Much as I dislike Trump and what he stands for, I kind of admire his reaction to the assassination attempt and to having a bullet take a chunk out of his ear. He's very determined, isn't he! I just can't believe that was staged - that they'd (a) rely on someone's marksmanship so close to their guy's head (a la William Tell!) (b) kill and critically injure audience members and (c) give the shooter an almost-certainly-fatal assignment. The photo composition is somehow reminiscent of the famous photo of the Marines raising the flag at (was it?) Guadalcanal. But I think it's just fortuitous - a real publicity windful for Trump's campaign.
Good question, Andrew! In Wallace's case (1972), the injuries were so severe that he was permanently disabled and it effectively ended his primary campaign. In Reagan's case, the record does show a boost, but that's hard to detach from the honeymoon effect, as the shooting happened just over 2 months after inauguration. It certainly didn't damage his ratings!
It would indeed be impossible to prove. And if it were, the cover-up would be more complex than the shooting itself, especially given that a homicide investigation is now ongoing.
Much as I dislike Trump and what he stands for, I kind of admire his reaction to the assassination attempt and to having a bullet take a chunk out of his ear. He's very determined, isn't he! I just can't believe that was staged - that they'd (a) rely on someone's marksmanship so close to their guy's head (a la William Tell!) (b) kill and critically injure audience members and (c) give the shooter an almost-certainly-fatal assignment. The photo composition is somehow reminiscent of the famous photo of the Marines raising the flag at (was it?) Guadalcanal. But I think it's just fortuitous - a real publicity windful for Trump's campaign.
Good thoughts, Kai. You were probably thinking of Iwo Jima:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raising_the_Flag_on_Iwo_Jima
Such imagery goes into the history books.
Did Wallace or Reagan gain popularity from being shot? Any pointers from those events?
Good question, Andrew! In Wallace's case (1972), the injuries were so severe that he was permanently disabled and it effectively ended his primary campaign. In Reagan's case, the record does show a boost, but that's hard to detach from the honeymoon effect, as the shooting happened just over 2 months after inauguration. It certainly didn't damage his ratings!
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/ronald-reagan-public-approval
Cheers
Grant
Wouldn’t be at all surprised if it was a false flag. Trump and the GOP donors are more than capable of it. Impossible to prove from here of course.
It would indeed be impossible to prove. And if it were, the cover-up would be more complex than the shooting itself, especially given that a homicide investigation is now ongoing.