“As if there hadn’t been enough drama in America, Donald Trump has survived another assassination attempt,” says Freddy Gray in The Spectator. The attempted killing of the former president at his golf course “was not nearly as threatening or deadly as the shooting nine weeks ago in Butler, Pennsylvania”, but it could still prove to be a “major moment” in the presidential campaign. It will remind voters of his “narrow escape” in Pennsylvania and of the fact that there are people who still want him dead, which might boost support among his backers and the undecided.
Trump won sympathy for his “conciliatory” tone after the shooting in July, says Rozina Sabur in The Telegraph. But this time he has said that Kamala Harris and Joe Biden’s rhetoric are to blame for creating an atmosphere of hatred and distrust. This is ironic coming from Trump, who is known for his ad hominem attacks on his opponents, but it’s also a “strategic error”. His claim may resonate with his ardent supporters, but it risks alienating the moderate swing voters who Trump must reach if he is to prevail in November.
What are the chances of a post-election war?
Let’s just be thankful he escaped unharmed, says Simon Tisdall in The Guardian. If Trump had been killed or suffered serious injury, that would not only be a personal tragedy for him and his family but would also throw the November presidential election into “utter confusion” and probably lead to “violent disorder”. The fringes of American society are now “sick with gun violence, schism and hate” and there are “real, justified fears” for the safety of Trump and J.D. Vance, as well as for Harris, Biden and Tim Walz.
MoneyWeek
Subscribe to MoneyWeek today and get your first six magazine issues absolutely FREE
Sign up to Money Morning
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
The “obvious but chilling possibility” that a candidate in the US presidential election could be seriously harmed or even killed isn’t the only concerning aspect of this election, says Daniel Finkelstein in The Times.
A few past elections, most notably in 1960 and 2000, have ended up with the losing candidate coming close enough to consider contesting the result. In the 2000 election, Al Gore eventually accepted the decision of the Supreme Court to stop the recount and honourably conceded. Richard Nixon did the same in 1960. But can anyone imagine that happening after this election? A result as close as that of 2000 is possible, but it’s hard to see either Trump or the Democrats gracefully accepting a loss.
How ugly could it get? The signs are not good, says The Economist. Even without Trump on the ballot paper, US elections are “drawn out and complex”, and “tend to invite legal challenges”. They “demand patience and trust”. Yet those qualities are in ever shorter supply in today’s America, a situation not helped by Trump’s claim that the last election was stolen from him.
Polls suggest the result will be tight, and Trump and his party are “gearing up to wage the post-election war a second time”. Worryingly, about 20% of American adults say they are open to the possibility of using violence for political ends. America will still see a peaceful transfer of power in 2025. But that is “a minimal definition of democratic success”. Voters need to believe that the process is fair and can be trusted, and accept the result.
This article was first published in MoneyWeek's magazine. Enjoy exclusive early access to news, opinion and analysis from our team of financial experts with a MoneyWeek subscription.
Related stories
-
The key October self-assessment tax return deadlines to remember so you can avoid a shock billThere are two important dates for self-assessment taxpayers to remember in October
-
Bank of England’s MPC expected to pause interest rate cutsThe UK economy is weakening, but persistent inflation means experts expect the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) to vote against a cut to UK interest rates at this week’s meeting
-
'Ride the recovery in emerging markets': Gustavo Medeiros of Ashmore Group tells MoneyWeekInterview What's the outlook for emerging markets? Gustavo Medeiros, head of research at Ashmore Group, gives his analysis and reviews progress in developing economies
-
'The City's big bet on green finance fails to pay out'Opinion Insurers and banks are backing away from “green finance”, and there is not much sign of the green boom we were promised. That’s a problem for the City
-
Why is English football thriving – and can it last?What has gone so right for English football? The national team has found its feet; the Premier League is swimming in money and profits are soaring
-
Should you invest in Pakistan – the Vietnam of South Asia?Opinion If Pakistan is now serious about reform, it’s time for investors to buy, says Maryam Cockar
-
'Why you must own gold and Bitcoin'Opinion The world is dedollarising, and gold and Bitcoin are the only alternatives. Buy now, says Dominic Frisby
-
'Britain is on the road to nowhere under Labour'Opinion Britain's economy will shake off its torpor and grow robustly, but not under Keir Starmer's leadership, says Max King
-
What are wealth taxes and would they work in Britain?The Treasury is short of cash and mulling over how it can get its hands on more money to plug the gap. Could wealth taxes do the trick?
-
UK bank stocks are no bargain – here's a safer alternativeOpinion Britain's banking sector faces severe political risks. Switch into this global financials trust instead, says Max King
