159
submitted 6 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

South Dakota's governor gets the sadism of Trump supporters, but screws up by saying the quiet parts out loud

Squint hard enough and perhaps one can see how Gov. Kristi Noem, R-S.D., thought it was a winning political move to brag  about murdering a puppy. It's the same trolling strategy used by MAGA Republicans like Donald Trump, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas: Say something extremely evil, stupid, or both. Draw the inevitable liberal outrage or mockery. Play the victim, claiming that it's more proof the "elites" hate the common sense working folk of MAGA. Then sit back and watch the dollars and followers roll in

For Noem, however, her tale of shooting her dog Cricket is not working out quite as planned. Sure, she got the predictable outrage and disgust from Democrats. But she also seems to have alienated the very Trump supporters she was trying to impress with her bloodthirsty tale. Fox News let their displeasure be known by doing a round-up story of conservative social media influencers denouncing Noem, often with quite harsh language. "Did she just intentionally end her career?" asked trollish podcaster Tim Poole. Other high-profile right-wingers blasted Noem as an "Absolute Psycho" and called for her to be "criminally charged for animal abuse." Even the notorious right-wing troll Catturd — who has 2.4 million Twitter followers because he acts as vile as his name suggests — drew a line at killing your child's beloved pet. 

Noem, however, still seems to think she can win over Republican voters by doubling and tripling down on her tale of executing a 14-month-old Wirehaired Pointer because it got confused and killed some chickens, instead of the pheasants she was training it to hunt. On Friday, she bragged about "the media gasping" at her "politically INcorrect" dog murder while hawking her new book. By Sunday she seemed to grasp that even Republicans were grossed out. She released a longer statement, trying to recast her choice as "hard and painful," claiming, "I have never passed on my responsibilities to anyone else to handle."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] kava@lemmy.world 62 points 6 months ago

Americans love dogs. Even the brainwashed MAGA loonies. I can't believe she is a successful politician and thought this would be an OK thing to include in a book.

Usually psychos who make it into power understand the public sentiment enough to hide certain things like this.

Maybe it was a calculated risk- an attempt at courting controversy like Trump does and just dramatically backfired.

[-] MagicShel@programming.dev 50 points 6 months ago

The story that is emerging is that she killed the puppy in a fit of rage and this would inevitably come out because there were witnesses, so this is damage control and an attempt to reframe her rage as a difficult but necessary decision.

[-] kava@lemmy.world 22 points 6 months ago

That makes sense. I did figure the story she's telling is probably not the whole truth. When we tell a story about ourselves, we tend to consciously or subconsciously manipulate it so that it looks better.

So this story already makes her look really bad. The truth is probably even worse. Like you mentioned.

[-] Neato@ttrpg.network 14 points 6 months ago

Usually editors tell authors they are about to fuck up this badly. Or a publisher won't let it get published with outright horror in it. Like what publisher wants to be associated with printing the autobiography for Puppy-Killer Governor?

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

Was it Regnery Publishing?

[-] jballs@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 months ago

Americans love dogs. Even the brainwashed MAGA loonies.

I am looking forward to seeing how this plays out. Trump is probably smart enough to stay away from her now. But if not, it would make MAGAts choose between their cult worship of Trump and literally killing puppies. I'm sure they'd find a way to justify it.

this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2024
159 points (96.0% liked)

politics

19090 readers
4662 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS