Some arguments are stronger than others because the support has less or no gaps, while other arguments might have some gaps which opens the door for alternative conclusions.

In this example, the Disney argument leaves no gaps, its either or. No in between. The Tiger argument is decent, the premise could allow different conclusions. But for the cat argument, although the support can lead to that the cat did indeed eat the salmon, it doesnt prove that the cat intentionally knocked over the trash, or that it knocked it over. Maybe something else did, and maybe the cat was eating something else.