Obama Says 'Defund The Police' Alienates Voters, Drawing Sharp Rebuke From The Left.

[brush]

Progressive Democrats, including Ilhan Omar and Cori Bush, criticized the former president for painting defunding as little more than a divisive “slogan.”

Sigh! We've got so much to learn as far as messaging. Words matter. Some actually think voters will automatically get that "defund the police" doesn't actually mean "defund the police". That it really means reallocate police funds to social workers to handle domestic violence situations or some other such emergencies.

The naivete and inexperience is sad. We have to be smarter. Many voters don't do nuance. They don't reinterpret a slogan the way you want or assume they will. Many will take such a slogan at face value and think you want to get rid of police because that's what the slogan seems to say. Again, we've got to get smarter.

Now they're criticizing Obama for saying what many think of that slogan. How did we get here? Maybe the newbie reps should take Marketing 101 so as to learn not to alienate so many voters.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/obama-defund-the-police-progressive-criticism_n_5fc70f99c5b62d34ec87dc46

[still_one]

1. Same thing that Jim Clyburn said

[Cha]

9. Exactly & I seem to remember

that getting pooh poohed by some, amiright?

[still_one]

13. I will listen to those who know what it takes to win

[Cha]

15. It only makes sense that "defund

the police" isn't a winning message.

Reform the police would be exponentially better.

Not all cops are bad and they need resources to help those who are victims.

[still_one]

68. Exactly Cha

[PatSeg]

85. I wonder whose brilliant idea it was

to use the word "defund" in the first place. Words matter and messaging has often been our weak point in campaigns. I definitely believe in reforming the police and even I, took the "Defund the Police" the wrong way at first.

[cwydro]

64. Yep, by some here.

I think I’ll go with people who know what they’re talking about.

[Thekaspervote]

2. STFU!

[brush]

3. Care to explain what you mean? I mean we're talking about Pres. Obama here, not just some nobody.

[Cha]

6. I can't

exactly say but pretty sure she's talking about those are "Sharply rebuking" President Obama.

Who knows what he's talking about.

[Demsrule86]

92. She is not saying to Pres. Obama...have you never seen her other posts?

[brush]

121. Not really familiar with her screen name, but this is a discussion board. I just wanted...

to hear more of what she meant.

[Cha]

4. President Obama is right.. the

"sharp rebukers" are wrong.

I thought i read on here that "defund the police" wasn't mentioned in the 2020 House Elections where we Lost some Seats that we had Flipped from red to BLUE in 2018?

And, here it is.

[jaysunb]

7. +1. n/t

[Cha]

10. Mahalo, jay..

Aloha~

[pazzyanne]

18. + 1 nt

[MANative]

53. Exactly. NT

[USALiberal]

81. I 100% agree! Nt

[elleng]

5. Pres. Obama is right,

and we must recognize it, difference between DEFUND and REFORM are critical; if we don't recognize it, we're dooming ourselves.

'We have to be smarter. Many voters don't do nuance.,' yes, in fact I'll say MOST voters don't do nuance.

IF we continue with this b.s., we're digging our own graves.

[jaysunb]

8. +1. n/t

[betsuni]

11. K&R

[Desert grandma]

12. It's not too late to adjust the messaging.

One word might have made such a difference in messaging. Maybe we should have been saying, "reform the police", or "support police integrity, not brutality!." This would acknowledge the majority of hard working, decent police officers. The intent would be similar and maybe even more precise.

[Spider Jerusalem]

14. It's just *awesome* the way Democratic centrists keep letting Republicans frame the debate

no-one running for Congress as a Democrat in a contested and winnable seat was running on a platform of "defund the police", but keep right on with the hippie-punching if it makes you feel better. Fucksake.

[brush]

17. So are you saying "defund the police" is a good slogan?

You don't think that Dem candidates being associated with that slogan contributed to us losing several House seats instead of gaining House and Senate seats?

Why do you think we lost those seats?

[Spider Jerusalem]

21. Doesn't matter whether it's a good slogan or a bad slogan?

Democratic candidates weren't running on it!

[brush]

27. But many got tagged with it and lost. There was no "defund the police" bs when those seats...

were won in the 2018 blue wave. It's ok, you can admit the obvious.

[muriel_volestrangler]

57. It matters, because some people are saying it *should* be used by candidates

It's a good idea to say "will this help?" before trying something. And President Obama says it lost a big audience when some commentators used it. So he, along with a lot of people, thinks it's a bad way of trying to explain what people want to do.

[PatSeg]

90. And President Obama

knows how to win elections. I would take his advice to heart. New folks in congress often have a hard time seeing the big picture. They might want to keep their mouths shut more and listen to those who have more political experience and expertise.

[uponit7771]

29. No, there's no evidence of the slogan or terms being a reason for down ballots losing.

"Why do you think we lost those seats?" Horrid polling that told down ballot candidates the wrong information.

Those are facts that are not in dispute, everything else is needless guessing

[brush]

35. Come on. You really don't think that hurt some Dem candidates who flipped red district...

blue in 2018? You don't think that phrase was ever used in repug negative ads?

Really?

[uponit7771]

37. What I think doesn't matter as much as what I know; there's no evidence slogans or

... terms like socialism got down ballot races that far off.

People are needlessly guessing when we don't have to.

Dems were up in the polls in a myriad of areas, and Biden is getting nearly the same margin of victory in 20 that Obama got in 08 so what the hell happened down ballot !?

In 16 and 20 the down ballot polling was so off in the US as to never believe a poll again until they explain to us what happened.

No other developed country puts up with polling this bad for this long tilted towards one party in outcome,

In another country a polling company would've called foul by now while in the US they shrug and say believe us next time

[brush]

39. Yeah, sure. Defund the police and radical socialism in negative repug ads had nothing to do...

with anything.

[uponit7771]

43. No, we would have evidence of such by now not guesses. If there was credible polling ...

.... that showed a slogan or a term screwed up the down ballot polling that much I'd change my thinking.

As of now we ... KNOW ... there were few if any polling that had Dems performing like we did in 16 & 20

[My Pet Orangutan]

61. It's really not that difficult to find the polling,

if you went looking for it - there have been a number.

2/3 of Americans opposed defunding the police.

How do we know it was biting in the electorate? Because the GOP agencies kept using it.

[uponit7771]

75. That's polling on DTP not how it affected down ballot races. We need empirical information on how it

... affected democratic candidates down ballot, there has been no explanation from polling companies on why the polling was off.

Matter of fact, if DTP was hurting dem candidates so bad why did they ... NOT ... know through empirical evidence.

[My Pet Orangutan]

110. The best I can say your very specific empirical evidence requirements is

well, I can't within the rules. cu

[uponit7771]

114. You can say its fact based evidence, that's well within the rules. Why would anyone on DU want to

... persuade people into "gut" more than facts?

Seems a little off

[Cha]

42. Actually there is.. quotes from Allison Spanberger..

VA District 7

This Democratic congresswoman just spoke some hard truth to her party

She went on to highlight two main reasons for Democrats " los[ing] members who shouldn't have lost":

1) The pervasiveness of the "defund the police" message

"The number one concern in things that people brought to me in my [district] that I barely re-won, was defunding the police. And I've heard from colleagues who have said 'Oh, it's the language of the streets. We should respect that.' We're in Congress. We are professionals. We are supposed to talk about things in the way where we mean what we're talking about. If we don't mean we should defund the police, we shouldn't say that."

2) The talk of socialism

Read more at the link..

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/06/politics/abigail-spanberger-house-democrats-2020-election/index.html

[betsuni]

45. Thank you for the link!

[Cha]

47. You're so Welcome!

Rep Spanberger was out there on the battlefield she knows what she's talking about.

[uponit7771]

46. Those are anecdotes not empirical evidence, show polls saying those slogans made Dems perform ...

... as bad down ballot as we did and I'll see.

Right now I see a shit ton of people on the left whistling past the voter suppression grave yard and excepting their "guts" on an issue vs empirical evidence.

[Cha]

48. Rep Allison Spanberger was out there on

the battlefield.. she knows what she's talking about.

That's all I'm saying about it.. I'm not trying to convince you.. just putting out the information.

[uponit7771]

52. Still not empirical evidence, the down ballot polling had dems performing well if a slogan

... or a term had us that off we would've known something and it would not been an after the fact analysis.

Bottom line, dems would've reacted to the polling if those slogans or terms were hurting ... THAT ... bad.

They weren't

On the issue of dems performing badly relative to polling we need to see facts, we accepted anecdotes in 16 and thought they would be addressed in polling in 20,

They weren't

We should not accepting abysmal polling and anecdotes for horrible down ballot losses like in 16, we need more than just a well respected persons professional gut feeling now.

[Dem4Life1102]

62. Very good points

Plus Democrats won the Presidency, kept the House and are in striking distance of taking the Senate.

[USALiberal]

87. We lost many house seats and many state dem seats! Nt

[Dem4Life1102]

89. True

But still won the Presidency and may yet take the Senate. I'm a glass is half full type of person. LOL

[USALiberal]

82. Lol, ok!

[uponit7771]

86. That's bad snark and not evidence either, why guess? why not just look at polling?

[PatSeg]

93. Well said!

[Cha]

127. Really.. Rep Allison Spanberger was out

there in the trenches on the front lines.

She knows what she's talking about.

[PatSeg]

129. Words matter, especially in politics

Republicans really know that and will use anything they can to undermine Democrats.

[exboyfil]

151. Six votes for the IA 2 House seat

I saw the ads (it is the District south of me). I bet six voters were swayed by them. It might have been enough to cost my Representative her job as well, but I won't go so far as to say that because her challenger had much more name recognition.

[betsuni]

20. "the way Democratic centrists keep letting Republicans frame the debate"

What does that mean? "Why didn't Democrats stop _____ ?" "Hippie-punching"? It's 2020, not the '60s.

[Spider Jerusalem]

22. What it says on the tin

no-one was running on a platform of "defund the police"! Accepting that framing is accepting Republicans claiming Democrats were in fact running on "defund the police".

[SoFlaBro]

26. We allowed the g.o.p. scumbags to reframe the argument as

"Defund the police" without correction.

[uponit7771]

31. "we" who? It was not "ours" to correct

[SoFlaBro]

40. Democratic Party. I'm a member. How about you?

n/t

[uponit7771]

76. Democratic party did not have DTP as a policy position.

[betsuni]

30. AOC: "Defunding the police means defunding police."

Omar: "The Minneapolis Police Department has proven themselves beyond reform. It's time to disband them ... ."

[Spider Jerusalem]

36. And?

Those two candidates both won re-election. So clearly their message was not a problem for their voters. It is not their problem that other candidates were incapable of adequately transmitting their views on the issue to their electorates.

[betsuni]

38. Oh, but "centrists" who won their elections because their message was not a problem for their

voters are .... what?

[Spider Jerusalem]

55. Whiners, apparently?

[betsuni]

60. Everybody's a whiner, apparently.

[Boomerproud]

63. They were in very safe districts.

[JI7]

69. They were in very blue districts where Biden got more votes than they did

[Bettie]

73. The Minneapolis police department

has been "trying" reform for years and it has not improved.

Maybe starting from scratch is the right answer if the reforms aren't working.

However, the problem may not be the departments as much as it is the fact that they are kept from instituting reforms by Police "unions" that aren't actually unions, but schemes to ensure that the corruption remains untouched. Now there's something that doesn't lend to a three word slogan.

[Cha]

32. Oh Yes.. some need to blame the Moderate

Dems who Won Overwhelmingly in 2018 on Health Care.

But now it's their fault in the Red Districts that some on the left are talking about "Defund the Police".. so they get smeared with it.

Never the fault of anyone who's spreading the "defund the police" message.

Link to tweet

Must blame Dems fighting for their seats in red Districts.

[betsuni]

41. +1

[Bettie]

74. "Red" districts are hard to win in a year when every

Trumpkin is crawling out from under every rock to vote for their orange idol.

Did these people lose in "red" districts that Trump did not win?

[mcar]

106. Wait, I thought no Democrats said this?

And we're just "Democratic centrists" who are "hippie punching."

[Cha]

128. Oh they Said It alright & it was on

one of the websites.

No use denying it.

[mcar]

130. Yep

[Cha]

24. You mean the Moderate Dems who WON

Overwhelmingly in 2018 on Health Care?

& then comes 2020 & some are talking about "Defund the Police" and those candidates in the red Districts who had flipped them to Blue were Smeared with that.. even though They had NOTHING to do with It.

[uponit7771]

34. +1, also there's no evidence that a slogan or term lost those down ballot races. Polling on those ..

... those races were horrid to the nth degree and was not giving the candidates the correct information, they can't react when there's no information to react to.

If slogans or terms of socialism was hurting down ballot races the candidates would've addressed the message instead of doing little to nothing.

Either polling was horridly wrong or voting was off, something went wrong down ballot for dems in 16 and even worse in 20.

There's no other developed country in the world that puts up with polling this far off for this many times tilted towards on political party in outcome.

[Demsrule86]

94. Democrats didn't do it...Republicans ran with this unwise and damaging phrase which we as

a party must distance ourselves from...it is a bad idea to die on the defund the police hill...Biden made it very clear he did not agree with this and he won. We want reform of the police department which most agree with.

[Demsrule86]

103. It was on AOC's website and was used in ads against House Democrats

Thank God Biden was too well known to be branded with it. I do believe it cost us house seats and maybe the Senate.

[Kahuna]

109. Their logic is not one Democrat that lost ran on "Defund the police..."

They take no responsibility that they were used to convey that message against fellow Democrats.

[mcar]

105. "Democratic centrists?" "Hippie punching?"

I feel like I just stepped back to 2008 on DU.

[Layzeebeaver]

16. Perhaps "demilitarise the police" is a more appropriate term

We are on the knife edge of a police state. Perhaps we have already been cut too deep.

[lapfog_1]

19. if we said "Fund Mental Health and Domestic Dispute Emergency Response Teams"

even the police unions would be in favor of it.
they don't like these calls either.

but FMHADDERT just doesn't have the right ring to it.

[brush]

23. Yep, slogans to be effective have to be short and to the point.

"Defund the police" is that exactly, but it's to the wrong point.

"Reallocate police funds" maybe? Just about anything is better than defund the police.

[marlakay]

25. I agree with Obama and I am on the left

From the moment I heard the slogan and saw signs supporting the police all over my neighborhood I knew we were headed for problems.

People want to know the police are there for them when they need them so they don't want to piss them off. They definitely need some training, accountability and restructuring their budgets but none of that is going to happen by running around saying defund the police.

Its hard watching the republicans get away with so much stuff, cops are getting away with so much stuff, its not fair and we want change.

But we have to remember that the republicans are great at messaging and defund the police cost us a bunch of votes.

[brush]

28. So true. Good post.

[tonedevil]

33. I didn't hear this...

pissing and moaning when Schools were being defunded.

[TlalocW]

44. Probably for at least two good reasons

The people defunding the schools did not choose the slogan, "Defund the Schools," and two, republicans don't care about schools so there's not going to be any teeth-gnashing from that side.

TlalocW

[misanthrope]

49. Because conservatives know about messaging

When they want to let industry rape national lands, then they brand it "Healthy Forests Initiative" and do what they want anyway.

[betsuni]

51. How would that work for Democrats?

[Cha]

50. I agree with Pres Obama & I'm on

the Left.. the Freaking Pragmatic Left who wants to get it DONE!

WINNING!

[Willto]

54. Obama is Right

The first time I saw a "De-fund the Police" poster at a protest the first thought that went through my mind was "OH MY FUCKING GOD". I remember thinking please, please, don't let that phrase catch on or we have just gut shot our chances to win the senate. But within 2 days there I sat watching some Democratic spokesperson on a daytime talk show trying to explain what the phrase "REALLY MEANT". Fuck what it really meant. Just absolutely disown it and move on.

It's the dumbest title for any cause ever conceived. It's like starting a group to help homeless children and calling it "Touching Children in a Special Way". I don't give a shit what the good intentions are there's no coming back from that title.

[quakerboy]

56. And supporting(actively or just by inactivity) the police alienates other voters.

I wish Obama had had this keen marketing knowledge in time to get the ACA passed and activated early enough to protect the house and senate from the losses that were taken during his administration, so that they could have continued working on it, adding the technical fixes and improvements it needed, and the numbers to put garland on the SCOTUS, along with countless other lower court judges and prevent Trump from coming along and packing the courts in truely alarming numbers.

Also.. Defund means different things. Ive noticed that the closer you are to the street protestors, the more likely you are to mean "100% cut the police budget and do something different" and the closer you are to being on a governing body that could actually defund the police, the more likely you are to mean "lets not raise the police budget this year while we are cutting all of our other departments". Given that gradient, with positions all in between, how is anyone supposed to know what defund actually means?

[Demsrule86]

96. Defund the police is a losing message. That is the bottom line.

[quakerboy]

137. how many candidates that ran on it lost?

How many candidates who did not run on it lost?

Im willing to accept that there are enough uncaring white people that its a losing message. But Id like to see the evidence. All Ive seen so far is a lot of theories asserted with no backing evidence.

[LeftInTX]

141. AOC is in a safe district, but lost 10 percentage points this election

That is a lot of points to lose. If she wasn't in a safe district, she would have lost.

[quakerboy]

143. Do you have an answer for the question?

What percentage of our democratic candidates who supported defund lost to a republican?
What percentage of our democratic candidates who avoided or opposed defund lost to a republican?

[LeftInTX]

144. They say it because they don't have to worry about the consequences...jeeze....

She got 78% of the vote in 2018 and 68% in 2020.

It's easy to say anything you want when you are assured of being re-elected...Why do you think crazy people like Gohmert get reelected? It isn't because of what he says or does...it has to do with his district.

The majority of candidates who opposed defund were reelected.

BTW: The person who had AOC's seat previously never got as low as 68%. The lowest he got was 74%.

[quakerboy]

150. So you cant answer the question.

[quakerboy]

153. Worth checking actual numbers

AOC got 152k votes in 2020

AOC got 110k votes in 2018

She actually significantly improved her vote count after serving her term

Her predecessor got 147k in 2016

AOC increased the democratic vote in her district from the last presidential election year. And her numbers from her initial election signficantly.

Got any other test cases of the theory to put up vs actual numbers?

[joshcryer]

58. It's simple. 80% of cops are traffic cops. Self-driving cars are on the horizon.

80% of cops need to be removed.

Defund the police. Stop saying "don't say that," reframe it to the reality.

[Hortensis]

108. And some retrained and reassigned, but good point.

Lots have college degrees, and some might choose to become the social workers who should be responding to calls for mental illness and homelessness. But we're going to need UGI for ex- and part-time cops also.

[Hortensis]

59. Agree, but 2 or 3 socialists calling themselves "Progressives" did that.

WE didn't "get here." They're not exactly admired by their progressive colleagues, and over 200 of them in the Democratic house caucuses did not.

Throwing them together with one misused term smears progressivism itself and smears our progressive house caucus with the behavior of a couple of socialist radicals of extremely different ideology. That's why the RW and hostile media do constantly.

[samnsara]

65. i agree..the message could have been clear using other less divisive wordage...

[oswaldactedalone]

66. Defund the police

Is the stupidest damn thing I’ve ever heard as a political slogan. Stop that nonsense, NOW.

[Kahuna]

67. They will not listen. Instead, they're standing by their purity and doubling down.

[Hortensis]

78. The term's as useful a weapon for them against Dems as it is for the GOP.

THAT's why. If they were sincere that reforming policing was their real goal, they wouldn't have adopted or keep pushing a stupid term that rallies the right against reform.

I suspect many have no more insight into themselves and what they're really up to than most trumpists do, though. "Purity" is merely an excuse for a need to oppose Democrats. Same as the trumpists.

Grrr!

[Demsrule86]

98. We have to face facts that some who claim to be on our side are not on our side...we must learn to

win without them I think. We must hold majorities to get anything done...and I can look at an electoral map and see the path to this is through moderate and red America. We won't get everything I want but we will stop the GOP destruction of long held policies like Social Security, Medicare etc cold and get some things we do want. Otherwise, we get nothing and the GOP continues its destruction of this Republic.

[NurseJackie]

70. Obama is correct.

Some actually think voters will automatically get that "defund the police" doesn't actually mean "defund the police". That it really means reallocate police funds to social workers to handle domestic violence situations or some other such emergencies.

If you're explaining and if you're defining... then you're losing. The "defund the police" slogan was poorly considered and it did indeed alienate voters.

Now they're criticizing Obama for saying what many think of that slogan.

Yeah, well... fuck 'em.

[Happy Hoosier]

71. He is correct. NT

[Tarheel_Dem]

72. As usual, Obama is absolutely right. I can't count the number of ads that ran in my area...

connecting ALL Democrats to "The Squad". They hurt us. They can say whatever the hell they want in their safe blue seats, but they are despised nationally, and being used as the face of the party. They'll continue to hurt us, and no amount of "messaging" from Dems in more moderate districts is going to blunt the fact that most of the country believes they represent the whole of the Democratic party.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

77. Lol "defund the police" is the COMPROMISE that mainstream Dems floated because "abolish the police"

was too scary, and now the concept of "defunding" is scarier than watching months of police brutality.

[Hortensis]

79. Lol, come on. "Abolish the police" was silly, not scary. It identified

lunatic fringe extremists -- and not to their advantage.

THEY dropped it and took up "defund the police" because that term incites trouble from the right, which makes it a weapon for both sides to use against Democrats.

Meanwhile, Democrats and other good-hearted leaders are working for police reform in hundreds of counties and communities across the nation. Can you name one where it's happening? Or had already happened long before this amazing #BLM summer catalyzed a new wave of REFORM?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

80. "Reform the police" doesn't incite trouble because it doesn't work.

[Hortensis]

84. Right. What's the goal here? Trouble for its own sake? nt

[WhiskeyGrinder]

88. My goal? Abolishing the police.

[Hortensis]

99. :) When 911 becomes available, I'll assign it to the closest pizza place. nt

[WhiskeyGrinder]

112. Oh, we'll still need emergency responses. Just not from a police model.

Although it's true, I have definitely had pizza emergencies as well.

[EX500rider]

115. And where else has that worked ever?

I believe Somalia might not have a working police presence but violent anarchy is not a improvement.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

116. Somalia does have a police force, so I'm not quite sure why you'd reference that country.

[EX500rider]

117. And again, where has "abolish the police" worked exactly?

Sure Somalia has a police force...the Criminal Investigation Department has 180 officers for the whole country of 15 million. They also have 140 traffic police for the whole country.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somali_Police_Force

[WhiskeyGrinder]

118. Where has it been tried?

[EX500rider]

119. Both Afghanistan and Somalia have had periods with no police. how'd that work out?

I imagine parts of Syria also.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

122. There's a difference between a failed state, and removing the police and filling that space with

economic, social and political equality.

[EX500rider]

123. What ever you replace it with no matter what u called it would be the same thing

Armed bank robbery in progress? Send guys with guns.
Speed 100mph thru town? pull over ticket/arrest
Murder? Send investigators.
etc

[WhiskeyGrinder]

124. Under an abolition model, no, it would not be the same thing.

[EX500rider]

126. So who responds to bank robbery, murder, speeding etc?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

136. Depends on the issue.

We can create the kind of helpers we want that aren't the police, because the vast majority of "help" the police are called upon to provide isn't responding to violence -- it's responding to the aftermath of violence, but with an approach, mindset and mission that sets them up to revictimize victims and, in the majority of violent crimes and property crimes, fail to solve the crimes.

[EX500rider]

142. That really avoided the question rather then answered it. nt

[Willto]

145. Abolish?

Good lord, we would lose 48 states running under that banner. We would probably struggle to hold on to New York and California. Suicide is not a very effective strategy in a situation like this.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

148. Yeah, that's why I don't think it's a useful campaign slogan.

But then, activist work rarely is.

[Dem2]

83. I agree with Obama

If a slogan possibly PREVENTS one from achieving the goal contained within the slogan, then it probably wasn't a winner.

[Danmel]

95. He is absolutely correct

I work for an elected official and we were targeted with pretty insane ads and linked to DeBlasio and accused of being pro murderers and rioters and all kinds of mean, nasty ugly people.
The "defund" language is toxic. It cost a few Democrats their seats in the NYC suburbs.
Word choice matters. A lot.

[Silent3]

97. Actually, I think most of "The Left" thinks the "defund" wording is stupid too.

Most of us think reforming the police is essential, and that money spent on police could in many cases be spent more effectively elsewhere.

It's simply not an issue of being on the left, or how far left you are. It's a matter of whether you're smart about messaging, or stridently insistent on stupid messaging.

[Demsrule86]

100. That is a very good point...hope you are correct.

[brush]

125. This exactly. Stupid messaging is loser messaging and we lost some House seats because of it.

[LiberalFighter]

101. I consider myself a Progressive. But these progressives don't have a clue.

You can't just say defund the police. The message needs to be about reorganizing the function of the police. And it also needs to require accountability.

[LAS14]

102. Just learned a new word today, "amplification." Well, obviously I didn't just...

...learn the word, but I did as used to describe elaborating, "amplifying," small divisions. In this case taking the words of some leftist people and amplifying it to "the left." Come on, Huff Post! Do you really want to split the Democratic party into worse factionalization? Just for a little bit of extra click-bait readership??

[mcar]

104. These young politicians need to listen to Obama

Maybe they'd learn something.

[PunkinPi]

107. Maybe they should listen to Sanders or Warren then...

Sanders:


Warren:


pretty much the same thing Obama said.

[edhopper]

111. Being right doesn't help

if we lose the House because of the way we frame it.

No doubt we lost House seats because of "Defund the Police" .

[apnu]

113. Obama's right it does alienate voters

The Left complaining about Obama here is blind and shooting setting up a circular firing squad... again.

[mvd]

120. I have mixed feelings

Yes, I think it should have been worded better. I also don’t want to show disrespect for those who came up with it - they are at the forefront of police reform. I do support the concept as actually intended, but I agree that we can’t keep explaining things.

[Paladin]

131. I'm with Obama. We got hoisted by piss-poor word choice.

If the progressives didn't really mean to "defund" the police, then why was that word chosen? It was a gift to our political enemies; they'll still be using it against us a decade from now.

[AnyFunctioningAdult]

132. Right on cue

This is trending on Twitter again with plenty of blue checkmarks and others defending the phrase and many saying things like "Yes, we literally mean this." What universe do they live in?

[truthisfreedom]

133. It should always have been Reform the Police

[LanternWaste]

134. Pres Obama realizes bumper stickers and applause lines ain't policy.

Defund the Police as policy branding is worse than New Coke, Colgate Frozen Foods and the car commercial that featured three women who were bound, gagged, and stuffed in the trunk of their new Ford hatchback put together.

The products themselves may or may not be good or bad, but the branding was counterproductive, and the negative publicity of these campaigns received more attention than the products themselves did.

The GOP has been successfully defunding education and social services for over a generation, but even they're not dull-witted enough to refer to it as such. Or defend that style of branding.

[brush]

135. Spot on. Even the GOP, as you say, is not dull-witted enough to...

The GOP has been successfully defunding education and social services for over a generation, but even they're not dull-witted enough to refer to it as such. Or defend that style of branding.

[betsuni]

138. +1

[Steelrolled]

139. If "defund the police" gets nixed they can always fall back on

"all cops are bastards".

Damn smart phones - they ruined our imagination.

[MustLoveBeagles]

140. Obama is right. Clyburn is right.

The Defund the Police slogan required too many explanations that sometimes contradicted each other. If you have to explain you're losing. Reform the Police is a much better slogan. Short and to the point with no explanation necessary.

[JI7]

146. What's interesting is Bernie Sanders Spoke out against Defunding the Police earlier on and the ones

attacking Obama and other Democrats on this seemed to have no problem with Sanders.

Wonder why they only objected when OBama and other democrats criticized the use of the phrase .

[betsuni]

147. Yes, that's very strange.

I wonder why they chose to ignore Sanders!

[kentuck]

149. De-militarize the police and the gun nuts with semi-automatic weapons.

And much of the problem will be solved.

[oswaldactedalone]

152. New DCCC Chairman Sean Patrick Maloney

Going off about how devastating the "defund the police" slogan was to Democratic candidates in swing districts. I hope to God that ALL Democrats disavow this terrible messaging. My suggestion would be to any Democratic elected official to not mention "defund the police" to Sean Patrick Maloney.