Yes, Trump Does Get 'Some' Props – The Day He Showed He’s Not Afraid

The Trump 2024 rally shooting vs his own words.

In the theatre of modern politics (and that’s putting it ‘politely’), few figures are as polarising as Donald Trump. Depending on who you ask, he’s either a bastion of unfiltered truth-telling, the proverbial ‘saviour’ of the free world, or, he’s the personification of chaos and full of bullshit and hatred. But every once in a while, the exaggeration surrounding such a character intersects with reality in a way that demands attention - whether you like it or not. And yes, irrespective of your ‘political beliefs’, if we’re to really better ourselves through critical thinking we need to put our belief systems and our own ‘feeling’ somewhat to one side. So think about that, So think about that - because I certainly had to.

Picture of a stern looking Donald Trump — Props to you.

Take his 2018 claim during a political rally that was in and around the time of an active shooter committing heinous crimes in Florida. Trump bellowed that he would have “run unarmed towards an active shooter to stop the carnage”. Well ok then…for some, this statement was peak Trump: audacious, theatrical, and bordering on absurd. Many sceptics dismissed it outright as more of his egotistical bluster. Yet, within his loyal support base, it was received as further proof of his unflinching strength, the kind of decisive leadership they believe the world sorely needs. Who was actually right at the time? Who is right now? That depends on which lens you're viewing it through - and frankly, it's anyone’s guess. No judgement here and if we’re honest, then for most (unfortunately), perception is reality.

Fast-forward to 2024, and reality served Trump a moment that few politicians would ever want to face - a sniper opened fire at one of his rallies. In the chaos that followed, one of the gunman’s shots and/or ricochets clipped Trump’s ear, and within seconds, the Secret Service rushed to protect him and then neutralise the attacker. There is a tragedy here one person attending the rally tragically lost their life and other were also injured, but what Trump did next was surprising: instead of succumbing to shock or retreating into the protective huddle of his security team, he stood, raised his fist to the crowd, blood trickling down the side of his face, and defiantly shouted, “Freedom!” as he was carted off stage.

To some, this was a moment of extraordinary fortitude, proof that Trump could walk the walk after years of talking the talk. To others, it was little more than performative theatre, a calculated display of bravado crafted for the cameras. But wherever you sit on the political spectrum, there’s no denying that in this one moment, Trump’s actions did somewhat echo his 2018 proclamation in a way that warrants both closer scrutiny but also one that gives him his props and proper applause.

The Reality Check on Bravado

Trump’s 2018 statement about running towards an active shooter sparked intense reactions. Critics on the left derided it as reckless blustering, while his supporters embraced it as emblematic of his fearless persona. The truth (as with most things) likely lies somewhere in between. After all, the idea of anyone - let alone someone old enough to be more likely to need a Zimmer frame, and also untrained in combat - charging into a gunfight without hesitation is, at best, improbable. But Trump’s flair for overstatement is part of his brand.

When the sniper targeted Trump at his rally, the stakes became very real, very quickly. For those brief seconds after the first shot, he didn’t know whether more bullets were coming, or if they’d be accurate, his hand (well, his ear) was forced to come face to face with his mortality, even if for just a moment. And in that moment, he didn’t crumble. He didn’t flee. He stood his ground, with blood dripping down the side of his face, and sent a message of defiance.

Picture of an arm raised with a clenched fist. Defiant, black and white. — Grrrrrrr...

Was it an act of genuine courage? Or was it calculated performance, knowing he was flanked by some of the most skilled security personnel in the world? That’s the grey area where the debate lies. But it’s worth acknowledging that, for a leader who has built his image on strength and resilience, this was an occasion where his actions truly aligned with his rhetoric.

Polarisation in Perception

This moment, like so much of Trump’s political career, has been viewed through the fractured lens of partisan bias. To his supporters, it was a Churchillian display of fortitude, a rallying cry for freedom in the face of tyranny. To his detractors, it was little more than a hollow gesture amplified by the safety net of the Secret Service.

But the broader issue isn’t whether Trump is brave or performative - it’s how deeply entrenched our own biases are when analysing such events.

If another world leader had reacted the same way, would the narrative have shifted?

Imagine if it were Zelenskyy, shouting defiantly after an assassination attempt. Would his actions have been met with widespread praise, framed as evidence of resilience and strength? I’d have to say a resounding probably (hah).

The answer, of course, is yes. And that’s precisely the problem. Our reactions to moments like this often have less to do with the actions themselves and more to do with our existing perceptions of the person involved. The guy was literally shot at and he did not cower, so FUC it, love him or loathe him, you have to give him this one.

The Safety Net Question

Now, let’s not oversell the moment. By the time Trump raised his fist, the immediate threat was probably not as ‘threatening’ anymore. The Secret Service had taken control of the situation and Trump’s act of defiance was performed within the relative safety of a tightly controlled environment, well a huddle around him at least.

But that doesn’t entirely negate the significance of the moment. What it does raise is an important question: how do we differentiate between genuine courage and calculated optics? Trump’s reaction, whether instinctual or theatrical, did resonate with his audience and for me, I have to say that in a split-second such as this, to somehow have the wherewithal to be calculated and ‘theatrical’ has to be pretty improbable. What that moment did, was reinforce the narrative he’s built around himself as a leader who won’t back down, even in the face of danger.

A Test of Our Own Biases

Now for the more awkward bit: this isn’t just about Trump. It’s about us - our instincts, our reflexes, our ability to separate actions from the people performing them. Because if we’re honest with ourselves, many of us struggle to acknowledge when someone we disagree with, or even dislike, does something noteworthy.

Trump’s moment of defiance doesn’t suddenly absolve him of his past controversies. It doesn’t erase the complexities of his legacy or make his 2018 statement any less ridiculous in hindsight. But what it does do is challenge us to step back from our biases, to;

evaluate actions on their own merit rather than filtering them through the lens of personal sentiment.

If we can’t do that - if we’re so entrenched in our own narratives that we refuse to acknowledge inconvenient truths - then what hope do we have for meaningful discussion? Or even bettering ourselves if we just comfortable living within whatever echo-chamber were inside.

Abstract picture depiction an echo chamber. — Which echo chambers do you live in?

The Challenge

So here’s the real test: can we separate the action from the actor? Can we, for a moment, put aside our preconceived notions and recognise when someone defies our expectations? And flip it for a moment, can we also not overly misrepresent and distort the actions of those we ARE in favour of?

It’s not about praising Trump or rewriting his legacy. It’s about confronting our own confirmation biases, about staying open to the complexity of human behaviour - even when it comes from the most polarising figureheads.

Because if we can’t do that, we’re no better than those aforementioned echo chambers And in a world as divided as ours, the ability to see beyond our own biases might just be not only the most radical act of all, but also the most important. Else, perhaps we’re all FUCT?

Ta ta for now,

FUCT.