ICE Lost the Renée Good Narrative Battle — Polls Show Why It Will Get Worse

(AP Photo/Adam Gray)

Polling has now delivered a verdict in the narrative battle over Renée Good’s killing, and the result explains why the conflict surrounding it is set to intensify.

A Quinnipiac University poll conducted January 8–12 finds that 53 percent of Americans believe the ICE agent’s use of force was unjustified, while 35 percent believe it was justified. That topline matters because opinion sorted cleanly and now shapes political incentives.

Other surveys confirm the pattern. YouGov polling conducted in the immediate aftermath found a majority disapproving of ICE’s performance, with independents particularly skeptical and a plurality calling the agency’s tactics too forceful. An Economist-YouGov survey taken days later showed roughly half of respondents viewing the killing as unjustified, alongside sharply reduced confidence in ICE and growing support for outside investigations.

Last week, I described how two camps formed almost immediately, each convinced that the footage proved its case. The polling now shows where that sorting landed and how firmly it has set the terms.

The partisan breakdown gives the numbers their meaning. Ninety-four percent of Democrats say the shooting was unjustified, and 77 percent of Republicans say it was justified. Independents tilt sharply against ICE’s handling: in Quinnipiac’s survey a majority of independents viewed the shooting as unjustified, and separate YouGov data shows a majority of independents disapproving of how ICE does its job and calling its tactics too forceful.

That pattern means the administration lost the broader argument about this incident, and the size of that loss — driven in part by independent skepticism — defines the political terrain going forward.

The Department of Homeland Security moved quickly with their story immediately after the shooting, asserting that the agent acted in self-defense after Good attempted to run over officers. Early institutional framing often shapes first impressions. Here, the administration spoke first and forcefully, and public opinion moved the other direction anyway.

That outcome reflects how far ICE’s baseline credibility has eroded beyond the Republican coalition. Local officials immediately challenged the initial account. Video contradicted key elements. The official narrative functioned less as an authoritative account and more as one argument among many.

The partisan split explains the direction of travel. Democratic opinion is overwhelming and consistent with recent enforcement debates. Republican opinion is equally consolidated. For the Trump administration, 77 percent support among Republicans provides political insulation. Aggressive enforcement and confrontational rhetoric carry limited internal cost.

Republicans have concluded that base intensity matters more than majority approval. The polling confirms they can sustain aggressive enforcement despite independent skepticism as long as their coalition remains unified.

Independent skepticism appears clearly across surveys. Approval of ICE’s handling of immigration enforcement remains low, and confidence has eroded beyond the Democratic base. In a median-voter political system, that would exert pressure to moderate. In the current system, it represents a tradeoff Republicans have already decided to accept.

The numbers now function as permission structures. Trump reads 77 percent Republican support and understands escalation carries limited political risk inside his coalition. Critics read near-unanimous Democratic opposition and understand their voters expect resistance rather than accommodation. Both sides study the same data and see reinforcement for harder lines.

Investigations continue. Additional video and testimony may clarify what happened. The polling suggests new information will be filtered through commitments that formed in the first forty-eight hours. Republicans will interpret developments as vindication of the agent. Democrats will see confirmation of excessive force. Independents will maintain skepticism toward ICE.

The Renée Good case establishes the template. Instant narrative conflict. Rapid tribal sorting. Polling that maps the divide rather than softens it. That sequence will recur the next time federal enforcement, video footage, and public judgment intersect.

What gives this polling weight is its strategic clarity. The administration lost this narrative battle by eighteen points and retained the seventy-seven percent base support central to its governing strategy. Critics secured majority agreement and face an opposition consolidated around confrontation rather than restraint.

I’ve covered American media through technological revolutions. This is the post-deliberation era taking shape in real time: opinion forms at the speed of identity, numbers replace uncertainty, and polling shifts from warning signal to marching orders.

These figures map the terrain for the conflicts ahead. That terrain rewards escalation, hardens division, and leaves little space between the sides that have already chosen where they stand.

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.