The electoral outcomes of last weekend’s assassination attempt on Donald Trump are still unclear.
The emerging profile of the gunman as a registered Republican makes straightforwardly pointing the finger at his political opponents more difficult, although the blame game on both sides was already in full swing hours after the shooting.
It seems likely, however, that the startling images of the aftermath will be used by the Trump campaign to project an image of strength that has the potential to greatly bolster his electoral chances.
The political calculus has been changed dramatically by the attempt on Trump’s life – which led to the death of one rally attendee and critically injured two others – muting the chorus within the Democratic Party calling for Joe Biden to step aside in favour of a younger, more energetic, more convincing candidate. Yet the fact remains that only 33 per cent of Democratic voters in a recent poll were happy with their nominee, versus 71 per cent of Republicans. There were reports last week that pledges worth roughly $90 million from Democratic donors have been frozen if Biden remains on the ticket, and the events of last weekend won’t have changed that.
Apple MacBook Pro M4 review: A great option, but only if you actually need the power of the Pro
Why I’m happy not to be an alpha male
‘Homeowners with solar panels could sell extra power to neighbours’: Examining local energy trading
Dave Hannigan: Katie Taylor’s presence lends a modicum of dignity to sporting farrago
Facing a newly revitalised Trump with a visibly and increasingly enfeebled Biden now seems even more likely to end in catastrophe for the Democrats.
But there are still four months to go in what has been an extraordinarily eventful campaign. And despite the rhetoric coming out of the Biden camp that the sitting president is the only one with the ability to beat the Maga ideology, the Democrats have a fairly robust bench of elected officials with experience and proven ability to win by healthy margins. The left of the party has been essentially tamed, with both Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders finding themselves incongruous defenders of the faltering president, despite progressives in the party having been some of the more outspoken critics of his stance on Gaza.
Any prospective replacement for Biden is unlikely to come from the handful of Democratic Socialists in the elected party, or from the party’s progressive wing, who have taken the view that, for as long as Biden stays in the race, there is not much to be gained from opposing him.
Instead there is a cadre of off-the-shelf liberals with broadly similar politics to Biden, give or take a few personal beliefs and 30 or 40 years of generational difference. None would represent a sea change in leadership at the helm of the party, but any could potentially seek a new path on the issues where Biden is seen to have failed.
Harris’s people have been strategically leaking information about her disagreements with Biden, particularly on what she has referred to as the ‘catastrophe’ in Gaza
The first and most obvious potential replacement is vice-president Kamala Harris. Harris is few people’s idea of a perfect candidate. After an unspectacular career in the Senate, her own bid for the job in 2020 was a disaster, and she withdrew before the primaries began. As VP, her relationship with Biden has reportedly been cool, and when she was given responsibilities at all, it was in the most intractable and politically unpopular areas. She has name recognition, but is known for her slightly off-kilter, somewhat dreamy speaking style, employing idiosyncratic metaphors and frequently dissolving into deep, sincere laughter. This has gifted her a growing, semi-ironic fandom online, with many sharing the infamous clip of her talking about coconut trees.
Perhaps the strongest argument for Harris as nominee is that it would be logistically straightforward. Were Biden to announce that he is stepping down, assets held by the Biden/Harris campaign – money, pre-booked advertising, infrastructure – could be easily transferred and used in a hypothetical top of the ticket Harris campaign. Americans are used to the logic of a VP taking the torch from the president. George HW Bush was Reagan’s VP, Nixon was Eisenhower’s.
The closest analogue to Harris is probably Hubert Humphrey, Lyndon B Johnson’s VP who ran in 1968 after Johnson stepped aside. Amid growing chaos over Vietnam and a violent and bitter Democratic National Convention in Chicago, Humphrey lost narrowly to Nixon. He made up huge ground with voters however, by eventually distancing himself from Johnson’s disastrous foreign policy.
Harris’s people have been strategically leaking information about her disagreements with Biden, particularly on what she has referred to as the “catastrophe” in Gaza and her refusal to rule out consequences for Israel.
Beyond the vice-president, the most compelling name in the race is Gretchen Whitmer, the governor of Michigan, who won her re-election in this swing state by a healthy margin. Whitmer is a polished communicator, particularly on the Democrats’ strongest issue: abortion. Unlike many other Democratic elected officials, she has also occasionally passed legislation, expanding public healthcare and repealing some of the state’s anti-union laws.
In 2020, the FBI foiled a right-wing plot to kidnap the governor over her actions during the Covid 19 pandemic. This experience of political violence, which Whitmer explicitly linked to Trump’s rhetoric, would go some way to nullifying the support that the former president might glean from his own attempted assassination.
Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro has many of Whitmer’s advantages, but lacks this compelling story and the ability to speak as personally on the issue of abortion, as she has done.
Other figures being touted include Kentucky governor Andy Beshear, Illinois governor JB Pritsker, and California governor Gavin Newsom. Beshear has a similar profile to Whitmer, telegenic, popular, winning two elections handily in a conservative state. Unlike Michigan, however, Kentucky is not a must-win for the Democrats, and good thing too because it’s extraordinarily unlikely to go for them. Pritsker is independently wealthy, something of a double edged sword, and Newsom has an oversized and obvious ambition that can work against him. Other options, like transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg or Hillary Clinton, are not serious suggestions.
One of the more fantastical suggestions is a hypothetical Michelle Obama campaign. By all polling accounts, the former First Lady would win by margins not seen since 2008. The only problem is that she appears to have no ambitions to do so whatsoever. Had she wished, she could have cruised to the nomination in 2016 or 2020, and she declined in both cases. Unless something changes, the Democrats’ dream candidate remains out of commission.
In the increasingly unlikely event that Biden can be convinced to step down – or is forced to – the Democratic party nomination should be a two-horse race. The choice facing party leaders is a straightforward risk/reward calculation. Do they stick with Harris, a safe choice that causes the minimum of disruption but has a smaller potential upside, or do they throw caution to the wind and back Whitmer, putting previously safe states up for grabs on both sides? To defeat a resurgent and newly iconified Trump, they may well have to be brave.
Jack Sheehan is a writer based in New York
- Listen to our Inside Politics Podcast for the latest analysis and chat
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date