No, the IDers are mainstream people.
Now when a "student" goes to look up the second law of thermodynamics,
ID doesn't use the Second Law of Thermodynamics as an objection to evolution.
Actually, I'm not even sure you can say ID objects to evolution. My view is that what it objects to is an undirected explanation of biodiversity.
Here is a very recent article by Dembski which specifically addresses the issue.
From you link YEC's should consider ID their friend and join them in the destruction of Darwinism. No go back to DU.
In the scientific community, or in the general populace? What does the general populace know about evolution? Probably only what their pastors tell them.
Does the general populace understand the basic issues surrounding ID vs. Evo? No. So their opinion doesn't matter in determining whether it's a reasonable or scientific view.
If a person cannot explain the "irreducible complexity" argument, and why evolutionists discount the "irreducible complexity" argument, they aren't worth listening to about evolution. (note that the ability to explain an argument does not mean that you have to support that argument; I'm not demanding that people support evolution in order for their views to be valid)