• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Tim Walz campaign, and the ******** attacks upon him.

Vance has been pushing the "Haitians are eating your pets!" lie.

Police Deny Claims Of Haitian Immigrants Eating Pets In Ohio—Spread By JD Vance And Right-Wing Commentators

The Springfield, Ohio, police department says it hasn’t received credible claims of Haitian immigrants abducting and eating pets, despite viral assertions by Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, and other right-wing influencers that appear to have erroneously originated from an incident in a different Ohio city.
Click to expand...

Vance, the Republican vice presidential nominee, claimed in a post on X on Monday morning that “reports” show “people have had their pets abducted and eaten by people who shouldn't be in this country,” referring to the thousands of Haitian migrants who have settled in Springfield, though he did not cite specific reports.

The Springfield News-Sun reported some viral posts had erroneously linked Springfield to an incident last month in Canton, Ohio, in which a woman was arrested and charged with cruelty to companion animals for allegedly killing and eating a cat.

Vance doubled down in a post Tuesday morning, claiming his office has heard from many Springfield residents “who've said their neighbors' pets or local wildlife were abducted by Haitian migrants”—but added it’s “possible, of course, that all of these rumors will turn out to be false.”

Vance also claimed Tuesday a “child was murdered by a Haitian migrant”—possibly referring to a 2023 incident in Springfield in which migrant Hermanio Joseph collided with a school bus in a crash that killed one child, though Joseph was charged with involuntary manslaughter and vehicular homicide, not murder.

Vance’s Monday morning post was viewed more than 2 million times and liked more than 50,000 times. The claims have been repeated by various right-wing commentators, including Charlie Kirk, who garnered more than 3 million views on a post amplifying a claim about pet eating from a Springfield Facebook group post. Kirk responded to another right-wing influencer, Ian Miles Cheong, claiming there are “lots of reports of Haitians eating people’s pets”—though the video that Cheong posted was related to the separate incident in Canton, Ohio. Stephen Miller, a former Trump adviser, has repeatedly posted about the pet eating claims and blamed Vice President Kamala Harris, as the Biden administration has offered temporary protected status to hundreds of thousands of Haitian immigrants. Elon Musk also repeatedly posted about the pet-eating allegations on X, formerly known as Twitter, and blamed Harris, citing an interview Harris gave to The View in which she explained that the administration offered Haitian immigrants temporary protected status because “they need support, they need protection.”
Click to expand...

What the hell is wrong with these people?
 
Stacyhs said:
Vance has been pushing the "Haitians are eating your pets!" lie.

What the hell is wrong with these people?
Click to expand...

Nothing, they're telling 40%+ of the US electorate what they want to hear - (other) immigrants are responsible for all their problems.
 
Stacyhs said:
Vance has been pushing the "Haitians are eating your pets!" lie.





What the hell is wrong with these people?
Click to expand...

kookbreaker said:
A lot.
Click to expand...

The Don said:
Nothing, they're telling 40%+ of the US electorate what they want to hear - (other) immigrants are responsible for all their problems.
Click to expand...

Thing is, they've already got the votes of the racists in that 40% locked up. If anything, this kind of crap will lose them undecideds. At least I'd like to think so.
 
The Don said:
Nothing, they're telling 40%+ of the US electorate what they want to hear - (other) immigrants are responsible for all their problems.
Click to expand...

Guy you don't get how it works IN US politics.
Just being a major party candidate will get you 40 plus percent of the vote.
It is the 15 or so percent that is undecided that decides elections.
The numbers are just for illustartion but that is how it works.
 
dudalb said:
Guy you don't get how it works IN US politics.
Just being a major party candidate will get you 40 plus percent of the vote.
It is the 15 or so percent that is undecided that decides elections.
The numbers are just for illustartion but that is how it works.
Click to expand...

No, I do get it and I do understand how US politics works.

40%+ of the US electorate are receptive to the message that immigrants are the cause of their problems.

It's the same here in the UK when you consider the level of support for the Conservatives and Reform. :o
 
arthwollipot said:
Nah, she was always going to endorse them sooner or later. She just had to nail the timing, and she did.
Click to expand...

Well, sort of. By combining it with the debate there will be no way to know if Harris gets a bump from the debate, the endorsement or both.

But aside from who or what gets credit from the bump, the bump is the important thing.
 
CarbShark said:
Well, sort of. By combining it with the debate there will be no way to know if Harris gets a bump from the debate, the endorsement or both.

But aside from who or what gets credit from the bump, the bump is the important thing.
Click to expand...

Over on Scrutable.science I said that the debate and the endorsement are more effective combined. The debate gave Swift an opportunity to say do your research and something to hang her endorsement on, whereas if she'd immediately rebutted Trump's fake endorcement the effect would have died down by now and wouldn't have added to the impact of the debate
 
malbui said:
As a gaeilgeoir, I was thinking in terms of the Hateful Eight whose existence my grandparents refused to admit. For them it was 18 letters and no more.
Click to expand...
Ah, the very vocal vanguard who viewed V as a villainous visitor to the vernacular vocabulary.

Gulliver Foyle said:
Ah well that was back in the day and old money, i.e. I never got taught about it in school.
Click to expand...
Well attitudes began to change in the 1800s....
 
jimbob said:
Over on Scrutable.science I said that the debate and the endorsement are more effective combined. The debate gave Swift an opportunity to say do your research and something to hang her endorsement on, whereas if she'd immediately rebutted Trump's fake endorcement the effect would have died down by now and wouldn't have added to the impact of the debate
Click to expand...

And adds to the message that Kamala won the debate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom