In the last 20 years which side has had more political violence republicans or democrats?

Checked on September 23, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.

Was this fact-check helpful?

1. Summary of the results

The analyses provided suggest that right-wing extremist violence is more frequent and deadly than left-wing violence [1]. According to a study from the Cato Institute, right-wing ideology accounted for the majority of politically motivated murders, with 391 of the 618 non-9/11 political murders attributed to right-wing ideology [2]. Additionally, Republicans are more likely to say that political violence is a very big problem [3], and younger Americans and liberals are more likely to defend feeling joy about the deaths of political opponents [3]. However, most people still say that feeling joy about the deaths of political opponents is unacceptable [3]. The data also shows that political violence in America rarely follows left-right politics, and that acts of violence have frequently led to people projecting their own political beliefs onto the situation [4].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

A key missing context in the original statement is the definition of political violence. The analyses provided do not offer a clear definition of what constitutes political violence, which could lead to differing interpretations of the data [3] [5]. Furthermore, the sources do not provide a comprehensive comparison of the frequency of political violence between the two parties over the last 20 years, which is the specific time frame mentioned in the original statement [3] [5]. Alternative viewpoints, such as the role of social media, polarization, and the availability of guns in contributing to political violence, are also mentioned in some of the analyses [5] [4]. Additionally, some sources note that both Democrats and Republicans have been targeted in recent attacks, highlighting the complexity of the issue [5].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement may be misleading or biased because it implies a clear comparison between the two parties, which is not supported by the data [3] [5]. The sources suggest that right-wing extremist violence is more frequent and deadly, which could be obscured by the original statement's framing [1]. Additionally, the statement's focus on the last 20 years may be too narrow, as some sources suggest that political violence in America is a long-standing issue that transcends party lines [5] [4]. The original statement may benefit conservative or liberal agendas that seek to blame the opposing party for political violence, rather than acknowledging the complexity of the issue and the need for a nuanced approach [2] [4].

Want to dive deeper?
What are the most notable incidents of political violence in the US since 2004?
How do FBI hate crime statistics compare between republican and democrat strongholds?
Which side has been more associated with extremist groups in the last two decades?
What role has social media played in escalating political violence in the US?
How have law enforcement responses to political violence differed based on the party affiliation of the perpetrators?