Moderators: Deeeez Knicks, mpharris36, j4remi, NoLayupRule, HerSports85, GONYK, Jeff Van Gully, dakomish23
GONYK wrote:Pointgod wrote:
What’s the margin of error in the polls?
Most are +/- 4
GONYK wrote:"Defund the police" is deeply unpopular from a semantics standpoint. To pretend that doesn't matter is to forget that politics is a persuasion game.
That's why Dems are going to start shifting the rhetoric like this:In an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, Clyburn firmly opposed embracing the concept amid Democrats’ push for criminal justice reform legislation.
“I would simply say, as I have always said, nobody is going to defund the police,” he said. “We can restructure the police forces, restructure, reimagine policing. That is what we are going to do. The fact of the matter is, the police have a role to play. What we have got to do is make sure that their role is one that meets the times, one that responds to these communities that they operate in.”
Clyburn went on to say that growing up he didn’t fear the police, but that “all of a sudden now I do fear police.”
“The fact of the matter is this is a structure that has been developed that we’ve got to deconstruct. So I wouldn’t say defund. Deconstruct our policing,” he said.
And you think this is the winning strategy on how to convince them? Or do you really think that references to this word in the context of redistribution policies will drive Democrats to vote for Trump? Either way, I just don't see it. The policies are all coming out from NYC, from NYS, from the House, from the Senate. Context matters. No one is saying "No Police at all." But it's clear to everyone that we need to restructure our society and law enforcement will get squeezed, defunded, re-shaped, rebuild, re-whatever work you want to use. Like it or not, the police footprint on our country's back is going to shrink. 
HarthorneWingo wrote:GONYK wrote:"Defund the police" is deeply unpopular from a semantics standpoint. To pretend that doesn't matter is to forget that politics is a persuasion game.
That's why Dems are going to start shifting the rhetoric like this:In an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, Clyburn firmly opposed embracing the concept amid Democrats’ push for criminal justice reform legislation.
“I would simply say, as I have always said, nobody is going to defund the police,” he said. “We can restructure the police forces, restructure, reimagine policing. That is what we are going to do. The fact of the matter is, the police have a role to play. What we have got to do is make sure that their role is one that meets the times, one that responds to these communities that they operate in.”
Clyburn went on to say that growing up he didn’t fear the police, but that “all of a sudden now I do fear police.”
“The fact of the matter is this is a structure that has been developed that we’ve got to deconstruct. So I wouldn’t say defund. Deconstruct our policing,” he said.
Who exactly are you looking to persuade? Trumpanzees? Please, brother, please!
And you think this is the winning strategy on how to convince them? Or do you really think that references to this word in the context of redistribution policies will drive Democrats to vote for Trump? Either way, I just don't see it. The policies are all coming out from NYC, from NYS, from the House, from the Senate. Context matters. No one is saying "No Police at all." But it's clear to everyone that we need to restructure our society and law enforcement will get squeezed, defunded, re-shaped, rebuild, re-whatever work you want to use. Like it or not, the police footprint on our country's back is going to shrink.
So is there a poll on the best word to use to describe what we're about to do concerning law enforcement in this country?
GONYK wrote:HarthorneWingo wrote:GONYK wrote:"Defund the police" is deeply unpopular from a semantics standpoint. To pretend that doesn't matter is to forget that politics is a persuasion game.
That's why Dems are going to start shifting the rhetoric like this:
Who exactly are you looking to persuade? Trumpanzees? Please, brother, please!
According to the polling, here is how the opposition to "defunding the police" breaks down:
73% of white people oppose
57% of Hispanics oppose
43% of black people oppose
According to the polling, here is how the opposition to reallocating the budget away from the police force to support mental health, housing, and education initatives breaks down:
66% of white people oppose
58% of Hispanics oppose
36% of black people oppose
Those are all Trump supporters to you?And you think this is the winning strategy on how to convince them? Or do you really think that references to this word in the context of redistribution policies will drive Democrats to vote for Trump? Either way, I just don't see it. The policies are all coming out from NYC, from NYS, from the House, from the Senate. Context matters. No one is saying "No Police at all." But it's clear to everyone that we need to restructure our society and law enforcement will get squeezed, defunded, re-shaped, rebuild, re-whatever work you want to use. Like it or not, the police footprint on our country's back is going to shrink.
So is there a poll on the best word to use to describe what we're about to do concerning law enforcement in this country?
Which is exactly why Clyburn said above. So why are you mad?
HarthorneWingo wrote:GONYK wrote:HarthorneWingo wrote:
Who exactly are you looking to persuade? Trumpanzees? Please, brother, please!
According to the polling, here is how the opposition to "defunding the police" breaks down:
73% of white people oppose
57% of Hispanics oppose
43% of black people oppose
According to the polling, here is how the opposition to reallocating the budget away from the police force to support mental health, housing, and education initatives breaks down:
66% of white people oppose
58% of Hispanics oppose
36% of black people oppose
Those are all Trump supporters to you?And you think this is the winning strategy on how to convince them? Or do you really think that references to this word in the context of redistribution policies will drive Democrats to vote for Trump? Either way, I just don't see it. The policies are all coming out from NYC, from NYS, from the House, from the Senate. Context matters. No one is saying "No Police at all." But it's clear to everyone that we need to restructure our society and law enforcement will get squeezed, defunded, re-shaped, rebuild, re-whatever work you want to use. Like it or not, the police footprint on our country's back is going to shrink.
So is there a poll on the best word to use to describe what we're about to do concerning law enforcement in this country?
Which is exactly why Clyburn said above. So why are you mad?
Nah, I ain't mad. Why'd you clip my post? I'm still waiting on my "word."
Ok, so the vast majority of black voters want to either defund or "re-allocate money away from" local law enforcement. The other groups, not surprising. Many Latinos come from, immigrated, escaped from country's where local law enforcement was either non-existent or under the control of the local gangs/cartels, even worse. Our police are relative angels compared to what they've experienced. Plus, there's an MS-13 gang problem throughout their communities and they're scared for their children, etc., and rightfully so. Fear can paralyze people from making change. (I will add that Latinos are, generally, more conservative in politics. They've just been driven away by the animals in the republican party. Latinos are also very religious.) That's why we have [or are supposed to have] leaders who understand how to envision and plan for a better society, something that is, sadly, out of the realm of most of these voters intellectual capacities unless they've been systematically victimized by the prior policies. These are issues that will be honed and molded by experts in their relative fields, not by referendum.
We've already gone over the many popular and successful government programs that faced fierce public opposition but were later embraced. This will just have to be another one of them.
GONYK wrote:HarthorneWingo wrote:GONYK wrote:
According to the polling, here is how the opposition to "defunding the police" breaks down:
73% of white people oppose
57% of Hispanics oppose
43% of black people oppose
According to the polling, here is how the opposition to reallocating the budget away from the police force to support mental health, housing, and education initatives breaks down:
66% of white people oppose
58% of Hispanics oppose
36% of black people oppose
Those are all Trump supporters to you?
Which is exactly why Clyburn said above. So why are you mad?
Nah, I ain't mad. Why'd you clip my post? I'm still waiting on my "word."
Ok, so the vast majority of black voters want to either defund or "re-allocate money away from" local law enforcement. The other groups, not surprising. Many Latinos come from, immigrated, escaped from country's where local law enforcement was either non-existent or under the control of the local gangs/cartels, even worse. Our police are relative angels compared to what they've experienced. Plus, there's an MS-13 gang problem throughout their communities and they're scared for their children, etc., and rightfully so. Fear can paralyze people from making change. (I will add that Latinos are, generally, more conservative in politics. They've just been driven away by the animals in the republican party. Latinos are also very religious.) That's why we have [or are supposed to have] leaders who understand how to envision and plan for a better society, something that is, sadly, out of the realm of most of these voters intellectual capacities unless they've been systematically victimized by the prior policies. These are issues that will be honed and molded by experts in their relative fields, not by referendum.
We've already gone over the many popular and successful government programs that faced fierce public opposition but were later embraced. This will just have to be another one of them.
Yes, after the people who are advocating for it actually win the election by referring to it in ways that the voting population isn't viscerally opposed to.
Elections are referendums, my friend.
HarthorneWingo wrote:GONYK wrote:HarthorneWingo wrote:
Nah, I ain't mad. Why'd you clip my post? I'm still waiting on my "word."
Ok, so the vast majority of black voters want to either defund or "re-allocate money away from" local law enforcement. The other groups, not surprising. Many Latinos come from, immigrated, escaped from country's where local law enforcement was either non-existent or under the control of the local gangs/cartels, even worse. Our police are relative angels compared to what they've experienced. Plus, there's an MS-13 gang problem throughout their communities and they're scared for their children, etc., and rightfully so. Fear can paralyze people from making change. (I will add that Latinos are, generally, more conservative in politics. They've just been driven away by the animals in the republican party. Latinos are also very religious.) That's why we have [or are supposed to have] leaders who understand how to envision and plan for a better society, something that is, sadly, out of the realm of most of these voters intellectual capacities unless they've been systematically victimized by the prior policies. These are issues that will be honed and molded by experts in their relative fields, not by referendum.
We've already gone over the many popular and successful government programs that faced fierce public opposition but were later embraced. This will just have to be another one of them.
Yes, after the people who are advocating for it actually win the election by referring to it in ways that the voting population isn't viscerally opposed to.
Elections are referendums, my friend.
Sure but saying you want to throw $100 billion more at law enforcement is most definitely in the wrong direction. Don't you agree?
Stannis wrote:We can't act like DNC really cares at this point. This favors McGrath over Booker, which is what they want. They'll bitch in November.
Anyways get em, Booker!!
8516knicks wrote:With Biden down supposedly picking Harris we're going to get 4 years of Republican lite. Not what we need. But better than Trump i suppose.
HarthorneWingo wrote:Stannis wrote:We can't act like DNC really cares at this point. This favors McGrath over Booker, which is what they want. They'll bitch in November.
Anyways get em, Booker!!
And Maxine Waters and the CBC are rallying behind Eliot Engle instead of black/progressive challenger Jamalle Bowman.
Phish Tank wrote:HarthorneWingo wrote:Stannis wrote:We can't act like DNC really cares at this point. This favors McGrath over Booker, which is what they want. They'll bitch in November.
Anyways get em, Booker!!
And Maxine Waters and the CBC are rallying behind Eliot Engle instead of black/progressive challenger Jamalle Bowman.
To the surprise of no one.
I hope more than 200,000 people will come out to vote for Bowman, because that's what it will take, at the bare minimum, to upset Engel. I think it'll be close, but I don't know if he'll squeak out the W. Though this may end up being different than Nixon & Teachout, both of whom tried to achieve the major upset and lost.
GONYK wrote:8516knicks wrote:With Biden down supposedly picking Harris we're going to get 4 years of Republican lite. Not what we need. But better than Trump i suppose.
Biden isn't down by any measure
The Democrats are clearly not interested in bold change at a time in existence when it is needed so badly. All you have to see is what is happening the Senate primary in Kentucky and the House primary here in NY. Two excellent progressive black candidates. It's all about protecting their teammates; not improving our lives. HarthorneWingo wrote:Phish Tank wrote:HarthorneWingo wrote:
And Maxine Waters and the CBC are rallying behind Eliot Engle instead of black/progressive challenger Jamalle Bowman.
To the surprise of no one.
I hope more than 200,000 people will come out to vote for Bowman, because that's what it will take, at the bare minimum, to upset Engel. I think it'll be close, but I don't know if he'll squeak out the W. Though this may end up being different than Nixon & Teachout, both of whom tried to achieve the major upset and lost.
I think it's more reminiscent of AOC vs. Crowley, no?
BBALLER4FR wrote:Anyone care to explain why the CBC is putting their support on the defeat of a progressive black candidate?
GONYK wrote:8516knicks wrote:With Biden down supposedly picking Harris we're going to get 4 years of Republican lite. Not what we need. But better than Trump i suppose.
Biden isn't down by any measure
