actually talk to the other side. Without people like him, all we have is people on both sides yelling at each other as hard as they can.

Why would someone target him? If they want more division. Maybe even if they want a civil war.

Who would want that? Maybe someone in government who wants disorder as an excuse to impose order by force. Maybe someone in Russia who wants a world order not let by America.

even if he s not that famous outside US, he might be targeted to send a message

He was the public face of Turning Point USA, a political organization that focused on getting more youth in the USA to turn conservative / Republican, to vote, and to adopt a more conservative culture. By “public face”, I mean he was 17 when he cofounded it with an octogenarian and a billionaire funder.

I think he and the org were active on Twitter, but they were MUCH more active on YouTube, and short form video (Instagram, TikTok).

It’s not even clear we know who the shooter is (still conflicting reports about whether the suspect has been arrested, let alone a confirmed identity). Too soon to know what the motive is.

You probably target the ones you have a chance of getting at? Trying to do this to Trump would theoretically be preferable to the shooter, but a great deal harder.

I'd never heard of him and now I hear flags across the US will be at-half mast. He's was a billionaire-sponsored influencer if I understand it correctly?

Yes, I'd say you are wrong. If you look at a lot of the clips of the right wing folks giving some of their most right wing comments, the stage they are on will have the Turning Point logos on them. So if not him specifically, his organization is very influential.

Like most of us, you're living in your own media bubble.

I first heard about him in around 2016, shortly after Trump was elected the first time. I'm pretty chronically online, but I was never very active on Twitter and I was still pretty aware of him. I've always found him pretty insufferable, though not as bad as Nick Feuntes or Steven Crowder.

My dude, the article in the Washington Post starts out with…

“Charlie Kirk, founder of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA, died Wednesday after being shot at an event at Utah Valley University, President Donald Trump said.”

He influenced the US President, that seems pretty influential to me. Anecdotally, my kid in high school surprised me by knowing quite a lot about them.

[flagged]

[flagged]

[dead]

[flagged]

[flagged]

[flagged]

[flagged]

[flagged]

What do you think how Trump and his administration will react.

What if that is purpose?

Twitter and the terminally online need to touch grass and overemphasize things that the real world doesn’t care about, but, to an approximation, it is the vanguard and real world talking points, political trends, etc, are all downstream from there. So yes, someone very influential with the Twitter crowd is influential.

He hand picked many of the Trump admin cabinet. He absolutely wielded power

Southpark made fun of him in a recent episode. Heard the name assumed he was a yet another alt right influencer podcaster.

Yeah, he was a minor / outlying figure in the same sense that Archduke Franz Ferdinand was.

> What change was the person who shot him hoping to elicit?

This would be a relevant question in many nations, but it's a bit beside the point in the US. Violence is a deeply respected and loved core of the culture for its own sake. It's an end, not means. Nearly all the US's entertainment, culture and myths are built around a reverence for violence. Even political violence has been pretty much the norm through most of the US's history. Celebrated cases aside, there's been something of a lull since the mid 1970s, but if as now likely it increases again, this will be a boring old reversion to the US's norm.