Barack Obama on Broad Slogans: "You lose people with 'snappy' slogans like 'defund the police'"

[Gotdatmoney]

"

Dude, if the individual suggested actions WITHIN defund the policy poll highly, you have an actual opportunity to do something about them. But instead they're hidden inside of an idiotic slogan that nearly everyone misinterprets.

You do you, but I'm all for effective messaging. If you wanna turn your nose up at the plebs who don't have time to deep dive research into this shit because they're desperately just trying to get through the day and make ends meet, that's fine.

Click to shrink...

Don't fucking make a discussion about police not murdering black people that we have had for decades to no avail under every definition in existence into "me and my elitism being the problem". You can fuck all the way off with that first of all.

Second, they can drop the defund slogan all they want. The reason police reform hasn't happened is because Demcocrats and the general public that isn't harassed by the police do not want it to change. That's it. It is not deeper than than that.

 

[KoopaTheCasual]

He's not wrong. I know a guy who used "HOPE" and "CHANGE" as slogans and he lost people (when he started protecting the police).

Click to shrink...

Honestly, it's all of this.

 

[Fart Master]

Thanks for your input, war criminal.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but i feel like these people that are screaming "Defund the police" are maybe in a better position to know what kind of stuff they want to yell than... well, Obama ?

Click to shrink...

I think you're missing his point. You wanna get stuff done? You can't alienate 95% percent of the country.

 

[Mezentine]

Still bewilders me that people honestly believe the issue here is the actual framing or phrasing of a slogan, and people who were never going to give an inch no matter what slogan you used.

Click to shrink...

If people are never going to give an inch, then what's the point of anything we're even talking about? Again I'm genuinely not being sarcastic, what do people think is actually going to work? If it's literally making politicians so afraid, possibly for their personal safety, so that they have literally no choice but to act on a demand that will also likely cost them their re-election chances, well, I'm not trying to bait anyone into that position, that may be what's necessary. But I kind of think we need to commit to that

 

[Eeyore]

Social services can't even protect abused children, watch The Trials of Gabriel Fernandez on Netflix. He died because when the teachers reported his abuse, the police handed it over to social services. If they had arrested the parents instead, he would be alive today.

Click to shrink...

I wonder what the difference between the two is in terms of funding. And if the other option isn't good we come up with something else, we don't go back to the department that has proven it can't handle themselves either.

I think you're missing his point. You wanna get stuff done? You can't alienate 95% percent of the country.

Click to shrink...

He doesn't want anything done on this topic.

 

[KarmaCow]

When you have to explain what you actually want, that's a losing battle for the misinformation battle that is said in less words

Click to shrink...

Not as a good as "Help Our Police" from the last thread about this but "Educate the Police" is real close for accidental absurdist comedy.

edit: I missed "Optimize the Police", that's some good Robocop language.

 

[gogosox82]

Rights for black people have never been popular so this not being popular should surprise no one. The slogan is fine. Its a clear message and demand on what protestors want. Its not 'popular' but its not meant to be. This is not for some politician like Obama to come in and get popular off of only to discard it when its not politically useful anymore. This is a demand to action and a fight for black people's lives.

 

[Deleted member 11413]

I know that but that's not what defund actually means. And if somebody understand defund as completely withdrawing funding from police that's fair.

Especially when you had groups who literally wanted to defund police, not reduce funding.

Click to shrink...

Then negotiate with them. Come to the table from a position of good faith and hash out a compromise. The implication of these kinds of statements is that people asking for complete withdrawal of funds from police rather than partial withdrawal of funds somehow don't matter to the discussion because they are coming from a position that is different from your own.

Instead we get concern trolling and handwringing about messaging and no good faith attempts to actually discuss the issue with those affected.

 

[Luminish]

Optimise the Police is better, even Restructure the Police is an improvement.

Click to shrink...

If you're already in power and need to pacify people into allowing change, sure, but what do you think that would do as a demand from a protest? All that does is leave open the people in power to do whatever the fuck they want and still say they satisified the protests demands.

It's incredible to me people can't understand the different context between a protest demand and a marketing slogan. Making "defund the police" have political pressure is the goal, not the method.

Obama might as well be saying "you lose voters with non-white candidates so I won't run for president". It makes no sense because Obama becoming president was his end goal, and getting a black president was one of the goals of the left.

 

[samoyed]

Social services can't even protect abused children, watch The Trials of Gabriel Fernandez on Netflix. He died because when the teachers reported his abuse, the police handed it over to social services. If they had arrested the parents instead, he would be alive today.

Click to shrink...

"If we abolished all police, those 5,000 people would be alive today. Support my campaign to abolish all police."

But no, seriously, maybe social services would be better with more funding, which we could get from defunding the police.

 

[Xaszatm]

The big issue is that we HAVE run on police reform in the past. As we can clearly see, the messaging for reform hasn't beared any fruit. That's why we are moving to more and more extremes. People ignore calls for Police Reform. They are paying attention to Defund the Police. So Defund The Police probably isn't going anywhere.

 

[madstarr12]

It doesn't matter if supporting "defund the police" is the right thing to do, if you can't win majorities in state legislatures, congress, senate, etc to elect those to make change happen, then they're just ideas that will never be implemented.

When so many places in the country are controlled by Republicans, where they can then control the narrative, you can bet that phrases like these will be used in the most negative light possible. You're trying to win majorities in this country, not just safe blue districts.

You can argue that Obama didn't do enough to tackle the issues with police, which is a valid argument and he should be pushed for it, but he also won in places that Ilhan Omar, Cori Bush, etc will never win with the messaging they currently have.

 

[Tfritz]

Except defund doesn't meant reduce and redirect funding. It means stop funding entirely.

Click to shrink...

fine, the slogan is now "reduce funding for police so we can better fund other services to address the root causes of crime" are you happy now.

 

[Pollux]

Stop being vague about your position in the criminal justice system, be honest about it so people can accurately assess your own motivations in this discussion.

Click to shrink...

Ok - as a prosecutor. First hand I can tell you, police have no business being sent out on the majority of calls. Not sure what you're disagreeing with me on with that statement.

 

[Xaszatm]

I think you're missing his point. You wanna get stuff done? You can't alienate 95% percent of the country.

Click to shrink...

I mean...we weren't getting anythinig done beforehand.

 

[Renna Hazel]

I know too many people that thought this meant get rid of the police, and they were liberals. They disagree with the slogan but agree with the idea when I explain it to them. In that sense, I agree with Obama and feel the messaging could be better. I think it's a problem when people agree with your goal but are turn off by the slogan.

 

[Rockets]

Okay.



Who is K.L. Smith? Why should we rely on their opinion?

Click to shrink...

Lmfao fr. Bro really used some random black dudes tweet as a way to trojan horse his own foolish views into this thread.

 

[Fart Master]

I wonder what the difference between the two is in terms of funding. And if the other option isn't good we come up with something else, we don't go back to the department that has proven it can't handle themselves either.

He doesn't want anything done on this topic.

Click to shrink...

You're probably right

 

[Pet]

People are not dumb. Defund isn't some mysterious word that has an obscure meaning. People who say they're "confused" do not care for the agenda itself.

Click to shrink...

If a Republican ran on defunding Planned Parenthood, wouldn't you assume that they mean to get rid of it entirely? I know I would.

If someone says defund the police but don't mean defund as in, get rid of, but rather another meaning, then it is going to be confusing, especially when most people think to "defund" something means to cut off funding to end it.

The tl;dr is that for many people, defund means the same as abolish.

 

[spam musubi]

I know too many people that thought this meant get rid of the police, and they were liberals. They disagree with the slogan but agree with the idea when I explain it to them. In that sense, I agree with Obama and feel the messaging could be better. I think it's a problem when people agree with your goal but are turn off by the slogan.

Click to shrink...

There really isn't a slogan that's going to be right-wing-propaganda-proof if dems keep going on the defensive instead of standing behind the slogan. The question is, do the dems actually want to?

 

[Davilmar]

If people are never going to give an inch, then what's the point of anything we're even talking about? Again I'm genuinely not being sarcastic, what do people think is actually going to work? If it's literally making politicians so afraid, possibly for their personal safety, so that they have literally no choice but to act on a demand that will also likely cost them their re-election chances, well, I'm not trying to bait anyone into that position, that may be what's necessary. But I kind of think we need to commit to that

Click to shrink...

Do you think people were afraid to commit to the Civil Rights Movement because people weren't going to give an inch? They marched and protested to make people uncomfortable, and understood that some people were never going to stand behind them. You think they engaged in sit-ins thinking they would be loved if they simply asked nicely? The slogan never damn matters. We spend more time finger wagging activists than actually holding elected officials and law enforcement responsible. Just like so many posters here, more concerned with niceties than standing for justice. The slogan isn't going to move someone who was never going to move an inch. You force them to compromise through protests and activism.

 

[Deleted member 11413]

Social services can't even protect abused children, watch The Trials of Gabriel Fernandez on Netflix. He died because when the teachers reported his abuse, the police handed it over to social services. If they had arrested the parents instead, he would be alive today.

Click to shrink...

Fuck off with this, police are a massive source of sexual and physical abuse, 40% of police officers are domestic abusers and police are notoriously terrible at dealing with abuse cases. As an abuse victim, I really don't appreciate you using child abuse as a shield for cops. This talking point always gets brought up and it's complete bullshit, cops perpetrate a ton of abuse and their track record on preventing abuse is abysmal.

 

[Zvonimir Boban]

Also, what you neglect with the data you cherry picked is that, at the time, a majority of Americans supported the Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act, and the Selma March. Note that the Selma March is what directly lead to the VRA's passing.

Click to shrink...

Before accusing me of cherry picking data you could have clicked the link and seen that even after the Selma marches support for MLK and civil rights protests was in the toilet.

After the Selma marches:

Harris Survey [July, 1965]
Do you feel demonstrations by Negroes have helped more or hurt more the advancement of Negro rights?

36% Helped cause
45% Hurt cause

Click to shrink...

Harris Survey [October, 1966]

All in all, do you feel the demonstrations by Negroes on civil rights have helped more or hurt more in the advancement of Negro rights?

85% Hurts Negro

15% Helps Negro

Subpopulation: Whites

Click to shrink...

Harris Survey [December, 1966]

Tell me for each man if in your opinion you think he is helping or hurting the Negro cause of civil rights... Martin Luther King?

36% Helping
50% Hurting
14% Not Sure

Subpopulation: Whites

Click to shrink...

Religion And Civil Rights [January, 1967]

Negroes would be better off if they would take advantage of the opportunities that have been made available rather than spending so much time protesting.

7% Definitely disagree
11% Probably disagree
30% Probably agree
53% Definitely agree

Click to shrink...

I'm sure they "supported" civil rights just like liberals today "support" ending police brutality, they just hate the activists that are trying to actually do it.

 

[iareharSon]

Slogans build on movements and political narratives. They build.

Initially, Black Lives Matter got a lot of pushback because, out of context, a lot of people (mostly white people) naturally assumed of course they do why are you even saying that. All lives matter.

But incident after incident, captured largely through the modern smartphone, people started to realize (again white people mainly, and not all of them) that indeed black lives did not matter that much in the US, as they were fed an almost weekly deluge of insanely violent police brutality direct to their screens. The slogan become more powerful and the innate political narrative became more and more focused. Thanks to the slogan.

It'll be the same with defund the police. The more people hear it, and the more people see cops running around with their body armour and their tanks and their drones and experimental weapons, the slogan will become more powerful, because more and more people will think "these guys really do have too much money and they are not using it well at all".

Click to shrink...

The issue with Black Lives Matter was never the messaging, and I say issue - not in terms of my problems with it (I have none), but instead the way it was received by its detractors over the years - it was the way the message was packaged and delivered. It was very in your face and disruptive, from blocking roads to storming political stages. Disruption is absolutely fine, but in the movement's infancy, it lacked the long term strategy and channels through which to weapon is that energy into tangible change and policy. I think Defund the Police is at that stage too, and similar to Black Lives Matter, whether it's under the same moniker or not, I think it'll eventually pivot to becoming a mainstay within political discount and effective in its ability to drive meaningful change.

 

[Xaszatm]

Again, the problem here is that all protest slogans aren't meant for elections. Black Lives Matter wasn't for elections. Taking a Knee wasn't for elections. Abolish ICE wasn't for elections. Impeach45 wasn't for elections. All were specific for moments at that moment in time. Some of these protests expanded such as Black Lives Matter. But none were ever meant for politicians to use as slogans. We are missing the forest for the trees in our attempts to make this slogan reachable. It's not meant to be. It's meant to be a threatening demand.

 

[Feep]

"


Don't fucking make a discussion about police not murdering black people that we have had for decades to no avail under every definition in existence into "me and my elitism being the problem". You can fuck all the way off with that first of all.

Second, they can drop the defund slogan all they want. The reason police reform hasn't happened is because Demcocrats and the general public that isn't harassed by the police do not want it to change. That's it. It is not deeper than than that.

Click to shrink...

I respect your position but completely disagree. Sorry.

Let's say Joe Biden had run an awful campaign. He didn't travel to the right states, he had awful messaging, he had a major gaffe in a debate. The election was *actually* decided by around 45,000 votes in key swing states; if he had fucked up enough, he certainly would have lost.

Your viewpoint, consistent with your current messaging, is that it wouldn't be Biden's fault. Americans should know better than to elect a fascist, racist fuckface. It doesn't matter that Biden said some dumb shit in a debate, *they're* the real problem.

And you'd be right, but assigning blame is only relevant toward *parties who can be held accountable*, who can change. I can blame gravity for killing me after stepping foot off a cliff, but gravity isn't going to change; I'm the one that has the ability to learn from and correct those mistakes.

You can get mad at police for murdering black people, and you can get mad at the people who support the police and turn a blind eye toward it. But if you have the ability to realize you could be more effective, to help save lives via political action, you should take that chance.

You are, again, perfectly justified in that anger. But your base conclusion that you shouldn't have to work on messaging is one not rooted in the reality of our modern political system. The slogan *does* matter. No politician could currently run on it and get elected. But they can definitely run on specifics within it.

Edit: With regard to your second point, it might be true, and none of this matters. But if that's the case, there's no point in arguing about it at all, so.

 

[Zvonimir Boban]

Like serously, Obama has offered virtually zero help in the fight against police brutality and he's kicking back and offering flimsy advice like we owe something to him.

Click to shrink...

Hey now, he's helped the cops plenty.

 

[GiantBreadbug]

When so many places in the country are controlled by Republicans, where they can then control the narrative, you can bet that phrases like these will be used in the most negative light possible. You're trying to win majorities in this country, not just safe blue districts.

Click to shrink...

The Democrats don't need Republicans to warp narratives in the places you're describing. They do it just fine by themselves.

This is just the Obama line on what the Democrats writ large started making their priority before the dust had even settled on this last round of elections: blame the left for any perceived electoral failures by proffering unfalsifiable rhetoric about the need to tack center. This is the dance they want us all to do into our graves.

 

[Rockets]

Again, the problem here is that all protest slogans aren't meant for elections. Black Lives Matter wasn't for elections. Taking a Knee wasn't for elections. Abolish ICE wasn't for elections. Impeach45 wasn't for elections. All were specific for moments at that moment in time. Some of these protests expanded such as Black Lives Matter. But none were ever meant for politicians to use as slogans. We are missing the forest for the trees in our attempts to make this slogan reachable. It's not meant to be. It's meant to be a threatening demand.

Click to shrink...

Couldn't have said it better myself. People want to argue over semantics. The fact is police brutality is a real issue in this country and it has been for decades. Desperate times call for desperate measures. Reform just isn't going to cut it anymore.

 

[BetterOffEd]

"Police the police"

It's not that hard.

"Defund" doesn't even directly address the issue activists are calling out. None of the police murders that made big headlines the past year required massive funding of any sort. Its entirely possible defunding the police would lead to more police murders up to a certain point, as new recruits are turned away in favor of unionized set-in-their-way seniority

If you want your slogan to address the fact that police are getting away with murder, directly address the fact that police are murdering people.

Taking the position that police shouldn't be murdering people is an extremely easy position to get the majority of America behind. Taking the position that police shouldn't exist is not...

Seriously, there's a reason the right push the "defund" slogan so thoroughly. It's almost as if they wrote the slogan and gave it to the left to help push people away from progressive causes

 

[Renna Hazel]

There really isn't a slogan that's going to be right-wing-propaganda-proof if dems keep going on the defensive instead of standing behind the slogan. The question is, do the dems actually want to?

Click to shrink...

I'm not even sure if it's propaganda in this case, I can clearly see how defund the police translates to getting rid of them in someone's mind. I didn't have much conflict with slogans like Black Lives Matter, but defund the police got the same response from a lot of people.

 

[Deleted member 11413]

Ok - as a prosecutor. First hand I can tell you, police have no business being sent out on the majority of calls. Not sure what you're disagreeing with me on with that statement.

Click to shrink...

I don't disagree with you on that statement, I just think should be very clear about your role in the justice system so that people can understand your biases in this discussion. BLM is also about the role prosecutors play in this corrupt system we have and the damage people in your position wreck on communities.

 

[Rayne]

Like serously, Obama has offered virtually zero help in the fight against police brutality and he's kicking back and offering flimsy advice like we owe something to him.

Click to shrink...

Man I've never done a 180 on someone as hard as I have Obama. That hope and change bubble burst so hard :(

 

[Deleted member 82064]

Then negotiate with them. Come to the table from a position of good faith and hash out a compromise. The implication of these kinds of statements is that people asking for complete withdrawal of funds from police rather than partial withdrawal of funds somehow don't matter to the discussion because they are coming from a position that is different from your own.

Instead we get concern trolling and handwringing about messaging and no good faith attempts to actually discuss the issue with those affected.

Click to shrink...

My gist was just that I found personally defund police stupid slogan. I always understood the context of the slogan, but I also understood how it would confuse people and how easily it would be twisted. Defund the police was not simple nor clear messaging for many people.

 

[woman]

Before accusing me of cherry picking data you could have clicked the link and seen that even after the Selma marches support for MLK and civil rights protests was in the toilet.

After the Selma marches:









I'm sure they "supported" civil rights just like liberals today "support" ending police brutality, they just hate the activists that are trying to actually do it.

Click to shrink...

And yet:

I'm not arguing that white supremacy isn't real. What I'm saying is that public opinion matters and these shifts in opinion (thanks to the protests), allowed for political action, even if white supremacy was still the norm.

The opposing argument seems to be that we should just do whatever because people are racist. That's a fallacious argument.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

I find it laughable that people are actually out here arguing you're a millimeter away from real police reform and black people are fucking it up by being stubborn and holding on to this slogan. That if they dropped this slogan right now mass police reform would occur.

I'm out, this is some fucking stupid ass bullshit and I'm not entertaining it any longer.

 

[OneEyedKing]

Fuck him.

Anyone who cares more about the PR and polling of a demand like this instead of confronting racist police head on like we should is on the side of the cops.

 

[grand]

He's not wrong. Optics can be everything. Whoever promoted "defund the police" rather than "reform the police" caused more damage than they can imagine.

 

[ExoExplorer]

Except defund doesn't meant reduce and redirect funding. It means stop funding entirely.

Click to shrink...

Then why is defund functionally different from abolish? Defund can mean removal of all funds but in this context it allows for a discussion of how far it should be taken. The average person is not going to be sitting down and going over absolute dictionary terms for this stuff.

 

[Deleted member 11413]

My gist was just that I found personally defund police stupid slogan. I always understood the context of the slogan, but I also understood how it would confuse people and how easily it would be twisted. Defund the police was not simple nor clear messaging for many people.

Click to shrink...

So what? It's a clear demand from activists. It doesn't have to be popular with the white majority of this country in order to be a legitimate demand.

 

[Pekola]

Some activists do want to abolish the police in its entirety and replace it with something that isn't founded on white supremacy. However, the actual wording that gained steam was 'Defund the Police'.

The reality is that it may not be police to abolish the police in our lifetimes. But you cannot compromise your vision or ideas before coming to the negotiating table, or you'll get a LOT less.

 

[Shiloh]

The problem is "snappy" slogans aren't sexy. Much like Sanders put infrastructure.

 

[Mezentine]

The media ecosystem is a much bigger problem than any slogan, I hope we can all agree on that

 

[BobLoblaw]

Ok, but this is a perfect example. Abolish ICE wasn't meant for votes. It was a call to abolish ICE for their inhumane prison system. Saying "it didn't sway voters" is like saying "Merry Christmas" fails to get me voters. It's meaningless to its actual purpose.

Click to shrink...

Abolish ICE is still a terrible way of saying "overhaul our entire immigration system." To the average person, it simply says "Allow illegal immigration." We absolutely do need a top to bottom overhaul of our immigration system, but we don't need a slogan that was originally designed to call attention to the asshole agents who were harassing and harming immigrants.

 

[Xaszatm]

He's not wrong. Optics can be everything. Whoever promoted "defund the police" rather than "reform the police" caused more damage than they can imagine.

Click to shrink...

...how?

 

[Wrapped in Black]

He's not wrong. With the disastrous elections in the House and Senate, the dems should rethink a whole lot of shit they're doing wrong. Defund the police was, and still is, a stupid slogan.

Click to shrink...

Maybe cuz it's not a fucking slogan?

Is "Say her name" a slogan? Or is it a rallying cry for a people who have been oppressed for hundreds of years to express their solidarity?

Not everything is a fucking political campaign. These "slogans" come from real people who witness real murder and are expressing their real reaction to it.

 

[Deleted member 11413]

He's not wrong. Optics can be everything. Whoever promoted "defund the police" rather than "reform the police" caused more damage than they can imagine.

Click to shrink...

Hm, let me think, who has done more damage for the BLM cause? The activists on the ground demanding change or the people whining about sloganeering rather than discussing solutions to the problem of police brutality? Gee I wonder.

 

[Artdayne]

Obama is a dangerous political figure because people look at him like he's the Black Pope. Those NBA players got played LOL. They gave deference to someone uninterested in our liberation.

Lebron only STARTED reading Malcolm X's book 5 days before meeting Obama. LBJ was not equipped for the moment imo.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, I would agree, and Obama broke in favor of Capital interests just as you would expect him to given his presidency.

 

[Eeyore]

He's not wrong. Optics can be everything. Whoever promoted "defund the police" rather than "reform the police" caused more damage than they can imagine.

Click to shrink...

Nothing would be different except people would be arguing about what reform means.

 

[Scottt]

Any criticism of slogans or branding should be paired with a statement on whether you agree with the policy goal or not. If you don't agree with it, then be more forthright. If you agree with it, then do the work of helping to explain it to those who have been misled about what the policy goal will entail.