The Impact of Assassination Attempts on Elections: A Complex Dynamic
by Lauro Amezcua-Patino, MD, FAPA, and Vincent Perez-Mazzola
“An assassination attempt is a seismic event in politics; it not only threatens the life of a leader but also reshapes public perception, galvanizes voter sentiment, and redefines the electoral landscape in profound and often unpredictable ways.” — Anon
Assassination attempts on political figures are rare but significant events that can dramatically affect the course of elections. The immediate and long-term consequences of such attempts reverberate through the political landscape, influencing public perception, voter behavior, party strategies, and the overall stability of the electoral process.
The failed attempt on Donald Trump may indeed be different. Social media posts became heated, with people issuing threats and blaming those who publicly oppose Trump. Quite ironic considering that Trump himself has alluded to political violence against his opponents many times during the past years, all of which are documented. On the other hand, Biden has never advocated such a thing, but a seemingly colloquial use of the phrase “put a bullseye on him” was enough for many to accuse Biden of inciting, if not planning, this crime. Though, in the aftermath, both called for peace, I believe that we will see additional political violence in the form of “Domestic Violent Extremism.”
Immediate Aftermath and Public Perception
A wave of shock, fear, and heightened emotions often mark the immediate aftermath of an assassination attempt on a political figure. Several factors, including the targeted individual's identity, the attempt's nature and circumstances, media coverage, and the initial response from political leaders and institutions can influence public perception during this period.
Assassination attempts typically generate a profound sense of shock and fear among the public. The sudden and violent nature of such incidents can create a pervasive feeling of vulnerability and insecurity. People may feel that their country's political stability is under threat, leading to a heightened sense of urgency and concern for the future.
For instance, the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan in 1981 shocked the American public. The fact that the President of the United States could be attacked in broad daylight highlighted vulnerabilities in national security. It instilled a sense of fear about the potential for further political violence.
The role of the media in shaping public perception in the immediate aftermath of an assassination attempt cannot be overstated. Media outlets provide real-time coverage, updates, and analysis, significantly influencing how the public perceives the event. The extent and nature of media coverage can amplify emotions, spread information (or misinformation), and shape narratives around the incident.
The assassination attempt on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in 2011 received extensive media coverage, with news outlets providing continuous updates on her condition, the details of the attack, and the broader implications. The media’s focus on Giffords’ recovery and resilience helped shape a narrative of hope and perseverance, influencing public sentiment.
A common immediate reaction to an assassination attempt is a surge of sympathy for the targeted individual. This sympathy can extend to their family, associates, and political party. The public often rallies around the victim, viewing them as a symbol of resilience and courage. This collective outpouring of support can manifest in various ways, including increased public approval ratings, solidarity marches, and expressions of support on social media.
After the assassination attempt on then-presidential candidate Benazir Bhutto in 2007 and her subsequent assassination, there was a significant outpouring of sympathy in Pakistan and around the world. This sympathy bolstered the Pakistan Peoples Party’s (PPP) position in the subsequent elections, as voters expressed their support for Bhutto’s legacy and her political vision.
Political leaders' and institutions' responses play a crucial role in shaping public perception following an assassination attempt. Statements from political figures, emergency measures taken by government authorities, and the broader political discourse can influence how the public interprets and reacts to the event.
Solid and reassuring messages from political leaders can help stabilize the situation and foster a sense of unity. Conversely, divisive or inflammatory rhetoric can exacerbate tensions and deepen societal divisions. After the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan, his administration’s calm and composed response, along with Reagan’s display of humor and resilience, helped reassure the public and project an image of strength and stability.
The immediate aftermath of an assassination attempt often leads to heightened political engagement among the public. People may become more attentive to political developments, more vocal in their opinions, and more active in participating in political processes. This increased engagement can manifest in higher attendance at rallies, greater involvement in advocacy and activism, and increased voter turnout in subsequent elections.
For example, the assassination attempt on civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. in 1958 (a decade before his eventual assassination in 1968) heightened awareness and engagement in the civil rights movement. The public’s reaction to such incidents can galvanize support for the causes championed by the targeted individual, leading to increased activism and political participation.
Assassination attempts can also shift the focus of political discourse. The incident and its immediate aftermath often become central topics in public and political conversations. Issues such as political violence, security, the motives behind the attempt, and the broader implications for democracy and governance come to the forefront. This shift in discourse can influence policy debates, legislative priorities, and the overall direction of political dialogue.
The assassination attempt on Representative Gabrielle Giffords brought issues of gun control, mental health, and political rhetoric to the forefront of national discourse. The incident prompted renewed debates and legislative efforts to address these critical issues, demonstrating how such events can reshape political agendas.
Voter Behavior and Electoral Outcomes
The occurrence of an assassination attempt can significantly influence voter behavior and, consequently, electoral outcomes. These influences manifest through changes in voter turnout, shifts in public sentiment, and alterations in voting patterns, ultimately impacting the overall dynamics of an election.
Assassination attempts can serve as powerful catalysts for mobilizing voters. The shock and emotional response elicited by such events often lead to heightened political engagement among the public. Supporters of the targeted individual or party may feel a renewed sense of urgency and determination to participate in the electoral process. This surge in motivation can lead to increased voter turnout, particularly among the base of the victim’s party.
For example, the assassination attempt on then-presidential candidate Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan in 2007 and her subsequent assassination significantly mobilized her supporters. The Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) leveraged the emotional wave to galvanize voters, resulting in a significant turnout that contributed to their electoral success.
Sympathy votes are a common phenomenon following an assassination attempt. The public’s emotional response to the event can translate into increased support for the targeted individual or their party. Voters may express their solidarity and compassion by casting their ballots for the victim or their political affiliates, viewing their vote as a tribute to the individual’s courage and sacrifice.
A historical example is the aftermath of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963. The national mourning and emotional response to Kennedy’s death created a wave of sympathy that benefited his successor, Lyndon B. Johnson. Johnson used the emotional climate to push forward his legislative agenda and secure a landslide victory in the 1964 presidential election.
While assassination attempts can mobilize supporters, they can also deepen political polarization. The stark and violent nature of such incidents can intensify existing political divides, leading to more entrenched positions among the electorate. Supporters of the targeted individual may become more fervent in their views, while opponents may also become more rigid in their opposition.
This polarization can increase voter turnout among supporters and opponents of the targeted individual or party, potentially making the election more contentious and competitive. The assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995 by a right-wing extremist is an example of an event that deepened political polarization in Israel. The assassination intensified divisions over the peace process with the Palestinians, influencing voter behavior in subsequent elections.
Assassination attempts can create an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty, which may deter some voters from participating in the electoral process. Concerns about personal safety and the stability of the political environment can lead to lower voter turnout, particularly among individuals who are less politically engaged or who feel vulnerable to violence.
In regions with a history of political violence, such fears can significantly impact electoral outcomes. The assassination attempt on Malala Yousafzai, though not directly related to an election, serves as an example of how violence can instill fear and suppress political engagement. In similar contexts, the threat of violence can discourage voter participation, skewing electoral results.
In some cases, an assassination attempt can produce a rallying effect, where the public unites in response to the perceived attack on democracy or national stability. This sense of national unity can temporarily bridge political divides and lead to a collective movement toward maintaining stability and continuity. Voters may rally around the incumbent government or the party perceived as best equipped to handle the crisis and ensure national security.
After the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan in 1981, there was a brief period of national unity and increased support for Reagan. The public’s perception of Reagan’s resilience and the symbolism of his recovery contributed to a rallying effect, bolstering his political standing and influencing subsequent electoral dynamics.
The impact of an assassination attempt on voter behavior can extend beyond the immediate election cycle, leading to long-term changes in voting patterns. The event can shape political identities, influence party loyalty, and alter the electorate’s priorities. These long-term effects can be seen in shifts in party alignment, changes in voter demographics, and evolving political landscapes.
The assassination of Senator Robert F. Kennedy in 1968 had a lasting impact on American politics. Kennedy’s death, along with the earlier assassination of his brother, President John F. Kennedy, contributed to a period of political turbulence and shifting voter allegiances. The disillusionment and grief experienced by many Americans influenced voting patterns and political engagement in the years that followed, contributing to the broader social and political transformations of the late 1960s and 1970s.
Party Strategies and Campaign Dynamics
When an assassination attempt occurs, political parties are thrust into a rapid and intense period of strategic reassessment and adaptation. The incident can fundamentally alter the landscape of an election, influencing everything from messaging and public engagement to security protocols and candidate positioning. The way parties navigate these changes can significantly impact the election’s outcome.
One of the most immediate and noticeable changes in the wake of an assassination attempt is a shift in campaign messaging. Political parties often need to quickly pivot to address the new reality, focusing on resilience, unity, and justice themes. The victim’s party typically emphasizes the strength and determination of their candidate, framing them as a symbol of endurance and moral fortitude.
For example, after President Ronald Reagan's assassination attempt in 1981, the Republican Party highlighted his recovery and continued commitment to his presidential duties. This narrative of strength and perseverance helped reinforce Reagan’s image as a robust and capable leader, contributing to his political resilience and subsequent re-election.
Assassination attempts invariably lead to heightened security measures for candidates and campaign events. Political parties must invest more in security protocols to protect their candidates, which can influence the logistics and nature of campaign activities. Rallies and public appearances might become less frequent or more controlled, affecting how candidates interact with voters.
This increased focus on security can also become a part of the campaign narrative. A party may highlight the need for greater national security and stability, using the assassination attempt as a backdrop to emphasize the importance of law and order. This can resonate with voters who prioritize safety and stability in uncertain times.
The emotional impact of an assassination attempt can be a powerful tool for political parties. Campaigns often leverage the public’s sympathy for the targeted individual to garner support. The narrative of a candidate overcoming adversity can create a deep emotional connection with voters, who may feel a personal stake in the candidate’s journey.
The assassination of Senator Robert F. Kennedy in 1968, during his presidential campaign, had a profound emotional impact on the American public. Although Kennedy did not survive, his legacy and the emotional weight of his assassination influenced the Democratic Party’s platform and galvanized support among his followers, affecting the broader political discourse of the time.
The opposing party must navigate the delicate terrain of responding to an assassination attempt. They must balance respect and sympathy for the victim with continuing to advance their campaign agenda. Criticizing the victim or their party too harshly can backfire, leading to public backlash. Instead, opposition parties often adopt a tone of unity and shared national grief while subtly continuing to promote their policies and vision for the future.
After the assassination attempt on Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in 2011, political opponents were careful to express condolences and avoid overtly partisan rhetoric. This measured response was necessary to maintain public favor and demonstrate a commitment to national unity and respect during a crisis.
The long-term strategic adjustments following an assassination attempt can reshape a party’s approach to future elections. Lessons learned from security lapses, public reactions, and changes in voter behavior can inform new strategies and policies. Parties may invest in better security infrastructure, refine crisis communication tactics, and develop more resilient campaign frameworks.
For instance, the assassination of Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme in 1986 led to significant changes in how political figures in Sweden are protected. The incident prompted a re-evaluation of security measures and influenced future campaign strategies to ensure the safety of candidates without compromising their accessibility to the public.
Sometimes, assassination attempts can push specific policies or legislative agendas to the forefront. Political parties might use the event to advocate for new laws or reforms that address underlying issues related to the attempt. This can include stricter gun control measures, enhanced security protocols, or initiatives aimed at combating political extremism and violence.
Following the assassination attempt on President Reagan, there was a renewed focus on mental health legislation and gun control. The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, which mandated federal background checks on firearm purchasers, was a direct outcome of the public and political reaction to the attempt on Reagan’s life and the subsequent shooting of his press secretary, James Brady.
Long-Term Implications and Political Stability
The long-term implications of assassination attempts are multifaceted and can vary significantly based on the political, social, and cultural context in which they occur. These implications often ripple through the political landscape, affecting governance, public trust, and societal cohesion.
In some cases, assassination attempts can lead to increased political stability. This can happen when the event unites the nation and reinforces the legitimacy of the governing party or individual who steps into the leadership void. For example, after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963, Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson assumed the presidency. Johnson was able to capitalize on the national grief and desire for stability, which allowed him to push through significant legislative reforms, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The sense of continuity and strong leadership helped stabilize the political climate during a turbulent time.
However, not all assassination attempts result in increased stability. They can often exacerbate existing political tensions and contribute to prolonged instability. The assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi of India in 1984 is a case in point. Her death triggered widespread riots and sectarian violence, particularly against the Sikh community, due to her assassination by her Sikh bodyguards. This led to a period of national turmoil and highlighted the deep-seated ethnic and religious divisions within the country. Although the Congress Party won a landslide victory in the subsequent elections by leveraging the sympathy wave, the underlying social fractures remained, leading to ongoing challenges for political stability.
Assassination attempts can also have profound effects on public trust in democratic institutions. When a political figure is targeted, it can raise questions about the effectiveness of security measures and the overall safety of political leaders. This can lead to a crisis of confidence among the populace, who may question the government’s ability to protect its leaders and maintain order.
In countries with fragile democratic institutions, assassination attempts can undermine the perceived legitimacy of the political system. This is particularly true in regions where political violence is already prevalent. For instance, in Pakistan, the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in 2007 led to significant political instability and eroded public trust in the electoral process. The incident highlighted the vulnerabilities within the political system and raised concerns about the future of democracy in the country. Allegations of fraud and violence marred the subsequent elections, further complicating efforts to establish a stable and legitimate government.
The societal impact of assassination attempts can be profound, influencing the level of cohesion or polarization within a country. Such events can serve as a rallying point for national unity, bringing people together in a shared sense of loss and determination to uphold democratic values. The aftermath of the assassination attempt on Representative Gabrielle Giffords in 2011 saw a temporary moment of national unity in the United States, with calls for civility and bipartisanship in political discourse.
Conversely, assassination attempts can deepen societal divisions, particularly if they are perceived to be motivated by ideological, ethnic, or religious differences. The assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995 by a right-wing extremist opposed to his peace efforts with the Palestinians is a stark example. Rabin’s assassination not only derailed the peace process but also intensified political polarization within Israel, creating a long-lasting impact on the nation’s political landscape.
Assassination attempts can also have international repercussions, affecting diplomatic relations and global perceptions of a country’s stability. When a high-profile leader is targeted, it can lead to a reassessment of the country’s security situation by other nations, potentially influencing foreign policy and international cooperation. For example, the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria in 1914 precipitated a series of events that led to World War I, dramatically altering the global geopolitical landscape.
Final Thoughts
Assassination attempts are pivotal events with far-reaching consequences for elections and political systems. The immediate emotional and psychological impact on the public can evoke widespread sympathy for the targeted individual and their affiliated party. This surge in support can translate into a tangible electoral advantage, as voters may rally around a figure they perceive as having been unjustly attacked.
However, the effects of assassination attempts extend beyond immediate voter sentiment. They can profoundly alter voter behavior, influencing turnout and engagement. Supporters of the targeted individual or party might be galvanized, increasing their determination to participate in the electoral process. Conversely, such events can also create a climate of fear and uncertainty, potentially discouraging voter participation due to safety concerns or a sense of instability.
For political parties, assassination attempts necessitate rapid and often significant strategic adjustments. Campaign messaging may shift to emphasize resilience, strength, and continuity while increased security measures become a priority. The narrative surrounding the assassination attempt can dominate the election discourse, influencing debates, advertisements, and public speeches. This can lead to a highly charged and emotionally driven campaign environment, where the focus may shift from policy issues to the personal and symbolic significance of the targeted individual.
The long-term implications of assassination attempts are complex and can vary widely. These events can sometimes lead to increased political stability, as seen with Lyndon B. Johnson’s presidency following John F. Kennedy’s assassination. Johnson was able to leverage the nation’s grief and desire for continuity to secure a decisive victory and implement significant legislative changes. In other cases, assassination attempts can exacerbate existing tensions and contribute to prolonged periods of instability and violence, as seen in the aftermath of Indira Gandhi’s assassination in India.
Understanding the dynamics of assassination attempts and their impact on elections is crucial for comprehending how such dramatic incidents shape political history. These events underscore the fragility of political systems and the profound influence of individual leaders on national and international affairs. By examining past instances and their outcomes, scholars and political analysts can gain valuable insights into the potential ramifications of future assassination attempts, ultimately contributing to more resilient and stable political institutions.