Tamara Keith and Amy Walter on the political fallout after a 2nd assassination attempt

Read the Full Transcript

• Amna Nawaz:

  Let's return now to the apparent assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump and the potential political fallout.

  For that, we're joined by our Politics Monday duo. That is Amy Walter of The Cook Political Report With Amy Walter and Tamara Keith of NPR. Great to see you both.

• Tamara Keith, National Public Radio:

  Hello.

• Amy Walter, The Cook Political Report:

  Good to be here.

• Amna Nawaz:

  So, now the second apparent attempt on Mr. Trump's life in just the past few months. We should note, President Biden, Vice President Harris, Governor Walz have all condemned the violence. Mr. Trump is placing blame squarely on Democrats now.

  Earlier on, to FOX Digital, he said this about the shooter — quote — "He, the shooter, "believed the rhetoric of Biden and Harris, and he acted on it. Their rhetoric is causing me to be shot at."

  Tam, there was a moment, a brief moment, after the first attempt on his life in which it felt like politics was paused for just a moment. There's really none of that now. Have we grown numb to this violence?

• Tamara Keith:

  Well, it was a very brief pause. As the Republican National Convention was starting, there was this question, is President Trump, former President Trump, going to tone down his rhetoric? Are Democrats toning down their rhetoric? Are Republicans doing it at the convention themselves?

  There was some of that. It did not last long. It was very brief. This time, it does feel different. I think that the campaigns are treating it differently. Obviously, former President Trump is treating it differently. Partially, that's because the suspect didn't fire a shot.

  This was, although a close call, although an assassination attempt, and that's the way it's being treated by law enforcement, it was not — there wasn't a video of violence happening.

• Amna Nawaz:

  Right.

• Tamara Keith:

  And I think part of that, there is less shock this time than there was last time. And I think that the political response is different.

  For instance, after the first assassination attempt, the Harris campaign immediately said, we're pulling all our ads down. No one's pulling ads down right now. This campaign is 50 days — the election is 50 days away, and there just wasn't a beat. There wasn't a pause.

• Amy Walter:

  Yes, we — actually, we were polling right at the end of July, so basically two weeks after the shooting in Butler happened, and we were asking folks a lot of these same questions about, who do you blame for this, or is there — should Democrats — I think we said specifically, is there rhetoric — we asked specifically about the rhetoric about extremism — to blame for this assassination attempt/

  And Americans were divided 50/50. And what's interesting to me is they were divided 50/50 regardless of party identification. Usually, that is such a partisan question, right? Do you think Democrats are responsible for this? But I think part of the reason it was so evenly divided was that you didn't see the participation of either Trump or Democrats in this conversation.

  It was very much of a, we're talking about this person specifically who took the shot at Donald Trump. We are not making this into a political issue. Donald Trump did not make it as blatantly political as he is right now. So I would expect that we will see voters kind of follow where the politics go on this.

  The other sad and sadly, predictable thing in this poll is, we asked people — whether they have concerns for political violence continuing. So this is at the end of July. What do we think political violence will look like going into November? Eighty-six percent said they expected this.

• Amna Nawaz:

  Eighty-six percent.

• Amy Walter:

  Yes, and post-election as well. And only 20-something percent said they were shocked that something like this could happen.

• Amna Nawaz:

  That echoes what we hear from law enforcement and national security sources as well.

  Meanwhile, speaking of political rhetoric, we should point out that the vice presidential candidate on the Republican side, J.D. Vance, continues to repeat baseless claims about the Haitian immigrant population in Ohio. He was asked about it this weekend on CNN by Dana Bash.

  And this was their exchange. Take a look.

• Dana Bash, CNN Host:

  But it wasn't just a meme, sir.

  Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH), Vice Presidential Candidate: If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that's what I'm going to do, Dana, because you guys are completely letting Kamala Harris coast.

• Dana Bash:

  You just said that this is a story that you created.

• Sen. J.D. Vance:

  Yes.

• Dana Bash:

  So, the eating dogs and cats thing is not accurate.

• Sen. J.D. Vance:

  We are creating — we are — Dana, it comes from firsthand accounts from my constituents.

  I say that we're creating a story, meaning we're creating the American media focusing on it.

• Amna Nawaz:

  So, Tam, Senator Vance's point here, what he's trying to say is that he's trying to get the media to focus on illegal immigration and Harris' border policies.

  Haitians in Ohio, we should note, are here legally. They're under protected legal status. And we know now that this kind of rhetoric has led to the potential for real-world violence, threats against people in the community there, and evacuations. Why are they continuing to repeat these lies?

• Tamara Keith:

  Yes, and Vance was absolutely unapologetic in that interview, and, in fact, was critical of Dana for even suggesting that these threats that have been called into schools and other civic places in the community of Springfield, that that would have anything to do with the rhetoric of Vance and former President Trump, who have both continued to amplify this, not back down, certainly not apologize.

  But that is the way of the Trump campaign, of the Trump political ethos, is to dig in and dig in and dig in. And what they might be doing here — there's a few things that they're doing. One, they are trying to get people to talk about immigration in a way that has people focused on dogs and cats and Haitian migrants and people who are here legally.

  So it's sort of an unusual way to get people to talk about immigration. But the other thing is, it was a week where former President Trump had a really bad debate, where he went on stage and he said he had concepts for plans, but not actual plans, where a lot of things went wrong for Trump.

  And he has been struggling for weeks to get any political oxygen at all directed to him in any way that is on his terms. And so this was a way they could get political oxygen on their terms.

• Amy Walter:

  Well, and the interesting thing about that debate too is the amount of time that Donald Trump talked about illegal immigration was a lot.

  He turned almost every single question to immigration. Very little of it did he turn to the issue that the broad majority of Americans say is their top issue, which is the economy and inflation, where a lot of Republicans walked away from that debate saying they couldn't understand why he didn't pivot more to an issue where he also has an opportunity to put the Harris campaign back on their heels, which is to talk about inflation that occurred during that administration.

  So he wants to talk about immigration because it is, one, a very comfortable place for him. And, two, yes, he has an advantage there. And the other thing that Vance said that I think is important, by focusing on the media, saying it's the media that's giving Harris a pass, trying to do both things, shame the media, and also try to shame the Harris campaign into doing more of these sort of sit-down interviews.

• Tamara Keith:

  The other thing is that the Trump theory of the case, the way he is going to win this race, if he is going to win this race, is by juicing his base, by getting his base excited, by reaching out to the very voters who got him into office in 2016.

• Amna Nawaz:

  That's who they're messaging to.

• Tamara Keith:

  That's who they're messaging too.

  They're not trying to win swing voters with this message. This is all about the base.

• Amna Nawaz:

  Right.

  Before I let you go, Amy, I need to ask you about a recent Cook Political Report move when it comes to the Senate map. We know Democrats are on the back foot defending incumbents in red states. You and your colleagues just moved one of those races, Montana, from a toss-up to lean Republican.

  Why, and what could that mean for Senate control?

• Amy Walter:

  Yes.

  So Montana is the weakest link, so to speak, for Democrats in trying to control their very narrow Senate majority. What we know about Montana, it's the most Republican state after West Virginia that Republicans — and Democrats hold. And Jon Tester, the incumbent, was able to hold on. He's been there since 2006, in part because he was able to rise above partisanship.

  He wasn't as associated with the national Democratic brand. That's getting harder and harder to do in this era. He has a very strong opponent, probably the strongest opponent that he's ever had, and polling's showing that he is running behind not just where a Democrat needs to be to win, but running behind his Republican opponent.

  And so this is one of, if — as Montana goes, likely so goes the Senate. And so if Democrats are unable to hold onto Montana, even if they win the White House, holding onto the Senate becomes incredibly difficult, if not really impossible.

• Amna Nawaz:

  Amy Walter, Tamara Keith, always good to start our week off with you both. Thank you so much.

• Amy Walter:

  You're welcome.

• Tamara Keith:

  Thank you.