The Real Reason Trump and Vance Are Spreading Lies About Haitians

Six days after terrorizing Springfield, Ohio, with baseless nonsense about Haitian immigrants kidnapping and eating people’s pets, Republican vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance admitted that the stories were meant to promote a particular narrative.

“If I had to come up with stories to get the American media to actually pay attention to the suffering of the American people, that’s what I would do,” Vance told CNN on Sunday. A few days ago, Vance admitted that “it’s possible that all of these rumors could turn out to be false” — an admission that means he doesn’t care whether they’re true or not.

Since former President Donald Trump and Vance began focusing their campaign on lies about Haitian immigrants being “dumped” in Springfield, city buildings, schools, and local festivals have had to be evacuated or canceled due to bomb threats. Asked if he condemned the threats against Haitian immigrants, Trump couldn’t even say that the threats were false, instead spreading misinformation about immigrants: “I don’t know what happened with the bomb threats. I know they were picked up by illegal immigrants,” he said. “It’s a terrible thing that happened.” In addition to showing no concern for the residents threatened by bomb threats, the statement was also false: The Haitians live and work in Springfield legally with green cards, humanitarian release, and temporary protected status, a legal immigration status for people who can’t safely return to their home countries. Trump has promised to deport them anyway.

The reward that the Haitian community in Springfield has received for doing exactly what Republicans ask of legal immigrants—working, supporting themselves, and contributing to their communities—is a campaign of smear and intimidation. Contrary to Vance’s insistence that he is creating “stories” about a community to alleviate the suffering of Ohioans, the Trump campaign is actually invoking that suffering as a license to justify violence and harm. It is the Trump campaign’s most widely used rhetorical tactic: pointing to someone’s suffering and then proposing a solution to state violence against a disadvantaged group, using Americans’ problems as an excuse to harm the people they choose to hate.

Trump and Vance have said that Haitians were “dropped” in Springfield, that they came illegally, that they spread disease, and that they eat people’s pets. These are all well-established staples of anti-immigration rhetoric, regardless of the immigrants’ background, and attempts to use horrific and disgusting stories to overwhelm people’s ability to think. Vance has now essentially admitted that he is weaving “stories” for a larger purpose, but it’s worth examining these claims more closely to see what that purpose is.

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican, told ABC News last weekend: “What we know is that the Haitians who are in Springfield are legal. They came to Springfield to work. Ohio is on the move, and Springfield has really had a big problem. rebounding with a lot of companies coming in.” “These Haitians came to work for these companies. What the companies tell us is that they are very good workers. They are very happy to be here. And frankly, it has helped the economy.”

There are a few things to note in DeWine’s comments. The first is that Haitian immigrants came to work and benefit the city’s economy; they weren’t “dumped” into it. The arrival of Haitians didn’t hurt Springfield; it helped revitalize the kind of city that Trump and Vance claim they want to help. The Republican claims about disease and pet eating appear to be completely false: The author of the Facebook post that originated these stories publicly apologized for publishing them and admitted he had no evidence to back them up. As my colleague David Graham has noted, the arrival of Haitian workers helped spur an economic recovery, which is exactly what Vance has said he wants for his home state of Ohio.

Vance’s complaints about Haitian immigrants contain only two points of truth. The first is that a local boy named Aiden Clark died last year when a Haitian driver accidentally hit Clark’s school bus—though Vance falsely described his death as a “homicide.” As for Eden’s father, Nathan Clark, he condemned “morally bankrupt” politicians and “hateful people” for trying to exploit his son’s death to incite racism against Haitians. The second point is that the influx of workers has strained local resources: The New York Times reported earlier this year that the new arrivals are putting pressure on housing, medical facilities, and schools. Of course, that’s how economic development works; as people arrive, lured by the promise of gainful employment, services are then expanded to meet the demand. These services in turn create more jobs and opportunities, in a virtuous circle.

But to the extent that the arrival of the Haitian workers who helped revive Springfield’s economy has caused problems, those problems have clear solutions—investing in housing, schools, infrastructure, etc.—that would benefit all Springfield residents. By contrast, deporting the workers would harm the city, reverse its economic recovery, and tear the community apart. City leaders are not calling for their deportation. Springfield’s Republican Mayor Rob Rowe has called the threats “an abhorrent response to immigration to our city.” He has received death threats for his defense of Haitian society.

So the question is, why are Trump and Vance so focused on deporting Haitians?

One reason is that Trump has a particular and well-documented hatred for Haitians. The former president called Haiti a “shithole country” from which the United States should reject immigrants, in favor of immigrants from countries “like Norway.” Trump has previously complained that Haitians “all have AIDS.” Trump’s hostility toward Haitians extends to other black immigrants—he has also reportedly complained that if Nigerian immigrants were allowed to stay, they would never return to their shacks. Nigerian Americans are the most highly educated immigrant subgroup in America, and Haitians, as the Cato Institute’s David Beer has documented, have higher employment rates than U.S.-born Americans and are more likely than other immigrants or U.S.-born Americans to join the U.S. military. Trump’s defenders have repeatedly insisted that Trump simply wants immigrants who can contribute to American society, but Trump himself ignores the contributions of black immigrants in favor of his own deeply held stereotypes about black people.

Another reason is that Trump and Vance do not seem interested in helping anyone in Springfield, or anywhere else. Their actions speak to a political theory of the election: that stirring up fear of immigrants, especially black immigrants, will make white people vote for Trump. They also underscore an ideological theory of the nation, that America belongs to white people and that the country will be better off the poorer and weaker it is, the whiter it is. Trump and Vance have a specific political agenda of socially transforming the nation through state power to be whiter than it currently is: mass deportations, abolishing birthright citizenship, and stripping American citizens of their citizenship. This agenda, in addition to being immoral, would destroy the American economy. Ohio Republicans are defending the Haitians of Springfield because they realize that their removal would have a terrible impact on their city and state—the same terrible impact that Trump’s agenda would have on the country.

The statements by Trump and Vance reveal a belief that it would be better to let dying Midwestern cities wither away than to revive them and have to share that prosperity with blacks. They seem to be betting that there will be enough American voters in enough swing states. agree that there will be. It is better to go bankrupt than to integrate. In exchange for these fearful voices, a second Trump administration will give tax cuts to the rich, raise them for everyone else, deregulate big business, and further undermine unions, while cities like Springfield sink further into decline.

This message, clearly stated, is not as appealing as they would like. So, to justify the hatred toward Haitian immigrants, Trump and Vance have chosen to demonize them as pet-eating savages. Saying “we will invest more in these communities to ensure they continue to thrive” will not cut it. And it will not eliminate what Trump and Vance see as the real problem, which is not poverty, addiction, lack of affordable housing, or job losses, but the mere presence of Haitians on American soil.