Speaking of political assassinations, I'm actually surprised that I haven't heard more fears about Barack Obama. With his echoes of both MLK and Robert F. Kennedy, it's not exactly a far-fetched worry, and we're a little overdue for a lone wacko with a gun. I know the Secret Service is very good at these things, but long distance weapons keep getting better.
What happens if Obama (or McCain) dies before the convention? What about the election? There are all sorts of political implications--if it's before the convention, do you go with Hillary or the VP selectee? Would Obama's supporters rally around her? Would voters chuck a McCain sympathy vote to his second in command?
Let's hope we don't find out.
Again, I won't pretend to an expertise that I don't have, but it seems that if it happens before the convention, it will be up to the convention delegates and super-delegates to decide who the nominee will be. I would assume that, in the case of the Democratic party, that would almost certainly be Hillary. For the Republicans, I more or less assume that they'd rally around Romney, but who knows?
Afterwards, I'm pretty sure that the VP on the ticket would move to the fore. If, somehow, both were killed, I would hope that there are party by-laws to handle such a contingency. (Perhaps by recalling the delegates to make an emergency selection?)
If it happens after the general election but before the innaguration, I presume that the Constitutional rules of succession would come into play.
I know that both my wife and I had that brief moment of fear when he made his victory speech - looking out over all those thousands of people. Unprompted by me, she remarked that she really hopes he stays safe. I think nobody wants to jinx him, so they're not voicing any of those fears publicly, for the most part. Also, people might not want to be the trigger for some crazy. Yeah, who knows what will set some people off, but it's probably better to play it safe and not mention it.
The secret service are ALL OVER THIS. And have been since very early on.
He basically already has presidential protection.
I am personally (and pleasantly*) surprised there has not been credible attempts on Bush's life, though some of that is due to an irrational expectation for an aught-year president.
* NB: I don't care one way or another for the guy, but it wouldn't have helped anything..
Given McCain's age, poor family history (on the male side) and the fact that he underwent seven hours of surgery for cancer not many years ago, assassination is not necessarily the main concern.
The death by any means of either Senator McCain or Senator Obama before the 2008 general election would cause enormous problems. I'm hoping they both have to withdraw from some blatant scandal and we get two sensible candidates, like Governor Romney or Senator Thompson on the Republican side and Senator Biden or Governor Richardson on the Democratic side, out of an open convention. I'm nearly 60, and this is the worst choice the major parties have offered in my lifetime.
If they die before the convention, the convention just nominates someone else. Likely Hillary for the Dems, since she already has close to enough delegates. The Republican choice is less clear. No one but McCain has enough delegates to be able to basically rule out anyone else.
This will only be the third national election where I've been old enough to vote. This is the best set of candidates so far, at least in my opinion. (Best set, not easiest choice. Easiest choice goes to 2004).
Don't different states have different deadlines for timing the printing of ballots? Before those deadlines kick-in then I guess the parties would scramble for an emergency convention. They must have rules for this sort of thing? I hope.
Once the ballot deadlines start to pass, then strictly speaking shouldn't it be up to the committed Electors who meet in January? They of course could punt it to the House, if they so desire. That would be the most democratic option for them.
After the House/Electors have elected a President, then I reckon the rules of succession would apply.
What "long distance weapons are getting better"? A standard bolt-action hunting rifle is more accurate than 99+% of shooters out to 3/4 of a mile and have essentially been unchanged since the Remington 700.
Up until the 3rd year of the war in Afghanistan the long-distance sniper record was held by Carlos Hathcock using a modified M2 machine gun that was designed in the 1920's (distance was 1.42 miles).
BladeDoc,
I suspect she is referring to things like shoulder fired rockets.
anomedebus:
How about the guy who threw a live grenade at him in 2005?
ABC News Link
I think that things like that aren't considered big news, because to the MSM, attempting to kill a Republican is just wacky fun. Not like killing a Democrat. Did you see the big story recently about how awesome of a president RFK would have been? And remember JFK? Wasn't that sad when we lost our innocence?
What "long distance weapons are getting better"?
Telekinesis?
Aric,
I suppose I should have said more .. attempts.
I had forgotten that incident, thanks.
Worse than Carter versus Ford?
If Obama is assassinated, most of the world will assume that the Clintons dunnit.
I'm actually surprised that I haven't heard more fears about Barack Obama
You must not hang out in the same parts of the Intarwebs I do, because not only do I see that fear expressed frequently, but specifically, i.e., that if he chooses Ms. Clinton for a running mate, she will assassinate him to get the presidency.
About six months ago the concern was about racists assassinating him; it only changed to Ms. Clinton in the last 2 weeks or so. But yeah, a lot of people I am acquainted with seem to be afraid that he will be assassinated in an almost obsessive way.
Based on the pattern of assassination attempts in the past 50-odd years, it's likely to be a mentally-unbalanced leftist who makes any attempt.
I'm pretty sure that doesn't apply to Hillary, but there are lots of people on DU, and some of them own guns.
Selecting Colin Powell would protect Obama from racist assassination attempts - why shoot the first black president just to get the second black president?
Gotta call you on this one, Megan... in the context of the 'lone wacko with a gun," your assertion that long-distance weapons are getting better is entirely without basis in fact.
We pretty much figured out the bolt-action sniper rifle with the 1903 Springfield. That's right - 1903.
There have been some marginal improvements since then, with the M-21 and M-24 sniper rifles. The latter, based on the Remington 700, features a floating barrel. There's a souped-up model that fires a .338, as opposed to a .308, which can reach out a bit longer. But we still pretty much have 9x sights, and the lone whacko with a gun needs to have a superhuman instinct for windage once you get out past about 900m. Which was about the max 50 years ago, anyway.
There are .50 cal. variants out there, and there have been instances of a hit on a man-sized target out to 2 klicks, but where are you going to get such a shot?
But y'know what? Carlos Hathcock was using a .50 cal with a scope for sniping in Viet Nam! And getting the rare hit out to that range. So long-range riflery is nothing new. And hardly any assassinations in the 20th century have involved long-distance sniping.
I suggest you stay clear of the guns beat! ;)
Edit: Incidentally, the point of developing the .338 version of the sniper weapon system (essentially a bolt-action rifle with a scope) was NOT to increase it's range. 1000 meters on an individual man-sized target is about the limit for human shooters, and has been since the scope was developed.
The point of the larger caliber was to launch enough mass behind the shot to penetrate protective armor at range. On the other hand, protective armor is much better than it was 30 years ago, too.
"I'm actually surprised that I haven't heard more fears about Barack Obama."
It's because you don't hang around black people or, to my surprise, read Andrew Sullivan enough. A lot of people are really, really convinced the guy's a goner.
"... Barack Obama. With his echoes of both MLK and Robert F. Kennedy"
Huh? You mean his quotes from them, or his references to them? Otherwise, he is about as much like either of them as they were like Pol Pot: human, not much more.
I don't entirely understand why people think that Obama is particularly more vulnerable to assassination than anyone else. His political views aren't at all extreme, and he hasn't dispossessed any particular constituency. Random kooks' motives generally have little to do with the actual target and everything to do with their own mental illness -- John Hinckley Jr wanted to impress Jodie Foster -- so crazies are sort of an equal threat to everyone.
So why do we assume that non-crazy American people are statistically more likely to want Obama dead? Because of his skin color? Really? Do you know anyone who would seriously shoot someone just because he is black?
I take Clinton's Intrade odds of winning the election despite losing the nomination as an indicator of Obama's probability of assisination. Intrade gives her a 25% probability of being selected as V.P., and a 4.6% prob of getting elected. So assume that her odds of getting elected conditional on her getting VP and BHO getting assassinated are 100%...
Odds of her being Prez = odds of vp x odds of his assassination x odds of her winning given assassination occurs
4.6% = 25% x ? x 100%
odds of assasination = .046 / .25 = 18.4%
So the market implies his odds of getting assassinated are a minimum of 18.4%. If the market thinks she could still lose the general election after an assassination of Obama, then the implied odds of an assassination rise.
Not sure if this reply belongs in the Hillary concession thread, or in this one, but if you turn off the volume, you can hear her say that she is suspending her run for the presidency because she now thinks she has a better shot of being president by not burning any more bridges and Obama being assassinated, than she does of stealing the nod at the convention.
O, I think Hillary's InTrade odds getting elected are independent of her being the VP candidate, so you may be double-counting BHO's assassination odds. I think they are below 4.6%, assuming that he could, conceivably, if unlikely, be knocked out for some other reason.
For the record, I'm not rooting for Obama to win, but would lament his assassination as a national tragedy.
O, that 4.6% could be the "Obama pisses off all the superdelegates" chances, far more likely than it is the "Hillary's his VP and he gets assassinated" chances. 4.6% of a wrecking scandal is high, under normal circumstances, but with Hillary Clinton out for blood I think it's about right.