Capitol Hill Blue Forums Capitol Hill Blue Opinions CHB Columnists Wokeness

Pretty amazing for me. You have decided that there is no way the feds can do anything about fixing police problems. This, in spite of the fact hat both Dems and Republicans are, right now, trying to get that done. As far as I can tell they are in agreement about no-knocks, strangle holds, etc. Their main problem seems to be over whether the individual policeman or the police force can be sued. I don't even care about that as suing the political group responsible for the police, the city, county or state, basically, gets sued, right now and gets to pay and its up to them to stop it and they haven't (which is why the feds are entering the fray).

I used to think that Trump disasters were due to Trump and his ability to know EVERYTHING! Now I realize that BOTH sides have those that know everything. If I have learned anything, over the years, is that when you meet or know somebody actually believes they know everything the wise thing is to run like hell.

Medicare for all is a defeating slogan. The trick, I think, is to get control and do the job. I actually think there is hope for our healthcare system its just not being dealt with by running mouth using crap language that gives offense. I also realize that you really don't get it because you know all things so I am done trying.

Have a nice day!

Raise the minimum wage, no. Defund the police, yes. 55% of all Americans support raising the minimum wage, 34% oppose. Defund the Police, 18% support, 58% oppose.

Medicare for all is a bit tricky. So much depends on the plan. Medicare for all replacing all private insurance, 40% in favor 55% against. Medicare for all while retaining all existing private health insurance, allowing each individual a choice, private or government, 67% in favor 29% oppose.

What then develops is a war of propaganda. Those in favor of Medicare for all, will cite the later percentages. Those oppose, the former percentages while neither tells the truth that there is a huge difference in the plans and how folks view each. In other words, no one is being honest, but one should never expect honesty in a politician or in politics.

Like I said, most of the police reform needs to happen at the municipal level. Lawmakers can put a few guidelines in place, do a few investigations and get a few headlines.

The feds do not control your local police. They do not control your county sheriff. They do not control your state police.

Hiring and policy is entirely up to the governments in charge of the various law enforcement agencies.

JGW, all you need to do to convince me I'm wrong is offer up proof.

Maybe a link showing a Democratic elected official supporting a movement to defund the police?

Have you read AOCs response when she was asked about defunding the police?

I didn't think so.

Do you understand the history of the "defund" movement?

Have you read the petition?

All you're offering is a knee jerk reaction to a teevee show.

I kinda like a slightly different way to get some of this stuff done. Basically its what Biden did. He didn't propose most of which he now has when he was running. He understood that it would probably lose him the election. Its odd but the way to go. Have a plan, kinda refer to it whilst running, and THEN get the job done when you win. Biden's main problem is that he didn't win by enough to gain seats in the congress. That wasn't his fault so much as the fault of the Democratic party which doesn't seem to have the skill, capacity or will to control its members mouths. Their message is a mess. I even think they know it, just don't have the gumption, I guess.

I am for a healthcare system which is universal and available to everybody. I am, pretty much, in agreement with most of his other stuff. I also think that there is a lot of stuff which won't make it and suspect that is part of the biden plans. My point is that its not very good to talk about everything until AFTER election. Before that just WIN! (something the Dems simply don't understand. They talk to each other a lot but hey are elected by the middle and, sometimes, I swear the Dems just want to piss them off).

Perhaps not letting the American people know what you have up your sleeve is the main reason for most presidents's massive losses in their first midterm. Americans think they elected one person, but get another once the winner takes office. Which basically means, Biden and all other presidents who do this have 2 years before they become neutered with the other party taking control of the House. This happened in 1994, 2010 and 2018. The only reason it didn't happen in 2002 was 9-11 happened. But Bush lost 33 seats in his second midterm and all of congress in 2006.


There's plenty of support for reforming the police, very little for defunding the police. Plenty of support for medicarel as an option for everyone to choose from along with their existing insurance. Give me a choice, Blue Cross, Kaiser, Medicare, let me choose. But not for Medicare for all replacing all existing insurance leaving me with no choice but to go on Medicare..

So how do the Democrats convince the people, especially independents, swing voters that they mean reform and not defund? That they want Medicare to be an option to existing health insurance. The problem, independents, swing voters, couch potatoes in greger's phase for them don't pay much if any attention to politics.

They hear the slogan defund the police which many democrats have shouted, they assume the Democrats mean defund, do away with, not reform. They hear the slogan medicare for all, they assume the Democrats want to do away with all existing health insurance and put everyone, 100% of all American on government owned and operated medicare. It's hey, I like my health insurance or I like my employer provided health insurance. I want to keep my health insurance, I don't want to go on Medicare.

What we have here is a failure to communicate. Or what we have here is a few loudmouth, heavily covered by the media congressional democrats blaring away with slogans most Americans don't agree with.At least the couch potatoes normally called independents who don't don't give a hog's squeal about politics until election time.

Perhaps you could provide a link to one of these loudmouth democrats blaring away with slogans?

Otherwise...it didn't happen.

LOL, okay, defund the police didn't happen. The problem is there's a lot of folks out there who heard the same and who voted against Democratic congressional candidates because of it. All google give me now is Democrats running away from the slogan of defunding the police.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021...a-most-democrats-dont-want-to-talk-about

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/548348-Democrats-brace-for-new-defund-the-police-attacks

https://theintercept.com/2020/12/07/defund-police-qualified-immunity/

https://www.vox.com/2020/6/14/21290877/democrats-defund-police-omar-clyburn

and a thousand more as the democrats continue to run away from and don't want to talk about defunding the police. Why? Most Americans know what defund means and they know what reform means, but the slogan of defund the police was used and not reform. A huge communications problem especially for coach potatoes.

Four pages in - I’ve been super busy and didn’t suffer a strong enough case of opinionitis to take the time to comment. But here’s a summary that is coming into focus from the fog that fits my personal memory of the Great Defund Debacle:

When I first heard the call to “defund the police” I thought, “That’s a stupid thing to say”, but it wasn’t at all clear to me who was saying it. The chatter was almost instantaneous trying to explain that defund meant reduce support for aggressive and punitive policing and reprogramming significant funds to preemptive and treatment oriented actions for non-criminals. Excellent strategy, but ‘defund’ was not a good description.

In my recollection, the source of the ‘defund’ call never became clear, but it was repeated over and over in the press. It was definitely red meat for right-wingers, though, and as we all know, righties love to barbecue.

I also have the vague recollection that “woke” appeared first as a self-description used by Trumpers to elevate themselves above the sleeping masses of ignorant old school Republicans (not to mention the evil liberals who are an even lower life form than John McCain). One day I awoke from night’s sleep and saw that ‘woke’ had replaced ‘elitist’ as the top insult for people who still had some ability to think rationally and who were foolishly seeking polite discussion and debate with others. Very quickly that morphed into a general defamation of all liberalish people, but with a ‘defund’-like meaning that used to only apply to woo-woo Santa Fe style Libs.

Enter James Carville, who loves nothing better than to scrap with idiots in after closing time street fights with the hold my beer and watch this crowd. JC is incensed (rightly, I think) by a couple of words that are being bent and sharpened into nasty little weapons of political warfare, and wants war.

The fundamental problem here is that liberals (in my perception) are more in the camp of the peaceable and reasonable tribe, and not generally very gifted at street fighting, wanton lying, and general sociopathic dalliances. Carville is an outlier, which seems to color his opinion on these matters. He desperately wants to fight fire with fire and is frustrated that his chosen tribe is just not that into it.

The deeper question is, “How do you fight stupid?”

The "Defund the Police" movement has been happening since the 60s. If you cared you could find out what it's about. If you read AOCs response to the issue you would see that it's an elegant solution which could work anywhere. In fact it is already working in practically every affluent white community.

But what you have been saying from the start(without any proof) is that it was a slogan taken up by Democrats. Now that you've finally Googled it you can see that every Democrat stepped away from it.

I've been trying to tell you this for days.

It's a BLM slogan, it comes with a petition and a list of demands. Sensible demands for equal treatment by law enforcement. The slogan and the protests worked. There is currently some bipartisan discussion of police reforms taking place in congress.

Is this slogan your latest attempt to explain the 2020 election? Have you got any proof that "there's a lot of folks out there who heard the same and who voted against Democratic congressional candidates because of it."

Or are you making that up too? Did the exit polls specifically ask voters about why they voted against democrats? Did they say it was because of the defund the police slogan?

People hated Trump, even republicans and right leaning independents.

That's why they voted against him but for other republicans. The election was a moratorium on Donald Trump, not offbeat political slogans that offended the uneducated masses.

Education is a good start. Living wages and decent healthcare would go a long way to help too.