Op-Ed: Shapiro’s ‘both-sides’ act draws fire in debate over political violence

Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro is trying to have it both ways — not fully committing to condemning political violence in all its forms — by allowing selective outrage depending on who’s the perpetrator or victim. 

That is the crux of an op-ed by Philadelphia radio host Ada Nestor on our network site Broad + Liberty. 

Nestor argues that this “both-sides” posture is criticized as morally and politically inadequate, especially given recent prominent incidents of political violence where Shapiro’s responses have been perceived as timid or inconsistent.

The piece goes on to suggest that this approach by Shapiro isn't just about optics; it has real political risks. 

By refusing to take clear stances, the governor may alienate constituents who want principled leadership, especially on pressing issues of extremism, speech, and security. Nestor warns this could undermine Shapiro’s credibility and leadership, weakening public trust at a moment when people expect moral clarity.

Finally, the op-ed calls on Shapiro to move beyond equivocation. It urges him to explicitly and uniformly denounce political violence, to refuse the temptation of neutrality when moral clarity is demanded, and to align his political posture with what the author sees as the ethical expectation of his office. The piece frames this not as partisan posturing but as a test of leadership in trying times.

Read the entire op-ed here.