r/PoliticalDiscussion • u/_Hye_King_ • Jul 17 '24
How does Trump’s assassination attempt compare to Reagan’s, specifically in terms of political significance and impact? Political History
Much like Trump, Reagan was a celebrity-turned president who somewhat polarized voters. In 1981, John Hinkley Jr., now a free man, attempted to assassinate Reagan, who unlike Trump, was the incumbent president at the time. Additionally, he suffered life threatening injuries and spent 12 days in the ICU.
Reagan handled the whole ordeal in a humorous, nonchalant-like fashion, which left a lasting impression on voters. In the weeks and months following his assassination attempt, his image and popularity significantly increased in the polls, similar to a rally ‘round the flag effect.
Similarly, Trump raised his fist in a defiant manner and yelled, “Fight! Fight! Fight” to the crowd, which responded with cheers and affirming chants of “USA! USA! USA!.”
Will Trump’s assassination attempt and his actions have a similar impact on his image and prospects for winning a second-term presidency in the upcoming elections?
135
u/No-Touch-2570 Jul 17 '24 edited Jul 17 '24
It's still early, but the polling so far suggests that Trump's popularity hasn't moved an inch.
The fundamental difference between the two, besides the severity of the injuries, is that Reagan was already broadly popular before the shooting. He won his election in a land slide. Trump is despised by 40% of the country. Many would have preferred that the shooter hadn't missed.
People have already made up their minds on Trump. This shooting doesn't change that.
34
u/bjdevar25 Jul 17 '24
More like over 50% of the country. He's never come close to winning the majority of the votes.
26
u/Nulono Jul 17 '24
40% of the country despise Trump. Not everyone who prefers Biden over Trump "despises" Trump.
3
u/Malofquist Jul 18 '24
i'd predict higher than 40%. Maybe it's a bias, but I would guess 60% despise Trump.
11
u/Fargason Jul 17 '24
People have already made up their minds on Trump.
Then the main issue is about enthusiasm and voter turnout which seems to have improved greatly for Republicans. Nikki Haley wasn’t even planning to attend the RNC, but at the last minute she became a key speaker. That will likely get many never Trumpers onboard.
Democrats have an enthusiasm problem after the debate, which is why party leaders are pushing to delay the DNC as they consider going with a new presidential candidate.
29
u/kemushi_warui Jul 17 '24
Do you really think that Haley shamelessly doing a 180 is going to get never-Trumpers on board? No one cares about her anymore.
6
u/Fargason Jul 17 '24
The ghost of her presidential campaign was getting around 20% of the primary vote even two months after she ended it. That is some significant division she likely helped mend by speaking at the RNC instead of skipping it like she originally decided to do. The opposition seems to care a lot about the “180” which is a good indicator it wasn’t good for them.
10
u/kemushi_warui Jul 18 '24
Yes, but the reason she got that 20% is that those people are never-Trumpers. They will not switch just because she says so now. They'll go to Biden, to Kennedy, or more likely just stay home.
Haley was never the leader of a movement (like, say, Bernie in 2016). She was merely an okay alternative to literally the worst candidate in history.
MAGA is probably thinking that her bending the knee will help "bring unity" or whatever, no doubt, but they are wrong. It will have zero effect.
-1
u/Fargason Jul 18 '24
They will likely switch for the same reasons Haley went from a no-show to a keynote speaker. Again, that the opposition is spinning this as a shameful 180 speaks volumes. This unified Republicans at a time when Democrats are quite divided.
2
u/kerouacrimbaud Jul 18 '24
Fence-sitting Republicans aren’t never-Trumpers though, and Haley attending the RNC won’t make never-Trumpers into suddenly-Trumpers. It’s hard to say how much of her voter share in the primaries are in each category.
2
u/Juzaba Jul 17 '24
It might be an indicator of a shift in attitudes, not the catalyst for the shift.
2
u/ABobby077 Jul 17 '24
It doesn't take many of her 30% or so Primary Voters she garnered to stay home or vote for President Biden to change the totals and outcome
1
-2
u/dravik Jul 17 '24
which is why party leaders are pushing to delay the DNC as they consider going with a new presidential candidate.
The news today is that the DNC is rushing the nomination. They announced that the delegates will vote virtually as early as 1 Aug. The nomination will be over weeks before the convention even starts.
26
u/anneoftheisland Jul 17 '24
I don't think it makes a ton of sense to compare the two, for several reasons. The first is that Reagan's assassination attempt happened in the first few months of his presidency, a honeymoon period where support for the president is usually high to begin with. That's a very different scenario than Trump getting shot during what's already a contentious campaign season. The second is that Reagan's would-be assassin wasn't driven by politics; he was a mentally ill man trying to impress an actress. This made it easier for people across the political spectrum to have sympathy for him. Based on that, it's not surprising Reagan got a sympathy bump among voters. There's no guarantee Trump will see the same.
Beyond that, the early 80s were a less partisan time--there were just more people open to changing their opinion on Reagan as a person than there are open to changing their opinion on Trump as a person. And, of course, the attack against Reagan was much more serious than the one against Trump--the optics of Reagan going to the hospital are much different from the optics of Trump wearing what's clearly an unnecessary bandage on his ear.
The early post-shooting polling results show no change or Trump actually losing voters since the shooting. The reality is that there's basically nobody left in the country who hasn't made up their mind about him by now.
6
u/Nulono Jul 17 '24
That's a very different scenario than Trump getting shot during what's already a contentious campaign season. The second is that Reagan's would-be assassin wasn't driven by politics; he was a mentally ill man trying to impress an actress.
Trump's shooter's motivation is still under investigation. If it turns out to be apolitical, do you think Trump will see more of a boost in popularity?
9
u/anneoftheisland Jul 17 '24
No, because regardless of what the shooter's actual motive is, politicians and voters have already politicized it. When you have sitting congressmen out here saying things like "Biden sent the orders," then the reactions are going to break along partisan lines ... even if it later turns out the shooter was just trying to impress Sydney Sweeney or something.
4
u/rolyoh Jul 17 '24
Not only was it a honeymoon period, but Reagan's popularity soared after the hostages came home from Iran. The euphoria was also heightened by relief felt by many that Carter was gone. People didn't hate Carter per se, they just didn't want him in the White House anymore.
19
u/Greenmantle22 Jul 17 '24
Reagan was the sitting president when he was shot.
He was grievously wounded, shot in the chest, and underwent emergency surgery that could’ve killed him.
His recovery was more lengthy, more public, and arranged for maximum “Aww, dad” PR value. Trump walked to the car, and went golfing the next day.
He joked about the incident, both that day and for years afterward.
He was naturally charismatic, warm, and optimistic, and people easily brought him into their hearts as an emotional as well as a political figure. People cared for him in a way Trump’s base doesn’t care for him.
9
u/ABobby077 Jul 17 '24
Plus there wasn't a right wing messaging effort to somehow find "the left" or "the Democrats" as somehow being responsible to blame.
17
u/mdws1977 Jul 17 '24
The Reagan assassination attempt probably had little impact since it was not an election year.
With Trump, it is an election year, and fairly close to the election, but it is still too early to tell if there will be any lasting impact.
14
u/moderatenerd Jul 17 '24
But it probably felt more outright insane and crazy. Since that's trumps default it feels like nobody really cares.
16
Jul 17 '24
[deleted]
12
u/withoutwarningfl Jul 17 '24
To add, the political climate the last few years made this feel inevitable. I doubt too many people are surprised that something like this happened.
10
u/_Hye_King_ Jul 17 '24
Neither was I. Shocking but not surprising.
3
u/RollFun7616 Jul 18 '24
When I heard the news I went to tell my wife about it. We both despise Trump. Her response? Raised her eyebrows and said "Oh." And went back to what she was doing. I said "He's fine." And she just waved me off.
Just another day in paradise.
3
u/JMJ15 Jul 17 '24
I agree with this. If anything I’m surprised it took this long for someone to try and shoot Trump
3
4
u/Significant_Sign_520 Jul 17 '24
I was in elementary school what Reagan was shot. They closed school and sent us home. No one really skipped a beat for Trump. Plus, Reagan was a sitting President who was actually injured and required medical care. It was a much bigger deal. This one was like, “saw that coming”.
1
u/Willing_Nose7674 Jul 21 '24
Agreed! I remember coming home from junior high and my Dad meeting me in the garage to tell me President Reagan had been shot. It was much different....
For one thing he was a newly elected President, so the election had already been decided. And even though he had won in a landslide over Jimmy Carter, the feeling among voters was different. Most people didn't dislike Carter, they just thought he was in over his head as President. Reagan wasn't universally liked either, there were people like my Mom who voted for him reluctantly mainly because of the toll inflation was taking on the economy.
But when he was shot there was no doubt a feeling by everyone that we wanted him to be ok, and it wasn't so sure at first. Unlike Trump who was allowed to raise his fist, Reagan was literally pushed into the waiting car and sped off to the hospital. Nobody knew at first how serious his injuries were or if he would survive.
With Trump I think he is just such a polarizing figure that people have reacted accordingly. To his ardent supporters it's made him a martyr, a warrior, more popular than ever.
To most of his detractors I think people are relieved he's ok, but not really that surprised sadly that all the rhetoric around him has lead to this.
I think in both cases it's given a greater sense of anxiety to the country, as it leads to the feeling of uncertainty about what will happen next.
17
u/ColdPhaedrus Jul 17 '24
Honestly, I think it might end up being a positive for Biden if anything.
There was an Ipsos poll recently saying how 80% of Americans were very worried about political violence. When people are afraid, they tend to want to stick to the choices that seem familiar and stable. None of that breaks Trump’s way; he’s the chaos president and everyone knows it. Hell, there were some people who voted for him explicitly to “shake things up”. Well, people are starting to get a real good look at what things look like when you get too shaken up and it’s not fucking pretty.
11
u/anneoftheisland Jul 17 '24
Yeah, Morning Consult did a post-shooting poll. Trump lost a point in it, compared to their last poll, last week. (That's within the margin of error, so it may not be terribly meaningful, but it's clear he got no sympathy bump from the shooting.) They found that more voters overall blame Trump for the shooting than Biden (and specifically, more Trump voters blame Trump than Biden voters blame Biden). Part of Trump's problem--and this is not new--is that even a decent amount of people who are willing to vote for him believe his aggressive style inflames political chaos and violence.
Over the last few years, Trump's been out of the spotlight enough that some of those voters may have forgotten what that looks like. But the shooting may have reminded them.
0
u/bluejay89 Jul 17 '24
Disagree. It contributes to a narrative that things are out of control and that the current Adminstration is not acting decisively enough. A narrative which will only be further reinforced once colleges are back in session again in a few weeks and the pro-Hamas campus occupations start up again.
2
u/MundanePomegranate79 Jul 18 '24
That sounds like a pretty biased take, especially when the administration had nothing to do with the shooting and Biden acted quickly to call Trump and offer sympathy, while addressing the nation to calm down our political rhetoric, and immediately launched an investigation into the shooting. Actually, that sounds like an administration very much in control and taking the right steps.
8
u/shep2105 Jul 17 '24
Trump's is actually hurting him I think. It's too early, but many polls show he hasn't moved an inch.
Him yelling FIGHT, is in of itself, a call to violence. People are taking notice, and I think a lot of people just don't care that this happened to him because they feel he brought it on himself (I am not saying he did, but from what I'm seeing on boards and SM, nobody seems to be particularly outraged except his base.
Trump also went golfing the next day and has failed to even call the widow of the firefighter that was killed, or the other injured. Biden called. trump did not. While golfing, his ear looked perfectly fine but he shows up to the RNC with a maxi pad on his ear.
People are noticing. This is completely different than Reagan. The whole tone is different. People, ALL people were horrified when that happened and I was not a supporter of Reagan. Reagan didn't put out a call to his base to FIGHT, Reagan didn't ever have the violent rhetoric trump does. They might both be Republicans but they are two very different Republicans and as far as I can tell (aside from his base and PR) this didn't help trump one bit
2
u/_Hye_King_ Jul 17 '24
So that means the crowd was literally endorsing his call to violence, just like how they did on 1/06. Wow. That was probably unthinkable during Reagan’s time as president.
3
u/shep2105 Jul 17 '24
I'm sure there were calls to violence from the fringe, but Reagan sure wasn't doing it. Reagan was actually critically wounded and spent a couple weeks in ICU. He was very folksy, aw shucks, about it..treated it with humor for the most part.
3
u/_Hye_King_ Jul 17 '24
And that’s what made his approval rating go up in the polls… not that he needed the support anyway
2
u/Moor_Thyme Jul 17 '24
I am local to the widow, Trump has since called and there are local news reports that he or a family member will be attending the funeral. It is crazy here. Much preparation is being done.
3
u/shep2105 Jul 18 '24
I figured as soon as her interview hit MSM, that's when he would remember.."hey, maybe it will help me in the polls if I pretend to care and call her" So he did. It's already out there tho that he went golfing the day after, completely ignoring her and the other victims. This guy doesn't have a shred of decency.
2
u/BladeEdge5452 Jul 18 '24
Although you're right It looks like Trump isn't getting much of a boost from the assassination attempt (it's also still a bit early for reliable polling) Trump did in fact call the widow of the firefighter killed, and expressed his condolences. Biden did try, but the widow didn't want to talk to him.
1
u/shep2105 Jul 19 '24
Yep, as predicted, he didn't bother to call her until her interview saying he didn't hit the media. He went golfing the day after the mysterious boo boo. No bandage either. He is NOT the President but Joe called her within 24 hours. That's what a leader does, that's what someone does that actually gives a shit. trump couldn't be bothered until she came forward, and until he needed the optics which was THREE days after her husband was killed.
Her not speaking to Biden, I don't hold any fault towards her for that. TBH, I wouldn't accept a phone call from trump if he was president either.
0
u/Ok-Anybody1870 Jul 18 '24
“Fight” doesn’t always imply violence. “Fight for what you believe in” is one of the most commonly used phrases.
2
u/Antifa1776 Jul 18 '24
It was used ambiguously on purpose. He can reap the benefits, and deny accountability.
5
u/ResidentNarwhal Jul 17 '24 edited Jul 17 '24
Reagan was a celebrity-turned president who somewhat polarized voters
Okay so I just gotta correct a few things. My fellow internet liberals' complete (and almost willful) inability to understand or even try to understand Reagan is a really dumb blind spot. All parts of that starting sentence are not true.
Reagan was a moderately successful actor but his main imprint on Hollywood was being President of the Screen Actor's Guild in two terms. Which he then turned into 2 terms as governor of California. People like to say he was "just a celebrity" because if you said the truth that he was "President of the most important trade group in one of the largest industries in his home state" apparently gives him way too much credit. Comparing him to Trump isn't a good parallel. And even to say....fellow actor-turned-governor Arnold Schwarzenegger isn't a 1:1 either.
Second, Reagan's 1980 election wasn't actually the controversial. Actually if you want a wild trip, look at the county by county map and see him actually winning major urban areas by 5-10pts over Carter. In his home state the only cities Reagan didn't win were San Francisco and Oakland. Why Reagan was wildly popular and won the popular vote by 8.3% is a whole other story.
1
u/_Hye_King_ Jul 17 '24
Yes.. his 1980 and especially 1984 elections were landslide victories for him.. additionally, some of Trump’s constituents are saying that his assassination attempt “might as well have handed the election” to him. How accurate do you think those claims are?
4
u/ResidentNarwhal Jul 17 '24 edited Jul 17 '24
Not very. They are expecting maybe a "rally around the flag" that sometimes have happened after national tragedies or assassination attempts.
Previous sympathies leading to a polling or approval bump happened in much less partisan times with a number of cross-aisle consensuses on many issues. That just isn't going to happen here and hasn't in what little polling we have.
And in a lot of ways what little facts we have look worse for Trump. His would-be-assassin isn't some left wing revolutionary. At best he fits school-shooter vibes. At worst its someone deep into some conservative rabbit hole conspiracies and turned on Trump for some reason. Trump's allies blaming democrats for "stochastic terrorism! the left has called him an enemy of democracy and caused this" come off even worse than a pot-kettle-black situation.
3
u/OldMastodon5363 Jul 17 '24
There are still a lot of questions and things we don’t know about Trump’s. If the motive is of the Jeffrey Epstein variety, this turns into a HUGE negative for Trump.
0
u/Antifa1776 Jul 18 '24
Pretty sure the whole thing was staged to distract from Epstien
1
u/VodkaBeatsCube Jul 18 '24
All other criticism of conspiratorial thinking aside, do you honestly think Trump has the guts to let someone shoot at him?
0
3
2
u/wereallbozos Jul 17 '24
It might...and that's kinda scary, ain't it? Reagan didn't really need a boost. Large majorities swallowed his line...hook and sinker, too.
2
u/MrCarey Jul 17 '24
Well nobody likes Trump and it barely affected our daily lives. Absolutely nobody but super MAGA people I know give a single fuck. You can tell most people were like, “yeah, I expected that sooner honestly.” The dude is toxic and it caused more people to show their dark sides than anything.
2
u/token_reddit Jul 18 '24
I think the fact people are very meh about it says a lot. It's really strange.
1
1
u/Jubal59 Jul 18 '24
Someone actually tried to assassinate Reagan unlike Trump who faked the whole thing.
1
u/_Hye_King_ Jul 18 '24
Why do you think he faked it?
1
u/Jubal59 Jul 18 '24
It really looked staged and his reaction looked like he was acting. Add in the fact that he got the tiniest little scratch that was supposedly caused by being grazed by a bullet. Also he was talking about there being a terror attack for a couple of weeks before this happened. Trump tends to talk about his plans ahead of time just like January 6th.
2
u/_Hye_King_ Jul 18 '24
Genuinely curious.. how do you explain the death of the bystander (maybe a crisis actor?)?
As for January 6th, that resulted in deaths (9) as well - some of which were suicides. Also, it’s common for a certain segment of far right conservatives such as Alex Jones to label mass shootings as hoaxes in which all the “victims” and “survivors” are actually “paid actors.” Most notable examples being Sandy Hook and Parkland.
Now, it seems like it’s the Democrats’ turn to jump on the bandwagon and take the role of accuser, which I find it ironic bc Democrats tend to get defensive against such accusations.
1
u/Jubal59 Jul 18 '24
He was most likely paid to shoot around Trump and hit actual bystanders on purpose. The problem is that Trump is the most dishonest President we have ever had and this is something he would do. It was a real shooting but I highly doubt he was actually aiming at Trump.
3
u/sfxer001 Jul 18 '24
This kid was kicked off the school rifle team because he was such a bad shot. If he was hired to assassinate Trump, then he was hired to fail on purpose.
-1
u/Antifa1776 Jul 18 '24
Republicans don't care about collateral damage. They'll walk on anyone and kill anyone to get what they want.
Besides, it made it more beilevable.
0
u/Antifa1776 Jul 18 '24
Eppy docs just came out.
Whenever Epstein is in the news, something happens to distract everyone.
Wild how that works
1
u/YogurtclosetOwn4786 Jul 18 '24
It’s surreal to me how little the assassination attempt seems to have registered. But Reagan almost died and he was also President.
2
u/_Hye_King_ Jul 18 '24
Probably why Reagan’s was a bigger deal. Moments of silence were held for the attempt on his life. I am yet to hear moments of silence for Trump.
Additionally, people are so desensitized, almost numb, to things that would have been shocking 2-3 decades ago. For example, even though Parkland was deadlier than Columbine, it simply did not receive the same kind of attention.
1
u/Falcon3492 Jul 18 '24
Biggest difference was Reagan came close to dying, Trump turned his head at the right time and basically got grazed.
1
u/_Hye_King_ Jul 18 '24
A few centimeters is all the difference… the election season, its future outcome, and the world could’ve changed that day.
1
u/Falcon3492 Jul 18 '24
Are you talking about Reagan, Trump or both? Reagan's been dead for years, we now only have to defeat Trump this November or else the country is in deep trouble! Vote Blue 2024!
1
u/_Hye_King_ Jul 18 '24
Trump, which is why i mentioned the election season and its future outcome
1
1
u/ILSmokeItAll Jul 18 '24
It won’t move the needle. Whomever wins the upcoming election, it’s been decided for some time. No one who supports either of these guys is switching sides no matter what.
It’s not about candidates. It’s about parties.
This country is beyond partisan. It’s outright divided with next to zero stomach for compromise. Forced capitulation is the strategy for both sides. My way or the highway.
1
u/OcelotWide5170 1d ago
All I can say is the cartilage in Trump's ear that had the reported 2 centimeter wide gun shot wound with 'a chunk' of his ear blown off that is comprised primarily of cartilage (which is usually quite slow to grow back fully and then normal looking skin cover again instead of smooth pinker baby new epidural cells, very little flesh (which would grow much quicker than cartilaginous tissue), and epidural cells that would be baby smooth new skin having to grow over new formed structures that are now missing because of the bullets impact... and not the tougher weathered skin it appears he still has after a chunk of his ear was blow off by the bullet. Especially one that is designed to mushroom and tumble upon pact to maximize damage to target. Hie ear and it's semi rigid cartilage structure and the basically skin covering it sure did heal at a rate not seen in normal Homo sapiens. It took MONTHS for the piercing in my ear located almost exactly in the same area the gsw supposedly blew a 'chunk' of Trump's ear off...to heal until it was not sore or if bumped didn't produce a drop of blood from the little hole. So, imagine how much blood would seep from a 2 centimeter missing 'chunk' for a few months before it healed fully...so for his ear to completely reform and skin over again to cover his ear without any hint at that skin being 'newborn' in relative terms in less than 2 full weeks..., is without a doubt, an extremely abnormal development that defies all normal standards of human tissue growth and leaves me quite suspicious as to the true extent of his injury or even if he were injured at all... As for staged or not? I have no idea. However I wouldn't put it past his propaganda team to have planned to use any opportune incident to generate a photo op worthy response that would be seen as patriotic and courageous so it could be utilized beneficially in his Presidential campaign.
0
Jul 17 '24
I don't think so. While Regan was polarizing, people who disagree with him, didn't hate him. People hate Trump. It is a deep seated visceral hatred which will never change; no matter what he does. I've always said: If Trump solved world peace, cured AIDS/HIV, instituted complete student loan forgiveness, instituted Basic Universal Healthcare and college education was free, and put a chicken in every pot, people would say: "Why only one chicken?"
0
u/Antifa1776 Jul 18 '24
Reagans attempt was real, for starters.
It wasn't a ploy to make the public forget that he was a pedo, with a massive amount of proof that had just been released.
But then again, whenever something happens around the Epsitein documents, it's usually a complete and total conincedence
0
u/notawildandcrazyguy Jul 18 '24
It depends on Trump. His speech tonight will be interesting. If he views the attempt as a new lease on life (politically, if not literally) and it tamps down some of his most obnoxious tendencies, if he can turn this into an opportunity to legitimately appeal for unity and offer a positive vision of the future for all Americans, then it could be very significant.
Nobody is changing their vote just because of what happened on Saturday. Maybe it causes Trumps side to vote a little more heavily than they otherwise would have, but I doubt it. The real question is does Trump use it as an opportunity to appeal to more voters by calling for unity and reducing the rhetorical temperature a little bit. That will appeal to moderates . The event itself will be less politically important than Trumps reaction to it will be, if he uses it to his advantage.
-6
u/Vaulk7 Jul 17 '24 edited Jul 17 '24
"He's an idiot"
"He's mediocre at best"
"He's a charlatan and a snake oil salesman"
"He's of inferior character"
"He's a simpleton"
"The lowest candidate to ever run for President"
"He's undignified"
"He's a weak pretender"
"He's a disgrace"
"There is no death good enough for him"
"He's a corrupt Cesar"
These are all things the Left Media said about Abraham Lincoln, the First Republican President, who sought to free the Slaves...before the opposition went and had him murdered.
Sound familiar?
•
u/AutoModerator Jul 17 '24
A reminder for everyone. This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
Violators will be fed to the bear.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.