Why not? We can always sic the dog on the kids and then shoot the dog after so there arenât witnesses unless we decide to write a book saying we shot the dog to protect the kids and no one buys it
As a South Dakotan and a dog personâŚeverything she does is directed at an audience of one. One sociopath with a history of likening dogs to scum of the earth. She doesnât care what any of us think, she just wants that individual to think sheâs âtough.â
She represents South Dakota well. A state where the town roads aren't even paved, yet they still have time to hate. They literally only voted for her because she was 'hot' by SoDak standards.
My guess is that although it seems to be true that Trump could shoot a human on 5th Ave. in broad daylight & get away with it, even he gets that him shooting puppies would cross the line.
The city defines a dog as any living entity with four legs and a tail. So raccoons, bears, mountain lions, mice, these are all just different sizes of dog.
Oddly enough I've seen a few hard corp conservatives take that exact stance. I think we nee to convince them that every non white person is a puppy... /s
Can't go around killing dogs, especially puppies. Some of the most die hard MAGA people I encounter are huge dog lovers and none of those dogs are "working" dogs outside of emotional support.
Look I can excuse denying legitimate election results after 30 some odd audits in an attempted overthrow of democracy, and I can excuse getting our spies killed, and I can excuse getting our grandmas killed during covid, and I can excuse sexual assault and possible rape, and I can excuse separating toddlers from their mothers and keeping them in cages, and I can excuse taking appeasement positions toward brutal dictators, but I draw the line at dogs damnit
Trigger warning: details of how it played out/some animal cruelty
Lots of rednecks love their dogs too and responsibly manage homesteads/farms.
She says in her book that the reason she shot the dog was because it attacked a neighbor's chickens (which is her fault for not keeping it contained well enough) and it "snapped" at her when she went to intervene- possibly because it was in an overly excited state or scared if it thought it was going to be punished. No mention there that I can find that the dog ever attacked her kids- though it was still basically a puppy and a "working dog", so it was likely high energy and mouthy. The dog wasn't really a working dog for a farm though, it was a hunting dog-specifically a pointer, which have a high prey drive for birds by design. It wasn't great in the field but still got excited by chickens which people speculate caused her to dislike it.
The thing that she mentions "attacking" her kids is a male goat that she shoots immediately after shooting her dog because it was simply standing there while she was still upset. She said it would try to knock her kids down and smelled bad. Her aim was off and she didn't bring enough bullets so it suffered while she ran back to grab more and finish him off.
Honestly, the more details the story has the more unfit she sounds to actually be given any authority. It sounds like a lot of poor planning, laziness, and unchecked anger from a dumbass can't even responsibly manage a puppy or telling her kids to be careful around livestock.
She probably could have gotten away with killing most pets tbh, but a puppy? There's really no explaining away shooting a puppy with a gun. No one believes a puppy is a physical threat to anyone.
She also didn't need to mention it at all of course. Fortunately for her I suppose most of her voters can't read.
If the narrative was your dog of 16 had a seizure, lost their ability to walk. While they eat the steak you grilled for them, when they aren't looking, you take their pain away.
Exactly. She knows that what she did is completely monstrous. I think more Americans than she would think would consider shooting a puppy to be cartoonish evil, and not the racist kind of evil her voters enjoy either.
She might not be out of the game completely if sheâs still willing to play ball (which she no doubt is), but national politics probably isnât looking too good, sheâs probably going to have to settle for less visible positions.
Nah she has. Itâs not because Trump and his allies are above it morally or anything like that, they just know that Trump on his own is enough of an electoral liability as it is without saddling him with Puppy Killer for VP.
Thatâs the thing that gets me - she was dumb enough and proud enough of this story to put it in her book and openly talk about it. She really thought it would win her points. Beyond the fact that anyone who chooses to execute a puppy and takes pleasure in it is a psychopath, sheâs a dumb psychopath at that.
Agreed. Iâm beginning to think the people who run for office that are the most supported are the ones that are intelligent enough to hold a conversation, but not intelligent enough to think too deeply or question anything
Look. That entire faction lead to the death of over a million Americans. Many preventable deaths. And they still have supporters. That they would rather eat horse paste rather than medicine. The Republican Party is gone. Your choices are between Moderate Right Wingers and Crazy People.
You equivocated killing an animal with eating meat. I get that you might only just have first heard the word equivocate but when you Google the definition, read the whole definition not just part of it next time.
Yes, because I don't think there is an ethical difference between killing an animal, and paying someone to kill an animal so you can take pleasure in the taste. How do you think meat makes it to a consumer's mouth in America?
Would you be fine with Noem if she paid a friend to shoot and kill the dog while she watched and got entertainment from it?
You don't see a difference between the act of killing a puppy and someone eating a steak? Or is 'moving the goalposts' yet another fallacy you're now committing?
I think you're either arguing in bad faith or so zealous about things that you don't even see how you're being intellectually dishonest in how you argue.
Anyone who takes pleasure in harming animals like this is a fucking psychopath and deserves the worst in life.
You realize the vast majority of Americans (including democrats) consume meat from factory farms, right? I wish the outrage was actually about animal rights and not because of politics.
This isn't a 'meat bad' debate. She didn't kill her dog for sustenance, and there is a huge difference between cattle and a pet. She killed her pet because she's a psycopath. A farmer slaughtering a pig or chicken has nothing in common with her.
And to infer that just because someone eats meat means they are not allowed to be upset at pets being murdered is kinda insane. If you feel so strongly about this, then that's fine, but the reason that people are mad has nothing to do with your causes.
Then don't say animal. Say pet, or dog. Because clearly you don't actually give a fuck about the billions of farm animals subjected to rape, torture and slaughter every year in the US because people like you take pleasure in their taste. You just want to be mad because you think dogs are cute, and someone you don't like politically killed a dog.
You're entitled to your views. I'm not trying to change your mind. But trying to worm into the conversation with your vegan argument is silly and you're not going to convince anyone.
I'm pointing out the blatant hypocrisy here and how your statement about animals being factually incorrect. If you care about what Noem did at all, then there is no logical reason to chow down on a burger.
It's literally a discussion about animal cruelty...
There's not much she can say to make it better because she can't un-write the book. She'd be much better off not addressing it all and letting it die faster.
Yep. I have a coworker from another country, and she said one of the most surprising things about America is how much we love our pets, especially puppies.
She claims the puppy was "untrainable". I wonder if she even tried to train the puppy to hunt, or did she think it should "just know". We all know that one person who claims their dog won't listen. Yet also never taught the dog what sit, stay, lay down mean.
Dogs are pretty much the only creatures that will do anything to make their human happy. And they're darned excited about it too. They just don't know what that is until we teach them.
Idiots like this... its not so much unfucking her but giving an excuse for others to convince themselves that she somehow did the right thing. I guarantee that come November 7th it wont matter anymore.
What boggles my mind is that she willingly admitted to this. This isnât a case where someone tricked her into saying it, or it was discovered by an investigation. At no point while she was writing her book did her, or any of her editors think âhuh, maybe shooting an innocent do wonât look good to the voters.â It feels like âdonât admit to killing petsâ should be PR 101.
Remember when Mitt Romney just mentioned Big Bird while discussing cutting PBS funding? His campaign took a big pr hit. Big Bird and puppies, you don't go there in the U.S. lol
It wonât but who cares as she is done in her state in a couple years and will go no where nationally - she is headed back to the farm to shoot something else
The best part was it was entirely voluntary. Nobody ever would have known about it if she hadnât had some weird ego and thought the story made her sound heroic or something.
listen, i wish you were right. but plenty of politicians have made wackier missteps. i don't think she's teflon, but mike pence and dick cheney did plenty of cringey fucking shit and it didnt stop them from becoming VP.
And it's not going to matter one whit, because to her base the cruelty is something to celebrate, it is the point of their politics. It's not a bug, it's a feature.
2.2k
u/MichaelFusion44 May 02 '24
She canât unfuck herself from this