Shock Poll: Democrats Split on Whether or Not Lindsay Clancy Is 'Guilty'

Many normal Americans have tuned out the Lindsay Clancy case weeks ago, believing it is simply a horrific story with a clear moral that we shouldn't sympathize with child-killers.

Such people don't get what the fuss is all about. Lindsay Clancy seems to them to be obviously guilty — and that is that.

The unfortunate truth is that the public reaction to the case has revealed something extremely troubling about our justice system. Identity politics is corrupting our jury pool and is posing a real threat to justice in this country.

Now, I am not going to make any outlandish claims that this means "women are hormonal, irrational creatures" who should lose the right to vote and should be banned from juries. This is insipid rage-baiting and should be ignored for the juvenile tripe that it is. 

But we do have a real problem with "suicidal empathy." And it is rearing its head in regards to the jurors who have come forward to blast the lone (male) holdout who would not cave and agree that Lindsay Clancy should be found "not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility" also known popularly as due to "insanity."

The danger signs that we had identity politics creeping into the jury deliberations are numerous. But let's go with the obvious sign of bias first: It seems like some jurors had their minds made up that she was "not guilty" on day one.

This just aired on CBS Boston:

A female 4th juror comes forward and says the other jurors were pushing to acquit on *DAY 1*

She changed from guilty to not guilty pic.twitter.com/SUVAAVUdsE

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) September 9, 2026

Then we've gotten word that backs up the earlier reporting that some jurors may have worn pink in solidarity with Lindsay Clancy.

WOW. The pro-Clancy juror who was angry that the male holdout “couldn’t get over the fact that Lindsay Clancy viciously killed her children” was the pink dress-wearing juror first reported by MAMA Magazine. https://t.co/PrSNRkQGta pic.twitter.com/T5qknzobXS

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) September 9, 2026

Of course, we have the mind-boggling complaint from a juror that the lone holdout couldn't get past the fact that Clancy had "viciously killed" her kids.

Best quote on the holdout juror:

"He had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children." https://t.co/8e4H3CMAUL

— Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) September 9, 2026

There is more digital ink that could be spilled on this, but let's get to the thrust of the story: A YouGov poll suggests that interpretation of the Lindsay Clancy case may be a reflection of politics.

Nearly half of the 23,554 adults who opted in to a YouGov poll conducted from Sept. 4-8 said that Clancy should be found "guilty." One in five said that she should be found "not guilty" by reason of insanity.

Sep 4-8 poll of 23,554 U.S. adults (±0.8 point)
% who think a more appropriate verdict for Lindsay Clancy, based on what they know, would be guilty of murder | not guilty by reason of insanity
U.S. adults 46% | 21%
Men 51% | 15%
Women 41% | 26%
Democrats 34% | 31%
Independents… pic.twitter.com/Eq7r8aUdqK

— YouGov America (@YouGovAmerica) September 9, 2026

Here is the actual survey question: "Lindsay Clancy's lawyers say she was experiencing postpartum psychosis and was not criminally responsible for killing her children. Prosecutors say she acted intentionally. Based on what you know, what do you think a more appropriate verdict would be?"

Here is where it gets really harrowing: Nearly half of Democrats say she should be "not guilty." Whether or not you agree with that determination, the shocking thing is that our interpretation of criminal cases is becoming a function of politics.

That is extremely dangerous, as anyone who has read about how "justice" systems function in socialist countries would know.

We got a taste of it already during the Biden administration: Political prosecutions, show trials, and kangaroo courts that have turned into a staple of Democrat Party politics.

The second Trump term has been beleaguered by activist judges issuing nationwide injunctions based on court-shopped cases representing alleged classes of victims.

When you have a media dubbing entire classes of people as inherently being "victims" — women, minorities, immigrants — then it is inevitable you will start seeing this distort our justice system.

Not only do politics run downstream from culture, so does the law.

America has failed to teach the core Western values that undergird our legal system. And it is leading to disastrous results.

We need to judge criminal cases according to the individual actions of the defendant involved. This should be determined by the evidence, not by the identity boxes she checks or whether or not she is "sympathetic."

That is why the Lindsay Clancy case matters. It isn't just another local story that is being blown out of proportion. It is a warning sign that our justice system is broken. And the fix for it isn't outrage bait, but civic education that teaches people right from wrong, as well as the danger of judging criminal cases based on your feelings.

Editor's Note: The Democrat Party has been infected by socialism, and it's spreading FAST. Democrats are claiming there's nothing to worry about, but we know the truth.

Help us continue to shine a light on the socialist takeover by joining RedState VIP.  Use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.