Suburban white women have bought the copaganda completely and are convinced it’s the 70s again out there
According to that data, a minority of blacks want police funding decreased.
Yeah there's a clear racial tilt but this is still a losing position among all demographics.
I'd absolutely like to see income disparity being represented on that poll because I'll take a bet that they're not actually polling the people most vulnerable to police violence and abuse. By that I mean poor people.
Suburban white women have bought the copaganda completely and are convinced it’s the 70s again out there
According to that data, a minority of blacks want police funding decreased.
Yeah there's a clear racial tilt but this is still a losing position among all demographics.
I'd absolutely like to see income disparity being represented on that poll because I'll take a bet that they're not actually polling the people most vulnerable to police violence and abuse. By that I mean poor people.
It's Pew. Feel free to click through it's methodology. They publish it.
I think it's fascinating that literally no Dem has adapted any sort of "defund the police" position that can remotely be attached to the party, but it has still become glued to them due to the demonization of them by the rightwing media to such a degree that they have to pivot away from it despite not having it as a position.
The party that’s all about “keeping things the way they are” will always be opposed by a coalition of people that want things to change, and human nature makes us skeptical of the changers always
Captain Inertia on
+1
Options
TraceGNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam WeRegistered Userregular
Suburban white women have bought the copaganda completely and are convinced it’s the 70s again out there
According to that data, a minority of blacks want police funding decreased.
Yeah there's a clear racial tilt but this is still a losing position among all demographics.
I'd absolutely like to see income disparity being represented on that poll because I'll take a bet that they're not actually polling the people most vulnerable to police violence and abuse. By that I mean poor people.
It's Pew. Feel free to click through it's methodology. They publish it.
Yeah there's no mention about relative wealth among the participants that I can see through a quick skim.
Suburban white women have bought the copaganda completely and are convinced it’s the 70s again out there
According to that data, a minority of blacks want police funding decreased.
Yeah there's a clear racial tilt but this is still a losing position among all demographics.
Which is, as we've talked about before, not new either. And given what appears to be a rise in violent crimes, not really all that strange either.
The rise to 2019 levels?
Mind, I’m not disputing the polling, I’m pissed about the unwarranted freak out
No. The murder rate spiked like 30% in 2020, which is I believe the largest change on record in either direction. AFAIK it goes back to levels from the 90s.
Whether or not people are overreacting to the changes is a separate issues from the fact that those changes seem to be very real from the data we have.
Suburban white women have bought the copaganda completely and are convinced it’s the 70s again out there
According to that data, a minority of blacks want police funding decreased.
Yeah there's a clear racial tilt but this is still a losing position among all demographics.
Which is, as we've talked about before, not new either. And given what appears to be a rise in violent crimes, not really all that strange either.
The rise to 2019 levels?
Mind, I’m not disputing the polling, I’m pissed about the unwarranted freak out
No. The murder rate spiked like 30% in 2020, which is I believe the largest change on record in either direction. AFAIK it goes back to levels from the 90s.
Whether or not people are overreacting to the changes is a separate issues from the fact that those changes seem to be very real from the data we have.
Uh huh, I’m not disputing it went up 30% YoY, I’m pissed it’s not presented this way tho
Suburban white women have bought the copaganda completely and are convinced it’s the 70s again out there
According to that data, a minority of blacks want police funding decreased.
Yeah there's a clear racial tilt but this is still a losing position among all demographics.
I'd absolutely like to see income disparity being represented on that poll because I'll take a bet that they're not actually polling the people most vulnerable to police violence and abuse. By that I mean poor people.
It's Pew. Feel free to click through it's methodology. They publish it.
Yeah there's no mention about relative wealth among the participants that I can see through a quick skim.
Given black and hispanic democrats are more likely then white democrats to back increases in police funding, it seems unlikely that it's an income-based split.
Suburban white women have bought the copaganda completely and are convinced it’s the 70s again out there
According to that data, a minority of blacks want police funding decreased.
Yeah there's a clear racial tilt but this is still a losing position among all demographics.
Which is, as we've talked about before, not new either. And given what appears to be a rise in violent crimes, not really all that strange either.
The rise to 2019 levels?
Mind, I’m not disputing the polling, I’m pissed about the unwarranted freak out
No. The murder rate spiked like 30% in 2020, which is I believe the largest change on record in either direction. AFAIK it goes back to levels from the 90s.
Whether or not people are overreacting to the changes is a separate issues from the fact that those changes seem to be very real from the data we have.
Uh huh, I’m not disputing it went up 30% YoY, I’m pissed it’s not presented this way tho
I literally presented it that way in words. Notice how if you draw a horizontal line from the end of that graph it doesn't hit a comparable level till the late 90s. Your graph literally shows what I've been saying.
At this point it feels like the problem is not how the data is presented but that the data is inconvenient.
Defunding the police is a universal good that goes against people's kneejerk views of How The World Works, like other universal goods like "give the homeless homes". It's a functionally impossible sell no matter how much evidence you produce.
Whether or not people are overreacting to the changes is a separate issues from the fact that those changes seem to be very real from the data we have.
I believe people are way overreacting and it’s because they hear “30% increase” and not “it’s the level it was when you were a 22 year old”
Anyway, I’m disappointed Biden said what he said but I understand why and my true frustration is the underlying condition that forces Dems into this position
To the extent that saying "fund the police" is a strategic mistake (not saying anything about policy), it is one because it completely kills enthusiasm on the left flank of the Democratic party to make a limited appeal to the mythical moderate who wants to like Dem ideas but keeps falling for Republican talking points about scary antifa soldiers or whatever. I'm not sure that's an effective trade.
E: Like, the long term risk is that you completely kill the enthusiasm of a bunch of grassroots organizers and activists who could have been committed for a long time. Even then, I doubt this is a "lib-dems promising not to do something, immediately allying with the Tories to do that" level mistake.
The left is certainly going to remember this. It wasn't something he actually had to say out loud but hey maybe -this time- he'll get some republican votes.
edit: because that's who he's gotta be pandering to saying this. There's no other group that actually gave a shit about the defund the police phrase other than cops or 'tough on crime' people
Or he could actually believe it? His messaging on this has been consistent since the primaries.
So, the hecklers were Boebert and Taylor-Green (shocking, I know) and they were screaming about building the wall and something about 13 dead soldiers from Afghanistan, respectively.
That Nazi CPAC that Taylor-Green and Gosar went to featured cheering for Russia and then the crowd chanting Putin Putin Putin shortly before Marg went on stage. It's beyond repulsive.
While its midly interesting to see when Democrats care about policy polling and when they don't, Im finding it hard to get too outraged about this fund the police shit. Real changes to policing were never going to come from the national party, especially once Joe Biden was calling the shots. I guess its mildly knife twisting that theyre using a play on words from protesters' demands to funnel more money towards the pigs but like end of the day there's no sense in getting mad at a wild animal for biting you, that's its nature.
To the extent that saying "fund the police" is a strategic mistake (not saying anything about policy), it is one because it completely kills enthusiasm on the left flank of the Democratic party to make a limited appeal to the mythical moderate who wants to like Dem ideas but keeps falling for Republican talking points about scary antifa soldiers or whatever. I'm not sure that's an effective trade.
E: Like, the long term risk is that you completely kill the enthusiasm of a bunch of grassroots organizers and activists who could have been committed for a long time. Even then, I doubt this is a "lib-dems promising not to do something, immediately allying with the Tories to do that" level mistake.
The left is certainly going to remember this. It wasn't something he actually had to say out loud but hey maybe -this time- he'll get some republican votes.
edit: because that's who he's gotta be pandering to saying this. There's no other group that actually gave a shit about the defund the police phrase other than cops or 'tough on crime' people
Or he could actually believe it? His messaging on this has been consistent since the primaries.
I think it's pretty likely he believes it given it's the default, intuitive position that everybody believes until they study the issue, but I also think that "what a politician truly believes" is generally not useful analysis. This is especially true in a speech like this, where Biden can talk on whatever he wants so anything he chooses to talk about will be strategic; I'm sure he believes in plenty of things that were cut.
So, the hecklers were Boebert and Taylor-Green (shocking, I know) and they were screaming about building the wall and something about 13 dead soldiers from Afghanistan, respectively.
That Nazi CPAC that Taylor-Green and Gosar went to featured cheering for Russia and then the crowd chanting Putin Putin Putin shortly before Marg went on stage. It's beyond repulsive.
And that’s very mild compared to the first transcripts I saw from speeches there
I feel like the police being defunded is one of those things people oppose because they're dumb
BLM phrasing it that way is fine but any legislative push should be framed as "Enhancing" the police budget, and indeed ending up with slightly more funding - it's just a lot less of it goes to cops now
Suburban white women have bought the copaganda completely and are convinced it’s the 70s again out there
According to that data, a minority of blacks want police funding decreased.
Yeah there's a clear racial tilt but this is still a losing position among all demographics.
I'd absolutely like to see income disparity being represented on that poll because I'll take a bet that they're not actually polling the people most vulnerable to police violence and abuse. By that I mean poor people.
It's Pew. Feel free to click through it's methodology. They publish it.
Yeah there's no mention about relative wealth among the participants that I can see through a quick skim.
Given black and hispanic democrats are more likely then white democrats to back increases in police funding, it seems unlikely that it's an income-based split.
It's not really surprising and has been discussed in the topical threads around police and crime. While minorities may be more likely to be victims of police violence, they are also much more likely to be victims of violent crime than white people.
That's the reason the Clinton crime bill generally had widespread support from black voters - it was their communities that had drug and gang problems and their kids / grandkids who were getting murdered in the streets.
Considering you get a range of about a dozen different answers when you ask what the 'Defund the police' slogan means in actual policy or implementation AND it polls so poorly it's a bad slogan and no surprise it's treated like political kryptonite.
Although that still doesn't excuse using 'fund the police' as a slogan.
There are a couple things going on with the public opinion on police funding.
-We have the first issue where our media is just fuck awful on the whole thing. This includes the news media being super eager to carry water for police officers and organizations that should be run out of ton because they have no fucking business being law enforcement. It also includes our entertainment media, which not only makes propaganda for cops, but is full of intellectually lazy hacks that often use scripts where there is a violent crime, usually murder, the bad guy is super dangerous, there is a gun fight and the bad guy dies. This is usually a problem because you do get a number of people that can not tell the difference between fact and bullshit fiction. They do not internalize that their favorite cop show is based on mostly bullshit because the US city it takes place in, is nowhere near that violent and the cops there are nowhere near that respectable or honest.
-The pandemic has caused a spike in crime. We're social animals, so the whole isolation thing was likely going to cause some people to become mentally unstable and do illegal things. Also the US has been pretty shit at the whole social welfare thing, so the economic problems that the rich keep going to get themselves another yacht, being ratcheted up further, likely resulted in desperate people having to resort to theft. Then there is the whole thing of entitled ass conservatives being assholes, some going so far as to be violent about their butthurt.
-Views on law enforced are nuanced. The problem with defund the police, unlike home the homeless, is that it's far too fucking easy to take it to the most extreme bullshit, even if none of the proponents want to do that (that being doing away with the police), where the homeless one gets harder because there are ways to make the assholes trip over their dicks on that. Most people don't want the cops beating up people, even if the person being beaten up has committed a crime. Some that might be okay with such unacceptable behavior, still have a hardline. Kid that stole a candy bar, that cop is a fucking monster and should be fired. Asshole that shot and killed their former partner for breaking up with them, totally deserved the beating. People don't want the cops all up in their business, nor to be fucked over because the cops are essentially being used as revenue collection agents. On the other hand, people absolutely want cops to deal with people that are committing crimes because they don't want people to be openly stealing, beating or murdering them.
Personally, not only do I think we sink too much money into police budgets, let the cops get away with too much because they are enforcing the law and really, should be investing in other agencies to deal with certain problems, rather than sending in the police, who are not an appropriate tool to use for those issues.
All that said, it gets complicated because you do have to thread the needle where you reign in the abuse, but have the public reassured that there are still going to be a properly funded law enforcement to deal with the crooks. This of course is made harder because you not only have people that do not understand how things actually are (they think their is more social disorder than there actually is, probably because they are shitty people that can't imagine that most people aren't assholes like them, but also the media and defunded education system has left us with a host of people that do not understand that their police issues are mostly a local thing. Sure the feds can do some things on that front and the states can do more, but most of the of the issues really need to be tackled at the local level because of how our government is setup.
I feel like the police being defunded is one of those things people oppose because they're dumb
BLM phrasing it that way is fine but any legislative push should be framed as "Enhancing" the police budget, and indeed ending up with slightly more funding - it's just a lot less of it goes to cops now
"Enhance" is a solid buzzword to rally behind. Decouple it from policing in general and call them "Enhanced Communities" where the money gets diverted to mental health care, social workers, homeless programs etc. Then when those programs succeed like they generally do, everyone will want to be an enhanced community.
Whether or not people are overreacting to the changes is a separate issues from the fact that those changes seem to be very real from the data we have.
I believe people are way overreacting and it’s because they hear “30% increase” and not “it’s the level it was when you were a 22 year old”
Edit: I was way off on the 2019 levels, yes
I think there are going to be some interesting dynamics here based on the types of crimes people are falling victim to, because they were all hit differently by the pandemic.
Looking at California specific data, homicides spiked, as well as aggravated assault (okay) and motor vehicle theft (???), while everything else fell since 2019. Assaults are kind of weighted heavily by folks getting into fights, which makes it more likely to be a crime you put yourself into a position to be victimized by. (Not to victim blame, but there's a difference between a guy getting mugged and a guy getting drunk and arguing with someone until the fists come out in terms of social perception of avoidability.)
So aside from homicide, the kinds of crime where you're minding your own business and you get victimized have uniformly fallen (including domestic violence, which I found surprising).
So we're in a situation where you are hearing about all this crime happening in the news, but also hearing about a lot less crime happening to your friends and acquaintances. And I guess people trust the news over their own lying eyes?
There isn't much good racial breakdown from primary sources because crime reporting is lol, but proxy data suggests that these crime trends are hitting different races about equally, at least in Cali. Aside from Hispanics, who saw crime plummet during the pandemic.
It's all fascinating and kinda weird.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Whether or not people are overreacting to the changes is a separate issues from the fact that those changes seem to be very real from the data we have.
I believe people are way overreacting and it’s because they hear “30% increase” and not “it’s the level it was when you were a 22 year old”
Edit: I was way off on the 2019 levels, yes
I think there are going to be some interesting dynamics here based on the types of crimes people are falling victim to, because they were all hit differently by the pandemic.
Looking at California specific data, homicides spiked, as well as aggravated assault (okay) and motor vehicle theft (???), while everything else fell since 2019. Assaults are kind of weighted heavily by folks getting into fights, which makes it more likely to be a crime you put yourself into a position to be victimized by. (Not to victim blame, but there's a difference between a guy getting mugged and a guy getting drunk and arguing with someone until the fists come out in terms of social perception of avoidability.)
So aside from homicide, the kinds of crime where you're minding your own business and you get victimized have uniformly fallen (including domestic violence, which I found surprising).
So we're in a situation where you are hearing about all this crime happening in the news, but also hearing about a lot less crime happening to your friends and acquaintances. And I guess people trust the news over their own lying eyes?
There isn't much good racial breakdown from primary sources because crime reporting is lol, but proxy data suggests that these crime trends are hitting different races about equally, at least in Cali. Aside from Hispanics, who saw crime plummet during the pandemic.
It's all fascinating and kinda weird.
I mean we know this already from how Biden is rated on the economy despite the US having one of its best economies fucking ever. The news has their entire body on the scale against the admin and people are easily lead by the nose.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
The problem with the "fund the police" line from a political point of view is that it cedes the attack to the GOP and acts as if the bullshit attack was correct. Because centrist Dems want to blame the left for their failures. That's why including the fund the police line was frustrating to me.
Pivot away and attack the GOP! Have a theme! Believe in things!
As I've said for years Democrats should unify everything around the idea of justice. And make positive frames in that context for popular positions. And the best thing is you can argue for both things from the justice framework. You can address (suburban white) people's concerns over crime by saying we will deliver justice towards (violent) criminals. You can also address people who care about police brutality by emphasizing justice for them and against cops. And yeah you'll still piss off police, but fuck the police.
Pursue justice against white collar criminals and fraudsters. Justice for people who cannot afford medication they need to live with dignity. Etc etc etc. You can frame basically every Democratic priority out of this framework and you can put the GOP on the defensive. AIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
is that it's far too fucking easy to take it to the most extreme bullshit, even if none of the proponents want to do that (that being doing away with the police)
I have had conversations with different people on this forum where I was told that defund the police absolutely means abolishing all police forces forever, and also by someone else that it absolutely did not mean that. I get that opponents are going to interpret things as the worst possible version, but this is true in all political arenas and arguments. It's why political campaigns keep hammering home their specific messaging, to prevent those kinds of interpretations. But it's not like this opinion doesn't exist, or even that there is widespread agreement on what it DOES mean.
The problem with the "fund the police" line from a political point of view is that it cedes the attack to the GOP and acts as if the bullshit attack was correct. Because centrist Dems want to blame the left for their failures. That's why including the fund the police line was frustrating to me.
Pivot away and attack the GOP! Have a theme! Believe in things!
As I've said for years Democrats should unify everything around the idea of justice. And make positive frames in that context for popular positions. And the best thing is you can argue for both things from the justice framework. You can address (suburban white) people's concerns over crime by saying we will deliver justice towards (violent) criminals. You can also address people who care about police brutality by emphasizing justice for them and against cops. And yeah you'll still piss off police, but fuck the police.
Pursue justice against white collar criminals and fraudsters. Justice for people who cannot afford medication they need to live with dignity. Etc etc etc. You can frame basically every Democratic priority out of this framework and you can put the GOP on the defensive. AIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Ah, but doing this sort of thing is hard, and requires taking a stand, pissing off rich and influential donors, and most importantly, may make it so Democratic leadership can’t just keep things coasting for awhile while blaming things on anyone except themselves.
"Go down, kick ass, and set yourselves up as gods, that's our Prime Directive!"
I dont think inaaction from government on defund has anything to do with some activists having different goals from other activists because theyre not really doing anything any of the activists want. They're doing what they want to do, which is more money.
The problem with the "fund the police" line from a political point of view is that it cedes the attack to the GOP and acts as if the bullshit attack was correct. Because centrist Dems want to blame the left for their failures. That's why including the fund the police line was frustrating to me.
Pivot away and attack the GOP! Have a theme! Believe in things!
As I've said for years Democrats should unify everything around the idea of justice. And make positive frames in that context for popular positions. And the best thing is you can argue for both things from the justice framework. You can address (suburban white) people's concerns over crime by saying we will deliver justice towards (violent) criminals. You can also address people who care about police brutality by emphasizing justice for them and against cops. And yeah you'll still piss off police, but fuck the police.
Pursue justice against white collar criminals and fraudsters. Justice for people who cannot afford medication they need to live with dignity. Etc etc etc. You can frame basically every Democratic priority out of this framework and you can put the GOP on the defensive. AIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
"Just Society" was Trudeau's thing opposite LBJ's "Great Society", and for some reason that means you aren't supposed to recycle slogans after FDR because plagiarism or something.
Whether or not people are overreacting to the changes is a separate issues from the fact that those changes seem to be very real from the data we have.
I believe people are way overreacting and it’s because they hear “30% increase” and not “it’s the level it was when you were a 22 year old”
Edit: I was way off on the 2019 levels, yes
I think there are going to be some interesting dynamics here based on the types of crimes people are falling victim to, because they were all hit differently by the pandemic.
Looking at California specific data, homicides spiked, as well as aggravated assault (okay) and motor vehicle theft (???), while everything else fell since 2019. Assaults are kind of weighted heavily by folks getting into fights, which makes it more likely to be a crime you put yourself into a position to be victimized by. (Not to victim blame, but there's a difference between a guy getting mugged and a guy getting drunk and arguing with someone until the fists come out in terms of social perception of avoidability.)
So aside from homicide, the kinds of crime where you're minding your own business and you get victimized have uniformly fallen (including domestic violence, which I found surprising).
So we're in a situation where you are hearing about all this crime happening in the news, but also hearing about a lot less crime happening to your friends and acquaintances. And I guess people trust the news over their own lying eyes?
There isn't much good racial breakdown from primary sources because crime reporting is lol, but proxy data suggests that these crime trends are hitting different races about equally, at least in Cali. Aside from Hispanics, who saw crime plummet during the pandemic.
It's all fascinating and kinda weird.
AFAIK it's specifically a violent crime thing. Everything going on is just really weird honestly and no one seems to have any idea why it's happening and why this specific way. Crime data is often shaky too but from my understanding murders generally get looked at as a pretty accurate measurement because they are the hardest to be under and over counted. And as noted above, the murder rate is doing some bad things right now.
And people remember big incidents and aren't good at feeling probabilities and If-It-Bleeds-It-Leads still holds, so that shapes public perception of what is going on. Murders being seemingly legitimately up a lot makes people feel more unsafe. And people legitimately want the cops to do their jobs and stop crime. So when they feel unsafe, you get polling like we are seeing. Which are some pretty big shifts.
There's much better ways to message all this though, as Ebum points out above.
Whether or not people are overreacting to the changes is a separate issues from the fact that those changes seem to be very real from the data we have.
I believe people are way overreacting and it’s because they hear “30% increase” and not “it’s the level it was when you were a 22 year old”
Edit: I was way off on the 2019 levels, yes
I think there are going to be some interesting dynamics here based on the types of crimes people are falling victim to, because they were all hit differently by the pandemic.
Looking at California specific data, homicides spiked, as well as aggravated assault (okay) and motor vehicle theft (???), while everything else fell since 2019. Assaults are kind of weighted heavily by folks getting into fights, which makes it more likely to be a crime you put yourself into a position to be victimized by. (Not to victim blame, but there's a difference between a guy getting mugged and a guy getting drunk and arguing with someone until the fists come out in terms of social perception of avoidability.)
So aside from homicide, the kinds of crime where you're minding your own business and you get victimized have uniformly fallen (including domestic violence, which I found surprising).
So we're in a situation where you are hearing about all this crime happening in the news, but also hearing about a lot less crime happening to your friends and acquaintances. And I guess people trust the news over their own lying eyes?
There isn't much good racial breakdown from primary sources because crime reporting is lol, but proxy data suggests that these crime trends are hitting different races about equally, at least in Cali. Aside from Hispanics, who saw crime plummet during the pandemic.
It's all fascinating and kinda weird.
AFAIK it's specifically a violent crime thing. Everything going on is just really weird honestly and no one seems to have any idea why it's happening and why this specific way. Crime data is often shaky too but from my understanding murders generally get looked at as a pretty accurate measurement because they are the hardest to be under and over counted. And as noted above, the murder rate is doing some bad things right now.
And people remember big incidents and aren't good at feeling probabilities and If-It-Bleeds-It-Leads still holds, so that shapes public perception of what is going on. Murders being seemingly legitimately up a lot makes people feel more unsafe. And people legitimately want the cops to do their jobs and stop crime. So when they feel unsafe, you get polling like we are seeing. Which are some pretty big shifts.
There's much better ways to message all this though, as Ebum points out above.
Violent crime is down overall, same as property crime. It's explicitly homicides that have risen.
Which... of all the crimes to have a wave, I'd rather be burgled.
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
FUND the police is not out of touch with the majority of Americans, as much as many folks here would like for it to be.
He could have navigated it better, but that probably won him more votes than it lost him. Defund the police is a bad slogan standing in front of a really great set of policies that lots of people will never hear because defunding the police is such a vastly unpopular string of words for a majority of Americans across all racial and socioeconomic statuses.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
FUND the police is not out of touch with the majority of Americans, as much as many folks here would like for it to be.
He could have navigated it better, but that probably won him more votes than it lost him. Defund the police is a bad slogan standing in front of a really great set of policies that lots of people will never hear because defunding the police is such a vastly unpopular string of words for a majority of Americans across all racial and socioeconomic statuses.
Nobody votes on that though, is the thing. Median voter theorem is wrong.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
is that it's far too fucking easy to take it to the most extreme bullshit, even if none of the proponents want to do that (that being doing away with the police)
I have had conversations with different people on this forum where I was told that defund the police absolutely means abolishing all police forces forever, and also by someone else that it absolutely did not mean that. I get that opponents are going to interpret things as the worst possible version, but this is true in all political arenas and arguments. It's why political campaigns keep hammering home their specific messaging, to prevent those kinds of interpretations. But it's not like this opinion doesn't exist, or even that there is widespread agreement on what it DOES mean.
The lack of unity of what exactly it means by proponents has also been a major reason why the right has been able to paint it as meaning the most extreme. Now, it also doesn't that our media is so fucking shitty and does most of the GOPs work for them, but when both the media and the GOP have a unified definition and the left doesn't, everyone just picks up on the bullshit being old by the GOP. It's one or the reasons why bullshit like cancel culture and outrage against CRT go anywhere, despite the right having no fucking clue on what those two things really mean. They just keep shouting it over and over again, until enough people that don't think things through critically take their word for it.
Whether or not people are overreacting to the changes is a separate issues from the fact that those changes seem to be very real from the data we have.
I believe people are way overreacting and it’s because they hear “30% increase” and not “it’s the level it was when you were a 22 year old”
Edit: I was way off on the 2019 levels, yes
I think there are going to be some interesting dynamics here based on the types of crimes people are falling victim to, because they were all hit differently by the pandemic.
Looking at California specific data, homicides spiked, as well as aggravated assault (okay) and motor vehicle theft (???), while everything else fell since 2019. Assaults are kind of weighted heavily by folks getting into fights, which makes it more likely to be a crime you put yourself into a position to be victimized by. (Not to victim blame, but there's a difference between a guy getting mugged and a guy getting drunk and arguing with someone until the fists come out in terms of social perception of avoidability.)
So aside from homicide, the kinds of crime where you're minding your own business and you get victimized have uniformly fallen (including domestic violence, which I found surprising).
So we're in a situation where you are hearing about all this crime happening in the news, but also hearing about a lot less crime happening to your friends and acquaintances. And I guess people trust the news over their own lying eyes?
There isn't much good racial breakdown from primary sources because crime reporting is lol, but proxy data suggests that these crime trends are hitting different races about equally, at least in Cali. Aside from Hispanics, who saw crime plummet during the pandemic.
It's all fascinating and kinda weird.
I'm not in the US. Do people routinely hear about their friends being victims of crime?
Last time I heard about any friend, colleague, family member, or acquaintance being a victim of a crime was pre-covid (theft of electrical bicycle battery).
It's so infrequent that it's impossible to infer general frequency of crime through my own social circle.
(And would probably be a bad idea to do anyway. Anecdotes are not data.)
Whether or not people are overreacting to the changes is a separate issues from the fact that those changes seem to be very real from the data we have.
I believe people are way overreacting and it’s because they hear “30% increase” and not “it’s the level it was when you were a 22 year old”
Edit: I was way off on the 2019 levels, yes
I think there are going to be some interesting dynamics here based on the types of crimes people are falling victim to, because they were all hit differently by the pandemic.
Looking at California specific data, homicides spiked, as well as aggravated assault (okay) and motor vehicle theft (???), while everything else fell since 2019. Assaults are kind of weighted heavily by folks getting into fights, which makes it more likely to be a crime you put yourself into a position to be victimized by. (Not to victim blame, but there's a difference between a guy getting mugged and a guy getting drunk and arguing with someone until the fists come out in terms of social perception of avoidability.)
So aside from homicide, the kinds of crime where you're minding your own business and you get victimized have uniformly fallen (including domestic violence, which I found surprising).
So we're in a situation where you are hearing about all this crime happening in the news, but also hearing about a lot less crime happening to your friends and acquaintances. And I guess people trust the news over their own lying eyes?
There isn't much good racial breakdown from primary sources because crime reporting is lol, but proxy data suggests that these crime trends are hitting different races about equally, at least in Cali. Aside from Hispanics, who saw crime plummet during the pandemic.
It's all fascinating and kinda weird.
I'm not in the US. Do people routinely hear about their friends being victims of crime?
Last time I heard about any friend, colleague, family member, or acquaintance being a victim of a crime was pre-covid (theft of electrical bicycle battery).
It's so infrequent that it's impossible to infer general frequency of crime through my own social circle.
(And would probably be a bad idea to do anyway. Anecdotes are not data.)
We count made up or far-removed people in Facebook group chain-email-equivalent posts, right?
Whether or not people are overreacting to the changes is a separate issues from the fact that those changes seem to be very real from the data we have.
I believe people are way overreacting and it’s because they hear “30% increase” and not “it’s the level it was when you were a 22 year old”
Edit: I was way off on the 2019 levels, yes
I think there are going to be some interesting dynamics here based on the types of crimes people are falling victim to, because they were all hit differently by the pandemic.
Looking at California specific data, homicides spiked, as well as aggravated assault (okay) and motor vehicle theft (???), while everything else fell since 2019. Assaults are kind of weighted heavily by folks getting into fights, which makes it more likely to be a crime you put yourself into a position to be victimized by. (Not to victim blame, but there's a difference between a guy getting mugged and a guy getting drunk and arguing with someone until the fists come out in terms of social perception of avoidability.)
So aside from homicide, the kinds of crime where you're minding your own business and you get victimized have uniformly fallen (including domestic violence, which I found surprising).
So we're in a situation where you are hearing about all this crime happening in the news, but also hearing about a lot less crime happening to your friends and acquaintances. And I guess people trust the news over their own lying eyes?
There isn't much good racial breakdown from primary sources because crime reporting is lol, but proxy data suggests that these crime trends are hitting different races about equally, at least in Cali. Aside from Hispanics, who saw crime plummet during the pandemic.
It's all fascinating and kinda weird.
I'm not in the US. Do people routinely hear about their friends being victims of crime?
Last time I heard about any friend, colleague, family member, or acquaintance being a victim of a crime was pre-covid (theft of electrical bicycle battery).
It's so infrequent that it's impossible to infer general frequency of crime through my own social circle.
(And would probably be a bad idea to do anyway. Anecdotes are not data.)
We count made up or far-removed people in Facebook group chain-email-equivalent posts, right?
Whether or not people are overreacting to the changes is a separate issues from the fact that those changes seem to be very real from the data we have.
I believe people are way overreacting and it’s because they hear “30% increase” and not “it’s the level it was when you were a 22 year old”
Edit: I was way off on the 2019 levels, yes
I think there are going to be some interesting dynamics here based on the types of crimes people are falling victim to, because they were all hit differently by the pandemic.
Looking at California specific data, homicides spiked, as well as aggravated assault (okay) and motor vehicle theft (???), while everything else fell since 2019. Assaults are kind of weighted heavily by folks getting into fights, which makes it more likely to be a crime you put yourself into a position to be victimized by. (Not to victim blame, but there's a difference between a guy getting mugged and a guy getting drunk and arguing with someone until the fists come out in terms of social perception of avoidability.)
So aside from homicide, the kinds of crime where you're minding your own business and you get victimized have uniformly fallen (including domestic violence, which I found surprising).
So we're in a situation where you are hearing about all this crime happening in the news, but also hearing about a lot less crime happening to your friends and acquaintances. And I guess people trust the news over their own lying eyes?
There isn't much good racial breakdown from primary sources because crime reporting is lol, but proxy data suggests that these crime trends are hitting different races about equally, at least in Cali. Aside from Hispanics, who saw crime plummet during the pandemic.
It's all fascinating and kinda weird.
I'm not in the US. Do people routinely hear about their friends being victims of crime?
Last time I heard about any friend, colleague, family member, or acquaintance being a victim of a crime was pre-covid (theft of electrical bicycle battery).
It's so infrequent that it's impossible to infer general frequency of crime through my own social circle.
(And would probably be a bad idea to do anyway. Anecdotes are not data.)
We count made up or far-removed people in Facebook group chain-email-equivalent posts, right?
Posts
Which is, as we've talked about before, not new either. And given what appears to be a rise in violent crimes, not really all that strange either.
I'd absolutely like to see income disparity being represented on that poll because I'll take a bet that they're not actually polling the people most vulnerable to police violence and abuse. By that I mean poor people.
It's Pew. Feel free to click through it's methodology. They publish it.
The rise to 2019 levels?
Mind, I’m not disputing the polling, I’m pissed about the unwarranted freak out
The party that’s all about “keeping things the way they are” will always be opposed by a coalition of people that want things to change, and human nature makes us skeptical of the changers always
Yeah there's no mention about relative wealth among the participants that I can see through a quick skim.
No. The murder rate spiked like 30% in 2020, which is I believe the largest change on record in either direction. AFAIK it goes back to levels from the 90s.
Whether or not people are overreacting to the changes is a separate issues from the fact that those changes seem to be very real from the data we have.
Uh huh, I’m not disputing it went up 30% YoY, I’m pissed it’s not presented this way tho
Given black and hispanic democrats are more likely then white democrats to back increases in police funding, it seems unlikely that it's an income-based split.
I literally presented it that way in words. Notice how if you draw a horizontal line from the end of that graph it doesn't hit a comparable level till the late 90s. Your graph literally shows what I've been saying.
At this point it feels like the problem is not how the data is presented but that the data is inconvenient.
I believe people are way overreacting and it’s because they hear “30% increase” and not “it’s the level it was when you were a 22 year old”
Edit: I was way off on the 2019 levels, yes
Or he could actually believe it? His messaging on this has been consistent since the primaries.
That Nazi CPAC that Taylor-Green and Gosar went to featured cheering for Russia and then the crowd chanting Putin Putin Putin shortly before Marg went on stage. It's beyond repulsive.
Either way, the works continues.
I think it's pretty likely he believes it given it's the default, intuitive position that everybody believes until they study the issue, but I also think that "what a politician truly believes" is generally not useful analysis. This is especially true in a speech like this, where Biden can talk on whatever he wants so anything he chooses to talk about will be strategic; I'm sure he believes in plenty of things that were cut.
And that’s very mild compared to the first transcripts I saw from speeches there
BLM phrasing it that way is fine but any legislative push should be framed as "Enhancing" the police budget, and indeed ending up with slightly more funding - it's just a lot less of it goes to cops now
It's not really surprising and has been discussed in the topical threads around police and crime. While minorities may be more likely to be victims of police violence, they are also much more likely to be victims of violent crime than white people.
That's the reason the Clinton crime bill generally had widespread support from black voters - it was their communities that had drug and gang problems and their kids / grandkids who were getting murdered in the streets.
Considering you get a range of about a dozen different answers when you ask what the 'Defund the police' slogan means in actual policy or implementation AND it polls so poorly it's a bad slogan and no surprise it's treated like political kryptonite.
Although that still doesn't excuse using 'fund the police' as a slogan.
-We have the first issue where our media is just fuck awful on the whole thing. This includes the news media being super eager to carry water for police officers and organizations that should be run out of ton because they have no fucking business being law enforcement. It also includes our entertainment media, which not only makes propaganda for cops, but is full of intellectually lazy hacks that often use scripts where there is a violent crime, usually murder, the bad guy is super dangerous, there is a gun fight and the bad guy dies. This is usually a problem because you do get a number of people that can not tell the difference between fact and bullshit fiction. They do not internalize that their favorite cop show is based on mostly bullshit because the US city it takes place in, is nowhere near that violent and the cops there are nowhere near that respectable or honest.
-The pandemic has caused a spike in crime. We're social animals, so the whole isolation thing was likely going to cause some people to become mentally unstable and do illegal things. Also the US has been pretty shit at the whole social welfare thing, so the economic problems that the rich keep going to get themselves another yacht, being ratcheted up further, likely resulted in desperate people having to resort to theft. Then there is the whole thing of entitled ass conservatives being assholes, some going so far as to be violent about their butthurt.
-Views on law enforced are nuanced. The problem with defund the police, unlike home the homeless, is that it's far too fucking easy to take it to the most extreme bullshit, even if none of the proponents want to do that (that being doing away with the police), where the homeless one gets harder because there are ways to make the assholes trip over their dicks on that. Most people don't want the cops beating up people, even if the person being beaten up has committed a crime. Some that might be okay with such unacceptable behavior, still have a hardline. Kid that stole a candy bar, that cop is a fucking monster and should be fired. Asshole that shot and killed their former partner for breaking up with them, totally deserved the beating. People don't want the cops all up in their business, nor to be fucked over because the cops are essentially being used as revenue collection agents. On the other hand, people absolutely want cops to deal with people that are committing crimes because they don't want people to be openly stealing, beating or murdering them.
Personally, not only do I think we sink too much money into police budgets, let the cops get away with too much because they are enforcing the law and really, should be investing in other agencies to deal with certain problems, rather than sending in the police, who are not an appropriate tool to use for those issues.
All that said, it gets complicated because you do have to thread the needle where you reign in the abuse, but have the public reassured that there are still going to be a properly funded law enforcement to deal with the crooks. This of course is made harder because you not only have people that do not understand how things actually are (they think their is more social disorder than there actually is, probably because they are shitty people that can't imagine that most people aren't assholes like them, but also the media and defunded education system has left us with a host of people that do not understand that their police issues are mostly a local thing. Sure the feds can do some things on that front and the states can do more, but most of the of the issues really need to be tackled at the local level because of how our government is setup.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
"Enhance" is a solid buzzword to rally behind. Decouple it from policing in general and call them "Enhanced Communities" where the money gets diverted to mental health care, social workers, homeless programs etc. Then when those programs succeed like they generally do, everyone will want to be an enhanced community.
I think there are going to be some interesting dynamics here based on the types of crimes people are falling victim to, because they were all hit differently by the pandemic.
Looking at California specific data, homicides spiked, as well as aggravated assault (okay) and motor vehicle theft (???), while everything else fell since 2019. Assaults are kind of weighted heavily by folks getting into fights, which makes it more likely to be a crime you put yourself into a position to be victimized by. (Not to victim blame, but there's a difference between a guy getting mugged and a guy getting drunk and arguing with someone until the fists come out in terms of social perception of avoidability.)
So aside from homicide, the kinds of crime where you're minding your own business and you get victimized have uniformly fallen (including domestic violence, which I found surprising).
So we're in a situation where you are hearing about all this crime happening in the news, but also hearing about a lot less crime happening to your friends and acquaintances. And I guess people trust the news over their own lying eyes?
There isn't much good racial breakdown from primary sources because crime reporting is lol, but proxy data suggests that these crime trends are hitting different races about equally, at least in Cali. Aside from Hispanics, who saw crime plummet during the pandemic.
It's all fascinating and kinda weird.
I mean we know this already from how Biden is rated on the economy despite the US having one of its best economies fucking ever. The news has their entire body on the scale against the admin and people are easily lead by the nose.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Pivot away and attack the GOP! Have a theme! Believe in things!
As I've said for years Democrats should unify everything around the idea of justice. And make positive frames in that context for popular positions. And the best thing is you can argue for both things from the justice framework. You can address (suburban white) people's concerns over crime by saying we will deliver justice towards (violent) criminals. You can also address people who care about police brutality by emphasizing justice for them and against cops. And yeah you'll still piss off police, but fuck the police.
Pursue justice against white collar criminals and fraudsters. Justice for people who cannot afford medication they need to live with dignity. Etc etc etc. You can frame basically every Democratic priority out of this framework and you can put the GOP on the defensive. AIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
I have had conversations with different people on this forum where I was told that defund the police absolutely means abolishing all police forces forever, and also by someone else that it absolutely did not mean that. I get that opponents are going to interpret things as the worst possible version, but this is true in all political arenas and arguments. It's why political campaigns keep hammering home their specific messaging, to prevent those kinds of interpretations. But it's not like this opinion doesn't exist, or even that there is widespread agreement on what it DOES mean.
Ah, but doing this sort of thing is hard, and requires taking a stand, pissing off rich and influential donors, and most importantly, may make it so Democratic leadership can’t just keep things coasting for awhile while blaming things on anyone except themselves.
"Just Society" was Trudeau's thing opposite LBJ's "Great Society", and for some reason that means you aren't supposed to recycle slogans after FDR because plagiarism or something.
AFAIK it's specifically a violent crime thing. Everything going on is just really weird honestly and no one seems to have any idea why it's happening and why this specific way. Crime data is often shaky too but from my understanding murders generally get looked at as a pretty accurate measurement because they are the hardest to be under and over counted. And as noted above, the murder rate is doing some bad things right now.
And people remember big incidents and aren't good at feeling probabilities and If-It-Bleeds-It-Leads still holds, so that shapes public perception of what is going on. Murders being seemingly legitimately up a lot makes people feel more unsafe. And people legitimately want the cops to do their jobs and stop crime. So when they feel unsafe, you get polling like we are seeing. Which are some pretty big shifts.
There's much better ways to message all this though, as Ebum points out above.
I want to see Joe Biden on Wheel of Fortune with FU__ The Police.
Violent crime is down overall, same as property crime. It's explicitly homicides that have risen.
Which... of all the crimes to have a wave, I'd rather be burgled.
He could have navigated it better, but that probably won him more votes than it lost him. Defund the police is a bad slogan standing in front of a really great set of policies that lots of people will never hear because defunding the police is such a vastly unpopular string of words for a majority of Americans across all racial and socioeconomic statuses.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Nobody votes on that though, is the thing. Median voter theorem is wrong.
The lack of unity of what exactly it means by proponents has also been a major reason why the right has been able to paint it as meaning the most extreme. Now, it also doesn't that our media is so fucking shitty and does most of the GOPs work for them, but when both the media and the GOP have a unified definition and the left doesn't, everyone just picks up on the bullshit being old by the GOP. It's one or the reasons why bullshit like cancel culture and outrage against CRT go anywhere, despite the right having no fucking clue on what those two things really mean. They just keep shouting it over and over again, until enough people that don't think things through critically take their word for it.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
I'm not in the US. Do people routinely hear about their friends being victims of crime?
Last time I heard about any friend, colleague, family member, or acquaintance being a victim of a crime was pre-covid (theft of electrical bicycle battery).
It's so infrequent that it's impossible to infer general frequency of crime through my own social circle.
(And would probably be a bad idea to do anyway. Anecdotes are not data.)
We count made up or far-removed people in Facebook group chain-email-equivalent posts, right?
I'm not on Facebook, so I don't.
Exactly