Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[starlord]

Yeah? Name one.

you don't know any? interesting.
2 people that i work with on a daily basis who like to start religious discussions with me, one of whom is also a business owner and scared of people destroying his restaurant.

[kaelleria]

Thanks to people like you, no doubt. But I've already said my piece on why it's the message of choice and why nitpicking of this sort is bordering on offensive coming as it does from primarily white moderates and liberal who are the among the least impacted demographics by this issue.



At some point the alternative to playing the name game is going to be actually burning shit down. Perhaps you can think of a politically correct way to rebrand arson while you're at it?

Last I checked this was the general election thread and messaging very much matters in the context of winning the White House and getting as many down ballot democrats elected as possible. It's not my fault people devolved this into a shit show.

I think defund the police is terrible branding and actually hurts the cause rather than helps it.

Do I think a lot of law enforcement agencies in this country need to just wholesale be replaced with something completely new? Yes.

Do I think we should have no local law enforcement?Absolutely not.

Police budgets are insane and the fact mental health and substance abuse are tied into them is beyond the pale.

The police union has too much power and needs to go as well.

[Elegiac]

you don't know any? interesting.
2 people that i work with on a daily basis who like to start religious discussions with me, one of whom is also a business owner and scared of people destroying his restaurant.

We know it's you Clarence Thomas.

[Felya]

Why don't we listen what an actual Black woman has to say on the subject, shall we?

Yes, I asked how a white person look burning down a business. She and black people don’t own those... Can you collect insurance for burning your own house down? Does it make it better to claim you do it on someone else behalf?

[starlord]

We know it's you Clarence Thomas.

lol. i am of mixed race myself.

[PACOX]

And defund the police had 16% support in the last available public polling.

When people say defund the majority of people believe you mean completely cut off and get rid of law enforcement...

16% support.

What else represents 16% of a whole in the 16%

Maybe that 16% makes up a group of people heavily impacted by police injustice
I know it's something liberals want. Something they need. But I can't think of it

- - - Updated - - -

lol. i am of mixed race myself.

Candace Owens has two black parents. Doesn't stop her from being a white supremacists.

[kaelleria]

16% support.

What else represents 16% of a whole in the 16%

Maybe that 16% makes up a group of people heavily impacted by police injustice
I know it's something liberals want. Something they need. But I can't think of it

Literally just explained this isn't about disagreeing with the thought behind defund the police but the messaging, especially in the context of the General Election... the thread we're in.

Sorry you didn't bother to read it.

[starlord]

Literally just explained this isn't about disagreeing with the thought behind defund the police but the messaging, especially in the context of the General Election... the thread we're in.

Sorry you didn't bother to read it.

yea but as long as you say "ra ra defund the police" then it doesn't matter if you actually accomplish it or not. right?

[PACOX]

Literally just explained this isn't about disagreeing with the thought behind defund the police but the messaging, especially in the context of the General Election... the thread we're in.

Sorry you didn't bother to read it.

And you literally spouted the same nonsense.

Maybe, just maybe, the people who have direct stake in the matter be consulted on what is and isn't proper messaging.

Unless Biden doesn't need that 16%.

[kaelleria]

And you literally spouted the same nonsense.

Maybe, just maybe, the people who have direct stake in the matter be consulted on what is and isn't proper messaging.

Unless Biden doesn't need that 16%.

Oh fuck off...
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/s23agrrx..._crosstabs.pdf

Cut funding for police departments
FAVOR
White 12%
Black 33%
Hispanic 17%
Other 17%

OPPOSE
White 75%
Black 36%
Hispanic 42%
Other 68%

[beanman12345]

Someone linked the 8% black vote tweet and I was scrolling down saw Cotton saying something about first dems want to abolish ICE, now defund police, next it'll be the military. Well that last part probably not because there are enough hawkish democrats, but yes please!!!!

[TigTone]

Oh fuck off...
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/s23agrrx..._crosstabs.pdf

Part of the issues of bad cops is lack of funding on top of lack of proper training.

So I would be against cutting funding too.

[kaelleria]

Part of the issues of bad cops is lack of funding on top of lack of proper training.

So I would be against cutting funding too.

A lot of departments needs to completely be dismantled and the trainers need to go too, but yeah messaging!

[Edge-]

Part of the issues of bad cops is lack of funding on top of lack of proper training.

Kinda sorta not really. They're getting trained, but it's "warrior training" that teaches them to essentially become soldiers and treat the general public as "the enemy" that they're willing to kill.

Beyond that, they're blowing money on military-grade gear, even if they get it at a steal, that's completely unnecessary in carrying out their duties.

So I would be against cutting funding too.

They can earn that funding. It should not be a given, especially with how departments have pissed away excessive funding for decades.

[Masark]

Part of the issues of bad cops is lack of funding on top of lack of proper training.

So I would be against cutting funding too.

Maybe we should take away the grenade launchers and APCs and cancel the Grossman lectures. That ought to free up some money.

[beanman12345]

It wasn’t a tweet, she said it during the presser today.

I know, but someone linked a tweet that had that like minute or so part of the presser.

[starlord]

Kinda sorta not really. They're getting trained, but it's "warrior training" that teaches them to essentially become soldiers and treat the general public as "the enemy" that they're willing to kill.

Beyond that, they're blowing money on military-grade gear, even if they get it at a steal, that's completely unnecessary in carrying out their duties.

They can earn that funding. It should not be a given, especially with how departments have pissed away excessive funding for decades.

its a thorny issue, part of the reason for that stems from organized crime having access to military grade weapons in the past. which is used as a nice circular argument against gun control. gun control also should be addressed to de-militarize the police.

[TigTone]

Maybe we should take away the grenade launchers and APCs and cancel the Grossman lectures. That ought to free up some money.

You will find no disagreement on that. Efficient and proper spending is needed.

I wonder how long it will take to re building policing in America.

[downnola]

Because it means exactly what it says.

The reason not to use a meaningless generic term is because it is meaningless and generic. "Reform" doesn't propose anything. It says "make better" without making any effort to suggest how. You could, in theory, "reform" the police by giving them all a happy-face button to make them seem less threatening, but not actually doing anything meaningful. Whereas defunding them will, necessarily, have direct and meaningful outcomes.

The same argument will play out no matter what generic platitude you pick; "change", "improve", "restructure", none of these mean anything, without explanatory context. "Defund" is that context. We're skipping the platitude, and getting at the core.

It's not exactly what it says or people wouldn't need to be told to go "look up" what people mean by it. Even when you do look it up, you notice that people are arguing that the police should be abolished.

I think the real issue is that people are so used to comforting-but-meaningless platitudes that a bald-faced direct statement of intent is so stark it seems frightening. But what frightens you is, fundamentally, direct honesty, without any attempt made to shave the corners off to try and make it more palatable, because that process is how you turn any movement into a meaningless, directionless platitude.

No. I'd be more impressed if the people throwing the term around actually said that the culture of racism and abusive power ran so deep in our police departments nationwide that they are beyond reform and should be abolished and re-imagined. That's closer to how serious reforms have to actually be to change anything. Some people actually are saying it in that way and good for them. At least they're being honest.

Cutting their funding so they can't buy Colt M4s and APC's is definitely a good thing, but it ain't going to stop the next George Floyd from being choked to death.

[Endus]

This is what we'd call "Chickenshit corporate sanitizing", where you run a statement or comment through so many rounds of PR review that it loses any emotional connection or value and becomes as meaningless as all those feel-good posts from gaming companies about the protests that were largely followed by no actual action.

As an additional counterpoint to this; anyone scared off by the word "defund" was not ever going to be a positive contributor to lasting, meaningful change in police practices and culture, in the first place. They want a milquetoast, semantically empty buzzword that makes them feel like they're helping, while not actually asking anything of them and changing nothing that matters. This is the laziest, most dishonest fucking approach to social reform that there is; it says that you want to be seen as supporting change, but you're too goddamned cowardly to actually do anything that could bring about change. You want the appearance of helping, without doing the work.

Even when that "work" is as little as "taking a couple minutes to understand a movement rather than kneejerking based on your assumptions based solely on their tagline". Literally, that was too much to ask of you. But you still want the appearance of supporting them.

Do the goddamned work. Or shut the fuck up and stop pretending you're an ally; you're just a remora who wants the acclaim for being seen to support a thing, without actually engaging in support.