https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Batley_and_Spen_by-election
It lets people know violence cannot change the balance of power.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Batley_and_Spen_by-election
It lets people know violence cannot change the balance of power.
Literally two Republicans tried to kill the Republican presidential candidate in the last year…
You really can’t imagine a world where someone believes the candidate from their party is either too extreme or not extreme enough on a wedge issue that they’d try to kill them to guarantee someone else from the same party wins?
Like…
I overestimate people, I can admit that
But do you legitimately just not understand why this is bad?
Don’t forget the Republican mob that wanted to hang the VP on January 6.
Even just a primary…
Your pick comes in second place, if you get the one from your own party that made it to the general, your first pick is now guaranteed the office.
Like, great sentiment, but I think the reason it works in the UK, is 99.99% of the population can’t get a high powered rifle in an afternoon.
Firstly, the Prime Minister and an MP are very different, so it’s not really a fair comparison. Replacing an MP with one of the same party might result in what? Your bins being taken out on a different day?
Anyway, I think this is a “don’t let perfect be the enemy of good situation”. Without any safeguards, an assassination is most likely to come from someone across the political spectrum than someone next to them. So it makes sense to focus on preventing that even if it does open a potential (risky to execute) exploit.