As Americans, we face an urgent choice at a historic moment

The attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump at a campaign rally in western Pennsylvania Saturday, where a gunman opened fire, injuring the former president, killing one spectator and critically injuring two others, has riled the nation.

Much remains unknown about the shooter’s motivation and how he was able to take a rooftop position with a clear shot at Trump at a rally protected by the Secret Service. Predictably in the age of social media, rumors and conspiracy theories quickly — almost instantly — spread to fill the void, and, just as predictably, have taken on a life of their own.

Physical violence of any kind has no place in the politics of a constitutional democracy such as ours. Violent rhetoric should be no part of political speech, whether uttered by candidates or their supporters. Violent rhetoric should not be endorsed by candidates or their campaigns.

Can we all just agree on these simple premises?

As Americans, we face an urgent choice at a historic moment. Can we agree on these simple premises and move forward together as a nation, or will we continue on the path that got us to this inflection point. It is up to us, each of us individually and collectively as the body politic, to examine our thoughts and think about the impact of our words before we speak or write them.

Hyperbolic political rhetoric that paints a political opponent or their supporters as enemies of the country or enemies of our system of government, or as treasonous  or a threat to the very future of our nation, encourages violent rhetoric and, even worse, violent acts against those individuals.

We have had a steady diet of this kind of rhetoric from opposing candidates, campaigns, political party leaders and political activists for more than a decade. In recent years it seems to have escalated. It is now commonplace to hear political speech include phrases centered around “saving” our country (or our state, county or even our local communities) from an opponent cast as “the enemy.”  

This is the kind of talk that incites riots, the kind of talk that incites unstable individuals with access to guns or bomb-making materials, to perpetrate acts of violence against political opponents, their supporters and groups of people thought to be their supporters, against government officials and government buildings.

Words matter. Words- have impacts. Think of the 21-year-old man who drove 600 miles to an El Paso, Texas Walmart on Aug. 3, 2019, where he opened fire, killing 23 people and injuring 22 because he believed them to be Hispanics immigrating to the United States, according to court documents.  He admitted that he chose El Paso, near the U.S.-Mexico border, to discourage Mexican and other Hispanic immigrants from coming to the United States. In his “manifesto,” the perpetrator opened with this statement: “This attack is a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas. They are the instigators, not me. I am simply defending my country from cultural and ethnic replacement brought on by the invasion.” His words echoed political rhetoric then being used by elected officials, including then-President Trump. The words we use in political discourse have consequences.

When candidates for office use phrases like we have to “save” our country from their opponent, or, “we’re not going to have a country any more” or they accuse their opponents of aiming to destroy the country as we know it, it’s just a matter of time before something like this happens. Yet this has become a common type of political rhetoric in the U.S. among Republicans and Democrats alike. It’s wrong and dangerous, regardless of who is using this type of language. 

All sorts of vile speech about perceived political opponents is commonplace now. It’s unhealthy for us at best, dangerous at worst. Americans — most Americans — used to be able to disagree with each other with some amount of civility. No more. Now, it seems, every debate is sucked up into the tribal battles people see playing out on the national political stage every night on cable TV. Everything — even the most local issues — has become part of the red versus blue “war” going on in America today, even when the issue has nothing to do with partisan politics. It gets us nowhere.

In a post on his social media platform Truth Social on the evening of the attempt on his life, former President Trump, recounted what it was like to be fired at a campaign rally. Among his comments on the events of that afternoon, he said, “It is incredible that such can take place in our Country.”

We respectfully disagree. One need not look back decades to the assassinations of political candidates, activists and even a president in the 1960s, or to the shooting of President Ronald Reagan in 1981 by a would-be assassin whose mental illness and an obsession with a famous young actress led to that heinous act. 

Ten U.S. presidents have been subject to actual or attempted assassinations, according to the Congressional Research Service. Four of the incumbents were slain (Abraham Lincoln, James A. Garfield, William McKinley, and John F. Kennedy.)  

Moreover, against the backdrop of rising gun violence and mass shootings in the United States in recent years — in schools, at an outdoor concert, in retail stores such as the El Paso Walmart and a supermarket in Buffalo, New York — Saturday’s incident was, tragically, not “incredible” in any way. 

Mass shootings have become a way of life in this country. Indeed, the U.S. far outpaces other economically and politically comparative countries in public mass shootings. 

“There were 109 public mass shootings in the United States and 35 public mass shootings in 35 other economically and politically comparative countries between 2000 and 2022,” according to a study published in February by the Rockefeller Institute of Government. “The United States makes up 33 percent of the combined population of these 36 countries; however, it also accounts for 76 percent of public mass shooting incidents and 70 percent of victim fatalities in these countries,” the author wrote.

In fact, what happened Saturday at the campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania could have had a much worse outcome. Former President Trump was within a fraction of an inch of being killed or seriously injured. The gunman could have injured or killed many more people attending the rally. 

Is this really who we want to be as a nation?

If America needs to be saved from anything or anyone at the moment, it needs to be saved from itself and it’s up to each of us, as Americans, to save it. It’s up to each of us to respond to this crisis with thoughtfulness. It’s up to each of us to choose our words carefully and wisely, respect each other and the principles for which our nation stands, to forego the rancor, and to embrace, in the words of former President George H.W. Bush, the idea of “a kinder, gentler nation.”

Editorials are the opinion of this publication.  They are written collaboratively by the editor and publishers, with input from staff.

Got an opinion about this or any other local matter? Send a letter to the editor.