Remember when talking about a potential civil war in this country meant getting fitted for a tinfoil hat? It was either that or people figured you were actually hoping for it. One or the other, generally. It wasn’t enough to say, “I see this coming.” No, it had to be either that you were nut or you were hopeful.

Considering how many people seem to think that’s in this country’s future these days, that has probably changed a good bit.

Thirty-one percent (31%) of Likely U.S. Voters say it’s likely that the United States will experience a second civil war sometime in the next five years, with 11% who say it’s Very Likely. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 59% consider a second civil war unlikely, but that includes only 29% who say it’s Not At All Likely. (To see survey question wording, click here.) Democrats (37%) are more fearful than Republicans (32%) and voters not affiliated with either major party (26%) that a second civil war is at hand. But 59% of all voters are concerned that those opposed to President Trump’s policies will resort to violence, with 33% who are Very Concerned. This compares to 53% and 28% respectively in the spring of Obama’s second year in office. Thirty-seven percent (37%) don’t share that concern, including 16% who are Not At All Concerned. Fifty-three percent (53%) are concerned that those critical of the media’s coverage of Trump will resort to violence, with 24% who are Very Concerned. Forty-two percent (42%) are not concerned about violence from media opponents, including 17% who are Not At All Concerned.

In other words, most people don’t think it’ll happen, but less than a third are convinced it’s not going to happen.

Realistically, I’m not sure how probable this is. I tend to think we’ve got a major blow coming. We’re way past due, in my opinion, which means we should all be a little conscious about that going forward.

But I do think no one is going to be let down by being ready. We’ve already seen groups of people in this country resort to violence in an effort to foist political change on people. The Antifa riots, for example, were nothing more than low-grade domestic terrorism. It’s not a leap for them to take it a step further, now is it?

What else was the shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise but domestic terrorism? This was someone who resorted to violence to cause political change, the very definition of terrorism.

Is a civil war the same as domestic terrorism?

Well, it can be. It’s a matter of scale, though. It’s about numbers. The lone wolf domestic terrorist isn’t part of an army trying to change the United States government. It’s a schmuck who thinks his way is the only way.

But if you get enough of those schmucks together, the potential for ugliness increases.

I can already see the comments. “We’d win. No problem,” and other variations on that theme. Honestly, we probably would. We’d have the police and military on our side, most likely, and we’d have plenty of armed individuals ready to fight back as well. We’d hold the edge in most instances.

That doesn’t mean it won’t get ugly, though. Fighting in our streets, assassinations, bombings, all things we’re used to seeing on the news…in other countries.

Frankly, I hope that 31 percent is wrong. I really do.