On 13 July, Thomas Matthew Crooks, a 20-year-old assailant, fired several shots at former President Donald Trump during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania in an attempted assassination. The motive for the attack remains unclear and at this stage no direct link to a political agenda or motivation has emerged. However, heightened tensions and strained relations across the political spectrum in the US have set the scene for a period of increased volatility during the election period and beyond. In this context, public dissatisfaction can readily erupt into unrest, and in extreme cases, turn violent.

A troubled landscape

Political disagreement is a natural and arguably necessary feature of a pluralist society, as is the sometimes-acrimonious airing of those disagreements. However, there has been a marked increase in political polarisation and outright hostility between rival camps the US in recent years. Data from the Pew Research Centre shows that the percentage of both Democratic and Republic supporters that hold a ‘very unfavourable’ view of the other has increased considerably over the past 30 years, going from 21 percent in 1994 to 62 percent in 2022 for the Republicans, and 17 percent to 54 percent for the Democrats over the same period.

These rifts have been exacerbated by several factors, including the increase in divisive rhetoric by some political leaders and candidates towards their rivals and the spread of misinformation and disinformation on social media. This has been further amplified by external actors, including Russian-linked accounts, which have sought to deepen divisions and sow fear in the US by spreading disinformation on social media platforms. This has involved the publishing of fake articles, posts and comments on divisive topics in the US, including immigration policy, the economy and racial tensions. In addition, growing distrust in government institutions and in law enforcement has led to increased levels of discontent and frustration as parts of society begin to question these institutions’ legitimacy and ability to meet their needs. According to the Pew Research Centre, for example, only 16 percent of the public say they trust the federal government “always” or “most of the time”.

Protests take centre stage

Consequently, sensitive issues and polarising events are now more likely to drive disruptive social unrest than in the past and pose the primary threat to political stability. For example, recent events such as the Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests in 2020, which were among the largest demonstrations in US history, and the Capitol Hill riots in 2021, underscore the threat of significant public responses to politically charged situations. Ahead of the election, tensions over key issues such as abortion rights, LGBTQ+ legislation, and the Israel-Palestine conflict are likely to escalate, increasing the likelihood of associated protests. Furthermore, given the high levels of discontent, unforeseen events could also serve as catalysts for demonstrations at short notice, as was the case in 2020 with the killing of George Floyd, which sparked the BLM protests.

The location and dynamics of these demonstrations are likely to evolve depending on the phase of the election period. Ahead of the election, protests and demonstrations over divisive and sensitive issues are likely to continue at traditional protest sites such as in the country’s larger cities, including New York and Washington, D.C. In July 2024, for instance, thousands of pro-Palestine activists converged on the capital and clashed with police during Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s state visit. However, during and after the election, the profile of the demonstrations could change, particularly if disputes over the election results and claims of voter fraud emerge. In this case, the protests could shift to towns and centres in swing states such as Pennsylvania, Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin, where the election will be closely contested and the outcomes pivotal to the overall result.

To the extreme

The growing polarisation of US society also heightens the threat of isolated cases of extreme violence, particularly those targeting politicians. While the motive behind Trump’s assassination attempt is yet to be determined, the assassination attempt on Slovakia’s populist leader Robert Fico by an individual opposed to Fico’s policies underscores the threat of such incidents in politically divided societies. This is particularly pertinent in the context of lone actor attacks, which are notoriously difficult to pre-empt or prevent. Most recent cases of targeted attacks on high-profile politicians or their families, including the assassination attempt on Trump and the attack on Paul Pelosi – Representative Nancy Pelosi’s husband – have been carried out by lone actors rather than organised extremist groups. This comes amid a substantial increase in threats against US politicians over the last eight years, with members of Congress receiving 902 threats that were investigated in 2016, rising to over 8,000 in 2023, according to the Capitol Police.

Law enforcement on alert?

The hostility between rival politicians and their supporters indicates increased political violence is a real threat in the US and will likely shape the next presidential term. With this in my mind, it will be up to law enforcement agencies to prevent unrest from developing into the disruptive protests and riots seen during the BLM demonstrations and the Capitol Hill riots, while also protecting political leaders from possible violent attacks.

For example, efforts to degrade the capabilities of the groups involved in the Capitol Hill riots, including the arrests of many of their leaders, have been largely successful. Similarly, police have sought to rectify their shortcomings during the BLM demonstrations, which included understaffed departments as well as ill-equipped and underprepared officers. These measures will likely mitigate the threat of widespread, disruptive upheaval in the coming months but cannot entirely eliminate the possibility.

In the aftermath of Trump’s assassination attempt, authorities have reviewed security protocols for high-profile candidates. The third independent presidential candidate, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., now has a security detail, and there will be an increased security presence at campaign rallies and events. However, agencies like the Secret Service and Capitol Police face limited resources and have reported staff shortages in recent years. For example, Secret Service agents protecting Trump have been denied requests for additional personnel over the past two years. The specific failure of the Secret Service to prevent the assassination attempt from taking place can more readily be blamed on tactical mistakes rather than personnel shortages, with information emerging soon after the incident that police had identified the perpetrator as suspicious well before the shooting took place. But this incident aside, members of Congress have repeatedly warned that without increasing the number of agents, the agency's mission risks being compromised, which is a significant concern for US political leaders amid the current environment.

A rocky road ahead

While the actions of Thomas Matthew Crooks were likely an anomaly, this is of little comfort considering that the discontent and aggression that have come to define US politics go much further than an isolated incident. With the fragmentation of society showing no signs of improvement, the current climate of turbulence and volatility is here to stay, no matter who takes office in the White House in 2025.