Yes, this is a dark question, and although no one should wish that on anyone… as an outsider to the US, it’s not unlikely given the tense political climate and the American aptitude towards firearms or other weapon's.
Related questions
@MattLashofSullivan Shot at or assassinated. Attempted or successful. There's no explicit mention that the modifier (attempted, etc) was modifying shooting or assassination. This event is an edge case where there was an attempted shooting. And therefore an assassination attempt as called by the media and the other markets.
@MattLashofSullivan The suspect left a loaded weapon which he abandoned when faced with potential lethal force. What else would it be but am assassination attempt?
@ForesterChristensen can we get some clarification here?
I bought NO, with regard to today's attempt on Trump, since he was neither "shot at" nor "assassinated", and felt this was pretty convincing.
It should be admitted that the added parenthesis at the end of the question's title could indicate more leeway. My interpretation was/is still that what's referred to in this parenthesis as "attempted", when opposed with "successful", is in regard to whether the target would die or not.
Let us know if your interpretation is different.
@HenriThunberg I find your reading surprising, attempted seemed to modify both shot at or assassinate for me
@HenriThunberg looks like we're not getting answers from this guy. He's made like 10 trades, the most recent of which was a month ago.
@HenriThunberg I think it is a yes, pending confirmation on details of what happened. Question says (attempted)
@HenriThunberg @HenriThunberg I strongly disagree with your view. I think the "attempted or successful" pertains to both variables within the question stem (being "shot at" or "assassinated") - i.e., that any attempt to shoot at and/or assassinate a presidential candidate would qualify. I think interpreting "attempted" and "successful" based on whether the target dies is wrong here, as I think "attempted" more clearly refers to the act of trying to carry out an assassination.
In your view, likening "attempted" to the target surviving would mean the market creator meant to have a market where the candidate would have to be shot at (survive/killed) or killed. I think this is far less likely, personally.
@Ashwin Yeah, this wasn't worded such that it exactly captures what happened. The suspect had a gun. Agents fired at the suspect. The suspect ran off. Trump heard "gunshots in my vicinity" but those were probably the agents firing. There has been no indication that the suspect fired off a shot.
I can't find information on the weapon being loaded or if the suspect was carrying ammunition. This would be an interesting piece of information. Ammunition is as important as the weapon. But I can only find information about the weapon.
I feel the spirit of the question should include this as an assassination attempt since the media is calling it as such, the suspect was carrying a rifle, and agents fired on him. If the rifle wasn't loaded and the suspect had no ammunition, then there would have been no capability of an assassination attempt.
I don't know how to call this though.
Edit: I feel like there's little difference between being shot at and being in the sights of a gunman with the capability of firing off a shot and who was engaged with potentially lethal force. Again, I feel information about ammunition is key here. If the weapon was loaded and pointed at the former President, then there's little difference between shots being ready to fire and shots actually fired.
Edit 2: Images of the weapon left at the scene show that it had a magazine attached. This is clearly an assassination attempt, though it's unclear shots were fired from the suspect. I feel it should be resolved with a yes because the capability was there, he just got engaged before he could pull the trigger.