James Clyburn says Democrats lost seats in Congress this year because of calls to'defund police'

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn said on Sunday that Democrats lost seats in both chambers of Congress because they aligned with "defund the police" efforts.

Speaking to Chuck Todd on NBC's "Meet the Press," Clyburn cited the South Carolina election between Sen. Lindsey Graham and Jaime Harrison, a former state legislator.

Graham won against Harrison with more than half the vote, according to Decision Desk HQ.

"Jaime Harrison started to plateau when 'defund the police' showed up with a caption on TV right across his head," Clyburn said.

Link to tweet

?s=20

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/house-majority-whip-says-democrats-lost-seats-in-congress-this-year-because-of-calls-to-defund-the-police/ar-BB1aOiP4?li=BBnb7Kz

[BlueLucy]

1. Ted Wheeler won re- election in Progressive PDX

He is not well liked but his opponent talked about defunding the police and wore a skirt adorned with communist dictators.

[gratuitous]

53. There was a substantial (13%) write-in vote for Teressa Raiford

Wheeler was re-elected with about 47% of the vote. The people of Portland also passed a measure (by 4-1) creating a citizen review board that has some actual power to police the police, including being able to fire officers. Naturally, the union has vowed to fight the measure in court, but the issue persists: If the police were acting responsibly and being held accountable when they didn't, none of this would be on the table for discussion at all.

[BlueLucy]

73. There is no doubt the people of Portland want police reform.

They don't want to defund the police and they don't want someone who brags about communism.

[gratuitous]

78. The City Council trimmed $15 million from the police budget earlier this year

And just voted 3-2 not to make an additional $18 million in cuts. If the Police Bureau doesn't recognize that as a warning shot across their bow, they'll be inviting further cuts to their budget.

As for the $15 million cut earlier, that money is being repurposed to alleviate some of the conditions that lead to police excesses.

[BlueLucy]

92. I hope they think about the people in East Multnomah county

Where citizens can not walk to the store without getting robbed by armed teenagers. This is happening everyday specifically on 162nd and SE Stark ST. There is no use in calling the police. They don't do anything, maybe out of petty grievances. I just got my family out of there in September. We moved to Kelso WA. I wish I would have gotten them out sooner. I couldn't wait for State Reps to do something when they have clearly ignored the community this entire time.

[gratuitous]

97. We're used to that in my neighborhood; the police aren't very responsive

Well, until someone is shot or something. Then the cops arrive along with the local media folks to affirm once again what a hell hole Lents is. I talked with a cop outside my home a couple of years ago, and when I mentioned there were two drug houses right on my block, he didn't bat an eye and said, "We [meaning the police] know." This is the place in the city where bad things are supposed to happen, and while the City really likes our tax dollars, they're not so keen on providing services.

[oswaldactedalone]

2. Indeed

It was a disaster from the moment it reared its ugly head. That phrase should be buried under the scrap heap of stupidity, never to rear it's ugly head again.

[mr_lebowski]

3. It always should have been something like 'Reform' or 'Rein In' or the like ...

Defund was a bad angle from the start for our side.

[TigressDem]

5. Yes. RE FORM is exactly what is needed. nt

[Baitball Blogger]

11. Now, was that so hard?

Re-form was the appropriate word.

[OnDoutside]

94. But that was obvious from the start, however I remember even posters here being attacked for

suggesting that.

[Baitball Blogger]

95. I agree.

[TigressDem]

4. It is a bad phrase, but the process is sound.

When the Police Union is the source of the problem, de-funding the police and reallocating funds can remove the Union from the place of direct influence and ability to protect officers that commit murder in the streets.


https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/06/12/calls-for-mpd-union-leaders-resignation-grow-louder

[AmericanCanuck]

6. "Defund the Police" was not a good slogan at all

Thank heavens Biden survived.

[bdamomma]

26. Who conveyed

or coined this slogan "defunding the Police" wasn't it about reforming and not defunding. WTF. Jaime lost his seat because of that slogan???

Remember Graham actually solicited for money inside a government bldg. which is punishable by a fine and imprisonment. Does anyone see him in prison??? Two sets of rules huh???

[Binkie The Clown]

7. Defund the police was a ridiculous idea.

It was a grave mistake to let get pinned to the Democratic party.

[TigressDem]

21. The IDEA is right, the label is the problem.

The action allows the corrupt Police Unions to be separated from the rest of the Police Department and limits the power of the union to protect police who murder people in the street.

But the way "Defund" sounds is that people want to get rid of police, not just the problem of racists murdering people in the street and getting away with it by hiding behind a badge.

And I do agree it was "a grave mistake to let get pinned to the Democratic party."

[bdamomma]

31. just like

the term "socialism".

[apnu]

35. Pretty much every Democrat running for office denounced it.

GOP still hung them for it. We should come out hard for police reform. Same thing, different messaging. Its all about messaging, not the policy these days.

[peggysue2]

79. Yes, it was

Because when you have to explain the content, the application or intent of a meme, you're losing the messaging war.

This was dumb, a self-inflicted wound. We handed the Republicans a club and they bashed us over the head with it.

[nycbos]

8. Indeed it's a stupid slogan that cost us.

There are so much better alternatives out there. Like reform the police, or reinvest in the community. We could probably come up with a couple dozen other ones that don't have such negative sounding affects.

[Humanist_Activist]

9. Republicans lie, most of the Dems who lost seats didn't support "Defund the police"...

nor anything close to it.

So basically we need to strike the idea from the minds of everyone in existence? What is being called for here? Suppressing the BLM movement?

[nycbos]

17. Some dems on the left did talk about it.

It buried our majority makers in marginal seats. We were expected to pick up seats this election and flipped some state legislatures but we didn't. Now we're going to be faced with the right wing court with more gerrymandering. And no one is talking about suppressing BLM. We are just talking about using different phrasing.

Congresswoman AOC is in a D+29 district. He isn't in a position to lecture anybody on messaging.


She should be worrying why Individual One did so well with Hispanic voters in Florida.

[Humanist_Activist]

22. But again, why does that matter when the Republicans lie about it?

Unless you want to remove progressives from the Democratic party entirely, what is to be called for here?

We had nutty billboards here talking about how Biden/Harris are Socialists/Communists and will be slaves to everyone left of well, Hitler, and yet no competing signs calling Trump/Pence fucking fascists. We need to fight fire with fire, or else we lose the messaging war.

[Demsrule86]

30. Of course not...but you can't say the same things in GA that you can say in NY ...and I would

wager that parts of New York...defund the police would not work. We are a center left country. Look at California and the ballot initiatives.

[caber09]

50. Defund the police was a bust in NY/NYC hurt us..

The NYC council had a meeting this week too, a few seats are in danger pending mail ins in NYC and the NYC area...council members were blasting the defund the police crowd...AOC "defund the police means defund the police". Apparently a ton of liberal dem voters crossed over down ballot bec of this making very safe seats in danger or much closer than they should've been. They are pissed just as much as Spanburger.

[Demsrule86]

74. I didn't know this...thanks for the information.

[nycbos]

32. You don't remove them.

You just get them to stop saying stupid slogans.

People like AOC didn't win us this election.

It was people like Jim Clybourn in the primary because his endorsement was pivotal when Biden winning South Carolina, and people like Stacy Abrams.


Look at NE-02 while Biden won the district, the Democratic Congressional candidate failed. She was a Medicare for all progressive.

[caber09]

51. Yep add clyburn to the defund police hurt us crowd too..

Worst slogan in a long time and it really really hurt us in this cycle...https://www.businessinsider.com/clyburn-defund-the-police-calls-cost-democrats-seats-this-year-2020-11

[TigressDem]

23. NO - DEMS need to reframe the Narrative to RE FORM the police.

BLM needs to make that word change too. RE FORM the police.

EVERYONE speaking for DEMS or BLM or anything to do with making changes in law enforcement have to SUPPORT THE HONEST Police Officers and HOLD the MURDERS ACCOUNTABLE.

NO BACKING AWAY FROM WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.

NO APOLOGIZING.

NO FIGHTING WITHIN OUR PARTY or with BLM.

JUST a clarification of what is actually needed.


Same action, different perception.

DEFUND gave the WRONG impression.

RE FORM is more correct.

[Humanist_Activist]

29. First off, BLM is a ground up, grassroots movement, so having them change messaging is going to...

be difficult. Second, calling it "reforming the police" doesn't help when the Republicans will still call it defunding the police, particularly if it involves any change in resource allocation on the city/county level that isn't an increase in the policing budget. Third, there's no consensus within the Democratic party that reforming the police is even necessary, you have moderates/right wing Democrats that will oppose such efforts, particularly if they are required to be comprehensive to be effective.

[TigressDem]

47. I live in Minneapolis, 10 blocks from Ground Zero of George Floyd's murder.

I will reach out to them.

We can not control the other side, you are correct. What they say is simply shit that comes out of their mouth and we can be all sweet tea and punch when we say, they don't have ALL the facts.

RE FORM is needed to get the Union corruption out of the Police Department.

We can still support the HONEST hardworking police and many of them are actually in support of getting rid of the ones who think they are above the law.

IF we can make it work in Minneapolis, then the model will be set and others will see that it can be done.

SOMEONE has to start.

The rest need to be supportive.

REFORM of ANY kind, even if it doesn't manifest in the defunding/rebuilding action, could help, but the Unions have managed to sneak around it before.


DEMS and consensus is always difficult. We are the party that herds cats on a daily basis. Just gotta convince US that it's really where we want/need to go and we're usually good.


EVERYONE agrees that we need less policemen murdering people in the streets. It's just the HOW of making it happen.

So generally we are pointed in the right direction. It's all finesse after that.

[Humanist_Activist]

48. The Majority of police in Minneapolis literally voted in a white supremacist as their Union leader.

I don't know how many "decent" police officers there are, but they seem few and far between.

[TigressDem]

61. The police cheif is a good man. There are others.

I know when we did protest here in Minneapolis during the GW era, the police here were respectful to US.

We didn't get a lot of coverage about our actual numbers, but they were not intimidating us as it is being done now.

My son filmed cops harassing some people on the street by our house during the recent riots. They pointed a rifle at him and told him to get inside. I AM inside my house. I have the door open, but I am standing inside.

Cops let 7-8 cars go by, but stopped the first one with brown people in it.

It's a mixed bag, but there are many good ones here.

Just like there are more DEMS.

[yardwork]

27. We know that, but we've got to improve our messaging.

Rural white people claimed to be frightened by the protests in Portland and other cities. I saw it on social media. Having grown up in a ruby red rural district, I know that many people there are afraid of cities. They're afraid of black people, Muslims, foreigners, Jewish people, etc. They think that Democrats are radicals, that Democratic socialism means authoritarian Communism, etc.

This isn't recent. These beliefs in rural areas go back to the 1950s at least.

AM radio, Fox News, and now social media perpetuate these myths and fears.

How do we change our messaging so that people learn the truth?

[Humanist_Activist]

36. We don't, their racism is their problem, what we need to do is focus on overcoming their numbers...

we aren't there yet, and have just faced a setback of a decade, perhaps more, unless we can radically increase the amount of registrations of young and progressive people, particularly so their votes can offset the rural whites. IF, and this is a big IF, we can take the Senate in January, this becomes easier, eliminate the filibuster, uncap the House, accept PR and DC as states, and, on the federal level, Democrats may enjoy a majority for at least 2 election cycles, if not more.

[Klaralven]

54. Rural and small town population is probably less than the 65 million it was in the 2010 census.

Most of the US population lives in suburbs.

Suburbanites are not interested in defunding their police forces.

[Humanist_Activist]

56. True, but that's also because the suburbs themselves were built as white spaces to keep out...

those with more melanin in their skin, their police forces help to keep that a reality.

[bdamomma]

40. Boy

we really need rural people to accept change, they are just not interested at all.

They will keep running around in circles biting off their own tails. Sad. really.

[TigressDem]

57. The REAL people to be afraid of are DUMPlings who bring guns to protests and kill people.

POINT OUT THE ACTUAL MURDERS are being committed by out of control white people.

Kyle Rittenhouse
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/teen-accused-shooting-2-kenosha-protesters-fighting-extradition-wisconsin-face-n1241070

Violence against blacks
https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-white-violence-against-blacks-is-as-american-as-apple-pie-20200605-dl5uas3qgnhgblqclklgccn3re-story.html

Intent to kill people counting votes - white guys with a hummer and assault weapons
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/philadelphia-threat-two-men-arrested-outside-convention-center-vote-counting/

[brush]

63. Defund the police is just the dumbest slogan ever. No one is calling...

for suppressing the BLM movement. Just that stupid slogan. The BLM movement never called for that. Someone at one of the demonstrations started that foolishness and it spread.

It should've been "Re-allocated police funds" but that doesn't exactly roll of the tongue. Maybe simply "Reform the police", but that's been said for decades so it wasn't fresh enough.

IMO what they should've of zeroed in on was the bad cops. "Ditch killer cops" works for me.

[Humanist_Activist]

64. The BLM movement is grassroots, in addition, the idea and slogan gained popularity out of...

that movement, so again, I ask, how do we change the messaging?

[brush]

68. "Ditch killer cops" works for me.

[Humanist_Activist]

70. That is a losing slogan as well, too many people think of cops as heroes.

We need to come to grips with the fact that a large segment of the population have no problem with George Floyd being murdered because cops literally cannot do any wrong in their eyes.

[brush]

71. Ok, what's your suggestion?

[Humanist_Activist]

75. First off, ignore the demands of the racist Republicans and police sycophants.

We cannot appeal to them, nor should we try. Chip away at their messaging by emphasizing Police accountability and responsibility to the public. Propose and pass reforms with actual teeth.

[brush]

77. All of that is a given. What's your slogan suggestion?

[Humanist_Activist]

80. Some like "Restore Police Accountability", trying to keep things within...

3 words or less is hard, thinking of it as a slogan you can put on a billboard or yard sign that also is somewhat meaningful is hard.

[brush]

83. Not bad. A shorter word for accountability and you've got something.

Allow me to change a couple of words in my suggestion. Instead of "Ditch killer cops" How about just "Fire bad cops"?

[Humanist_Activist]

85. How about something to put a public flair on it, "Add citizen oversight."

Or how about "Participatory Policing".

My problem with the "Fire bad cops" slogan is its a single action, where as these are more slogans for structural changes that are needed that lead to firing bad cops.

[brush]

90. I get you on that, but slogans to be effective have use short, punchy words...

that convey an easily digestible message.

More complex concepts probably have to use more than one short, punchy slogan otherwise they can get to wordy.

[scipan]

99. Hold police accountable.

I hear the word accountable all the time with regard to other groups.

[treestar]

87. It's part of the game

We do it, too. Their extremists say something stupid, and we have people attributing it to the average Republican.

[tman]

10. Just like "pack the court". Fucking stupid framing.

[TigressDem]

25. Yep -- it is ALREADY been PACKED by the ReThugs. It needs to be UN-Packed.

We are REvolting against the dismantling of JUSTICE in the Court System, by looking to make it more representative of the actual PEOPLE who the Court Serves.

IN A DEMOCRACY EVERY ELECTED OFFICIAL IS A SERVANT OF THE PEOPLE, up to and including Supreme Court Justices and the President.

They are here to make our society work for the PEOPLE, not for themselves.

[BainsBane]

12. Clyburn said the problem was sloganeering

and that some slogans are counterproductive, defunding the police being one of them. This is all the more true because, I am told repeatedly, it doesn't actually mean defund the police.

[BootinUp]

13. If the only thing a slogan is good for

Is to attack Dems with then it’s common sense. Clyburn is exactly correct.

[still_one]

14. Fortunately the Democratic Senators in the runoff in Georgia are very disciplined, and will

stay on message what they will do to help the people in Georgia by working for them to get the COVID crisis under control, the stimulus to help people get through this, healthcare, jobs, etc.

Representative Clyburn and Stacy Abrams are very focused and know what it
takes to win

[Mariana]

15. How does Rep. Clyburn propose to control what protesters say?

I'm sure he's right, but I don't see how the Democratic Party can prevent protesters from saying what they wish - and they certainly can't stop the right-wing from falsely accusing Democratic candidates of supporting such things.

[TigressDem]

28. HE can't fix anything, but DU could.

How many of US are there who could go to protests and introduce better narratives?

It TOOK ALL OF US voting to get Biden and Harris in, now we have to keep it up and clean up the mess the tRumpies are making of things.

YEAH. Being a DEM is hard work. THAT shit never changes.

[comradebillyboy]

44. AOC was a loud proponent of defunding the police.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/505307-ocasio-cortez-dismisses-proposed-1b-cut-defunding-police-means-defunding

"Defunding police means defunding police,” the congresswoman said in a statement.

[Yusuf2k7]

16. GOP will always slander

No one ran on defunding the police just as Biden didn't run to communist platform but that doesn't stop them trying to make it stick.

The real issue is what did these candidates do to overcome this messaging and have their messaging reach the voters. Failure is on the candidates campaigns if the voters believed the GOP

This is cope out of loser campaign that did not do their jobs. Forget about policy but it speaks to their incompetence in this environment with more money and monster at the top they could not win. Whatever strategies that were involved in these campaigns and those who ran it should be analyzed and avoided in 2022.

Instead they finger point instead of looking internally on failures.

[TigressDem]

34. True.

The really important thing is RE FRAMING the message so the Democratic Party can move forward TOGETHER.


WE THE PEOPLE ARE ONLY STRONG WHEN WE PULL TOGETHER IN THE SAME DIRECTION.


Focus on who IS in office, who can challenge to get recounted and confirmed into office and HELP them once they are in to re frame the narrative and RE FUSE to be labeled by the opposition.

THIS IS NOT THEIR WORLD or even THEIR COUNTRY.

It belongs to ALL OF US and what each of US thinks and believes is OUR CHOICE.

In America we have the right to our own thoughts and opinions, so when someone tells US what we think, and we tell them they are wrong - it's a FACT.

WE DEFINE WHAT OUR PARTY IS ACTUALLY ABOUT.

NOT THEM.

TAKE BACK OUR PARTY PLATFORM and tell the tRumpies to go whining somewhere else.

[qazplm135]

18. I don't know why folks were so admitted about keeping that phrasing

when reform police would have been both more accurate and less scary to the normies.

Our side sometimes does not understand messaging, or we don't figure out that the other side gets a vote so "fuck em" isn't really a viable strategy.

The idea was absolutely correct...the execution of the messaging was horrible.

[Andy823]

19. I totally agree with him

It was a very bad idea to use "defund" the police, and it helped republicans push the idea Democrats would get rid of the police instead of reforming things.

I also think the Democrat will "pack the courts" also hurt us. It's not a good idea to broadcast these kind of things "before" an election, because republicans used them to keep control of the Senate.

I hope Democrats can correct these things before midterms.

[EarlG]

20. We need to have some seriously fresh thinking on this

IMO this is not about "Defund The Police." It's about defending ourselves from ANY attacks by the RW.

This is how the Republicans do it: they find a issue on which the public should broadly agree with the Democrats, but which requires some nuance to discuss. (Take, for example, reforming police departments across the country in order to stop cops from murdering unarmed black people.) They then either grab a simple phrase that activists (not Democratic politicians) are using (eg. Defund The Police) OR they simply make up a simple phrase of their own, and then they hammer ALL of our candidates with it, whether our candidates have anything to do with it or not.

Then suddenly we're not talking about police reform, we're being faced down with "DO YOU SUPPORT DEFUNDING THE POLICE YES OR NO??????"

After that, we just do the GOP's work for them. Moderates strip all nuance out of the issue (because they're running in districts with a lot of Republicans) and try to position themselves in opposition to progressives ("OMG of course I don't support defunding the police and I think the lunatic left in my party is crazy for saying so!" ).

Meanwhile progressives attempt to discuss the issue with nuance, and fail ("When people are talking about defunding the police what they're really trying to get at is... *media tunes out the rest*)

We end up fighting each other over an issue which we should broadly agree on (police reform) while the GOP sits back and laughs.

"Defund the Police" is the issue in this case, but it could literally be ANY issue on which the Democrats hold a nuanced position which the public would broadly agree with, if they weren't being constantly brainwashed by Republican misinformation (health care, gun control, you name it).

So forget blaming losses this cycle on "Defund the Police" because next cycle it will be something else, and the cycle after that it will be something else. We need to change our approach somehow to address the ROOT of the GOP strategy, otherwise we'll just keep playing whack-a-mole on issue after issue forever.

[Humanist_Activist]

24. Exactly, in previous cycles it was "partial-birth abortion" and "gay marriage", etc.

The Republicans are great at creating or latching onto simplistic slogans for things they are against, because no nuance is required to being contrarian.

[TigressDem]

37. Yeah, so imagine US DEMS many college educated and word smiths at times....

Shouldn't WE be able to TAKE back the narrative?

[Humanist_Activist]

42. No, because simplistic slogans lead to simplistic policies...

Reforming the Police sounds great, but its also meaningless. I mean, it can be reformed in numerous different ways, some of them being decidedly worse than what a lot of Democrats want. So you require paragraphs, hell even whole papers or books to explain what you mean by this.

The Republicans are better at this because frankly, most of their policies are childish and ultimately selfish/self-serving. We are talking elementary school bully level of reasoning here, and it resonates with people who are frankly bullies themselves. American Exceptionalism and Individualism feeds into this quite well.

[Humanist_Activist]

67. The issue is that we have no control over the message, there is no left wing radio...

and the media are going to start "both sidesing" things all over again, which traditionally always favors Republican messaging. Hell, even Democrats end up adopting and advancing this messaging, as evidenced by the Majority Whip himself.

If we wanted to come up with slogans, I would suggest maybe "Demilitarize the Police" or "Deradicalize the Police" but you have the problem of those never catching on because they require explanation. And again, no consensus with current elected Democratic leadership as to how to reform the police at all.

[OnDoutside]

96. Exactly. Well said.

[EarlG]

69. 100%

This has been going on forever. They're always able to force us into a defensive crouch and have us fighting ourselves.

Some jujitsu is required here, and that can't work without a counterattack. I don't think the answer is more simplistic slogans for our own policies -- instead we need simplistic slogans to describe Republican policies, and then hammer them relentlessly.

The purpose of politics is to win elections and get power, which in turn allows you to push your policies through. Our side tends to view this as the same thing. If we have great policies, people will vote for us on the issues, and then we'll be able to pass those policies! Republicans view it as two separate things. If we say that Democrats kill babies, people will vote for us because they're scared and then we can give tax cuts to the rich!

If you think about it, this is why Biden was so successful. His electoral strategy was essentially "Restore American Decency." Yes, there was more to it than that, and of course he had positions on all the issues, but those were not what sold his candidacy to America. It was the simple message at the heart of the campaign. (Think of Obama too -- "Hope and Change." )

And the other reason it was so successful was because it was hard for Republicans to defend against. You can easily sell "Restore American Decency" when you're running against four years of Donald Trump, just as you can easily sell "Hope and Change" when you're running against eight years of George W. Bush.

I think we need to be better at deflecting and dismissing GOP attacks and counterattacking hard with a message which THEY find difficult to defend against. They rely on us simply absorbing their attacks and then wallowing in them. We need to stop doing that.

[Humanist_Activist]

72. Perhaps positive messaging rather than negative messaging would be more important...

for example, "Require Police accountability!" or something along those lines. Or perhaps emphasize that the Police are the servants of the Public not the other way around.

[EarlG]

82. It just never seems to work

This is why I was saying that we need a serious strategic rethink, not just better labeling of our own policies. I'm proposing deflecting and counterattacking to keep them on the backfoot and off balance.

Example: health care has been the number one issue for many Americans for quite some time now. Obviously it is an important issue to many people, and obviously our policies are far superior to the Republican policies in this area.

But are Americans going with the Democrats on health care because they understand and agree with all the nuances of the Affordable Care Act? Or are they going with the Democrats because in this particular area we have successfully branded the Republicans as the party who wants to take your health care away?

Health care is an issue where we have actually managed to put the GOP on the defensive, and by doing that, we have been able to win a lot of elections. And by doing THAT, we are in a position to pass other policies -- like, say, police reform.

So instead of worrying about coming up with a better slogan with regard to reforming the police, we just acknowledge that police reform is an absolutely necessity, but then immediately pivot to attack the Republicans on something which will put THEM on the defensive.

Q. Do you support defunding the police?

A. I think ALL Americans would agree that we have seen far too many instances of police killing unarmed African Americans, and that needs to change, and it will change when we're in charge. But when it comes to protecting the lives of American citizens, you should be asking the Republicans why they support negligent homicide by COVID. That disease killed 1,000 Americans yesterday while Republicans just sat back and watched. Where are they? Why won't they do something?

Then when you win the election, work on police reform, and then present the RESULTS of that effort to your own constituents as a reason for why they should continue to re-elect you.

[Humanist_Activist]

89. That's more like a deflection from the question and you may end up painting yourself in a corner..

because of it.

How about this:

Q. Do you support defunding the police?

A. That's the wrong question, the question should be: are police effective and more importantly are they publicly accountable for their actions? Police are only effective if they have the public's trust, and that trust is broken when they participate in activities that lead to the disproportionate deaths and injuries of people of color. In addition, police are assuming roles that are best provided by more specialized trained emergency personnel, so we need to make sure they are only called in situations where they are most effective and required.

[EarlG]

91. Yes, it's a deflection!

That's the whole point. We have a tendency to accept the framing of their attacks, absorb their attacks, and then even adopt their attacks and start using them on each other. This thread is full of people arguing about the use of the phrase "Defund the Police."

I'm suggesting that instead, we should ignore their framing, deflect their attacks, and come back at them with our own attacks designed to put them on the back foot. It's sound political strategy, and we know that it works because they use it effectively on us all the time!

[ooky]

45. Agree. Every election they lie about and distort our positions and their audiences soak up

their propaganda. Somehow we have to do a better job of educating the public. Unfortunately that's way easier said than done. If it was strictly about policy nobody would ever vote for their shit. So, they have become masters of creating wedge issues aimed at generating fear of democrats.

[NurseJackie]

33. I believe he's correct.

[LisaL]

38. Agree.

Defund the police isn't a winning slogan.

[CousinIT]

39. I believe he's right. The slogan for that always concerned me. That is exactly why.

I understand what is needed and why. But that slogan was just...bad. It gave a totally wrong impression.

[Snake Plissken]

43. There is no question about, it almost cost Joe Biden the Presidency too.

It is why Trump won the White female vote

I saw it first hand on my clients' factory floors that I visit on a day to day basis , the rioting and looting absolutely caused people to vote Republican who otherwise would not have.

A few of my posts were flagged and removed because I mentioned it, as if ignoring reality would somehow make it go away.

[Humanist_Activist]

52. But most of that "rioting and looting" was greatly exaggerated or literally instigated by police.

Unless you want to ban protests altogether, how do you combat false narratives like that?

[Snake Plissken]

55. Regardless if it was real, fake, or exaggerated, it absolutely caused Democrats to lose votes

and not just a few, I witnessed it first hand.

[Humanist_Activist]

59. So what should we do, ban protests? Because the Republicans have made their followers believe...

that cities like Portland are ashes right now, and that's no exaggeration. They are removed from reality due to the constant stream of misinformation they surround themselves by and then propagate to the larger population.

[Snake Plissken]

66. The Democratic party needed to do a better job of getting it's message out

in a singular consistent and coherent manner.

They allowed the republicans to control the narrative and it absolutely resonated with Blue Collar workers, and not just White people

like I said, I saw it first hand and was shocked at how much it did resonate with them.

The general consensus I witnessed was a resentment by people who were working through a pandemic while others were collecting benefits from the government and out protesting, rioting and looting, and republicans successfully associated all of it with the Democratic Party.

Ignoring this or trying to pretend it didn't happen will not make it go away, the Democratic party needs to do a better job convincing workers that they are working of them and not just people who are unemployed, or the Midwest will swing back to the Republicans in the midterms and 2024

[cwydro]

46. He's spot on.

He knows what he’s talking about.

[mopinko]

49. it wasnt the message. it was the machines.

get it through your heads, dem.
we will never have our rightful majority as long as we have to get a supermajority at the polls to overcome their cheating.

[wyldwolf]

58. but... but.. AOC said...

[In It to Win It]

60. ...but they do need to be demilitarized. No more buying armored war machines

[R B Garr]

65. He's right. It's a totally losing phrase. Rev Al also said

a brick through a window is a vote for Trump.

And when you run as a Democratic Socialist, well, then don’t act surprised when others point out that doesn’t help us —“socialist”.

[Sugarcoated]

76. He's right.

It's why we didn't retake the senate. Hopeful that we can tie it....

[BarackTheVote]

81. Oh my frikking gawd

Imagine if some Democrat in a Red district complained about Democrats always talking about “Women’s Rights” and how they were “Pro-Choice,” and they “shouldn’t TALK about that issue because, you guys, it’s not playing well in MY district! I mean, look at the numbers, Pro-Choice is a LOSING ISSUE, we lost *80%* of the Evangelical vote, you guys! And it motivates them to turn out! You gotta drop this whole Pro-Choice Women’s Rights thing because it’s gonna lose me my seat!”

That’s what y’all sound like.

The slogan was created organically by people on the ground in communities where cops had murdered people; it was created by people who were staring down the barrels of rifles and wading through tear gas. The police in the last few months proved one thing beyond the shadow of a doubt: they are NOT on our side and they have irredeemably damaged their public trust

Defunding the police might be a losing issue in SOME district, but it’s a WINNING issue in others, and guess what, we freaking kept the House, which means we WON the House, which means our message RESONATED WITH VOTERS. But I know how much some of y’all love to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

[ananda]

84. Republicans used that against us, I guess.

But Biden said several times that he was against
defunding the police.

And AOC said no Dem was in favor of that policy.

She said we need more effective ways of combatting
the false labels the GOP puts on us.

[OnDoutside]

98. She was correct when she said that no Dem was in favor of that policy, however, that's not the issue

The issue is that some within BLM came up with that, and then was amplified by bandwagonners, and it became a huge baseball bat with which to hit Biden, by the Repugs. Democrats need to be a lot sharper on batting this stuff down at source, because once it gets oxygen, it's very hard to put out.

[treestar]

86. That always was dumb

Nobody wants to give up the police force over the acts of a few bad ones.

[gulliver]

88. The real problem is the unending acts of foolishness called "protests" for historical reasons.

We live in the Internet age now. These self-disempowering gatherings we call "protests" are worse than useless. All they do is create trouble for their own side of the argument. Protests worked back in the sixties (barely). Since then, they've ranged in effectiveness from merely self-destructive to suicidal.

Always argue with the fool on the other guy's side. Shift the mass media attention to the fool (who will gladly accept it) and away from the wiser leaders and effective messengers. Graham didn't have to argue with Harrison (who always kicked Graham's ass easily). Graham just argued with some protester's sign or ball cap.

The number of people who see a protest in the media dwarfs the number of people who participate. When I see a protest on the left, I always think, "Why is that person selecting themselves to speak for me? Who elected them? Why are they ruining our argument? Why are they helping Republicans defeat us? Go home! Vote! Run for office!"

[BarackTheVote]

100. Protests DO matter and protests DO help

People of all ages were out there putting their bodies and their lives on the line to stand up for Black lives and trying to make damn certain that the evil that was being committed couldn’t be ignored or swept away! Why don’t the cops ever get saddled with the responsibility for escalating things?? They were gassing US citizens, pepper-spraying them indiscriminately, shooting them deliberately in the face with rubber bullets, they were deliberately targeting media people and legal advisors and permanently maimed some of them!

Those are fascist tactics to a “T,” and setting the precedent that we would let those tactics cow us, THAT would have been real freaking bad for this democracy! And, holy crap, they were out there to show up, to show that they stood in solidarity in the thousands against police brutality, and even though they were being brutalized night after night, they kept that commitment and they kept showing up and that sort of bravery deserves more than this rank disdain. People all across the free world stood with them in solidarity, and I know that meant a whole hell of a lot to a lot of people who have probably felt very alone and marginalized for a real freaking long time!

And maybe, MAYBE it contributed to losing a handful of seats, and not even enough to lose our majority at that! But do you think the names of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor and Elijah McClain would still be spoken today if not for the massive spotlight these protests attracted? Do you think we’d have had network celebrations of Juneteenth? Do you think we’d have had this serious call and response for self-examination of our own attitudes with regards to racism and systemic racism? People complaining about keyboard warriors not getting out there and getting their hands dirty—well, they went out there, and they got their hands dirty, and they made damn sure the fascists knew they wouldn’t get away with killing people without public pushback. You’re welcome.

[OnDoutside]

93. I'm glad James has said this, and I'd like to see Joe and Kamala hammer down further that there will

be NO defunding, there may even be an INCREASE on better training, justice & accountability. Change the narrative from a DECREASE to an INCREASE.

[empedocles]

101. Can't believe this basic point, 'defund the police', which so obviously is bad politics - that

some just obstinately refuse to get over it.