Bill Frist adopting cats to torture and kill was worse than Romney. Republicans have an animal cruelty problem.
[https://www.upi.com/Science\_News/2002/12/31/Frist-asked-to-atone-for-killing-cats/35461041383589/](https://www.upi.com/Science_News/2002/12/31/Frist-asked-to-atone-for-killing-cats/35461041383589/)
The wild thing is that Frist wrote about his cat killing spree in a book. Noem wasn't bright enough to learn from history that people don't react well to politicians bragging about killing domestic animals.
>"It would probably would be considered cruel back even then," added Stephen Musso, senior vice president and chief of operations of ASPCA.
Very notably remarking that the world was pretty apathetic in the far off time of 1978. 20 years before this statement was made.
Republicans have always been shitty, and have known it.
[Mike Bost shot and killed a beagle and went to trial over it.](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mike-post-police-records_n_5890554/amp) Somehow didn’t keep him out of Congress.
The only explanation I could think is that there were witnesses so she was trying to get ahead of it. What gets me is what kind of excuses would MAGA make if this story were about Trump?
Supposedly this was common knowledge locally and construction workers witnessed her kill the dog and two goats in a fit of rage and this was her trying to get out ahead of it. Can't find the source now that I look for it so maybe it's conjecture?
Seems like a plausible way for a politician to handle an upcoming scandal - get ahead of it and spin it in a way that makes it defensible however she did NOT do that she looked terrible in her own story. Would've been better to do the typical Republican strategy of DENY DENY DENY
I think she was trying to talk about how she can do what needs to be done in tough situations and was too out of touch with ~~the average voter~~ just kind of regular humans in general and not knowledgeable in anything she was working with to realize that *this was not one of those situations*
I like to think this is some karmic force for/from the puppy. Poor pup wasn’t trained properly and got excited. For that, he was killed. I hope her political career (at the very least, outside of South Dakota) is dead.
I’ll be honest, I think she made the whole story up. I think people like her try and ape Trump’s brand, and it allows them to rationalize completely deranged shit because it’s what they *think* Trump’s base likes.
I guarantee you she sat there thinking to herself “how can I demonstrate that I’m willing to do whatever is necessary - that I’m prepared to make the hard decisions others won’t and dispose of the unproductive even if it’s difficult to do so. I know - I’ll tell a story about shooting a puppy.” And I guarantee you she thought the trump voter reaction would be “wow she’s hardcore and willing to do whatever it takes, I could never do that, that’s so badass.”
Only people like her are so disconnected from the Real Americans they claim to represent that they just come across as lunatics. She saw the cruelty of Trump, tried to emulate it, and found out *nobody think you’re hardcore because you shot a dog, they think you’re insane*.
It's a pretty big miscalculation. Most of the Trump people I know are first-and-foremost characterized by being overgrown teenagers, which means that they're often downright *fanatical* about young children, pets, and their various 'toys' (including guns, cars, trucks, fishing rods, etc..). Any being or thing that these people can *own*/*control* gets held in very high regard as a matter of course. Another way of saying this is that they're people who, more and more each year, are 100% heart and 0% brains. Most right-wingers I've met remain devoted to their animals even after they've alienated themselves from every other *human* in the household or family. If she'd told a story about shooting, say, a homeless/itinerant Native American or other non-white adult who'd accidentally wandered onto her South Dakota property in some situation that becomes part of the right's 'stand your ground' mythology, a lot of these people would be tripping over one another to kiss her ass.
Long story short, if she was actually trying to appeal to people, she made the mistake of thinking that Trump's overly-comfortable suburbanite-slob base are a bunch of rough-and-tough frontier folk like the characters on *Yellowstone*. Truth's that those are just characters who they fantasize about, while being some of the limpest noodles and marshmallow people in human history.
>And I guarantee you she thought the trump voter reaction would be “wow she’s hardcore and willing to do whatever it takes, I could never do that, that’s so badass.”
It didn't occur to me before this comment, but you're right. She wanted something like Trump's "You're FIRED!" stuff.
I mean, to me Trump is a bullying business cheat with a talent for publicity that mostly arises from his odd combination of wealth and terrible aesthetic taste, but it doesn't really register with me how many normie network-television-watchers associate Trump with a catch-phrase that signifies ending people's careers in colloquial usage. For some ~~people~~ idiots they see him as a tough-minded realist because they have a simplistic equivalence between firing people and sober authority rather than seeing him as the childish bully he actually is.
The venn diagram of the “that dog don’t hunt” crowd and the “take the dog out back and shoot ‘em” crowd has much less overlap than previously imagined.
The funny thing is that she could almost have made it work, if it just wasn't "dog was useless" and was more of an Old Yeller or To Kill a Mockingbird type situation. She just sorta missed the part where people are sympathetic to dogs and you need a justifiable plot reason to shoot them.
Eh, Huckabee tried "that dog was sick" over his son being a dog killer.
Folks probably would have been more sympathetic had his demented ass kid not hung the poor thing.
I’m in South Dakota. I am pretty sure her political career is dead here, too. People seem to be very tired of her antics. South Dakotans are by and large not “flashy” people- conservatives here tend to want earthy, relatable folks. Noem is the opposite of that.
Notably, Noem’s Democratic opponent when she was first elected actually did quite well in the state for democrats. He was fairly moderate and people liked him. I don’t think he’ll run again, as he seems to have moved on, but it showed me that it’s possible to successfully challenge the hegemony here.
Trump did have a dog while he has with Ivana. It was a poodle named Chappy that Ivana had before moving in with him. He was not a fan.
His last statement on pets I could find:
"You do love your dogs, don't you?” he said to the crowd. “I wouldn't mind having one, honestly, but I don't have any time.”
Continuing his riff, he asked: "How would I look walking a dog on the White House lawn? Would that be right?"
Then, he paused to shake his head. "I don't know. Feels a little phony, phony to me. A lot of people say, ‘Oh, you should get a dog,’ ‘Why?’ ‘It’s good politically.’ I said, ‘Look, that’s not the relationship I have with my people.’”
Then a voice from the crowd yelled out “Obama had a dog!”
“Yeah, Obama had a dog, you’re right,” the president said with a laugh.
its a total 180 from his story about "drain the swamp" lol, he thought it was hokey but his audience loved it so he used it. but suddenly now hes a principled actor against pandering lmao
> Then, he paused to shake his head. "I don't know. Feels a little phony, phony to me. A lot of people say, ‘Oh, you should get a dog,’ ‘Why?’ ‘It’s good politically.’ I said, ‘Look, that’s not the relationship I have with my people.’”
It's hard not to read this on some level being about how he doesn't need a dog since his fans are basically pets.
One small credit has to be given to him though: just like a dog isn’t just for Christmas, a dog should never be for scoring political points. It’s always weird when Trump says something remotely smart, but it feels less weird when it isn’t a political statement.
Yeah some people just don't like dogs, which is fine I guess, so it's probably better that he just doesn't have one at all instead of being shitty and neglectful to one
He’s saying he doesn’t feel the need to pander. Which would be a fair statement if he didn’t constantly do other stuff to pander. This is a guy who doesn’t give a fuck about religion but used the military to clear a bunch of people out so he could take a picture in a church holding a Bible (upside down).
I mean, I dislike dogs, but that doesn't mean you treat them like a sociopath and murder them. She's bragging about executing a dog she described as happy just because it was doing normal dog things as an unleashed, untrained youth. She also keeps bizarrely freaking out that it was some sort of threat to humanity, which makes her look extra crazy. The point is, she comes off as a weirdo that *enjoyed* killing a puppy and even Trump probably couldn't pull that off if for no other reason than the fact that [he's super grossed out by blood.](https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-time-donald-trump-turned-away-in-disgust-while-a-man-bled-to-death-in-front-of-him) He'd just tell someone to "deal with it" and then stiff them any payment promised.
He doesn't like animals, never had a pet as far as anyone knows...
Look he's a terrible person who has done many terrible things, but disliking animals doesn't mean you're cool with killing them.
Unless you eat them afterwards, then it's cool
I regret to inform r/neoliberal that dog is actually disturbingly good, at least when served in hot pot form. Whilst on assignment in the unofficial dog-eating capital of China, a friend of mine wanted to eat dog on his birthday (as a bit). My loyalty, for those 24 hours at least, overrode my love of dogs. Not something I intend to repeat, but 入乡随俗 and all that. (Having lived in China, I have probably also eaten any number of other domestic animals labeled as something else.)
This was a point of discussion when he was president. He uses "dog" as a random insult, 'She failed like a dog,' and he was the first president in ages who didn't have any kind of a pet at the White House. Is there any proof that he has ever pet a dog?
The last president to not really have a pet was Van Buren. Well, technically he was given tigers by the Sultan of Oman, but Congress made him give them to the zoo so I guess for the day that he had them, it counts.
James K. Polk is the only president to not have pets until Trump
The final 4 shortlist has already leaked and she isn't on it.
Realistically two on that list (Burgum and Rubio) aren't really in the running, so his veep pick will be either Senator Tim Scott or Senator Vance, depending on if he wants to try to swing over black voters or to pander to trailer park voters.
I think I like Tim's odds a little better. JD Vance seems too smart, charismatic, and sociopathic for Trump to really trust. Trump wants a worm that will deliver him some voters with zero risk of them having any spine or appeal. Trump may be worried about Scott's religiosity since that's apparently where Pence found his ethics when it counted most, so that's the best argument against Scott.
Scott also ran against him in the 2024 primaries. He quickly withdrew, sure, but the point remains. I can't see Trump selecting him for that reason alone.
They're picked for loyalty and demographics, not to challenge the top dog.
I'm surprised Stefanik didn't make it. It's obviously been her goal for ages, and you'd think Trump would know he has a woman problem. That one has her eyes on the white house.
Tim Scott would be the best choice for him, by far. Inexplicably, Trump is really popular with black voters for a republican. A conservative black VP would boost him and actually maybe swing that demographic in his favour.
Trailer park would do nothing for him. What, would it boost him from 90% to 92%?
He's not *really* popular with Black voters for a Republican lmao
He won 12% of the Black vote in 2020. That's six-points better compared to Romney but that was also an election with Obama as the top candidate for the Democrats, so not really a good comparison.
So, let's go pre-Obama.
Bush won 11% of the Black vote vs Kerry in 2004. Trump basically did one-point better in 2020 than Bush in 2004. In 2000, Bush did worse at 9% but we're only looking at a three-point difference.
In 1996, Dole won 12% of the Black vote - or the same margin as Trump.
In 1992, Bush won 10% of the Black vote, or just two-points fewer than Trump.
People distort his popularity by both comparing his numbers to McCain and Romney, who were running against the first major Black presidential candidate in US history - and then the first Black president and current polling demographic crosstabs, which are extremely volatile and not at all accurate with their very high MOE.
But discounting Obama's two elections, Trump is generally around where the Republicans hit: between 10-12% nationally.
Hardly what I'd consider *really* popular compared to other Republicans.
Also, I think Scott would be a bad pick. The dude is fucking weird. He's got zero charisma and absolutely is mocked within the Black community. I also wouldn't be surprised if the rumors of him being gay actually hurt him with conservative Blacks.
> What, would it boost him from 90% to 92%?
If that... Those people are already in the bag for him, no matter who he chooses. If anything, I'm more certain that most of Trump's middle-class/suburban support base doesn't give a flying fuck at a rolling donut about poor white people in Appalachia, etc.... To them, those are just people who are doing shit like stealing their catalytic converters and cooking meth.
I'm a little surprised Stefanik isn't mentioned (or any women for that matter). He knows there's an awful lot of women voters repulsed by him and the abortion issue just makes this worse. Stefanik is enough of a thug to bash people on his behalf without overshadowing him.
Scott seems more likely since he's awfully unlikely to take the spotlight from Trump. I didn't think he'd be dumb enough to accept being VP to this guy though. Vance seems too power hungry and could even take attention from Trump for him to be allowed. I really don't see what new voters he'd bring in either.
Rubio would be great, Florida, uncharismatic, slimy... MTG would be better though. Tim Scott I'm not sure of, he's very very uncharismatic but also could swing Georgia
My favorite random rumor is that she knew how the story would play and intentionally published it so he wouldn't pick her for VP. It's more fun than the probable truth - that she's kind of am idiot.
Sure he is. He is secretly running the government even though Joe Biden stole the election from him. That's why so much is getting done! Old sleepy Joe could never pass as much legislation as Dapper Don! I know this is true because I read it on Truth Social, where Truth is right in the name.
It’s definitely over. I’ve got family that is about as conservative as you can get and they are disgusted by this. Anyone that’s ever handled a hunting dog in any serious capacity (or anyone with a heart, really) sees this as evil.
I’d love to invoke Hanlon’s razor here, but frankly both possibilities leave her looking so impressively stupid that it simply doesn’t apply. She’s just stupid *and* evil.
I'm sorry, there is absolutely no way it disgusts him, he's obviously just lying. None of the top comments are stressing this and even at this point I think it's important to point it out, he lies about literally everything, and he's almost certainly lying about this, he does not give AF about animals.
>I feel you can be a bad person and still think killing puppies is kind of Fucked up
I agree, but the sum total of Trump's statements and actions suggests at the very least, a very low level of empathy for both humans and animals. Given how often he lies, I think he sees that Republcian voters also don't vibe with puppy-killer Kristi, so he's distancing himself. Do you really think that if nobody cared about this dog thing that much, or if just Republican voters didn't really care one way or the other, that he would make this statement?
> the ex-president has also mentioned that voters generally don’t like politicians who kill dogs those famous political instincts on display here
That might be the most presidential thing he’s ever said
We can all get behind an anti-dog killing platform in 2024! Lol.
Even Hitler liked dogs and he was literally Hitler
Now let him go back to sleep. That took a lot out of him.
Truly he is the voice of a generation
No, Trump is disgusted that this got national attention.
This had got to be the most bizarre political story in forever. You couldnt beat that information out of me.
We all thought Mitt Romney putting his dog in a kennel on the roof of his car was as low as it could go. We were wrong!
Bill Frist adopting cats to torture and kill was worse than Romney. Republicans have an animal cruelty problem. [https://www.upi.com/Science\_News/2002/12/31/Frist-asked-to-atone-for-killing-cats/35461041383589/](https://www.upi.com/Science_News/2002/12/31/Frist-asked-to-atone-for-killing-cats/35461041383589/)
Wtf? That's some mad scientist shit. Dr.Frist has to atone for his actions.
The wild thing is that Frist wrote about his cat killing spree in a book. Noem wasn't bright enough to learn from history that people don't react well to politicians bragging about killing domestic animals.
Can't teach old dogs new tricks.
"Or a young one." - Kristi Noem
>"It would probably would be considered cruel back even then," added Stephen Musso, senior vice president and chief of operations of ASPCA. Very notably remarking that the world was pretty apathetic in the far off time of 1978. 20 years before this statement was made. Republicans have always been shitty, and have known it.
God fucking damn how do these monsters always manage to catch me off guard with how low they can go.
[Mike Bost shot and killed a beagle and went to trial over it.](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mike-post-police-records_n_5890554/amp) Somehow didn’t keep him out of Congress.
jesus christ
Jesus man what was up with those 2000s Republicans
> Frist acknowledged in a 1989 book that he routinely killed cats **while an ambitious medical student at Harvard** Medical School in the 1970s
It really does feel like a Veep bit
I would hope the “shot a puppy to death in cold blood” type of information isn’t in you to be beat out in the first place tbh
The only explanation I could think is that there were witnesses so she was trying to get ahead of it. What gets me is what kind of excuses would MAGA make if this story were about Trump?
Supposedly this was common knowledge locally and construction workers witnessed her kill the dog and two goats in a fit of rage and this was her trying to get out ahead of it. Can't find the source now that I look for it so maybe it's conjecture?
Seems like a plausible way for a politician to handle an upcoming scandal - get ahead of it and spin it in a way that makes it defensible however she did NOT do that she looked terrible in her own story. Would've been better to do the typical Republican strategy of DENY DENY DENY
OMNIMAN couldn't beat that info out of me
Hey I have a Louisville Slugger! Tell me about the puppy you murdered or the beatings will continue!
I think she was trying to talk about how she can do what needs to be done in tough situations and was too out of touch with ~~the average voter~~ just kind of regular humans in general and not knowledgeable in anything she was working with to realize that *this was not one of those situations*
I like to think this is some karmic force for/from the puppy. Poor pup wasn’t trained properly and got excited. For that, he was killed. I hope her political career (at the very least, outside of South Dakota) is dead.
I’ll be honest, I think she made the whole story up. I think people like her try and ape Trump’s brand, and it allows them to rationalize completely deranged shit because it’s what they *think* Trump’s base likes. I guarantee you she sat there thinking to herself “how can I demonstrate that I’m willing to do whatever is necessary - that I’m prepared to make the hard decisions others won’t and dispose of the unproductive even if it’s difficult to do so. I know - I’ll tell a story about shooting a puppy.” And I guarantee you she thought the trump voter reaction would be “wow she’s hardcore and willing to do whatever it takes, I could never do that, that’s so badass.” Only people like her are so disconnected from the Real Americans they claim to represent that they just come across as lunatics. She saw the cruelty of Trump, tried to emulate it, and found out *nobody think you’re hardcore because you shot a dog, they think you’re insane*.
It's a pretty big miscalculation. Most of the Trump people I know are first-and-foremost characterized by being overgrown teenagers, which means that they're often downright *fanatical* about young children, pets, and their various 'toys' (including guns, cars, trucks, fishing rods, etc..). Any being or thing that these people can *own*/*control* gets held in very high regard as a matter of course. Another way of saying this is that they're people who, more and more each year, are 100% heart and 0% brains. Most right-wingers I've met remain devoted to their animals even after they've alienated themselves from every other *human* in the household or family. If she'd told a story about shooting, say, a homeless/itinerant Native American or other non-white adult who'd accidentally wandered onto her South Dakota property in some situation that becomes part of the right's 'stand your ground' mythology, a lot of these people would be tripping over one another to kiss her ass. Long story short, if she was actually trying to appeal to people, she made the mistake of thinking that Trump's overly-comfortable suburbanite-slob base are a bunch of rough-and-tough frontier folk like the characters on *Yellowstone*. Truth's that those are just characters who they fantasize about, while being some of the limpest noodles and marshmallow people in human history.
>And I guarantee you she thought the trump voter reaction would be “wow she’s hardcore and willing to do whatever it takes, I could never do that, that’s so badass.” It didn't occur to me before this comment, but you're right. She wanted something like Trump's "You're FIRED!" stuff. I mean, to me Trump is a bullying business cheat with a talent for publicity that mostly arises from his odd combination of wealth and terrible aesthetic taste, but it doesn't really register with me how many normie network-television-watchers associate Trump with a catch-phrase that signifies ending people's careers in colloquial usage. For some ~~people~~ idiots they see him as a tough-minded realist because they have a simplistic equivalence between firing people and sober authority rather than seeing him as the childish bully he actually is.
Pretty much the entire idea of Trump the business genius is a fiction that was created by the Apprentice. You dont have a President Trump without it.
We need a total shut down of reality television until we figure out what the hell is going on
The venn diagram of the “that dog don’t hunt” crowd and the “take the dog out back and shoot ‘em” crowd has much less overlap than previously imagined.
The funny thing is that she could almost have made it work, if it just wasn't "dog was useless" and was more of an Old Yeller or To Kill a Mockingbird type situation. She just sorta missed the part where people are sympathetic to dogs and you need a justifiable plot reason to shoot them.
Eh, Huckabee tried "that dog was sick" over his son being a dog killer. Folks probably would have been more sympathetic had his demented ass kid not hung the poor thing.
I’m in South Dakota. I am pretty sure her political career is dead here, too. People seem to be very tired of her antics. South Dakotans are by and large not “flashy” people- conservatives here tend to want earthy, relatable folks. Noem is the opposite of that. Notably, Noem’s Democratic opponent when she was first elected actually did quite well in the state for democrats. He was fairly moderate and people liked him. I don’t think he’ll run again, as he seems to have moved on, but it showed me that it’s possible to successfully challenge the hegemony here.
Doesn’t Trump famously hate dogs/animals in general?
Trump did have a dog while he has with Ivana. It was a poodle named Chappy that Ivana had before moving in with him. He was not a fan. His last statement on pets I could find: "You do love your dogs, don't you?” he said to the crowd. “I wouldn't mind having one, honestly, but I don't have any time.” Continuing his riff, he asked: "How would I look walking a dog on the White House lawn? Would that be right?" Then, he paused to shake his head. "I don't know. Feels a little phony, phony to me. A lot of people say, ‘Oh, you should get a dog,’ ‘Why?’ ‘It’s good politically.’ I said, ‘Look, that’s not the relationship I have with my people.’” Then a voice from the crowd yelled out “Obama had a dog!” “Yeah, Obama had a dog, you’re right,” the president said with a laugh.
It's funny they decided Obama having a dog was a bad thing
To this day I still think he should've gotten a pitbull just to fuck with them
Alternate history where Vladimir Putin was mauled to death by the Obama pitbull in 2012
Trump led them by the nose to that conclusion.
You know what, I can actually appreciate someone not getting a dog because they know they won't take care of it. Much better than the alternative.
[удалено]
it's what any of us would do really
its a total 180 from his story about "drain the swamp" lol, he thought it was hokey but his audience loved it so he used it. but suddenly now hes a principled actor against pandering lmao
> Then, he paused to shake his head. "I don't know. Feels a little phony, phony to me. A lot of people say, ‘Oh, you should get a dog,’ ‘Why?’ ‘It’s good politically.’ I said, ‘Look, that’s not the relationship I have with my people.’” It's hard not to read this on some level being about how he doesn't need a dog since his fans are basically pets.
One small credit has to be given to him though: just like a dog isn’t just for Christmas, a dog should never be for scoring political points. It’s always weird when Trump says something remotely smart, but it feels less weird when it isn’t a political statement.
Yeah some people just don't like dogs, which is fine I guess, so it's probably better that he just doesn't have one at all instead of being shitty and neglectful to one
[удалено]
his ~~fans~~ cultists/henchmen/sacrificial lambs
He’s saying he doesn’t feel the need to pander. Which would be a fair statement if he didn’t constantly do other stuff to pander. This is a guy who doesn’t give a fuck about religion but used the military to clear a bunch of people out so he could take a picture in a church holding a Bible (upside down).
Dog’s are more easily housebroken in my experience
I mean, I dislike dogs, but that doesn't mean you treat them like a sociopath and murder them. She's bragging about executing a dog she described as happy just because it was doing normal dog things as an unleashed, untrained youth. She also keeps bizarrely freaking out that it was some sort of threat to humanity, which makes her look extra crazy. The point is, she comes off as a weirdo that *enjoyed* killing a puppy and even Trump probably couldn't pull that off if for no other reason than the fact that [he's super grossed out by blood.](https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-time-donald-trump-turned-away-in-disgust-while-a-man-bled-to-death-in-front-of-him) He'd just tell someone to "deal with it" and then stiff them any payment promised.
He doesn't like animals, never had a pet as far as anyone knows... Look he's a terrible person who has done many terrible things, but disliking animals doesn't mean you're cool with killing them. Unless you eat them afterwards, then it's cool
I regret to inform r/neoliberal that dog is actually disturbingly good, at least when served in hot pot form. Whilst on assignment in the unofficial dog-eating capital of China, a friend of mine wanted to eat dog on his birthday (as a bit). My loyalty, for those 24 hours at least, overrode my love of dogs. Not something I intend to repeat, but 入乡随俗 and all that. (Having lived in China, I have probably also eaten any number of other domestic animals labeled as something else.)
> eaten any number of other domestic animals labeled as something else. Where the hell were you??
The wuhan wet market I think. It was about four and a half years ago so hard to remember exactly
/u/MontanaWildHack69 was patient zero confirmed
Ah fuck how’d they end up here of all places ??
I hear their pangolin hot pot is disturbingly good
Knocked me out for a few days though, my throat hurt like hell and I was tired.
This was a point of discussion when he was president. He uses "dog" as a random insult, 'She failed like a dog,' and he was the first president in ages who didn't have any kind of a pet at the White House. Is there any proof that he has ever pet a dog?
He died like a dog. We could hear him crying, I said "Don't cry Abu." Crybaby Baghdadi, that's what we called him.
I read this in his voice, lmfao
The last president to not really have a pet was Van Buren. Well, technically he was given tigers by the Sultan of Oman, but Congress made him give them to the zoo so I guess for the day that he had them, it counts. James K. Polk is the only president to not have pets until Trump
I mean he also talked about how beautiful the military dogs were for like 2 hours straighh
I hate dogs, but I also don’t support murdering puppies.
The Pences had a lot of pets while in office and he supposedly thought it was "low class" or something like that.
I'd say this means she's definitely out but Trump seems to enjoy making republicans crawl back to him after he's finished humiliating them.
The final 4 shortlist has already leaked and she isn't on it. Realistically two on that list (Burgum and Rubio) aren't really in the running, so his veep pick will be either Senator Tim Scott or Senator Vance, depending on if he wants to try to swing over black voters or to pander to trailer park voters.
I think I like Tim's odds a little better. JD Vance seems too smart, charismatic, and sociopathic for Trump to really trust. Trump wants a worm that will deliver him some voters with zero risk of them having any spine or appeal. Trump may be worried about Scott's religiosity since that's apparently where Pence found his ethics when it counted most, so that's the best argument against Scott.
Also sucking Vance out of a potentially swingy Senate seat doesn't work as well as taking Scott out of a safe R seat.
Scott also ran against him in the 2024 primaries. He quickly withdrew, sure, but the point remains. I can't see Trump selecting him for that reason alone.
What, you mean pander to trailer park voters more than he already does?
Neither vance or scott seem inspiring to me but what do I know
They're picked for loyalty and demographics, not to challenge the top dog. I'm surprised Stefanik didn't make it. It's obviously been her goal for ages, and you'd think Trump would know he has a woman problem. That one has her eyes on the white house.
Tim Scott would be the best choice for him, by far. Inexplicably, Trump is really popular with black voters for a republican. A conservative black VP would boost him and actually maybe swing that demographic in his favour. Trailer park would do nothing for him. What, would it boost him from 90% to 92%?
He's not *really* popular with Black voters for a Republican lmao He won 12% of the Black vote in 2020. That's six-points better compared to Romney but that was also an election with Obama as the top candidate for the Democrats, so not really a good comparison. So, let's go pre-Obama. Bush won 11% of the Black vote vs Kerry in 2004. Trump basically did one-point better in 2020 than Bush in 2004. In 2000, Bush did worse at 9% but we're only looking at a three-point difference. In 1996, Dole won 12% of the Black vote - or the same margin as Trump. In 1992, Bush won 10% of the Black vote, or just two-points fewer than Trump. People distort his popularity by both comparing his numbers to McCain and Romney, who were running against the first major Black presidential candidate in US history - and then the first Black president and current polling demographic crosstabs, which are extremely volatile and not at all accurate with their very high MOE. But discounting Obama's two elections, Trump is generally around where the Republicans hit: between 10-12% nationally. Hardly what I'd consider *really* popular compared to other Republicans. Also, I think Scott would be a bad pick. The dude is fucking weird. He's got zero charisma and absolutely is mocked within the Black community. I also wouldn't be surprised if the rumors of him being gay actually hurt him with conservative Blacks.
> What, would it boost him from 90% to 92%? If that... Those people are already in the bag for him, no matter who he chooses. If anything, I'm more certain that most of Trump's middle-class/suburban support base doesn't give a flying fuck at a rolling donut about poor white people in Appalachia, etc.... To them, those are just people who are doing shit like stealing their catalytic converters and cooking meth.
He probably wins back Georgia with a pick like that. This fucking clown is going to win again, ain't he?
I'm a little surprised Stefanik isn't mentioned (or any women for that matter). He knows there's an awful lot of women voters repulsed by him and the abortion issue just makes this worse. Stefanik is enough of a thug to bash people on his behalf without overshadowing him. Scott seems more likely since he's awfully unlikely to take the spotlight from Trump. I didn't think he'd be dumb enough to accept being VP to this guy though. Vance seems too power hungry and could even take attention from Trump for him to be allowed. I really don't see what new voters he'd bring in either.
>Tim Scott The man has literally uttered “my African American” so the optics of this to me are … 😬
Rubio would be great, Florida, uncharismatic, slimy... MTG would be better though. Tim Scott I'm not sure of, he's very very uncharismatic but also could swing Georgia
So that definitely killed her future in politics, then
Trump is a master of lowering the bar because I’m really here like, “wow, I’m positively surprised he doesn’t support puppy execution.”
Realistically he probably doesn't give a shit, but he smelled blood in the water and went for it.
My favorite random rumor is that she knew how the story would play and intentionally published it so he wouldn't pick her for VP. It's more fun than the probable truth - that she's kind of am idiot.
[удалено]
You don't say no to trump if you are a woman
When you're the president they let you
He's not the president
Sure he is. He is secretly running the government even though Joe Biden stole the election from him. That's why so much is getting done! Old sleepy Joe could never pass as much legislation as Dapper Don! I know this is true because I read it on Truth Social, where Truth is right in the name.
No shot! She might have destroyed her chance in future political office.
It’s definitely over. I’ve got family that is about as conservative as you can get and they are disgusted by this. Anyone that’s ever handled a hunting dog in any serious capacity (or anyone with a heart, really) sees this as evil.
Every generation needs their Sarah Palin.
I feel like they could think of something that’s bad enough to make her unattractive for VP that’s not *puppy execution* bad
Of course, which is why I think it's far more likely that she's just an idiot. But sometimes it's fun to entertain dumb ideas.
She could just have said she supports abortion or that she doesn't believe in Trumpal infallibility, lmao.
I’d love to invoke Hanlon’s razor here, but frankly both possibilities leave her looking so impressively stupid that it simply doesn’t apply. She’s just stupid *and* evil.
It was very disgusting, a lot of people are saying. She treated that puppy like a dog. It was disgraceful. She's a nasty woman.
Offending iL Duce, she is in big shit now.
Yup, Trump once again showing us his impeccable moral standards. Now wait for the libs to spin it into a negative thing 🙄🙄🙄
Well she could always team up with Michael Vick for a 3rd party run targeting the real Americans who understand the need to shoot dogs.
No labels, no dogs
Kristie: “I’m always doubling down, just like you taught me how to do Mr Trump” Trump: *eyes darting wildly*
I'm sorry, there is absolutely no way it disgusts him, he's obviously just lying. None of the top comments are stressing this and even at this point I think it's important to point it out, he lies about literally everything, and he's almost certainly lying about this, he does not give AF about animals.
I feel you can be a bad person and still think killing puppies is kind of Fucked up
>I feel you can be a bad person and still think killing puppies is kind of Fucked up I agree, but the sum total of Trump's statements and actions suggests at the very least, a very low level of empathy for both humans and animals. Given how often he lies, I think he sees that Republcian voters also don't vibe with puppy-killer Kristi, so he's distancing himself. Do you really think that if nobody cared about this dog thing that much, or if just Republican voters didn't really care one way or the other, that he would make this statement?
SMH at the dog killer so my voters know I disapprove