The best take I've seen is that Democrats should take this opportunity, dust off an old gun control bill that failed, rename it the President Trump Assassination Prevention Act and try to pass it. Republicans will still vote against it, but they'll be on record as voting against the President Trump Assassination Prevention Act.
Or, just violence in general. Violence in the political sphere is the result of just general violence everywhere.
Silicone Valley
Los Angeles? But seriously...
Generally, surviving an assassination attempt gives you a boost in support. That is a pattern that has been repeated often. Another recent example is the attempted assassination of Bolsonaro in Brazil. He's often called Brazil's Trump. This case could be different, but odds are it's not going to result in undecided voters saying "hmm, the shooter was probably right, I'll side with him".
The situation in the US was a disaster even before this happened. IMO this can only make things worse.
Sad these days that you know both of those can't be true.
To understand why, you have to look at how broken things were that one of the two major parties chose him as their candidate. He's a symptom, not the problem.
People who weren’t voting for him before aren’t going to start now just because he was shot
The decided voters are pretty much irrelevant. They made up their mind a long time ago. The issue is the swing voters.
Unfortunately, we have evidence that surviving an assassination attempt leads to a boost in approval. Reagan surviving an assassination attempt led to a big jump in his approval rating:
"In the wake of the assassination attempt, Reagan's approval ratings jumped -- providing a new baseline that propelled his legislative agenda forward and helped translate to his broad-based re-election. "
https://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/03/30/avlon.reagan.shooting/index.html
Bill Clinton: "Violence has no place in America, especially in our political process"
Bill... c'mon. America is violence's head cheerleader.
Ah, then the addition of two sine waves offset by a certain phase would have been easy for you to understand. It's always hard to guess how much someone will already know.
Sure. So, imagine a rectangular pool of water. You have a little weight on one end of the pool bobbing up and down producing waves. Then you put a wall halfway down the pool with two gaps in the wall. The waves from the wave-generator hit the gaps and go through. At the back wall of the pool you can measure the wave height. What you see is that at some points there are big waves, and at other point no waves at all. What's happening is that the waves coming through each gap travel different distances. If the wave from one gap is at a trough when the wave from the other gap is at a peak, they interfere with each-other and the water doesn't move much. If, instead, the distance is right so that both waves are at a trough or both waves are at a peak, the wave height is doubled at that point.
If the weight bobbing up and down is very regular, the pattern stays very regular. The places on the back wall with no waves are always in the same spot, and the places with big waves are in the same spot.
Now, do a similar experiment but instead of using water, you use light. To keep the waves all the same wavelength / frequency, you need a laser. So that laser shines forward and hits a barrier with two small slits in it. When the laser hits a wall after that you get the same pattern of bright spots and dark spots. Light is acting like a wave and the light waves are interfering with each-other in the way you'd expect.
But, what if you turn the laser way down. You can reach a point where instead of getting a continuous pattern on the back wall of the experiment, you only get an occasional "blip". What's happening there is that the intensity of the laser is so low that you get a single photon being emitted, passing through the slits and hitting the back wall.
So, this basically shows that light is acting like a particle. It is emitted from the laser, passes the slits, and hits at one single, specific point on the back wall. So, this shows that light is both a particle in some ways (individual light "packets" can be emitted and strike one specific spot on the back wall), and it's a wave, because the light passing through the two slits interferes and produces a strong/weak pattern on the back wall.
But, the truly mind-blowing part of the experiment is what happens if you record the positions of each hit on the back wall when the laser is tuned way down and only emitting one photon at a time. If you record the location of the hits (or say, use something like photographic film that you expose over multiple days while you run the experiment), what you see is that there are points where you get many single-photon hits on the back wall, and points where you don't get any single-photon hits on the back wall. And, the points where you don't get any hits are exactly the points where you get dead zones from the wave interference when you run the laser at full intensity. Even though you're only allowing one photon to go through at once, it's still acting as if it's going through both slits in some way.
The obvious question at that point is "Which slit is it actually going through?" So they measured that, and as soon as they could determine which slit the photon went through, the interference pattern disappeared. Instead it looked exactly how it would look if you blocked the other slit. But, when they stopped measuring which slit the photon went through, the interference pattern comes back.
This revealed a few fundamental things in quantum mechanics:
Honestly, just google it. Tons of people have that problem and if you search for it you get pages and pages of results.
Who would step in to replace Trump? Trump has worked hard to discredit anybody who could potentially challenge him. Strongmen often groom a son to take over for them, but only after they've been in power for many years. Trump might want Junior to take over, but I doubt even Trump's hand-picked yes-men would accept Junior at this point.
Instead you'd almost certainly get a power vacuum with various Republican factions trying to take over.
And those 3 would start snapping at each-other trying to become the dominant head. And, as long as they're distracted snapping at each-other, they're not going to be focusing on us.
IMO, Trump is also the only thing holding this right-wing coalition together. As soon as he's gone the factions are going to turn on each-other. The bad thing is that they've already shown that they're going to get violent when they feel their grip on power is slipping. I'm sure this assassination attempt is going to lead to right-wing violence, and if it had succeeded it would have been a lot more violence.
The most dangerous thing about Trump is that he's he's got almost half the US behind him. There are probably more cruel Republicans, and probably some who would be more effective at implementing their cruel policies. But, not many who would be able to get so much support and keep the coalition together.
The Republican base is getting smaller each year as old people die. It's not a popular platform with the younger voters. If the US can avoid a Trump win this year, the MAGA version of the Republican party will probably fall apart. Then it will be back to the regular corporatocracy that the US has been dealing with for decades. If he does win... well I'm glad I don't live in the US.