Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
You do know that, at least today, Obama’s slogans are kind of seen as a joke, right? HOPE in big bold letters was perfectly fine in 2008, but what did it actually mean? What were people HOP Eing for? Did they even get it?
HOPE is just about the most useless slogan on earth. It could mean anything. HOPE for an end to police brutality, sure. Or your slogan could be HOPE for a white ethnostate.
It’s a buzzword that you could attach to literally anything.
I don’t think MAGA is vague at all, personally. Make America Great Again is one hell of a dogwhistle. The only time it could have been “great” before was... when people had less rights.
Edited by smokeycut on Dec 11th 2020 at 10:08:58 AM
Thing is “Defund the police” isn’t a slogan for politicians, it’s not like Democrat lawmakers have been using it.
That’s the issue here, we’re looking at a slogan that’s designed for activists to rally around and use to put pressure on politicians, but we’re treating it like a slogan for politicians to get popular with the public (because that’s what Fox treats it as).
That’s part of what makes me uncomfortable with all the politicians calling for the slogan to not be used, I agree that it’s not popular with the public, but it’s not a slogan made by or used by Democrat politicians, and I’m not sure if they should be telling activists what they can and cannot say.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
x2 Oh sure, it's a joke today, but it was super effective in '08. And again, Obama didn't simply hide on the vagueness of Hope and Change; Hope and Change was a pretty door to the room that was his Campaign's actual ideas. And again, it worked.
As we've seen in '08, '16 and to a lesser extent '20, Slogans whether they're for Politicians or People do effect elections. And Slogans are an organic thing people make and use, they might as well be accessible to all and effective with the true neutral/independent voters.
Edited by DingoWalley1 on Dec 11th 2020 at 10:11:54 AM
x2 And as we saw with Voters to Politicians, the grand majority of Voters despise the message and voted for the Politicians who actively despised it. Seriously, when we can't even win the Senate Seat in MAINE, the slogan sucks. Biden won in part because he actively despised it. If he were all for it, he could have easily lost and we'd have 4 more years of Trump.
Because of the 'only two sides' nature of American politics, left-wing activism will be taken as indicative of what the left wing, and therefore Democrats, want to do. Ignoring that is not going to help, I don't think. Who is it going to influence, how, why? If anybody wants to be actually effective at swaying opinion, those questions have to be asked, regardless of whether you're a street level activist or running for President.
The "it's a slogan from activists" is not helpful when official reps are using it. AOC has defended it, Ilhan Omar and Cori Bush have defended it...it does get used and it isn't popular, even among minority communities.
At least with Defund The Police, people know what you’re talking about.
EDIT: Police The Police is better, though I’m unsure if it’ll gain traction, and if the actual goals are different or not.
But it's not clear. "Defund means Defund" means nothing. Do you want to strip police departments of funding so they can't afford military grade weapons? Greater accountability? Do you want to abolish them? Or do you still want police and transfer resources to social services? I have had people argue each one to me and say it's 100 percent clear.
I also repeat that police department funding has little to do with them murdering black people and escaping accountability for it. That's not fixed by defunding.
I get that the slogan comes from a place of hurting and wanting to see justice, and I'm not super comfortable policing activists to tell them what they can or cannot say, but as far as "defund the police" goes, all the evidence we have suggests it's not an effective slogan
with most voters. Even among black people, it's more popular than not but doesn't have over 50% favorability. So while obviously activists are voters, what they want (or more specifically, the messaging that they want) does not necessarily represent what most voters want or prefer.
Having said all that, I'm not sure how to fix the problem of democrats being associated with that slogan even if they aren't running on it. Would coming up with new ones be enough?
No, but defunding them would at least stop them from firing military grade weapons at civilians and attacking people with taser shields and tear gas.
EDIT: How about this, how does “Stop Committing War Crimes Against American Citizens” sound? Too edgy? Too abrasive for the average voter?
Edited by smokeycut on Dec 11th 2020 at 10:24:22 AM
Tulsi Gabbard Pushes Bill to Block Transgender Girls from Women's Sports
Here we go again.
"Yup. That tasted purple."There is far more at work than a slogan at play to ascribe a political movement's failure or success solely to it.
Would a "catchy" slogan help? Sure, why not.
Would no "catchy" slogan work? Also yes.
"Defund the Police", regardless of whose feelings it hurts for "UHHH TOO VAGUE" or "UHHH NOT DESCRIPTIVE ENOUGH" or "OH MY GOD SOUNDS SO SCARY NO ONE WILL GET BEHIND IT MIGHT AS WELL JUST SEND BOMBS TO PEOPLE'S HOUSES YOU COMMIE TERRORIST!!!1!" adequately describes the change and policy that is sought.
But before even getting to hear the slogan, there's a crashing hindenburg's worth of propaganda that will label anything they desire as "too leftist", "too unamerican", "too radical" or "that's communist/socialist" that will render any slogan, movement, proposal, or idea, no matter how "good", completely ineffective due to decades and decades of casual jingoism pumped daily.
The recalcitrance is not so much against the slogan itself, it's the ideas it represents.
The U.S revolution did not succeed because someone said "Give me liberty or give me death!". Women's suffrage did not succeed because someone said "Deeds, not words". And the Civil rights movements did not succeed because someone said "We shall overcome".
Nah, fuck all that.
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes![]()
Yeah, that was brought up several pages ago, though it got kind of overshadowed by this whole "is this slogan worth using still or not?" thing.
Except that 538 article that was linked pointed out that the slogan is much less popular than the ideas behind it.
Edited by M84 on Dec 11th 2020 at 11:29:41 PM
Disgusted, but not surprised
x3 At this point I wouldn't be surprised if she did a party switch to the GOP. She's anti-LGBT and she has been openly hostile to AOC and other more progressive Dems.
This argument feels disingenuous to me when you consider the fact that people have adverse reactions to defund the police, but more favorable reactions to some of the policies that exist under that umbrella, like delegating certain responsibilities to non-police groups that are more qualified, or creating greater police accountability.
I don't think anybody has said that slogans are the only thing that matter, either.
x4
No, nothing succeeds just because of a Slogan. But more importantly, none of those slogans actively hindered the success. Where as "Defund the Police" has clearly done nothing but hurt the cause. It's akin to Free Choice activists creating and using the Slogan "Let us murder babies!".
Edited by DingoWalley1 on Dec 11th 2020 at 10:32:11 AM
Also, from my perspective, "defund the police" is not self-explanatory. All that communicates is "let's take money away from the police", which maybe that sounds appealing to you as a high-information voter, but I don't think the average voter automatically sees any benefit to that. From their perspective, the core issue is not how much money the police gets necessarily but the fact that they have no accountability and go about their job in a very biased and needlessly violent and harmful way. Most people do not agree with police abolition, they just want the police to do their job in a constructive way.
It doesn't make any sense anyway. You don't solve problems by taking away money.
You wouldn't fix potholes in the road by cutting infrastructure funding.
You don't solve problems with public schools with outdated textbooks and oversized classrooms by cutting their funding.
Edited by M84 on Dec 11th 2020 at 11:41:49 PM
Disgusted, but not surprisedEDIT: How about this, how does “Stop Committing War Crimes Against American Citizens” sound? Too edgy? Too abrasive for the average voter?
Most high profile police murders were not committed by military grade weapons.
And no, people do not hear "Defund the Police" and instantly think "Aha, it means a reasonable allocation of resources so that they simply cannot afford military grade weaponry, obviously."
When people believe policing needs to change, but "defunding" is an unpopular slogan even when popular sentiment was with the protesters, maybe it's time to rethink it.
The ideas it represents are popular. But welcome to America where people hate Obamacare but love the Affordable Care Act. Branding matters.
Edited by Lightysnake on Dec 11th 2020 at 7:45:58 AM
Defending a slogan and using it are not the same thing. Yes there’s a case to be made that left-wing Democrat politicians should have distanced themselves from it more, but that’s very different from the argument that they are responsible for the slogan as if they’re the ones who created and spread it.
A slogan from activists isn’t always meant to be popular, it can be meant to be a conversation starts and a Overton Window dragger. It’s outrageous on purpose, it’s a political action version of a poster that says “SEX!!!” at the top then talks about something else. It draws you in by being so in your face you can’t ignore the conversation.
Defund the police might not be popular, but looking at police funding as a leaver for reform to policing is now part of the conversation.
I doubt there are more than a handful of democrats who despise the idea of reducing police funding, the majority might disagree with it, but the idea is more popular now then it’s been for a long time, some cities have reduced or reallocated funding, others have frozen or reduced increases in funding.
Maine was down to a lot more than one slogan that doesn’t go over well with voters, it was down to Collins being a very effective politician, bothsideism making Collins look good and the Supreme Court vote allowing her to tout her ‘maverick’ status without actually doing anything to impact things.
Edited by Silasw on Dec 11th 2020 at 3:49:38 PM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranA slogan from activists isn’t always meant to be popular, it can be meant to be a conversation starts and a Overton Window dragger. It’s outrageous on purpose, it’s a political action version of a poster that says “SEX!!!” at the top then talks about something else. It draws you in by being so in your face you can’t ignore the conversation.
Activists can be criticized for how they choose to do activism. Setting aside that the Overton Window is only questionably a thing, it's not always a conversation started. Sometimes, it's a conversation ender when the slogan is so deceptive and toxic nobody wants to listen to it. Because that's what we're seeing, it's like a reverse of the GOP position of sneaking in unpopular policy positions via things like "school choice" or "right to work." It's putting in popular policy positions under terrible slogans and then reacting with utter petulance when being informed of this.
And where's it going now without congressional seats?

MAGA is vague as hell, and it worked to a disturbing degree.
"Defund the Police" is smack dab in the Uncanny Valley of slogans. Too specific to allow people to project whatever they want on it, and too vague for people to get without wasting time explaining what you really mean.
Edited by M84 on Dec 11th 2020 at 11:07:35 PM
Disgusted, but not surprised