THEY’RE EATING DOGS AND CATS September 13, 2024
Given candidates’ inherent dodging and weaving, I don’t see presidential debates as learning experiences—except for last Tuesday’s.
Donald Trump enlightened a national TV audience about Haitian immigrants. “In Springfield [Ohio], they’re eating the dogs—the people that came in, they’re eating the cats. They’re eating—they’re eating the pets of the people that live there and this is what’s happening in our country, and it’s a shame.”
The real shame? It’s a lie. Trump may have heard this whopper from his vice-presidential candidate, JD Vance, Republican senator from Ohio, who scrounged it up online. Following the debate, Vance doubled down.
Springfield officials state that no evidence of pet feasting exists.
Nor is there evidence of “millions and millions” of criminals having entered the U.S. illegally, about which Trump informed us. Have criminals crossed our border? Sure. They do it legally, too. Millions and millions? Sounds like the famed astronomer Carl Sagan, who spoke about the billions and billions of stars in the universe and the possibility those numbers raise of extraterrestrial life. Only, Sagan told the truth.
Then again, evidence doesn’t hold a place of prominence in Trump World. Remember Trump advisor Kellyanne Conway cluing in America to alternative facts?
I also learned—again—that Trump won the 2020 election because he got the most votes of any Republican candidate ever. (Forget the Electoral College.) Trump did receive 74 million votes. Under the hot lights, it may have slipped his mind that Joe Biden received 81 million.
Oh, and Kamala Harris wants babies executed. And America is dying. So I guess I had something of a learning experience.
But I found post-debate commentary more interesting.
As expected, CNN’s folks—except David Urban, an advisor to Trump’s 2016 campaign—thought that, in the words of Jake Tapper, “Kamala won handily.” Chris Wallace opined, “Kamala Harris pitched a shutout.”
CNN’s fact checker Daniel Dale added, “Trump made at least 33 false claims . . . A remarkable chunk of what he said was not true.”
So, I did something I don’t do often enough. I switched to Fox. I figured they’d hail Trump as the winner. They did not. It seems Kamala Harris, according to Britt Hume, “wasn’t the dunderhead we thought she was.” Laura Ingraham declared, “She moved the points on the betting market.” And not to Trump.
Trump disagreed. He posted on Truth Social: “People are saying BIG WIN tonight!” Three minutes later: “I thought that was my best Debate, EVER, especially since it was THREE ON ONE!” He referred to ABC moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis ganging up on him.
Trump says there won’t be another debate. Thank God! Harris and Trump would only repeat what they’ve said over and over. Although you never know what might pop up to top Trump’s claim about Haitian immigrants devouring dogs and cats.
Oh, and Taylor Swift, a self-professed childless cat lady (see: Vance, JD), announced on Instagram that she’s endorsing Harris. She posed with a cat. I assume she doesn’t plan to eat it. Does she, Donald?
And, do celebrity endorsements matter? Well, getting people to register to vote is a good thing.
Bottom line: Who was the debate’s real winner? After 100 minutes of candidates huffing and puffing, I conclude—not the American people.
Please pass this on.
Order my new novel, TAKING STOCK (Kirkus Reviews starred selection) in softcover or e-book from Amazon, barnesandnoble.com or iuniverse.com. Or from your favorite bookstore.
What scares me is that, still, ~50% of the voters are still supporting Trump. What has our nation come to?
Definitely scary, Jean. I, like you, wonder.
We were discussing the dog-and-cat diet of Haitian immigrants on a Zoom meeting the other day, and someone correctly compared it to the blood libel — that Jews slaughtered Christian babies and used their blood to make matzahs (Yuck!). The Trump/Vance “dog libel” would be utterly laughable if it weren’t so blatantly racist, posing a real threat that someone will actually act to “protect” Springfield’s pets. In fact, there have already been bomb threats to some public institutions in Springfield. And, of course, the Haitians in Springfield are not illegal; they have temporary protected status, which allows them to work, which Springfield has embraced enthusiastically.
I disagree that the American people got nothing from the debate. They got further confirmation of Trump’s character, and they saw — perhaps for the first time — that Kamala Harris is capable of formulating a coherent strategy and executing it without being distracted by Trump’s BS. Articulating detailed policy points was never her goal in the debate. Rather, it was to draw a sharp contrast between her and her opponent by showing the marked difference in attitude between optimism and joy on one hand and dark paranoid pessimism on the other. As David Brooks opines in the NY Times this morning, she is catching — and perhaps creating — a cultural shift, and the debate served both to tack into that shift and to sharpen it. She won, he lost, and we are better off.
I agree with you, David, but for this: Trump did show us how beyond-the-fringe he is. Who doesn’t know that? Kamala Harris came out much better and, making no bones about it, I am voting for her. But I learned nothing new. Here’s hoping key American voters turn to sanity.
cemented what we already knew.
Trump is a dangerous imbicile.
Agreed, David.