politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I don’t exactly blame him. That assassination attempt was a massive failure on the organization that should be fail proof.
At the same time, I wonder if this will just be a way to remind people about it. Nobody is talking about it anymore and it was a huge deal for his campaign.
I thought it was interesting that he said he was going to return to the same location in October for a rally. That is a great strategy. So far that is the only thing his campaign has going for it, so might as well lean into it (the strategy…).
I assume that it is no longer being reported on because Trump's campaign planners could'nt even find halfway credible evidence that the assassin was not a conservative. This can hardly be explained in any other way than that Trump is not very popular with his own violent supporters.
I wouldn't say "not very popular" ... it's more like there's a non-zero chance that some of his violent, unhinged followers will, upon realizing he's a fraud and they've been duped all this time, turn their violence towards him. It only takes one.
That is of course quite possible. That's just the way it is when you don't build on a political program, but on hatred and idiocy instead.
I imagine the fact that he constantly forced the secret service to pay over the odds to stay at properties he owns probably didn't encourage them to assign their best and brightest to protect him.
Well, apparently he didn't have time to properly zero his sights or practice with his weapon.
What?
Not sure what you’re getting at, but it was an undeniable massive failure of the secret service. He never should have gotten as close as he did with a gun.
Something I have encountered with protective situations, and which I haven't seen addressed anywhere regarding Trump is why the sightline to the buildings weren't simply blocked.
It is impossible to secure every single location, but if there is a cluster of buildings, you park a semi-truck and trailer in the line of sight (or put up a green fence, or whatever) and then you have the much easier job of securing your blocking.
But I guess that's a really in the weeds.
I wonder if we’ll ever get answered to this. It seemed like such a basic failure that it should never have happened. I’m surprised the house didn’t immediately start hearings and pressing people for answers. Makes me think they would end up finding themselves to blame or something.
There was a House hearing, and the USSS director resigned.
There were no good answers provided in the hearing. Complacency and sloppiness of procedure seem to be the baseline answer, but pinpointing names of who exactly on the ground failed is difficult for the public.
Ok, I definitely didn’t pay attention to that.