Now if I have this right, "political Islam" is the demand of the religious ultra conservative to impose those beliefs into the secular business of running governments.
In general a religious component influencing government is pretty much healthy, if the governmental system allows for influence and yet not control. Separation between church and state is a good fundamental concept. But normally we see a religious influence on individuals in public office as a good thing. I don't think the US has ever had a proclaimed atheist in Presidential office. And it is still one of the best ever governments ever run by any people anywhere -- improvements sure could be made but 240 years of peaceful transition and consistency it is unmatched.
So religion should have influence on folks but not on the government of a democracy. I know the distinction is a fine line but it works so far.
So I think a rise in any religion can be absorbed by a democracy if it is not violent. Your question does not go to violence merely a movement.
Another factor is that marginalizing such a group and movement is probably worse than the inclusion which will only reach a small minority.
Totally different answer for countries without democracy ingrained and a permanent basis of stability within democratic society.