Mainstream Democrats Dogged by Association with a Violent Far-Left Fringe
What to do with the Radicals who want Nothing to do with the Dems and yet are Portrayed as Mainstream Democrats
Related Articles: Effectiveness of Protests, National Guard Deployment to LA and Violent Protesters.
A protester stands atop a vandalized vehicle as another burns behind him during chaotic demonstrations in downtown Los Angeles on June 8, 2025. Scenes like this have fueled perceptions that the Democratic Party is tied to radical, anarchic elements on the far left.
In early June, what began as an anti-immigration enforcement protest in Los Angeles spiraled into fiery unrest. Police struggled to contain the chaos as several Waymo autonomous taxis were torched, sending black plumes of smoke over the Civic Center. Protesters slashed tires, smashed windows, and spray-painted anti-ICE slogans on the self-driving cars – eventually setting three of the vehicles ablaze. Amid the bedlam, some individuals took the demonstration to disturbing extremes: one rioter was seen wearing a Hamas armband and a PFLP headband while waving a Mexican flag in front of the burning cars. Many Americans watching these images on the news or social media, for one reason or another, tend to associate these actions to the Democratic party rather than far left radicals who almost dislike the party as much as the GOP.
A Violent Fringe Fuels Voter Perceptions
High-profile incidents of far-left activism devolving into violence have become political flashpoints. Conservatives have eagerly amplified these events as evidence that “radical leftists” are ascendant and that Democrats are beholden to extremists. The Los Angeles riots, for example, quickly became national news – and Republicans seized on the imagery of burning cars and foreign flags to bolster their narratives on immigration and lawlessness. “These idiots waving Mexican flags during the LA riots just gave Donald Trump the greatest political gift,” quipped Republican strategist Matt Wylie, noting that such visceral images would be “Exhibit A” in portraying an “invasion” and justifying hardline crackdowns. Indeed, conservative media routinely link Democrats to scenes of street chaos, suggesting that the “Democrat Party” tacitly endorses or at least tolerates the mayhem caused by Antifa, far-left anarchists, or militant pro-Palestinian protesters.
Even Democratic leaders acknowledge the political damage that violent fringe actors can inflict on their party’s image. After the Los Angeles riots, Democratic Senator John Fetterman – hardly a conservative – publicly rebuked the lawlessness. “This is anarchy and true chaos,” Fetterman wrote, warning that “[m]y party loses the moral high ground when we refuse to condemn setting cars on fire, destroying buildings, and assaulting law enforcement”. His message underscored a growing concern within the party: failure to decisively distance itself from violent agitators could forfeit Democrats’ credibility in the eyes of moderate voters. Other prominent progressives echoed the sentiment. (Even Senator Bernie Sanders, a leading left-wing voice, has stressed the importance of nonviolent discipline in political movements, invoking Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy in contrast to destructive protests.) The optics of unrest – whether riots in city streets or campus melees – have provided ample ammunition for opponents to paint Democrats as the party of chaos.
One particularly sensitive flashpoint has been the reaction of some far-left activists to the Israel-Hamas war. In the wake of Hamas’s brutal October 7, 2023 terror attack on Israel, most Americans (across the spectrum) were horrified by the massacre of civilians. Yet fringe elements on the left clouded the waters by appearing to celebrate or justify the attack – a stance that alienated much of the public. For instance, at a rally in New York City just one day after the attack, pro-Palestinian demonstrators openly celebrated Hamas’s deadly assault even as nearby Israel supporters mourned the victimstimesofisrael.com. And according to reports, some U.S. protests purportedly for Palestinian rights featured speakers praising or excusing Hamas’s violence, adopting slogans like “Globalize the Intifada” and other incendiary rhetoric. Such images and slogans have been splashed across television and Twitter, reinforcing the notion that the “extreme left” is not only violent but even willing to endorse terrorist brutality. Inevitably, mainstream Democrats find themselves guilted by association in the court of public opinion, no matter how little they have to do with these fringe positions.
Far-Left Activists vs. the Democratic Party Establishment
Ironically, the radical leftists whom Republicans link to Democrats are often bitterly opposed to the Democratic establishment itself. In reality, the relationship between the progressive fringe and mainstream Democrats is fraught with tension – even open antagonism. Many on the far left view the Democratic Party as too centrist, too incremental, or complicit in the very systems they seek to upend. This dynamic was on full display during the reaction to the Israel–Hamas war. As President Joe Biden firmly backed Israel’s right to respond to Hamas, a significant number of progressive and Muslim voters broke ranks in protest. Seven months before the 2024 election, “some progressives, young voters and Muslim American voters [were] showing serious reservations” about Biden’s re-election specifically because of his support for Israel’s war against Hamas. In Democratic primaries, voter discontent on the left became quantifiable: in state after state, atypically large percentages of Democrats cast protest votes against Biden. In Minnesota’s primary, for example, 19% of Democratic voters opted for “uncommitted” rather than affirm Biden, and similar double-digit percentages were recorded in Michigan and Wisconsin. The message from these voters was unmistakable – Biden’s stance on Gaza (among other issues) was unacceptable to them.
Perhaps the most striking rebuke came from within the ranks of the progressive firebrands in Congress. Rep. Rashida Tlaib, a member of the left-wing “Squad,” pointedly refused to endorse Biden in the primaries – instead urging supporters to cast a blank or “uncommitted” ballot as a protest against his Gaza policies. In fact, Tlaib garnered headlines for explicitly endorsing a “Leave it Blank” campaign in her home state of Michigan, and she even indicated she was not committed to supporting Biden over Donald Trump in the general election. She was not alone; several “Squad” members and other progressives withheld their votes from Biden in the primaries, contributing to hundreds of thousands of Democrats nationwide voting uncommitted rather than backing the sitting Democratic president. Far from being enthusiastic foot soldiers for the Biden-led party, these left-wing activists and lawmakers were effectively campaigning against the Democratic nominee from the left flank.
This schism extended beyond just the Israel issue. Left-wing organizations and third-party candidates also drew support away from Democrats. The Green Party and socialist-aligned groups frequently field candidates or mount campaigns that siphon liberal votes in protest of the Democratic establishment’s moderation. In 2024, prominent progressive intellectual Dr. Cornel West launched a third-party presidential bid that attracted disaffected leftists (though he ultimately withdrew), and groups like the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) pointedly declined to endorse Biden. All of this underscores a crucial reality: the extreme left is not a loyal part of the Democratic coalition – in fact, it often seeks to undermine mainstream Democrats. Thus, there is a deep irony in the general electorate associating Democrats with their “extreme left” fringe: the fringe itself frequently disowns the Democrats.
Mainstream Democrats Push Back and Draw Distinctions
Facing this challenge, mainstream Democratic leaders have taken pains to distance themselves from the fringe and clarify what their party truly stands for. President Joe Biden has unequivocally condemned both political violence and terrorist groups like Hamas, making the party’s stance crystal clear. In a White House address after the Oct. 7 Hamas onslaught, Biden denounced the massacre as “an act of sheer evil” and insisted “there’s no justification for terrorism. There’s no excuse” for what Hamas didtheguardian.comindianacapitalchronicle.com. He stressed that Hamas does not represent the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people, reinforcing that one can support Palestinian humanitarian needs without ever endorsing Hamas’s methods. The Democratic administration not only voiced full support for Israel’s security, but also took steps (such as proposing aid packages) to back those words with action. This forceful response was a deliberate rebuttal to any notion that Democrats are ambivalent about terrorism or lawlessness.
At the party level, Democrats have also beaten back attempts by the far left to alter core positions. In July 2024, as the Democratic National Committee crafted its platform, a minority of far-left delegates pushed to add language rejecting U.S. aid to Israel. The party establishment resoundingly rejected those efforts and instead emphasized continued support for Israel, aligning with Biden’s stance. The adopted platform highlighted the party’s commitment to Israel’s security and condemned Hamas, illustrating that the official Democratic line diverges sharply from the extreme anti-Israel rhetoric of the fringe. Similarly, on domestic issues like policing, top Democrats including Biden have consistently disavowed calls to “Defund the Police,” even as Republican attack ads tried to tie the party to that slogan. In short, mainstream Democrats have repeatedly and publicly condemned violence – whether it’s street riots or terrorist attacks – and have stressed that those who resort to such tactics do not speak for the Democratic Party.
Crucially, many voices on the progressive left itself reject the extreme methods and messaging of the fringe. Being pro-Palestine is not the same as being pro-Hamas, as thoughtful left-wing commentators have pointed out. Most progressive activists advocating for Palestinian human rights, for example, abhor the slaughter of civilians and the antisemitic ideology of Hamas. “Many on the left do not support Hamas, its exclusionary ideology, or its violent agenda,” one Palestinian-American advocate wrote, lamenting that a small subset’s “new trend of whitewashing Hamas’ terrorism” is undermining the broader movement’s credibility. In other words, even within leftist activism, there is pushback against those who appear to excuse violence. This is an important counterpoint to the caricature that “all Democrats” or all progressives cheer on riots and terror – the reality is far more nuanced. The vast majority of Democratic voters and officials occupy a mainstream that rejects political violence, embraces peaceful protest, and supports democratic norms.
The National Conversation: Guilt by Association or Honest Debate?
The tangled dynamic between the Democratic Party and its extremist fringe raises tough questions for America’s political discourse. Republicans clearly believe that harping on the “guilt by association” can yield electoral gains – and indeed, images of masked left-wing militants torching cars or chanting revolutionary slogans are political gold for those who want to portray Democrats as dangerously out-of-touch. The general electorate’s tendency to conflate Democrats with their loudest, most extreme detractors poses a persistent branding problem for the party. Every time a progressive protest turns violent or a far-left activist says something outrageous, Democratic candidates find themselves on the defensive, pressed to denounce actions they never endorsed in the first place.
Yet, ignoring or downplaying the fringe’s impact isn’t really an option either. Violence in the name of left-wing causes is real and has occurred – and it is fair for voters to ask how a party balances promoting social justice with maintaining public safety and order. The national conversation, therefore, has to grapple with a dual reality: Democrats are not monolithic with their far-left wing, but they also cannot pretend that wing doesn’t exist. The challenge for mainstream Democrats is to draw clear distinctions (as Biden and others have done) while addressing the underlying issues that fuel extremist fervor (from economic inequality to foreign policy grievances) in a way that undercuts fringe appeal. Likewise, voters and media bear a responsibility to recognize nuance – to understand that a handful of violent protesters or controversial student groups do not represent the beliefs of an entire party or ideology.
In the end, the association of Democrats with their “extreme left” may say as much about political messaging as it does about actual allegiances. The far left often operates at cross-purposes with Democratic electoral goals, even actively undermining Democratic candidates, yet in the public imagination they are lumped together. This disconnect has proven frustrating for Democratic leaders and moderates, who find themselves tarred with actions and views they clearly repudiate. Going forward, expect to see Democrats doubling down on highlighting this contrast – showcasing their commitment to pragmatic progress and peaceful change, while continuing to denounce violence unequivocally, no matter its source. Bridging the perception gap is no easy task, but it may be essential if the party hopes to allay voters’ fears and prevent fringe actors from hijacking its public image. In American politics, perceptions can quickly harden into reality; for Democrats, ensuring voters perceive the real values of the party – rather than the antics of its most extreme critics – remains an urgent and ongoing project.
Notes: This is my own opinion and not the opinion of my employer, State Street, or any other organization. This is not a solicitation to buy or sell any stock. My team and I use a Large Language Model (LLM) aided workflow. This allows us to test 5-10 ideas and curate the best 2-4 a week for you to read. Rest easy that we fact check, edit, and reorganize the writing so that the output is more engaging, more reliable, and more informative than vanilla LLM output. We are always looking for feedback to improve this process.
Additionally, if you would like updates more frequently, follow us on x: https://x.com/cameronfen1. In addition, feel free to send me corrections, new ideas for articles, or anything else you think I would like: cameronfen at gmail dot com.