A second assassination attempt puts Trump back in spotlight— Can he take advantage of the moment to sway voters?

16 September 2024, 13:06

For the second time in just two months, an American presidential candidate has survived an assassination attempt.

Such attempts are not unheard of in American history but have become rarities in the modern era. While four American presidents have been assassinated in the country’s 250-year history, a relative calm has typified the past 50 years, with relatively few attempts on the lives of candidates or office-holders.

In a country with more guns than people, the absence of political violence has been notable. The two recent attempts on Donald J. Trump’s life threaten that this calm may be about to break.

There are two glaring questions these attempts raise. First, how will this affect the presidential election?

When Trump was fired upon in July, suffering a wound to his ear, he was in the midst of a seeming ascendency towards the presidency. After trouncing his rival, President Joe Biden in their first (and only) debate, Trump was rising in the polls and seemed poised to return to the White House.

But then, just a week after that first assassination attempt, Biden withdrew from the race and was replaced with Vice-president Kamala Harris. Since then, Harris has soared in the polls and returned the contest to a more balanced status.

Will this second assassination attempt bring sympathy and support to Trump, allowing him to retake the lead?

That seems unlikely, as the first attempt on his life failed to produce many gains in the polls and this second was a far less dramatic attempt. An assassination attempt on its own will not tip the balance.

What it does provide to Trump is an opportunity to present a message to the country that may appeal to voters.

Having survived a second attempt on his life, Trump is again on centre-stage and has a chance to speak to the American people about how this experience may have changed his outlook. Used to hearing his anger and divisiveness, a message of unity and calm might provide the tone that many Americans, particularly those who remain on the sidelines of politics, are desperate to hear.

With partisans largely decided on how they will vote, it is this population of political outsiders who are likely to determine the winner of the election, so appealing to them could bring massive rewards.

Trump merely would have to put aside the rage and speak to this population of more temperate minds than either of the partisan bases. Such an appeal could win him new supporters while not risking alienating his base. It could deliver him the presidency.

But it seems like a stretch to imagine that Trump, who tends to prefer a more angry, divisive rhetoric, will seize this opportunity. The polls will likely remain unchanged.

The second question we must ask is, do these attempts mark the return to a more bloody era of politics?

At first glance, it seems so. The United States has not seen such a polarised, angry political landscape since the civil rights era 50 years ago, when citizens rioted and cities burned. Trump himself has thrived in politics by creating a personality of controversy and outrage, frequently disparaging and degrading his political opponents in personal attacks.

His political opponents have responded in kind, portraying Trump as unfit for office and a danger to democracy itself. In this world of personal animosity, civil politics struggles to survive.

More worrying is that the attempts on Trump’s life may further enrage his Republican supporters, who are more likely to own and carry firearms than their Democrat counterparts, making them more capable of committing deadly acts.

Following Trump’s call to storm Congress after his electoral defeat in 2020, the nation certainly seemed poised for a return to violence but the peace held, barely. Despite the actions of that day, the nation broadly accepted the peaceful transition of power, as it has for 250 years.

Even Trump’s well-armed, angry supporters allowed the inauguration of President Biden to proceed, accepting if not agreeing with the outcome.

As assassination attempts proliferate, Trump’s supporters, already convinced that the election is rife with fraud and manipulation, may lose faith in the process. As that faith wavers, a descent to violence becomes more likely.

The country, and world, will likely have to hold its breath and hope that the peace can hold through Election Day and the inevitable controversies that will follow.

This attempt at violence provides Trump the opportunity to demonstrate his ability to reach beyond the anger and craft a message of togetherness for the American people.

It is ironic that such a message, which could hand him the election and the presidency, seems less likely than a message of anger and hate that will limit his vote share, weaken his electoral prospects, and risk a return to bloody politics.

________________

David J. Andersen is an assistant professor of United States Politics at Durham University, and an expert on American campaigns and elections.

LBC Views provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest.

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position.

To contact us email views@lbc.co.uk