Is post-election violence inevitable, win or lose?
As Election Day draws near so does the prospect of a violent response, no matter the eventual outcome


There's an argument to be made that the defining moment of Donald Trump's presidency, if not the past decade of politics at large, was Jan. 6, 2021, when a violent mob of MAGA protesters stormed the U.S. Capitol building to disrupt Congress' certification of Joe Biden as the winner of the 2020 election. The images from that day — lawmakers cowering behind security forces with their guns drawn, a mock gallows erected outside the Capitol rotunda, a braying "QAnon Shaman" stalking the Senate chambers — have become an indelible reminder that America is just as susceptible to political violence as anywhere else. It is perhaps even more so, given Trump's penchant for actively stoking the flames of resentment and frustration across his already fervent base.
Now, as the 2024 presidential election kicks into high gear with just three months to go before polls close in November, the specter of violence once again looms large over an electorate still grappling with the legal and political fallout of Jan. 6. In a Reuters/Ipsos poll taken this spring, more than two-thirds of respondents — Democrats and Republicans alike — said they were "concerned that extremists will resort to violence if they are unhappy with the election outcome." A more recent Deseret News/HarrisX poll saw three-fourths of the country "concerned about more political violence occurring before Election Day."
It's clear that fears of political violence, to say nothing of its actual likelihood, have a hold on the national psyche. Whether those fears will be realized one way or another remains to be seen.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
What did the commentators say?
"Almost no one considered the U.S. a serious candidate for post-election violence until recently," political scientist Barbara Walter said at The New Yorker. But in the past decade, it's become "impossible to ignore that America has all the characteristics of a country at risk" including the "exact type of political system — presidential, winner-takes-all — that is most vulnerable."
"Many of the same sources of instability and grievances that precipitated" the Jan. 6, attack, "along with other challenges to the outcome of the last election, remain present today," agreed The Counsel on Foreign Relations. Even though the most acute threats are largely confined to the right wing, the "possibility of far-left extremist violence cannot be dismissed." The threat — an "urgent national security imperative" — isn't simply domestic, either. The prospect of violence could "undermine the United States' international standing and foreign policy goals, in a year where at least eighty elections will take place around the world."
If Donald Trump wins in November, there are "two components" of potential violence to watch out for, said right-wing extremism expert David Neiwert at The American Prospect. "One is the immigrant front" as has been previously seen in border states, where militia members are "rounding people up and serving them up to the Border Patrol" but on a national scale. The other is "Three Percenters, militias, the Proud Boys, who have all been gearing up" to attack protesters gathering to demonstrate against a Trump electoral victory. Conversely, if Kamala Harris wins, the risk of violence comes when bad actors "show up at ballot-counting centers, as well as at any other sort of body involved in counting and certifying the votes."
If this seems familiar, there's a reason for that. Many of the people involved in previous efforts to delegitimize American elections are the same ones agitating for — or at least anticipating — future violence and think that either "a lot" or a "great deal" of political violence will occur after the 2024 election. A study last month from Johns Hopkins University found more than 30% of conservatives who believe Joe Biden did not legally win the 2020 election "think that either 'a lot' or 'a great deal' of political violence will occur after the 2024 election." Perhaps more alarmingly, 65% of that group also "believe that the United States is 'very likely' or 'somewhat likely' to lapse into a civil war."
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
What next?
While a Republican victory in November is "likely to yield a more peaceful transition," the long-term effect means "we'll probably see more violence under a Trump presidency," said Walter at The New Yorker.
With the possibility of violence looming no matter the electoral outcome, "people should be getting ready; they should be talking to local and statewide law enforcement," said Neiwert. Stakeholders in the upcoming election, "including government, the private sector, and civil society," should begin exploring "countermeasures at the motive, means, and opportunity levels" to help diffuse the threat of, and perhaps even mitigate any outbreaks of, political violence, agreed CFR.
Rafi Schwartz has worked as a politics writer at The Week since 2022, where he covers elections, Congress and the White House. He was previously a contributing writer with Mic focusing largely on politics, a senior writer with Splinter News, a staff writer for Fusion's news lab, and the managing editor of Heeb Magazine, a Jewish life and culture publication. Rafi's work has appeared in Rolling Stone, GOOD and The Forward, among others.
-
September 14 editorial cartoons
Cartoons Sunday’s political cartoons include RFK Jr on the hook, the destruction of discourse, and more
-
Air strikes in the Caribbean: Trump’s murky narco-war
Talking Point Drug cartels ‘don’t follow Marquess of Queensberry Rules’, but US military air strikes on speedboats rely on strained interpretation of ‘invasion’
-
A tour of Sri Lanka’s beautiful north
The Week Recommends ‘Less frenetic’ than the south, this region is full of beautiful wildlife, historical sites and resorts
-
Air strikes in the Caribbean: Trump’s murky narco-war
Talking Point Drug cartels ‘don’t follow Marquess of Queensberry Rules’, but US military air strikes on speedboats rely on strained interpretation of ‘invasion’
-
Brazil’s Bolsonaro sentenced to 27 years for coup attempt
Speed Read Bolsonaro was convicted of attempting to stay in power following his 2022 election loss
-
Calls for both calm and consequences follow Kirk killing
TALKING POINTS The suspected assassination of far-right activist Charlie Kirk has some public figures pleading for restraint, while others agitate for violent reprisals
-
Why does Donald Trump keep showing up at major sporting events?
Today's Big Question Trump has appeared at the Super Bowl, the Daytona 500 and other events
-
‘Democracy is under threat globally’
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
Former top FBI agents sue, claiming Trump purge
Speed Read The agents alleged they were targeted by a “campaign of retribution”
-
Why does Trump keep interfering in the NYC mayoral race?
Today's Big Question The president has seemingly taken an outsized interest in his hometown elections, but are his efforts to block Zohran Mamdani about political expediency or something deeper?
-
Judge lets Cook stay at Fed while appealing ouster
Speed Read Trump had attempted to fire Cook over allegations of mortgage fraud