By Dimitris Kouvaras,
American politics is toxic. One has no difficulty in reaching that conclusion; all it takes is observing the current presidential race. A few days ago, on the 13th of July, the ramifications of this toxicity culminated in an apparent assassination attempt against Donald Trump at a Pennsylvania rally. The consequences of this shocking event are manifold, and the possibilities it opens vary depending on whether it will be treated as a warning about the dangerous path that American politics has taken or be manipulated for partisan and communicative gain at the November election. However, before discussing the present and potential ramifications, let’s get it right about the facts first.
The shooting took place on July 13, at a rather modest in size raly in Pennsylvania (a crucial swing state for this year’s race), just a few minutes after Trump had begun his speech. Around eight shots were fired, one of which apparently pierced through Trump’s ear, forcing him to duck down before being swarmed by the bystanding secret service officers, according to the security protocol. Unfortunately, a man was killed and another two heavily injured. The audience could be heard screaming and seeking cover as the scene unfolded, while police shooters took to action. The suspect, Thomas Matthew Crooks, a 20-year-old kitchen worker from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania, was shot dead by security forces shortly after. A Trump supporter maintained that he saw him crawling up a roof near the rally’s sight with a firearm on hand and pointed him out to the police, which failed to acknowledge the threat in time. The distance of the shot, at 150 meters, has raised serious concerns about safety, as the shooter’s vantage point lay within the security perimeter. After Trump was escorted back to his motorcade, the sight became an active crime scene for the ensuing FBl investigation.
The motive behind the attack remains unclear, with speculative theories about the shooting being staged and disinformation linking the attack to the Antifa movement flooding social media. However, no evidence supports any of them. What’s more, even though none can be sure about what really motivated the attack, speculation is counterproductive until new evidence comes up. Crook’s background sheds little light on the case, since he has been described as an introverted, knowledgeable but occasionally bullied teen with a passion for history and an interest in shooting, although his student record on the sport was dismal. Nonetheless, he was a member of a shooting club in the months prior to the attack, which would allow for practice if the attack was premeditated. As for his political affiliations, they create further confusion, given that he was a registered Republican. Besides the gun, which belonged to his father and was purchased more than six months prior to the incident, he was probably also in possession of explosive devices, which were discovered in his vehicle.
Unless a clear motive is discovered, what matters the most is the aftermath, which is arguably significant in terms of the Republicans, the Democrats, the election, and even American politics in general. For the moment, two distinct and conflictual tendencies can be seen coexisting, and only time will tell which one will prevail. The first can be summed up in Trump’s infamous image of aggressively –or courageously– raising his fist in defiance, despite the bleeding and the apparent danger (although at of the photo the scene was clear). It is an example of the positive communicative impact the incident has for Trump, and of how he made sure to make the most out of it for political gain. Already a quasi-messianic figure for some of his core advocates, Trump now presents himself as invincible in an almost providential way. Under this consideration, the fist-raising and words “fight” coming out of his mouth were by no means an innocent spontaneity. Compounded by his claim that the doctors said they had never seen something like this, and an “I was supposed to be dead” kind of rhetoric to create the profile of invulnerability, which beyond its physical sense can take on a metaphorical political meaning. Given the shortcoming of the Democratic campaign, the latter is by no means insignificant. Following this trend, one can expect renewed political fanfare and populist impression-making rhetoric,aided by the trope of victimhood. For once, Republicans lost no time to call out Joe Biden’s phrasing that “it’s time to put Trump in the bulseye” as a probable cause of the shooting. Bullshit politics reappearing once more. If this trend prevails, nothing will change.
While this tendency of recycling political pathogenies leads the Republicans to misleading rhetoric, it leads the Democrats to stagnation. The party’s presumptive nominee, Joe Biden, had been under (more than justified) fire due to his poor debate performance and repeated signs of a deteriorating mental condition in his speech. He often seems incapable of uttering a meaningful sentence and has even reached the point of referring to himself as the “first black woman” Vice-President and tο President Ζelensky as Putin. Intraparty criticism had mounted, with many in Congress pressuring him to repeal his candidacy before the August National Democratic Convention. Although Kamala Harris’ approval ratings have been dubbed problematic and no other potential candidate has stood out, and despite the political cost of a change in the nomination, a renewal could be salvaging for the Democrats in the long run, as Biden seems prone to losing either way. What would be a difficult task replacing Biden at the top of the party’s ticket, considering Biden’s own reluctancy and the complexity of the nominating procedure, appears almost impossible after the attack on Trump. Biden occupied the limelight in a presidential manner, condemning violence through a formal televised message, while the party has scaled down its campaign following the incident, especially concerning attack ads. As the Democrats take an awkward defence position against Trump’s rhetorical advantage and decelerate their campaign, a shift so drastic as replacing Biden seems improbable. Again, nothing changes, except for the fact that Democrats face a new disadvantage.
However, there’s also another tendency following the shooting, this time positive. Its unforeseen and shocking character, which brought back disturbing memories of the 1968 assassinations (John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr.), enabled a transcendence of partisan lines. Common ground can be reached based on the shared concern about security and the value of the human (or at least American) life, as well as the realisation that polarisation has gone too far, resulting in unpredictable and destructive consequences. Even Trump is not oblivious of that fact. As Democrats put campaign politics aside to wish him health, he announced that his speech at the upcoming Republican National Convention will focus on national unity rather than Biden’s weaknesses. We must wait to see if he keeps that promise, but nonetheless this is a noticeable alteration of course towards moderation, considering Trump’s temperament, and potentially an acknowledgement that hyperpolarised politics can easily backlash. On a similar note, Biden addressed the nation as President calling for unity and calm, while delivering a “short and respectful” call to his adversary, who characterised it as “nice”.
This shift in political discourse towards more humane and pragmatic tones is a great opportunity for American politics; one that would not have happened without such a shocking event. Both Republicans and Democrats, Biden and Trump (whose personal life-threatening experience might also be an awakening) should seaze the moment and reconfigure American politics, lest even worse incidents unfold.
References
- What we know about the Trump attacker. BBC. Available here
- Frenzied Democratic effort to replace Biden comes to a standstill after Trump rally shooting. NBC News. Available here
- What We Know About the Assassination Attempt Against Trump. The New York Times. Available here
- Trump Says GOP Convention Speech will Call for Unity. Forbes. Available here
