Somebody trying to shoot Trump again

[dustoffthebooks]

news.sky.com/story/donald-trump-rushed-to-safety-after-gunshots-heard-near-his-florida-golf-course-13215905 news.sky.com/story/donald-trump-rushed-to-safety-after-gunshots-heard-near-his-florida-golf-course-13215905]]]]

How wonderfully convenient! Just when he needs a jump in his ratings, there is a (sort of) repeat of the event which led to a large jump in his ratings !!

I disagree with @Blackandbluesed this is exactly the kind of navel gazing that gets the left wing into trouble: we want to figure out why people on the right vote for way they do. Hey! They are racist!

I only wish they'd stop because it encourages his narcissistic mememe attitude

There is no conspiracy. It's just another person with gun (and there are many in the USA).

If he were in jail, he’d be safe from shooters. Sad.

I find it hard to believe too, for the exact reasons you mentioned! He lost some traction after that terrible debate, which he will likely now regain.

I also wouldn't put it past him to blame Harris in some way.

Republicans love their guns.

Soon he'll be able to add "being the best at not being assassinated" to his list of things he best at.

Hatred comes from somewhere, it's not navel gazing to want to know where.

When you think about it the logic behind someone shot at the republican candidate therefore we should vote for the candidate is quite strange. Or any other candidate.

Surely that's a bit like saying women are responsible for incels?

I don't see politicians on the right doing a whole lot of thinking about why people on the left vote the way they do. Do you?

More guns than people make it an exceptionally dangerous place.

Since our own John Lennon was murdered in New York, over 1.5 million have died via firearms there (murder, manslaughter, suicide). Just shy of a third of the population of Ireland.

I'd always be wary of getting into even a minor argument there, as it only takes an armed person (of which most are) to snap and you could be in trouble. Likewise teen angst, they can take it out in classmates (over 100 school shootings there per year).

It's for this reason I have some sympathy with the police there. They have a reputation for being gung ho/trigger happy, but they are faced with people armed to the teeth, so even making a traffic stop could cost them. To all intents and purposes they are in a warzone without the official status of being in one.

I remember the Queen was at Giants Causeway and she got out of her car and walked over to the public, and a couple from the US were stunned she wasn't surrounded by security. That kind of freedom to roam could never happen over there.

Not to me it doesn't.
What an odd takeaway.

"not based on anything rational." thats part of people voting, its not always logically or makes any sense etc so therefore is the whole system the best we have if people can vote based on views that are not logical or rational ?

It most certainly was not. No reasonable person would have concluded that from what I posted.

What other system would you propose?
Democracy is not perfect, but it's the best we're going to get.

Technocracy
Technocracy refers to a system in which experts in various fields, particularly science, engineering, and economics, make decisions based on data, technical knowledge, and logic rather than political ideologies or popular opinion.

Meritocracy
Meritocracy is a system where political power is distributed based on individual ability, talent, and achievement, rather than through elections. Leaders in a meritocratic system, including a president, would be selected based on proven competence in governance, leadership, and problem-solving skills.

Epistocracy
Epistocracy, or the "rule of the knowledgeable," is a political system in which voting rights are restricted based on a certain level of political knowledge or competence. In this system, only those who pass a test or demonstrate a clear understanding of political and economic issues would have the right to vote or influence the selection of leaders like the U.S. president.

@XChrome so there are better systems

@soupfiend
Hitler killed himself...

I just said there are not better systems.

Mind you, a benevolent dictatorship run by yours truly would obviously be much better, but let's be realistic here. ;-)

but in your view why are any of those 3 not better or am i misunderstanding your point ?

Shooter is reported to be a registered Democrat voter

IOW, elitism. Rule by the intellectual elite is not a better system. It disenfranchises anyone without the means to pursue higher education. In other words, it favours the wealthy.
Also, judging who is more knowledgable and has more merit as a candidate is always subjective. It's wide open for personal bias, racial and gender bias, etcetera. So-called "experts" are not immune from that. Far from it.

Who would even be the judges of who is best suited for power if it's not the people? How would they be chosen?