Poll: Defund the Police U.S or anywhere?

Be advised that this is a public poll: other users can see the choice(s) you selected.

Page 14 of 22 FirstFirst ...
4
12
13
14
15
16
... LastLast
  1. #261
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    73,283
    Quote Originally Posted by minteK917 View Post
    If there is 20% municipal support for defunding your PD. Its not happening even if theres 20 Endus working with the mayor saying so. Just mean there will be a new mayor next cycle. The only reason anything you talk about this big to a Mayor gets done, is that they can feel this is expedient. Nobody said changes needed votes. It needs politicians that can feel this is popular enough for them to make the change and keep it changed.
    You're back to focusing entirely on popular support, and that's just not how policy's written, dude. Anywhere.


  2. #262
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You're back to focusing entirely on popular support, and that's just not how policy's written, dude. Anywhere.
    Well tell me when you delete the police, since its that easy. Ill be waiting. That you think you only need to convince politicians is hell of funny thought.

  3. #263
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    73,283
    Quote Originally Posted by minteK917 View Post
    Well tell me when you delete the police, since its that easy. Ill be waiting.
    Who said "easy"? And where did "delete" come from?

    Look at them goalposts go whizzing by.


  4. #264
    The argument was lost in '20, and reinforced when cities that were the most receptive to "defund police" increased funding.
    Sure, at least people are talking about it.

  5. #265
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Who said "easy"? And where did "delete" come from?

    Look at them goalposts go whizzing by.
    No, you are literally working in fucking reverse from all we know lol, so im just hyperbolic. So how was our gay marriage support in Canada when all provinces started making it legal in the early 2000. Oh yeah, it already had massive support. Hmmmm, I guess I was only the endus of the country that got together and whispered in prime ministers ears and not the whole fucking society had shifted massively into supporting same sex marriage. Nah couldnt be it. How about the right to die....oh wait that had massive support almost a decade before it happened, but it MUST HAVE BEEN THE ENDUS WHISPERING. What about weed, nope never mind even cops stopped arresting you for weed in most places a decade before the law. Man those endus whisperer convincing politicians to pass laws. THEY CANT BE STOP. SOCIETY DOESENT DO ANYTHING, ITS ALL THE SHADOW ENDUS GUYS. NOBODY CARES ABOUT SUPPORT.

  6. #266
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Who said "easy"? And where did "delete" come from?

    Look at them goalposts go whizzing by.
    IDK how anyone can be aware of the Republican's political agenda for the last 50+ years and think grass roots popularity means a damn thing to those people.

    - - - Updated - - -

    wow, you mean society, despite it's conservative government, drifted to being more progressive and inclusive!? inconceivable! it must have been the cultural Marxists.

  7. #267
    Quote Originally Posted by uuuhname View Post
    IDK how anyone can be aware of the Republican's political agenda for the last 50+ years and think grass roots popularity means a damn thing to those people.

    - - - Updated - - -

    wow, you mean society, despite it's conservative government, drifted to being more progressive and inclusive!? inconceivable! it must have been the cultural Marxists.
    I know right, its almost like THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE YOU NEED TO CONVINCE FIRST. Not the fucking politicians endus think hes whispering into the ears of. I know right. If you are at the point where you whisper into he ears of politicians, its already supported in society, not the fucking reverse.

    So we are back to square one. If abolishing the police is a goal, how is it demonstrated to a society that this is worth supporting. If society is mostly bought in, like all the other changes it will ultimately happen. How do you get to that goal. Mabye doing other things first, that shows polices arent as needed as people are bought in to believe. So how do we tackle this first steps.
    Last edited by minteK917; 2022-07-18 at 09:51 PM.

  8. #268
    Quote Originally Posted by minteK917 View Post
    I know right, its almost like THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE YOU NEED TO CONVINCE FIRST. Not the fucking politicians endus think hes whispering into the ears of. I know right. If you are at the point where you whisper into he ears of politicians, its already supported in society, not the fucking reverse.
    are you not aware of how US politics works? like, are you seriously suggesting the only people that count worth a damn are the monied interests that have the money and power to bribe politicians? I mean, it makes YOUR stance make a little bit more sense, but that's it.

  9. #269
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Haven't done a lot of work with governments, have you?

    You don't need to convince voters of shit. The people you spend your time talking to are the elected representatives, who (generally), have a bit more focus and understanding. You speak to, in this case, police advisory councils in local municipalities and seek to convince them to pursue defunding directly.
    Trying to convince elected representatives that won't give you the time of day is a waste of time. Look at the GOP. They'd spit on you sooner than they'd listen to someone like you. The first step is getting elected representatives who will listen in office, and with a vote share big enough that change won't affect their chances of getting re-elected.

    It's great that you're privileged to the point you don't have to worry about that first step in canada. We're not there yet. Public opinion, in our case, still matters.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  10. #270
    Quote Originally Posted by uuuhname View Post
    are you not aware of how US politics works? like, are you seriously suggesting the only people that count worth a damn are the monied interests that have the money and power to bribe politicians? I mean, it makes YOUR stance make a little bit more sense, but that's it.
    No, sadly if it was as easy as bribe. Sometimes good changes could happen faster. Then again so could terrible changes. My stance is that the idea that politicians are gona listen to a endus like person with no society support is literally ridiculous. It never happens or endus just never checked polls on anything he advocated for. If he was part of any of these big policy shifts in his and my country in the last 20 years. He would know that the government is fucking 10 years behind anything. Hes not a fucking shaman convincing mayors to do shit that is unpopular at large. I actually dont think bribe are as powerful or as common as people think. My province had a lot of corruption and most of it amount to giving friends contract and shit. In the USA money probably plays a larger roles, but I dont think the stats show it does as much as people think. I think most people are just oblivious to the division on some issues society has in general.

    A good example again for the USA is healthcare. When asked Americans track in the high 80% as in favor of every American having access to healthcare. But when you go into the weeds of HOW to give American access to heathcare, that shit is cleaved into literally small chunks of support for different things. Every democrat politician is gona have a different interest there, not even because of money. But because even among democrats voted area, these arent clear issues with one answer at the top.

    If you agree with me that society shift before a government like you just did, why the fuck do you not realize why you need to fucking look at people support to know where to fucking go?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    Trying to convince elected representatives that won't give you the time of day is a waste of time. Look at the GOP. They'd spit on you sooner than they'd listen to someone like you. The first step is getting elected representatives who will listen in office, and with a vote share big enough that change won't affect their chances of getting re-elected.

    It's great that you're privileged to the point you don't have to worry about that first step in canada. We're not there yet. Public opinion, in our case, still matters.
    No he has to worry about the first step, endus is too far up his ass right now to even realize, anything he advocated for had massive support in the country before any politician even moved a fucking finger lol. No amount of Endus whispering made weed legal, most of the country stopped caring about weed and police stopped arresting you for weed, made politician put weed legal. The change wasent made because the shadow cabbal of endus convinced Justin Trudeau. Trudeau did it to win elections because people wanted it for a fucking decade lol.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Yeah you would all go quiet now lol. Imagine going pages after pages claiming societal changes of anything requires no support of society what so ever. Activist are magic shamans in 2022.
    Last edited by minteK917; 2022-07-18 at 10:09 PM.

  11. #271
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    73,283
    Quote Originally Posted by minteK917 View Post
    Yeah you would all go quiet now lol. Imagine going pages after pages claiming societal changes of anything requires no support of society what so ever. Activist are magic shamans in 2022.
    It got "quiet" because you got abusive and I have better things to do with my time than deal with someone who's going to resort to that. You're clearly not interested in open discussion, since you're not even dealing with what I actually said, just going off about "shadow cabals" or similar nonsense.


  12. #272
    Quote Originally Posted by uuuhname View Post
    again, explain why cops need tanks. either answer that question or don't bother responding.
    WHOOOSH!

    My point is that if you wanted to solve that problem you shouldn't be working towards defunding the police, but primarily towards demilitarizing it where Obama (and possibly Biden) have made progress by not allowing surplus armored tracked vehicles (not tanks) to be given freely to the police.

    As stated before 'defund the police' is a bad slogan in terms of the immediate reactions it gives (Blair called it 'the worst leftist slogan since dictatorship of the proletariat') and the policies it suggests (the money to the police isn't the problem).

    Why do you want to lose?
    Last edited by Forogil; 2022-07-19 at 08:03 AM.

  13. #273
    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    WHOOOSH!

    My point is that if you wanted to solve that problem you shouldn't be working towards defunding the police, but primarily towards demilitarizing it where Obama (and possibly Biden) have made progress by not allowing surplus armored tracked vehicles (not tanks) to be given freely to the police.

    As stated before 'defund the police' is a bad slogan in terms of the immediate reactions it gives (Blair called it 'the worst leftist slogan since dictatorship of the proletariat') and the policies it suggests (the money to the police isn't the problem).

    Why do want to lose?
    Because they can't virtue signal otherwise.

  14. #274
    Quote Originally Posted by minteK917 View Post
    . A good example again for the USA is healthcare. When asked Americans track in the high 80% as in favor of every American having access to healthcare. But when you go into the weeds of HOW to give American access to heathcare, that shit is cleaved into literally small chunks of support for different things. Every democrat politician is gona have a different interest there, not even because of money. But because even among democrats voted area, these arent clear issues with one answer at the top. .
    Embarrassingly accurate. It's why I advocate "baby steps," and any step should be seen as a win. Wide sweeping changes neither gain traction, nor well thought out as any structure for replacement is nonexistent...

  15. #275
    Quote Originally Posted by Minifie View Post
    Other issues involved are that other slogans do get used, but again, slogans in and of themselves don't do shit. The slogan, of course, can always be better, but if your main focus is "the slogan sucks" you probably don't know just how awful African American communities are treated by police, and are fine with that, or find it too difficult to articulate what needs to be done to people (and yes, convincing racists is hard/near impossible, but a smart slogan won't convince them either).
    If you think the main focus is "the slogan sucks" you're not listening. The focus is on garnering a larger base of public support so things can actually get done, at least on my part. Instead of using messaging that harms the chances of election outcomes you need, use better messaging. It's about reaching the people who "don't know just how awful African American communities are treated by police". They don't see the police as malignant influences in their communities, they see them as a source of safety. When you attack police, you're telling those people you want them to be less safe. They're not going to be receptive to anything you have to say after that. Instead target motivations they have.

    There is a reason focus groups exist. Messaging matters in a democracy. Companies and political campaigns don't spend millions of dollars a year testing messaging because it's ineffective. Deliberately handicapping yourself is an assured way to lose. Stubbornly ignoring the advice of the president who was excellent in messaging and received the biggest initial percent vote differential since '80 is counterproductive. They've seen the results of the focus groups that were done on this issue. Taking expert advice is not a sign of weakness. It's great that the slogan resonates within a group that already knows and understands the problems involved. Those aren't the people you need to reach. Preaching to the choir in this case, while alienating everyone else, is a losing strategy. That choir isn't big enough to drown out the noise from professional propaganda campaigns with billion dollar budgets.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  16. #276
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    If you think the main focus is "the slogan sucks" you're not listening. The focus is on garnering a larger base of public support so things can actually get done, at least on my part. Instead of using messaging that harms the chances of election outcomes you need, use better messaging. It's about reaching the people who "don't know just how awful African American communities are treated by police". They don't see the police as malignant influences in their communities, they see them as a source of safety. When you attack police, you're telling those people you want them to be less safe. They're not going to be receptive to anything you have to say after that. Instead target motivations they have.

    There is a reason focus groups exist. Messaging matters in a democracy. Companies and political campaigns don't spend millions of dollars a year testing messaging because it's ineffective. Deliberately handicapping yourself is an assured way to lose. Stubbornly ignoring the advice of the president who was excellent in messaging and received the biggest initial percent vote differential since '80 is counterproductive. They've seen the results of the focus groups that were done on this issue. Taking expert advice is not a sign of weakness. It's great that the slogan resonates within a group that already knows and understands the problems involved. Those aren't the people you need to reach. Preaching to the choir in this case, while alienating everyone else, is a losing strategy. That choir isn't big enough to drown out the noise from professional propaganda campaigns with billion dollar budgets.
    They can't reach those population, they are too busy insulting them and despising them.

  17. #277
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    Trying to convince elected representatives that won't give you the time of day is a waste of time. Look at the GOP. They'd spit on you sooner than they'd listen to someone like you. The first step is getting elected representatives who will listen in office, and with a vote share big enough that change won't affect their chances of getting re-elected.
    True - except that you are too kind, I view the ones spewing forth that stories as worse than deplorables.

    The reason is that this idea that you can just sweet-talk the representatives is to close to the conspiracy idea of a deep-state, but with the extra twist that the deep-state isn't a problem - you just have to convince it to be on your side.
    That fosters a sense of voter apathy, which is clearly not what you want your side to feel in a democracy,- and worst of all: when there's a grain of truth it totally back-fires as shown below:

    The Black Visions Collective is allegedly the origin of the Defund the Police:

    Their not recently updated web-site https://www.blackvisionsmn.org/redistribution states
    Moved a veto-proof majority of our city council to commit to dismantling the Minneapolis Police Department, so that all their future actions would be measured against this public commitment
    This makes you think it works, except that when they put that to the voters it failed: https://edition.cnn.com/2021/11/02/p...lts/index.html

    And not only did it fail once with voters, it also failed in reality as crime surged and they then back-tracked https://www.startribune.com/minneapo...des/600126143/ - notable of the four voting against the new increase only one was facing re-election; i.e. they realized that it would be toxic in terms of voter support. And some of them had by then actually understood what I have been saying all along - you can propose money to other solutions without reducing the funding for the police department.

    That's what happens when activists listen to stupid shit-advice and think that they don't need to convince voters of shit.
    Last edited by Forogil; 2022-07-19 at 05:35 PM.

  18. #278
    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    True - except that you are too kind, I view the ones spewing forth that stories as worse than deplorables.

    The reason is that this idea that you can just sweet-talk the representatives is to close to the conspiracy idea of a deep-state, but with the extra twist that the deep-state isn't a problem - you just have to convince it to be on your side.
    That fosters a sense of voter apathy, which is clearly not what you want your side to feel in a democracy,- and worst of all: when there's a grain of truth it totally back-fires as shown below:

    The Black Visions Collective is allegedly the origin of the Defund the Police:

    Their not recently updated web-site https://www.blackvisionsmn.org/redistribution states

    This makes you think it works, except that when they put that to the voters it failed: https://edition.cnn.com/2021/11/02/p...lts/index.html

    And not only did it fail once with voters, it also failed in reality as crime surged and they then back-tracked https://www.startribune.com/minneapo...des/600126143/ - notable of the four voting against the new increase only one was facing re-election; i.e. they realized that it would be toxic in terms of voter support. And some of them had by then actually understood what I have been saying all along - you can propose money to other solutions without reducing the funding for the police department.

    That's what happens when activists listen to stupid shit-advice and think that they don't need to convince voters of shit.
    No dont you get it, the shadow cabal can just speak to the mayor really hard and it would pass even if the majority in an area oppose the change. Its magic, shamans are who really changes society.

  19. #279
    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post

    That's what happens when activists listen to stupid shit-advice and think that they don't need to convince voters of shit.
    again, there are plenty of arguments to be made about dramatically changing society; to where we don't have cops with tanks OR the ability to just walk up in a firing squad and murder an unmarred homeless man at a bus stop in board day light. but whenever those ideas are brought up the only response I get is to have some eternally ass blasted lib relitigate 2016. so, at some point trying to convince you people of anything becomes an obvious waste of time, precisely because you don't actually want to be moved from the position you've planted yourself in.

  20. #280
    Quote Originally Posted by uuuhname View Post
    so, at some point trying to convince you people of anything becomes an obvious waste of time, precisely because you don't actually want to be moved from the position you've planted yourself in.
    "You people" just happens to be the voting population.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •