Let's (be) perfectly clear... Democrats do not want to de-fund the police...

[Soph0571]

[KarenS]

1. YES!!! n/t

[WhiskeyGrinder]

2. "De-brutalize" makes no sense. The institution itself, whose primary function is protecting

property and white supremacy, cannot be de-brutalized. It's a brutal system, because it protects a brutal system.

This Democrat wants to abolish the police.

[Tndem615]

3. Absolutely

[brooklynite]

7. ...and your alternative solution is.....?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

9. The short answer is take the resources we pour into policing and instead fund things we know

reduce and prevent crime -- meeting people's needs.

[EX500rider]

25. So psychopaths' and rapists just need their "needs" met and they will be good citizens..

Unlikely

[brooklynite]

27. See: Trump, Donald

[WhiskeyGrinder]

31. We actually know what causes a lot of crime. When it comes to rape and sexual assault,

we know that childhood trauma and lack of empathy are two of the largest and most common pathways that lead to sexual assault. Both of those can be off-ramped in childhood through better parenting and schooling. If we take the resources that go towards policing and apply them to better parenting and schooling, rape will go down.

[EX500rider]

36. "rape will go down." is not the same as "will disappear" Will still need police.

Someone robs a bank and kills the teller: will still need police.
Someone goes on a driveby and kills innocent bystanders...will need police
Home invasion...police
etc

[WhiskeyGrinder]

42. It always cracks me up when people use rape as an example for why we need cops,

when the majority of rapes go unreported, the vast majority of reported rapes go unsolved, and about half of solved rapes result in a conviction. Why not take resources that are doing little to solve rapes and put it into efforts that prevent rapes?

[EX500rider]

47. No country anywhere anytime has ever eliminated violent crime

So people are always going to want a armed police force and detectives they can call for help or to solve and jail the criminals so they don't do it again.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

48. No country has tried.

[EX500rider]

51. Nonsense, all countries try to eliminate or lower violent crime.

Human nature however makes that a utopian pipe dream

[WhiskeyGrinder]

54. I'll be more specific, no country has tried a holistic model that embraces things we know work

to reduce crime. There are pilot projects here and there, but when it comes to policy, policing and incarceration -- reacting to crime, instead of preventing it -- are seen as the primary way to do so.

[EX500rider]

57. Well for one countries can't afford to just give people everything they need.

Money does not grow on trees, you have to earn it and there will always be people who would rather steal others rather then work themselves.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

58. The resources that go toward a violent and reactive system of policing can go a long way toward

meeting people's needs.

[EX500rider]

59. No I don't think it would

Across the US, state and local governments spent $364 per capita on police protection in 2018. A dollar a day won't go very far.

https://www.urban.org/policy-centers/cross-center-initiatives/state-and-local-finance-initiative/state-and-local-backgrounders/criminal-justice-police-corrections-courts-expenditures

[WhiskeyGrinder]

60. Yeah, not as a cash disbursement.

[Demsrule86]

68. I don't agree at all. The idea that we can fix crime with social programs is nave at best.

We need social programs... But I highly doubt they would end crime.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

79. It's not only social programs. It would require a fundamental change in how we relate to each

other, how we build communities, and even other aspects of our lives -- some in the movement talk about how abolishing the cops goes hand-in-hand with abolishing capitalism, because one of the cops' main jobs is protecting private (not personal) property.

[Dorian Gray]

76. I'm sorry

but this is just a terrible and horrible no good idea.

We need to reform how things are done, for SURE.

Abolishing the police won't fly. Marginalized communities don't want that. Nobody but ideologues wants that.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

78. Decades of reform have gotten us to where we are today -- still dealing with cop violence

and oppression, no closer to ending it. You can't reform a flawed system.

Marginalized communities don't want that. Nobody but ideologues wants that.

Marginalized communities have always been the ones to lead the cop abolition movement. In the first part of the 20th century, it was immigrants and the emerging labor movement. Now, many of the leaders are black women. Marginalized communities are not a monolith, of course. But those who bear the brunt of oppression are going to have some of the strongest ideas on how to get rid of it.

[Dorian Gray]

85. Minority communities

overwhelmingly voted for Eric Adams in NYC instead of a candidate who would defund the police. They certainly are not a monolith and formed by myriad backgrounds and peoples and identities. But people want safe cities. Part of that safety is a police force that works with the people.

There are also people joining the police force from those marginalized communities. (Active recruitment is one way to reform the police.) I would love to see more of that. More training revolving around mental health. More outreach to mental and physical health providers to help them on their calls. More social workers working with the police force.

The abolition movement is not realistic. The majority of people will reject it, and if democrats embrace it, they will lose.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

86. It's not clear that more minorities in a police force reduces cop violence.

And simply adding "more" in front of nibble-around-the-edges reforms that so far haven't worked may get Democrats elected, but it's not likely to get results.

The abolition movement is not realistic.

Yeah, I've been told. I believe it's something important to work for, though, and even if we never achieve it, using it as a target will ensure we get much farther than simply aiming for "reform."

[EX500rider]

49. I'll take half of rapists go to jail over none.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

52. What sort of things would achieve that stat?

[Demsrule86]

38. You want to lose elections forever than run on abolishing the police. You have to have a police

force...defund was bad enough...abolish would destroy our party.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

43. I don't see abolishing the police as an electoral politics issue.

[Demsrule86]

66. It is a political issue. Clyburn who knows his stuff said 'defunding' the police lost us house

seats. I can only imagine what abolishing the police as a message would do...it would be terrible. The GOP would win big-we would be screwed in all ways. There is always a need for police. However, there needs to be rules of conduct on a national level in place.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

80. What I'm saying is, I acknowledge that running on a message of "abolishing the police" is a

nonstarter for any candidate.

[Paladin]

4. That "De-fund The Police" thing was a gift-wrapped present to our enemies.

It will take years to clean it up. Live and learn, folks.

[Tndem615]

11. Clean what up?

With less law enforcement, marginalized people won’t be adversely affected by police interaction. Less persons of color murdered.

[Paladin]

18. Lots of luck attaining that "less law enforcement" status...

...when the "de-fund the police" statement sends a critical portion of the electorate stampeding over to our fascist opposition. It was a thoughtless, damaging choice of words that we'll be paying for, well into whatever future we have remaining. And the marginalized segment of our population will be paying the most for it.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

33. "And the marginalized segment of our population will be paying the most for it."

Because the Democrats will race to increase cop budgets and pass crime bills to show that they don't want to defund the police.

[Dorian Gray]

77. This is total BS

Communities of color in NYC just voted overwhelmingly for a candidate who does not want to defund the police.

This is pie in the sky wishful thinking.

[ChrisF1961]

24. And it was never a policy of the Democratic Party

nor was it endorsed by most democratic candidates. It was a dishonest attack line pushed by the gop and their sycophants in the media.

[Paladin]

28. Word. (nt)

[uponit7771]

55. THIS !!!! ☝🏾☝🏾☝🏾 ... and there are STILL people on DU saying DTP *CAME* from democratic party

... or originated with democratic pols.

It didn't, DTP was a slogan of the oppressed in the year the whole planet protested bad policing after seeing an American police officer torture and murder a black man in front of children.

[Demsrule86]

67. Prominent Democrats had it on their websites...and it hurt us.

[betsuni]

73. Yes they did.

[uponit7771]

29. This is false, the "gift wrap" was not responding to GQP lies about DTP

[Silent3]

75. The stupid wording "defund the police"...

...made it much easier for Republicans to spin those lies, and harder for Democrats to un-spin them.

[uponit7771]

81. Then we need to control what protesters say? DTP wasn't a democratic slogan and only a few ...

... democratic candidates supported it as policy vs sentiment (fuck Trump doesn't mean people want to have sex with Trump)

If we can't control what a few protesters say then we need to respond to lies of the GQP when they attribute stupidity to democrats, we did NOT do that in 2020 when it came to DTP.

[Silent3]

82. Of course we can't control what protesters say

That doesn't stop a stupid slogan from having bad consequences that would be hard for any Democratic messaging effort to overcome. And what few Democrats adopted DTP themselves to express the "sentiment" were idiots.

[uponit7771]

83. ... or we could come up with a messaging platform that responds to GQP lies and not allow them

... to fester like DTP and or CRT?

I put GOOD money on it that there will be 1 too many dems running away from DTP next year affecting the votes of PoC who see them as selling out to GQP fear ... NEEDLESSLY ... like they did not addressing DTP at.

We need a messaging machine like the GQP

[Silent3]

84. The Republican messaging maching works as well as it does...

...because the Republican base contains a lot of the people who are most vulnerable to simplistic messaging that appeals to their worst instincts.

I'm not saying Democrats can't do better, but they have more voters who can't be manipulated so easily.

[C_U_L8R]

5. Let's just have more effective police.

[Tndem615]

12. This can be

Done by shifting the funding to counselors, medical intervention, and social programs.

[Demsrule86]

39. You will always need police, and prison etc. But I think our laws are draconian myself...hang them

high kind of justice.

[Cosmo Blues]

6. Whoever came up with

Defend the police was not running for office. Reforming the police means spending money on social workers and others who are more appropriate to send out on calls that even the police don't want to go out on. Dealing with the mentally ill, some domestic violence, overdoses etc

[LetMyPeopleVote]

17. The persons pushing this stupid slogan are in deep blue districts

I was pleased to see that the candidate pushing this slogan lost the New York mayor’s race despite being endorsed by supporters of this stupid slogan

[Cosmo Blues]

19. Wasn't that Eric Adams

The ex police captain that won?

[uponit7771]

34. People who continue the lie that democrats came up with the slogan are repeating RWTPs

[quickesst]

8. "Defund The Police".....

....is a stupid hole, thought up by stupid people that the Democratic Party should not have to be clawling their way out of now.

[uponit7771]

35. Democrats didn't come up with the slogan it was that of the oppressed and just like CRT the GQP make

... makes dems run away from the oppressed by demonizing their sentoment.

We'll do it again with CRT and lose PoC votes like we did in 2020 flipped districts

[quickesst]

65. I did not say....

.... that Democrats came up with it, but it did create the hole the Democratic Party finds itself trying to claw its way out of. Perhaps unintended consequences but just like I wrote in my post.

[David__77]

10. Lots of Democrats certainly do want to defund the police.

It’s a big tent.

[Ms. Toad]

20. You are correct.

Which is one of the challenges with the phrases. It means different things to different people. And for every person who believes it does not literally mean defund the police (and who is scrambling to distance themselves from the literal meanng) - there are others for whom that is exactly what it means.

[uponit7771]

37. +1, that's why EACH democrat should define themselves on the issue PERIOD and if its not dtp then

... its crt or some other shit the gqp has demonized for the day.

We need to get out first and define the GQP then that makes it hard for them to change the subject

[Demsrule86]

40. This doesn't change the fact, it is a losing message and will only make things worse when the

GOP regains power and pushes worse ...

[Ferrets are Cool]

13. Yes, but the phrase is such a good political tool, the right will keep hammering the lie.

It's one of the things they are best at.

[uponit7771]

50. Then we need to get in front of their lying with the solid stance on the issue. The world protested

... bad policing after seeing an American police officer torture a black man for 9+ min, murder him, in front of children on camera.

I think we were flat footed on the issue and that let the GQP slide in with some shit we weren't even supporting.

Fuck Trump doesn't mean we want to have sexual intercourse with Donald Trump but the GQP was able to turn DTP sentiment into TRULLY defunding the police because the policy support from a just a couple of democrats.

We were flat footed on the issue

[LetMyPeopleVote]

14. Defund the police was a very stupid slogan that cost democrats a number of seats

This stupid slogan cost the Democrats a good number of seats

[malaise]

15. Pellucidly clear

[LizBeth]

16. That was really an error in wording. I had to do a lot of scramblin to figure what was being said

and then spend a lot o time with "what they mean is...". That is never good.

[Ms. Toad]

21. I wish Aunt Crabby was correct.

But I have Democratic friends who actually do want to defund (as in take all money away from) the police, and abolish them.

That is one of the most significant problems with the slogan - Some do mean it literally, so as long as some do mean it literally it will be impossible to deny that the slogan means take all the money away from the police.

[Demsrule86]

41. What we say is this is a fringe idea and most Democrats do not favor defunding the police.

[Ms. Toad]

62. Then why continue to defend the phrase?

[Demsrule86]

69. I don't defend it...I sent a pointed letter to a prominent Democratic house member who had it

on her website during the election. It is a foolish thing to say.

[uponit7771]

56. Correct but the capital (D)emocratic party does not want that. What pisses me off is democrats run

... from the issue in flip districts and lose PoC votes because they wont define themselves on the issue before the GQP does.

Same will happen with CRT; dems will run away from that issue and lose PoC votes because we've allowed the GQP to demonize the well taught subject.

We need a quick response messaging platform that blunts their lies they balloon mostly on forums

[Ms. Toad]

61. There is a distinction, though -

CRT is a long-standing, relatively well defined but complex entity - weaponized by being turned into a bullet pointand moved into the political arena by Republicans who are more clever than we are at weaponizing things. (Because it came from academia, that also means a fair number of Democrats are trying to deweaponize something they don't undrstand.)

Defund the Police is a recent outgrowth of activism - that was originally intended as a bullet point way to capture a concept, but those who use it never settled on a common understanding of what was behind the bullet point. So, while the goal of capturing the essence of something in a few words is something Democrats desperately need to get better at (so good political instincts), when the bullet point is being simultaneously touted by folks on our side as exactly what it means - and not at all what it means, it was trivialto weaponize it.

More than a quick response messaging platform that responds to lies, we need to get better at concise messaging in the first place.

[Sgent]

70. Its not part of the

formal platform, but when you have nationally known D office holders spouting that slogan (AOC among others), then the party gets branded with it.

[uponit7771]

72. Only because there was little to no relative response. They two studies show the GQP spent ...

... millions on DTP but democrats didn't know it was on the radar.

I don't get it, GQP get to literally tell democracy to fuck off by sympathizing with traitors and attacking the capital and we're running from slogans of the oppressed.

I do ... Its our messaging, theirs is much much more robust and responsive and they can lie their asses off ... that helps too.

[Demsrule86]

71. Well if the GOP wins then POC color will be worse off. And the Black families I know

don't want criminals running rampant either. We all want a better police force which means serious reform.

[MichMan]

22. Some do however. For example, Rashida Tlaib, who represents a district in Detroit in my region.

Tlaib tweeted, “Policing in our country is inherently & intentionally racist. Daunte Wright was met with aggression & violence. I am done with those who condone government funded murder. No more policing, incarceration, and militarization. It can’t be reformed.”

No police & no incarceration is what she was demanding a couple months ago. Given that her district has high crime rates, I wonder how many of her voters agree with her stance ?

[EX500rider]

26. Sure, why would anybody want poor rapists' and murderers to go to jai? lol

[uponit7771]

32. Rashida Talib is not the democratic party she's one member of it. Just like we can't define GQP as

... MTG there's no way the GQP can define Dems as Rashiad Talib if we don't allow it.

[MichMan]

44. The OP said "Democrats"

Last time I looked, Tlaib was an elected Democrat. I said some do support defund the police and gave an example of a representative in my state.

If the OP was referring to the official platform of the party, they would have said so.

[uponit7771]

45. She's a democrat (singular) and doesn't represent the sentiment of the Democratic party ...

... the "Democrat(s)" in the OP was referring to the party (capital D) not individuals cause they gave no facts that the party wanted to DTP.

Of course there are democrats (singular individuals) who want to defund the police and physically beat the shit out of every 1/6 terrorist but that's not the Democratic (capital D) party stance.

[MichMan]

46. Where did I ever say she represented the sentiment of the party ?

Because I didn't. I said "some do" and gave her as an example, which she clearly is.

I don't know what the OP meant other than what specifically was posted so my comment was based upon those words. You might want to direct your criticism of Tlaib, who actually said it, rather than at me who just posted what she said.

I hope she loses in the primary, but since I don't live in her district, my vote doesn't matter.

[uponit7771]

53. Got it, I took Democratic to mean the party. I do agree some want the policy of defund the police in

... part or whole but I don't agree dems should be running away from the sentiment that we need to change policing in America in some way.

In races that were close and dem candidates defined their stance on policing we won.

We're falling in the same trap with CRT which we're allowing the GQP to demonize. In 2021 I put money on it that there will be some flip district democrats run away from CRT and lose PoC votes like a couple of studies said we did in 2020 because of undefined stance on DTP.

[Kingofalldems]

63. Yeah don't see the point of that post.

Trying to refute the OP with zero evidence.

[sarisataka]

23. Whenever a post begins with

Democrats do not want to....

I can almost guarantee that within 5 posts at least one of them will be "yes we do"

[uponit7771]

30. ***DEMOCRATS DID NOT COME UP WITH OR COMMIT TO DEFUND THE POLICE*** People pushing

... that democrats did come up with it or push it are repeating right wing talking points.

It was for the most part a slogan of the oppressed that GQP lied about, PERIOD

[gulliver]

64. That slogan's no better unfortunately.

Just end the Drug War. We'll need 50% of the current police we have and get better results overall. The Drug War is a great, great, great, great grandkid of the Civil War. It's cruel, asinine, and ruinously expensive.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

74. Jim Clyburn is amazing

He shut up this Hasan person

Link to tweet

?s=20