This is an as-told-to essay based on a transcribed conversation with David Head, a historian specializing in American history, author, and lecturer at the University of Central Florida in Orlando, FL. It has been edited for length and clarity.
When I first read that the former President had been shot, I was shocked.
Then came a sinking feeling we were descending into the chaos of the 1960s and 70s, when political assassinations, bombings, and rioting marred campaigns in the US and globally.
Working as a historian and lecturer at the University of Central Florida, I’m interested in conspiracy thinking in American politics, both in the early period and in the 20th century, especially the assassination of John F. Kennedy in 1963.
However, I didn’t think the attempt would significantly impact the 2024 election outcome. Throughout history, an election is won or lost based on the context in which it happened, not an assassination attempt.
The most similar historical assassination attempt to Trump’s resulted in a loss
The closest parallel, although very different, was the 1912 assassination attempt on Theodore Roosevelt while he was running for president. Like Trump, Roosevelt had already been president but had left office for four years after two terms, leaving Republican William Howard Taft as president.
For the 1912 election, Taft had the official Republican Party nomination, but Roosevelt decided to run as a third-party independent candidate. They were both running against Democratic candidate Woodrow Wilson.
At a campaign event in Milwaukee on October 14, 1912, Roosevelt was shot getting in his car en route to a campaign speech.
Despite his injury, he continued to the event and spoke. Roosevelt understood the drama of presenting his speech in a blood-stained shirt.
Like Roosevelt, Trump is a natural showman. He probably didn’t need to think about how to react —he knew how powerful a defiant image captured by the media could be.
Roosevelt’s popularity surged following the incident. The shooting happened in October, so it was very close to the election.
But in the end, the Republicans were split between Taft and Roosevelt. He went on to lose to Wilson. Whether Roosevelt had been shot didn’t change the dynamic of the election campaign.
JFK and Robert Kennedy’s assassinations had different electoral outcomes
After John F. Kennedy’s assassination on November 22, 1963, Lyndon B. Johnson became president. Johnson enjoyed significant popularity — over a 75% approval rating — on the coattails of Kennedy’s assassination. He rode that popularity to win the US election in 1964 with a landslide victory.
Johnson’s popularity waned, however, as the Vietnam War dragged on through his term. By 1968, his diminished support among Democrats led him to end his presidential bid early in the campaign.
While seeking the Democratic nomination, Robert F. Kennedy was shot and killed following a campaign event in Los Angeles in 1968. Due to his brother’s legacy, he was a strong candidate to succeed Johnson and run against Nixon.
Robert Kennedy’s assassination meant Johnson’s vice president, Hubert Humphrey, had an easier time securing the Democratic nomination. However, Robert Kennedy’s death and the chaos surrounding it reinforced the image of a Democratic Party in disarray. Richard Nixon, leading a unified Republican Party, won the presidency in 1968.
Two tragic deaths had opposing political outcomes based on the context of the race.
The dynamics of the political race are more influential than assassination attempts
In 1975, a year before the next presidential election year, Republican President Gerald Ford was shot at twice. Ford had taken over the presidency after Richard Nixon resigned in August 1974 following the Watergate scandal.
Ford pardoned Nixon and tried to move past Watergate, but the Republican Party couldn’t overcome Nixon’s stink and Ford’s dismissal of his wrongdoings.
Ford went on to lose the 1976 election because of the underlying dynamic of the race — attempted assassinations had little to no impact.
As this race has suggested, elections can change quickly
And now, there is Donald Trump and Kamala Harris.
Trump has been incorporating the assassination into his speeches and social media messaging. His ear was bandaged when he spoke at the Republican convention, and he recently said he “took a bullet for democracy.”
I expect this will be a part of his campaigning from now on. The shooting galvanized the party at the Republican convention days later.
The intensity of Republicans’ enthusiasm at the convention played a role in Biden dropping out. Biden was already facing calls to drop out because of concerns that his health would prevent him from winning in November.
But, just like in these historic assassination attempts, the context of the campaign is what matters on election day.
No one feels undecided about Trump right now. He’s dominated political and cultural discussions since 2015. If people’s opinions weren’t already set, I don’t think this shooting would change that.
Kamala Harris now gets a chance to make a first impression as a presidential candidate. We’ll see what she does with the opportunity.
While it is helpful to consider the outcomes of historical presidential assassination attempts and what they could mean for our future, it’s also not determinative. Things can change very quickly, as they have time and time again during this current campaign.
