BOOM!! Inadequate Dem Brand is what hurt *NOT* Defund Police!! 2nd Dem 2020 Report to say so.

[uponit7771]

Last edited Thu Jun 24, 2021, 03:23 PM - Edit history (1)

TLDR Edit: Lack of branding and messaging for new down ballot dems was the game changer not DTP.

2022 dems need to brand themselves and their opponents hard, first and often so as to not let in stupid cudgels by republicans.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/06/us/politics/democrats-2020-election.html

“Win or lose, self-described progressive or moderate, Democrats consistently raised a lack of strong Democratic Party brand as a significant concern in 2020,” the report states. “In the absence of strong party branding, the opposition latched on to G.O.P. talking points, suggesting our candidates would ‘burn down your house and take away the police.’”

This tracks and FOLLOWS an earlier DCCC Post Mortem Report says.

In the D.C.C.C. report, the committee attributed setbacks at the congressional level to a surge in turnout by Trump supporters and an inadequate Democratic response to attacks calling them police-hating socialists.

I've been saying this for months; If a candidate gets tagged with a slogan they don't ascribe to then that's inadequate definition of themselves or the opponent and not the slogans fault.

From the report itself

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/2020-postelection-analysis/871b6e27d1b7c544/full.pdf

Candidates with strong, homegrown biographies that had the resources to stay on that message throughout their campaigns tended to win

Blaming DTP for down ballot losses is like blaming COVID for killing 500,000 Americans vs Putin's Whores flaccid assed response and lying about the virus. Dems know the GQP distractive lies are coming we need to have messaging infrastructure that punches beyond them.

Lets not start with the If [GQP LIE] didn't exist they couldn't use it, puh-lease we ... KNOW ... the GQP will make shit up if it doesn't exist!!

If its not defund the police then its Biden Hates Beef or Harris is batwoman or Kerry swiftboat in regards to GQP distractive lies. Bottom line if our ***SIMPLE*** emotionally connecting messaging is clear bullshit lies from the GQP don't break through.

In the next 12 months we need a better messaging machine (float, feedback and distribution of brand) than what we have now seeing GQP have thousands of radio stations, social media machine and a dedicated 24hr cable station to push their anti democracy agenda.

We should be MUD STOMPING a party that literally worships a man as a god (even built a golden statue of him), who's god killed 500,000 Americans through lies about a virus and wants to rule as dictator of the country.

YES WE CAN Mud Stomp the GQP if we face the music about our messaging (branding, meme .. whatever) and tailor messages to PoC issues.

What say you?

tia

[hlthe2b]

1. The success of Adams for NYC mayor would argue otherwise. Just sayin

I don't deny that better messaging is needed. Nonetheless, I still agree with Obama that the point of police reform was largely lost with the term "defund the police" which gave the RW one hell of a cudgel to use against us. Seeing an increase in crime nationwide is only going to accelerate that--even among classic Democratic constituencies.

EVERYONE can appreciate a fear of rising violent crime. We have to be smarter than that and words do matter. The RW has used linguistic manipulation for decades. We can not afford to put out messages that can readily be misconstrued or "bastardized."

[Elessar Zappa]

3. But, for the most part,

it wasn’t Democrats who said “defund the police” but activists on the street. And we can’t control what slogans protestors use.

[StarfishSaver]

22. This

Funny how Republicans aren't blamed for actual CRIMES committed at their behest, in their names, with their praise and approval, and often by their own selves, but Democrats are blamed for whatever any random people on the left (whether they're Democrats) happens to say or do, even when they disavow and distance themselves from it.

[KPN]

70. ++++

[TheAnnoyedAgnostic]

71. Exactly, a complete double standard we're held to nt

[George II]

184. I think the difference is that republican voters will vote for republicans regardless...

....of the candidate or crimes committed, whereas Democrats think about what they're doing, weigh the candidates, records, and things done on their behalf, and then vote. They then vote for the Democrat in a particular race, maybe even vote for the republican, or not vote at all.

republicans blindly follow, Democrats use their brains.

[StarfishSaver]

185. Real Democrats vote with their brains

But some people who claim to be Democrats vote for Republicans and then make stupid, fake excuses like "I would have voted for the Democrat but some activists somewhere else in the country with no connection to this campaign or the candidates and whom I don't know and never heard of said 'Defund the Police' so I voted for the Republican."

[uponit7771]

190. yep

[LetMyPeopleVote]

251. Do you tire Of being wrong

Link to tweet

[George II]

178. It was some (few but prominent) Democrats who created the slogan and then defended it.....

I won't give the actual quote but you can see it in this link and the article:

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/505307-ocasio-cortez-dismisses-proposed-1b-cut-defunding-police-means-defunding

Then the republicans grabbed and ran with it. This hurt us a lot in the November elections and I'm sure lost us a few seats.

[fescuerescue]

222. Are you saying the activist aren't Democrats?

Honestly I really don't think it was Republicans marching with "defund the police" signs.

[Elessar Zappa]

227. Certainly weren't Republicans

but they may or may not be registered Democrats. The marchers were focused on a single issue: ending police brutality and systemic racism.

[fescuerescue]

232. That seems like distinction without a difference

In this country, if you aren't a Republican, the odds that you are a Democrat is about 90%

I'm sure that a few libertarians, socialist and communist, plus a few other odd ball party members were in there but it feels disingenuous to suggest that they weren't mostly Dems.

[uponit7771]

6. I respect Obama and Clyburn but facts matter. This is the 2nd 2020 report basically saying ...

... the same thing; a good message beats a lying cudgel any day.

The GQP is going to go as far as making up their weapons to use so that's a given and nothing we can do to stop that .... NOTHING ... we can make it of no effect by having a strong brand.

In 2020 democrats did ... NOT ... have a strong brand.

We can whistle past the facts that multiple reports have come up with or we can keep losing by thin margins to people who worship a man.

[SharonClark]

56. "a good message beats a lying cudgel any day"

Lying seems to be working quite well for the GQP.

[uponit7771]

57. +1, it does work VERY VERY well and we need to respond to them faster. In the 2nd report on

... page 30 it describes why some dems didn't respond at all to DTP attacks.

I wonder if the DNC heat maps DU ... hmmmm

[LetMyPeopleVote]

138. Again, please consider working in a real campaign in the real world

You have repeatedly attacked and defamed good democratic candidates who lost due to the idiotic defund the police slogan. I worked on two local races and the GOP used the Defund the Police slogan. According to your premise, my friends who lost these races are really bad democrats who deserved to lose. That is sad

[LetMyPeopleVote]

250. You are again lying about the autopsy

On another thread you demanded exit polling and I posted some strong exit polling that you misquoted and made materially false statements about. Your statements were so false that they were amusing.

Here you have repeatedly claim that the DNC autopsy supported your sad and poorly informed defense of the moronic "defund the police" slogan. Your claims are again so false that they are funny. You should consider reading the material that you post. Here is what the autopsy actually states https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/democrats-ding-own-party-failing-persuade-minorities-explain-party-s-n1269874

The report found that Republican attempts to tie moderate Democrats to the left's most extreme and unpopular elements, such as calls to defund the police, worked. The problem was partly their own making because Democrats failed to explain where they actually stood on police funding and many other issues, other than opposing former President Donald Trump.....

Up until the eve of the election last year, Democrats expected to expand their House majority, but instead lost nearly all of the most competitive congressional races in the country and held on to control of the chamber by razor-thin margins. Democrats took control of the Senate, thanks to two January run off elections in Georgia.

Democrats failed to gain any new governorships or flip a single state legislative chamber, the impacts of which will be felt for a decade as states take up redistricting this year.....

In the weeks following the November election, a long-simmering feud spilled into the public when moderate Democrats blamed progressive for the party’s disappointments, while progressives shot back by saying they were being scapegoated for others' losses. Third Way, one of the reports’ sponsors, is firmly in the moderate camp.

The report argues the "defund the police" attacks were toxic because Republicans was able convince some voters that Democrats cared more about kowtowing to a narrow band of activists or going after Trump than helping average voters solve kitchen-table issues.

Again, I saw commercials being runned against candidates who are friends where the GOP PAC showed a video of a member of the Squad making the claim "defunding the police" was official policy and these ads were very effective.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

252. So will you condemn Nina and this Mike idiot for their disrespect of Rep. Clyburn?

Link to tweet

BTW since you have repeatedly stated that any real Democratic candidate who lost in 2020 due to the stupid “defund the police” slogan, I know that you will not answer this question

[LetMyPeopleVote]

258. This makes me smile

Link to tweet

[LetMyPeopleVote]

137. You are correct and it is clear that in real campaigns, this slogan does not work

I have worked in real campaigns and it is clear that the author of the OP has not This slogan killed down ballot candidates in the real world and the OP has the gall to claim that any real Democrat who lost to this slogan was a bad democrat and deserved to lose

[JustAnotherGen]

161. This

Our Local and County Committee had a gift from heaven . . .

Tom Kean Jr palling around with white supremacists pictures showed up.

Our Congressman also did NOT support defund the police. But it was tied to him by the GOP.

[NewJeffCT]

180. so, the lack of the Dem brand

enabled the GOP to drive turnout on their end by endlessly repeating "Defund the Police" on Fox News and all the other RW media sources.

[hlthe2b]

187. Oh, please Jeff. We've "known each other for years" Don't put words in my or anyone elses' mouth

You know quite well that I'm not saying that or that few on this website are so ignorant as to believe that most things in politics are not multifactorial in causation.

Maybe you woke up on the wrong side of the bed, but, give it a break.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

245. What Eric Adams Shares With Joe Biden

The NY mayor's race again proves that the defund the police slogan is a stupid slogan

Link to tweet

Indeed, in the closing days of the campaign, as crime increasingly became the issue in primary voters’ minds, Adams seized on two recent horrifying episodes: the shooting of a 10-year-old through his front door in Queens and a sidewalk shooting in the Bronx that nearly took the lives of two innocent bystanders, a 10 year-old girl and her 5-year-old brother.

Even before these incidents, Adams rejected the progressive “Defund the Police” sloganeering that cost the Democrats several winnable House seats last fall. He favored a narrow use of the stop-and-frisk policy to curtail gun violence. And he pledged to restore the NYPD’s recently abandoned gun-collecting anti-crime unit.

The coalition that Adams put together — including an estimated 43% of the Black vote in a multicandidate field that included two other Black candidates — isn’t too dissimilar from the one that led to Biden’s victory. A look at voter turnout shows that Adams swept the southeastern Queens neighborhoods dominated by middle-class Black families that have been supporting moderate Democrats for decades.

How much did Adams’s apparent victory resonate? Well, one day later, Biden unveiled a plan to address rising crime that includes allowing states to draw from the $350 billion federal stimulus to hire new police, among other crime-fighting measures. Defund the police? How about refund the police?

Last year, pragmatic, temperamentally “conservative” Black voters — their party’s most loyal bloc — ensured that Democrats nominated the candidate best suited to vanquish Donald Trump. This year, New York’s pragmatic Black voters appear to have nominated the Democrat best suited to revive the city most ravaged by Covid-19 — by making it once again a place where law and order helps the economy flourish.

Both Adams and Joe Biden focused on the true base of the party which are moderate African American voters.

[gab13by13]

2. Defund the Police is a bad slogan.

Reform is a much better word.

[uponit7771]

7. Its the perfect slogan for the sentiment the DNC needs better branding and GQP can't use ...

... crap like DTP or Biden Hates Beef against us.

[Happy Hoosier]

49. What does that even mean?

I’m always hearing about “branding”. I mostly hear it from barely literate business school grads. Few of them can articulate what they think it means and what kind of “string brand” is needed.

[uponit7771]

54. In political context its what you stand for and how you want to be viewed. In 2008 down ...

... ballot candidates hate a poster of Obama with the word Hope on it and that was all that was needed for instance.

It spoke volumes ...

What was the poster for down ballots in 2020?

I don't know either.

[Happy Hoosier]

111. That's still a pile of jello.

Are you saying we need a slogan? A logo? What does it actually mean, and how do we as a party do it?

[uponit7771]

114. Yes, in 2008 we had one in 2016 and 20 we didn't and the guy at the top of the ticket in 2020

... was already defined and was already branded so stupid cudgels didn't stick and it was the down ballot that suffered.

What was the one word slogan for Biden in 20?

Me neither

[Happy Hoosier]

117. I think he DID have a slogan. And it won.

It was DECENCY. Again. IT WON.

Down ballot, I think it was largely "Defund the Police" and that sold poorly.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

234. Fewer than 1 in 5 support 'defund the police' movement, USA TODAY/Ipsos Poll finds

So you support an idiotic slogan that drives off voters in the real world? https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/03/07/usa-today-ipsos-poll-just-18-support-defund-police-movement/4599232001/

Support to redistribute police department funding has decreased among Americans since August after a summer of protests had erupted across the country against racial injustice and police brutality, a recent Ipsos/USA TODAY poll found.

The call to redistribute police budgets stemmed from Black Lives Matter activists and protesters who called to "defund the police" after the deaths of unarmed Black Americans at the hands of police, such as George Floyd and Breonna Taylor.

While some believe defunding the police is a call to get rid of law enforcement completely, many activists behind the slogan intended to make a more nuanced argument for police budgets to be steered toward community social programs so officers were less often required to take on roles better suited to social workers.

Only 18% of respondents supported the movement known as "defund the police," and 58% said they opposed it. Though white Americans (67%) and Republicans (84%) were much more likely to oppose the movement, only 28% of Black Americans and 34% of Democrats were in favor of it.

This was always a stupid slogan.

I am waiting for you to either not understand the above polling or to misread such polling to make another claim that this polling actually supports your claims. Again the article in the OP and the other polling cited does not support your claims.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

139. Do you tire of being wrong? Here is real exit polling that proves that you are wrong

Here is an exit poll that showed that we lost a number of seats due to the moronic slogan "defend the police"
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2020/11/09/defund_the_police_backfired_on_democrats_528914.html

Instead of a blue wave for the Democrats, there was a red Republican wave in the 2020 elections. Many analysts are explaining this unexpected outcome in ways that confirm their prior assumptions. Anti-woke centrist liberals: The Democratic Party was too woke. Bernie Sanders-type social democrats: The Democrats blew it by not running on Medicare for All. Professional conservative pundits: Trump and Trumpism are more popular with Americans than we thought.

I beg to differ. I think this was a law and order election.

According to early exit polls, here were the reasons that voters voted for Trump and presumably other Republicans: The economy (82%), crime and safety (71%), health care policy (36%), the coronavirus pandemic (14%) and racial inequality (8%).....

Maybe the slogan “defund the police” backfired.

Democrats might reply: But Biden and Harris rejected the phrase “defund the police.” Indeed, they did. And Donald Trump has repeatedly denounced and rejected white supremacy and white nationalism. Nevertheless, the mainstream media and Democratic propagandists (but I repeat myself again) have told us for four years that by denouncing white supremacy in public, Trump is secretly approving of white supremacy, dog-whistle-style.

Turnabout is fair play. Having tried to persuade voters that all Republicans are closet Nazis whose public statements cannot be taken at face value, Democratic spinmeisters in the media cannot be surprised if it turns out that some swing voters have concluded that apparently mainstream Democrats are closet antifa sympathizers. Possibly many swing voters thought that actions—or, in the case of the summer riots, inaction—spoke louder than words about the Democratic Party’s attitude to law enforcement, particularly when many Democratic urban governments from Minneapolis to Austin proceeded relentlessly to cut police budgets in the name of racial justice, even as the violence was going on.

When you put together two facts—the fact that the Republican Party as a whole picked up voters, and the fact that 71% of voters for the Republican presidential candidate said they were motivated by “crime and safety”—it all adds up. The voter backlash following the urban riots of 1967 helped to produce the Nixon victory of 1968. And the voter backlash following the urban riots of 2020 helped to produce the Republican electoral wave in November 2020.

[Nexus2]

15. Agreed, I'm not sure why some are so in love with it. [nt]

[uponit7771]

46. +1, enough to blame down ballot losses on it vs the facts that say the opposite.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

140. Why do you continue to insult and defame real democrats who had the courage to run for office?

It is your sad position that real democrats who had the courage to run for office and lost due to this moronic slogan are bad democrats and deserved to lose. Here is a better analysis that shows why your claims are false Here is a better and more thoughtful analysis that focuses on the content onf the ads. The GOP was more effective in using negative ads and the Democratic candidates focused on the wrong issues https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/27/can-democrats-avoid-pitfalls-2020-new-analysis-offers-striking-answers/

The analysis also finds that Republicans spent a lot more money on casting Democrats as extremists than Democrats did in making the case against Republican extremism.

Democrats, of course, lost a net dozen House seats, underperforming victorious Joe Biden all over the place. The findings suggest Democrats need a rethink of their approach to those conundrums, the analysts conclude.

This is also more pressing now that Republicans are radicalizing in a way that poses a threat to future democratic stability, raising questions about how Democrats can highlight this to the public.

The study by Way to Win — a group distinguished by its big expenditures on turning out the Democratic base — attempts a comprehensive look at all the TV ads that ran in House races in the 2020 cycle. Some findings:

Democrats spent three times more than Republicans on ads that touted bipartisan outreach. Democrats spent $21.8 million on ads about “bipartisanship” or “working across the aisle,” while Republicans spent $6.2 million on them.
Democrats spent six times as much on positive ads than Republicans did. Democrats spent $18.6 million on positive ads that also happened to mention Republicans (say, by touting the ability to work with them), while Republicans spent $2.9 million on positive ads mentioning Democrats.
Republicans spent more than 10 times more on ads with the words “extremist” and “radical” than Democrats did. Republicans spent $51 million on such ads, while Democrats spent $3.4 million.
Overall, Republicans spent more than $87 million on ads with one or more of the following words in it: “AOC,” “Ocasio,” “Pelosi,” “socialism,” “socialist,” “defund,” “radical,” “extremist,” “extreme.”
GOP ads were more likely to use words with “emotional punch,” such as “taxes,” “radical” and “jobs,” while Democratic ads featured words like “insurance,” “voted” and “work.”

Jenifer Fernandez Ancona, the vice president of Way to Win, said that, in sum, Democrats in 2020 sent mixed messages: They touted their willingness to work with Republicans, even as Republicans called them socialists and extremists.

Negative ads such defund the police and socialism work and the GOP focused on these ads instead of more positive ads. Defund the police was a very effective line of attack according to the other polling on this thread

[LetMyPeopleVote]

253. Why are you misrepresenting the facts? Neither the autopsy nor the exit polling back your lies

Reread the material posted or have someone read it and explain it to you. The autopsy is clear that defund the police was a potent weapon used by the GOP and cost us a number of races that we should had won. Again,y ou are misquoting the exit and other polling that has been posted I read the poll and the key thing is that I actually understood the material. Did you even read the article? I am amused that you are misquoting the article by leaving out a key passage. Here is the passage that you clearly did not understand

SCR’s survey findings also suggest that most voters did not see a clear Democratic agenda; moreover, Democratic candidates were hurt by their party’s associations with far-left attitudes and movements—in particular, the movement to defund the police.

Here is the link and relevant passage that show that it was the lack of a clear message was due to the Democratic Party's "associations with far-left attitudes and movements—in particular, the movement to defund the police."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/dougschoen/2020/11/17/new-post-election-poll-reveals-how-democrats-leftward-movement-cost-the-party-in-the-2020-election/?sh=403ab6b4675f

SCR’s survey, which sought to gain insight into the attitudes of voters in order to lend an explanation to Democrats’ relatively disappointing election performance, reveals that a plurality (39%) of voters already believes the Democratic party’s agenda is too left-wing. Yet, less than 3-in-10 (29%) voters believe the Republican agenda is too right-wing, and a plurality (43%) believes that the Republican agenda strikes an appropriate balance.

Though party identification in both SCR’s survey and in national exit polls are close to evenly split, the ideological balance of the electorate tilts conservative. Indeed, a plurality (37%) of respondents in SCR’s survey self-identified as conservative, and a similar share considered themselves to be moderate (36%). Yet, less than one-quarter (24%) self-identified as liberal.

Our survey also found that respondents strongly preferred that the candidates who were elected this year pursue right-leaning policies (45%), rather than left-leaning policies (31%) once they take office.

These findings may be unsurprising, given the Democrats’ disappointing election performance, notwithstanding Joe Biden’s likely victory. Contrary to pre-election predictions, which showed a demonstrable Democratic advantage, the Senate is likely to remain evenly divided with perhaps a narrow Republican advantage, and perhaps with no party advantage. Further, the Democrats also lost several seats in the House, including seats that were thought to be secure.

The last sentence is important. Democrats lost a number of seats because of left wing polices such as the rather ignorant Defund the Police slogan pushed by the Squad and progressives. Read the material. Your characterization of this polling is simply false.

You either did not read the article or you did not understand this article. Again, here is a key passage that you are ignoring or do not understand

SCR’s survey findings also suggest that most voters did not see a clear Democratic agenda; moreover, Democratic candidates were hurt by their party’s associations with far-left attitudes and movements—in particular, the movement to defund the police.

By a 12-point margin, 35% to 23%, respondents said that the movements across the country to defund the police made them less likely to vote for Democrats. Likewise, by a 12-point margin, 32% to 20%, respondents also said that these movements made them more likely to vote for Republicans.

Read the material. The fact that the Squad and progressives pushed rather stupid policies such as defund the police is what hurt the Democrats. The unclear agenda was due to the squad and the progressive types pushing defund the police.

Defund the Police is a stupid policy that hurt us. I saw ads using this theme and socialism used in Texas and the socialism attacks evidently worked very well in Florida where Joe should had have a chance due to trump's poor treatment of Puerto Rico.

In Texas we have looked at why trump did better with Hispanic voters and according to the Continuing Legal Education courses put on by the Harris County Democratic Lawyers Association and the Texas Democratic Lawyers Association (witht the state party numbers cruncher) I have also attended trump was benefited with Hispanic voters due to law and order/defund the police issues and claims of socialism.

I have been working hard in the real world to turn Texas blue. We went from 49 Democratic seats in the Texas house after the 2010 elections (out of a total of 150 seats) to having a good chance of flipping the Texas state house. It hurt like hell to see the GOP retain control of the house due to issues like defund the police. There were a number of seats where Beto beat Carnival Cruz in 2018 that the party hoped to pick up. Now, I and other Texas Democratic lawyers are gearing up to fight bad redistricting maps and GOP voter suppression law

You really should consider reading all of the article. Misquoting an article is not a good idea when dealing with someone who actually read the article

[USALiberal]

42. Yep!!! Nt

[mopinko]

44. reform has failed over and over. that's why.

those of us that have been on this for a long time know how rotten the cops are.
reform is an empty slogan if there ever was one.

[Happy Hoosier]

52. I can 100% guarantee that

“Defund the police” will lose the suburbs again if we foolishly embrace. It’s dumb idea and a worse political strategy.

[Demsrule86]

218. Well defunding the police will fail also and get

Many good Democrats tossed out of office.

[Ace Rothstein]

50. Especially with violent crime exploding around the country.

Good luck continuing to use that term and getting people to support your cause.

[ancianita]

65. Yep. Demilitarize the police is better.

'Reform' works, too.

[uponit7771]

109. +1, if we would've had ... ANY SLOGAN ... in 2020 it would've worked but we didn't have

... brand or a slogan or a message down ballot.

The 2nd report says the polling was off ... I wonder if that's were Russians hit dems with hacking attacks.

[ancianita]

128. Now THEY'VE got DEFUND THE MILITARY per FOX. We need to run against that!

I saw the FOX show. We need to blow that up the way MSNBC did today, and spread that far and wide for 2022.

[lagomorph777]

66. It's an excellent slogan. Republicans used it heavily, to their great advantage.

We didn't successfully fight it with a catchier and more positive slogan.

[uponit7771]

91. THANK YOU !!! I'm going crazy here thinking this isn't getting through. I'll update my OP with this

... line if you don't mind.

[lagomorph777]

93. No problem!

[Treefrog]

123. Thank you.

[cinematicdiversions]

179. Even Demilitarize the police is better. NT

[vercetti2021]

4. I think it could be a mixture of both

like they're going to use critical race Theory as their next a little Boogeyman for the 2022 elections

[uponit7771]

9. Its not both, this is the second report out saying dems didn't message or brand themselves

... correctly in 2020 and homogenized messaging to PoC especially Hispanics.

We have to face the facts, we need better messaging not fewer slogans

[ProfessorGAC]

88. Too Convenient

They seem to be willing to ignore that in some areas DFP became part of the brand.
If a group doesn't properly market themselves and their ideas, it becomes easier for someone to brand them, rather than branding themselves.
The negative effect of DFP, small or large, could have stuck with some voters because inefficient marketing & branding facilitated it.
Strong marketing of ideas and an unassailable brand could have made DFP an irrelevant slogan of the right. But, this reports confirms that dems were inadequately branded & had insufficient marketing.
So, it can be both. I don't see how they're necessarily exclusive of each other.

[uponit7771]

90. It became part of dem brand due to wrong response not because DTP was effective. Page 30

... of the second report said some dem candidates didn't respond to DTP attacks at all.

[ProfessorGAC]

96. Your Making My Point

You seem to think you're arguing with me, but you're actually reinforcing what I said.
It's both, because despite not running on it, it became a negative slogan the other brand used. It doesn't matter if it had a major or minor impact on down ballot races. The lack of proper marketing let the other side slap a bunker sticker on our cars.
I think it's naive to suggest "defund" had no impact on law & order type independents.
This report doesn't say no effect, either.
But, if dems improperly marketed they provided an opportunity to the other side to tell voters who we are, as opposed to us telling voters ourselves.
I'm not making any case that marketing is anything other democrats' greatest weakness. Branding is definitely a problem, because it shouldn't be this hard to sell good ideas & plans.
So again, it can be both. The "defund" thing may be a symptom not a cause, but it does not mean it's meaningless.

[uponit7771]

98. Got it, "The lack of proper marketing let the other side slap a bunker sticker on our cars."

I think it's naive to suggest "defund" had no impact on law & order type independents.

Yes DTP had some impact but not enough to lose a race, the bigger issue is no branding and 3 different polls have stated this among swing voters and democratic voters.

DTP had an impact on the middle but it wasn't a game changer like it was to the right.

[ProfessorGAC]

102. I Think We've Come To Like Minds

Like I said, it was a symptom that could be worse in some future circumstances.
It may not have had a big impact. This time!
Rather than fret about next time, we need to find a way to sell good ideas and defang the Rs.

[uponit7771]

107. RIGHT !!! I'm thinking the defanging them it to attack them on the economy and how horrible

... they are at it.

If you vote republican you'll get poverty and violence and then let GQP walk themselves into that all day long

[ProfessorGAC]

122. That's A Start

Also, since T***p proved that some people are suckers for plain, tough talk, start calling out their lies as, you know, LIES! Quit soft peddling!

[LetMyPeopleVote]

141. Can Democrats avoid the pitfalls of 2020? A new analysis offers striking answers.

Your complete lack of experience in working on real campaigns is sad and shows. Here is a better and more thoughtful analysis that focuses on the content of the ads. The GOP was more effective in using negative ads and the Democratic candidates focused on the wrong issues https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/27/can-democrats-avoid-pitfalls-2020-new-analysis-offers-striking-answers/

The analysis also finds that Republicans spent a lot more money on casting Democrats as extremists than Democrats did in making the case against Republican extremism.

Democrats, of course, lost a net dozen House seats, underperforming victorious Joe Biden all over the place. The findings suggest Democrats need a rethink of their approach to those conundrums, the analysts conclude.

This is also more pressing now that Republicans are radicalizing in a way that poses a threat to future democratic stability, raising questions about how Democrats can highlight this to the public.

The study by Way to Win — a group distinguished by its big expenditures on turning out the Democratic base — attempts a comprehensive look at all the TV ads that ran in House races in the 2020 cycle. Some findings:

Democrats spent three times more than Republicans on ads that touted bipartisan outreach. Democrats spent $21.8 million on ads about “bipartisanship” or “working across the aisle,” while Republicans spent $6.2 million on them.
Democrats spent six times as much on positive ads than Republicans did. Democrats spent $18.6 million on positive ads that also happened to mention Republicans (say, by touting the ability to work with them), while Republicans spent $2.9 million on positive ads mentioning Democrats.
Republicans spent more than 10 times more on ads with the words “extremist” and “radical” than Democrats did. Republicans spent $51 million on such ads, while Democrats spent $3.4 million.
Overall, Republicans spent more than $87 million on ads with one or more of the following words in it: “AOC,” “Ocasio,” “Pelosi,” “socialism,” “socialist,” “defund,” “radical,” “extremist,” “extreme.”
GOP ads were more likely to use words with “emotional punch,” such as “taxes,” “radical” and “jobs,” while Democratic ads featured words like “insurance,” “voted” and “work.”

Jenifer Fernandez Ancona, the vice president of Way to Win, said that, in sum, Democrats in 2020 sent mixed messages: They touted their willingness to work with Republicans, even as Republicans called them socialists and extremists.

Negative ads such defund the police and socialism work and the GOP focused on these ads instead of more positive ads. Defund the police was a very effective line of attack according to the other polling on this thread

[LetMyPeopleVote]

247. Do you tire of being wrong?

You made the uninformed claim that this analysis/autopsy backed your claim that defund the police was not a factor in the 2020 election. You misread the quote from the Washington Post.. If you actually read up on the autopsy and understood the concepts being discussed, you would realize that Defund the Police did hurt candidates. Maloney does not believe that it was dispositive but such polling did cost Democrats a number of seats that we should have won.

I am amused that you think that this helps you. Here is more on this autopsy and shows that you are again wrong in your attempt at analysis https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/06/07/election-report-sends-democrats-warning-outreach-voters-color/7585820002/

As a result of the messaging issues, the report argues, Republicans were able to blunt at least a dozen Democratic wins last year by anchoring liberal candidates to more far-left ideas, such as the defund police movement.

"In the absence of strong party branding, the opposition latched on to GOP talking points, suggesting our candidates would 'burn down your house and take away the police,' " the report says.....

That also gave GOP candidates a window to seize a narrative with attacks related to "radical socialists" or "defund the police" based on the series of national protests last summer around controversial police shootings of African Americans.

Congressional races that saw attack ads by Republicans pummeling Democrats with a drumbeat of "law and order" or "socialism" saw a higher share of people of color voters supporting the GOP candidate, according to the report. None of the candidates included in the report's analysis supported defunding the police, but the study says nearly all were targeted with paid attack ads claiming they did.

That issue has sparked an internal debate among Democrats for months, with moderates blaming more activist-minded or progressive national figures for going too far to the left.

"Look, there are people in the Democratic coalition who think we should literally dismantle police departments and not have them," political strategist Matt Bennett, a Third Way co-founder, said in an interview Monday.

The solution suggested by this autopsy is strong branding which means shutting the Squad up and keep the Squad from declaring that "defunding the police" is a good policy. For example, I had three friends running for office and a couple of GOP PACs ran effective ads using members of the Squad promoting defund the police. For the autopsy to work, we need a clear message which means keeping the Squad from making ads for GOP PACS.

Again the autopsy does not help your argument and I am amused that you think that it does. Again you made a claim that was false and you would know this if you read up on the issue

[RegularJam]

5. It was a different kind of election.

Last edited Thu Jun 24, 2021, 08:05 AM - Edit history (1)

We did have some candidates doing a good job branding themselves as democrats and laying out their message. But Trump sucked the oxygen out of the room. Across the board we spent more time than normal branding Republicans as the party of Trump.

Defund the Police, a phrase I’ve used and supported as I think it’s an excellent conversation starter about problems we face, didn’t help us electorally across the board. But that aspect was minor and some on our side seem desperate to make it more.

“Republican attempts to brand Democrats as "radicals” worked”

Our ongoing campaign during all of the unrest helped.

[uponit7771]

19. There's no proof it didn't help us, matter of fact some dem candidates in the report said they

... didn't even poll it because it wasn't a blip.

The bigger issue with voters was our lack of branding and messaging; voters didn't know what the DNC stood ***FOR***.

I respect our party leaders but it wasn't DTP slogan that killed dem turnout in Miami Dade or South Texas it was no message to PoC in those places.

There's no polling proof that DTP hurt dems more than it turned out GQP

There's ... PLENTY ... of proof that lack of brand and messaging did hurt dems though

[RegularJam]

30. There is "proof" and this sentence contradicts what you are saying.

“ There's no polling proof that DTP hurt dems more than it turned out GQP.”

Kind of says it all and is a strong argument against yourself, in your own words.

[uponit7771]

37. Disagree, my last sentence is plain; we didn't turn out vote GQP did. That's not a fault of

... a slogan that's bad messaging and in the case of the reports branding.

DTP didn't keep dem turnout low and as I said in the OP ... ANY ... generic false cudgel would've been used even ones completely false.

We better stop whistling past the grave yard and get our messaging straight, I would think 2 different reports stating dem branding was weak and that allowed DTP to stick would've been conclusive but people still want to argue that the GQP would ... NOT .. .have made up a cudgel if DTP didn't exist.

[RegularJam]

39. I'm now fully aware that you get it.

“ There's no polling proof that DTP hurt dems more than it turned out GQP.”

No sweat off my back. I like the slogan even knowing(like you) that it hurts us a small amount electorally. It’s already brought about real and positive change and will continue to do so.

[brooklynite]

67. What "real and positive change" has it achieved?

[KPN]

75. One thing it has done is resonated with many

people from the standpoint of public grasp of the overall dimensions of our “police” problem. It’s not just a few bad apples, it’s systemic, authoritarian, and corrupt. You don’t fix that with tweaks … and more people understand that now. Understanding is key to progress. That’s real and positive.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

248. It sad but you clearly did not read the autopsy

Again, you misread the autopsy, We need clear messaging and that means not handing the GOP ready made attack ads where members of the Squad provide great material for use in such attack ads. If you read the autopsy, we need better messaging which includes not having groups promote dumb policies such as defund the police and providing material to be used in attack ads

I saw attack ads in my county where GOP PACs took statements from the Squad about defunding the police and used such statements to imply that this was Democratic policy. Here is an excerpt from a good article on the autopsy https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/06/07/election-report-sends-democrats-warning-outreach-voters-color/7585820002/

That also gave GOP candidates a window to seize a narrative with attacks related to "radical socialists" or "defund the police" based on the series of national protests last summer around controversial police shootings of African Americans.

Congressional races that saw attack ads by Republicans pummeling Democrats with a drumbeat of "law and order" or "socialism" saw a higher share of people of color voters supporting the GOP candidate, according to the report. None of the candidates included in the report's analysis supported defunding the police, but the study says nearly all were targeted with paid attack ads claiming they did.

That issue has sparked an internal debate among Democrats for months, with moderates blaming more activist-minded or progressive national figures for going too far to the left.

"Look, there are people in the Democratic coalition who think we should literally dismantle police departments and not have them," political strategist Matt Bennett, a Third Way co-founder, said in an interview Monday.

I agree with the autopsy that the party needs better messaging. Part of that messaging needs to be agreement to not promote stupid concepts like "defund the police".

[FBaggins]

8. Your title is unsupported by your quoted selections or provided link

"It was A NOT B!" is not a reasonable conclusion when A=B

[uponit7771]

12. Dem branding in both reports is stated as the prevalent issue. Without the branding DTP was able

... to be tagged onto candidates that didn't support it and that would've happened with or without DTP.

Bottom line if we had A (branding) then B ([generic GQP cudgel]) wouldn't work

Its two reports that claim this in a multitude of ways.

[FBaggins]

25. They're the same thing... not either/or

Democratic branding was hindered by "defund the police". You can't claim that the problem was the branding and NOT what impacted the branding.

"Stop saying 'defund the police' - it's hurting the party's image with voters!" cannot be rebutted by claiming that it's a branding problem. Our image with voters IS our branding.

IOW - both reports support the claim that DTP hurt us. They don't rebut it.

[uponit7771]

32. Nothing in either report supports the "hindering" conclusion with polling. Bottom line we didn't

... define ourselves to voters so the GQP did it for us.

We need to do the defining ... FIRST ... and often so cudgels don't work and in 2020 that did NOT happen.

Those are the facts we have to go on

There's even a poll out that shows it was weak democrat branding that hurt us nothing about defund the police outside of it bringing out GQP voters.

[FBaggins]

41. Both reports support exactly that conclusion

It appears that you don’t understand marketing/branding. It’s far more than just what colors you use on your logo. There is no “defining FIRST” because there is no starting or ending point.

And the ingredients you choose to use are part of your branding.

The entire conversation re: DTP is a branding conversation. You cannot rebut it by saying “we need better branding”

[uponit7771]

45. "There is no "defining FIRST" ... " Yes there is, you think someone can now define Ronald ...

... McDonald as a tree now? REALLY

The sentiment expressed in your post completely goes against human behavior science and don't think it would stand up to scrutiny in its on op on DU.

Look, we define ourselves and our opponents first and often and don't let the GQP slide in with the stupid by ignoring the lies or we lose.

That's about it

[FBaggins]

48. You've discovered a time machine?

Your argument is really just that nonsensical.

[uponit7771]

58. No, I have Anchoring Bias theories from pathologist (link)

https://www.verywellmind.com/cognitive-biases-distort-thinking-2794763

3. The Anchoring Bias

The anchoring bias is the tendency to be overly influenced by the first piece of information that we hear. Some examples of how this works:

[FBaggins]

64. You're missing that the branding for the next election is already well under way

You don't get to say "we'll just give them the first piece of information" when the first piece (and the 50th) are already out there.

DTP is still "a thing". There is no way to get the "first piece" out there without that time machine. If we want to deal with "branding" issues we need to...

... oh wait...

... you don't want to talk about that. You think that "branding" is different from recognizing that something that exists on our side of the political spectrum is making us look bad to enough voters to sway many elections and perhaps we should stop doing it.

You remind me of the managers in that recent comedy skit who call in their marketing officer and tell him that they've come up with a solution for their branding problem... and they want him to produce an add and make it go viral. "Just push that button that makes it go viral"

[uponit7771]

92. We agree its under way and our current response is HORRIBLE on its face.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

254. House passes George Floyd Act as Democrats avoid 'defund the police' clash

I was pleased to see that the House version of the George Floyd act rejects the moronic concept of defund the police

Link to tweet

But the debate over legislation turned into a political liability for Democrats as Republicans seized on calls by some activists and progressives to “defund the police” to argue that supporters were intent on slashing police force budgets.

Though this bill doesn’t do that, moderate Democrats said the charge helped drive Democratic defeats in swing districts around the country last November.

“No one ran on ‘defund the police,’ but all you have to do is make that a political weapon,” said Teas Democratic Rep. Henry Cuellar.

Republicans quickly revived the “defund the police” criticisms before the vote. “Our law enforcement officers need more funding not less,” Rep. Scott Fitzgerald, R-Wis.

[TraceNC]

13. Agreed. Faulty logic.

[uponit7771]

17. Facts matter, false cudgels don't work were there's strong branding and good messaging.

There's already two reports out on it, we can't bury our heads in the sand and repeat the same mistake of 2020 down ballots expecting to win.

[TraceNC]

21. You're arguing that we had a messaging and branding

problem, while arguing that one of the most controversial slogans in recent memory wasn’t a messaging and branding problem.

And yes, it is controversial. Which would be okay if the slogan itself didn’t do the opposition’s work for them.

But the real point here is that these reports (AKA, just some other opinions, they’re not scientific of course) are splitting hairs: messaging and branding matters but…slogans don’t. Or something. Honestly, they appear to be set on defending that slogan rather than objectively assessing the problem with it.

[uponit7771]

24. No I'm not arguing that, the reports are. The plainly say dems had weak branding and a message...

... that didn't go through to voters.

In the face of weak branding DTP (OR ANYTHING) can be ascribed, that's not the slogan that was effective it was lack of branding and messaging.

They are easy reads and easily debunk any of the blame to DTP slogan.

Of course DTP might have helped GQP turn out but it wasn't the issue that kept DNC turnout low, it was lack of message especially in PoC areas.

[TraceNC]

26. Then what argument are you making

if you’re not arguing in favor of what the report is arguing? I thought you agreed with it.

And I stand with President Obama on this issue. It’s just a dumb slogan.

[uponit7771]

28. I think the reports speak for themselves, they're pretty clear. We didn't have a brand or a message

... and that allowed the GQP to ascribe us one.

That's bad campaigning not the cudgels fault.

And I stand with President Obama on this issue. It’s just a dumb slogan.

So is Biden Hates Beef but be damned if they're not going to use it come next year !!

The cudgel doesn't have to be smart or even true just used in the void of proper branding and or messaging.

[TraceNC]

31. The reports are right but our most

effective messaging and branding President in decades isn’t? Sorry. I’ll go with President Obama on this.

[uponit7771]

33. The second report addresses this very fact that Biden had a strong brand already so ...

... DTP didn't stick with him.

It also goes on to state this was the case for other candidates that defined themselves on the issue early even without a strong brand and this was true in Georgia with Ossoff and Warnock.

The reports are clear and we need to define ourselves first and often and not allow GQP lies to slide in with the stupid.

I’ll go with President Obama on this.

Regardless of whether it was dumb it wasn't the thing that beat it us, our lack of branding and messaging response was.

The Cudgel COULD"VE been "Biden Hates Beef" if there's no response to it then it sticks

[TraceNC]

35. You do know that the right-wingers

were pushing the message that President Biden is going to limit how much ground beef you can eat, right?

They tried. It failed.

They’re still hammering the “defund” argument.

That should tell you something.

[Bettie]

40. And that's it, we need to respond

and hit back hard at anything they throw at our candidates. Don't just ignore the lies, call them out as lies, set the record straight and add the positive message of what we really stand for and hammer that home.

Don't let the bullshit stand unchallenged. Ever. Tell them what we stand for, always.

[uponit7771]

43. THIS !!!! ☝🏾☝🏾☝🏾

[TraceNC]

82. Of course.

That’s all necessary in politics anyway but becomes especially hard when you have a dumb slogan that’s easily exploited. New slogan needed.

[Bettie]

83. Well then, what is your plan to

regulate what protestors may put on their signs?

That's where Defund the Police came from. It wasn't thought up by any person in office or running for office.

And this year's "DTP" is Critical Race Theory, something that has existed for a long time, but some right wing asshole decided is the giant issue for the year.

[TraceNC]

84. I wouldn't regulate the speech of ANY protestor.

You just made that up. That’s a straw man.

Now, back here in the real world, what we can do is encourage the use of smart slogans. Our elected Democrats can do the same. Even better if they introduce legislation that’s about reforming and not defunding, so they can say, “Here’s our bill. It’s about reforming, not defunding.” This is what our leaders could do. Hence the term “leader.”

[Bettie]

87. The slogan didn't come from anyone running for office

it came from protestors...the right wing picked it up and ran with it.

So, you can't force "smart slogans" on people and even if you do, there's always some right wing operative who has thought up something that no one ever said.

Our side needs to just shut that stuff down immediately and loudly.

The point is that we can't control 100% of the things that are said. Ever so we need to be more forceful in other messaging.

[TraceNC]

89. Which is why I suggested that

our elected Democrats can shape the party’s message and let the protestors decide if they want to side with the Democratic Party or not. If they side with the Democratic Party, great! If not, direct all inquiries about the slogan to them.

[uponit7771]

95. Correct, the problem is in 2020 for down ballot candidates there was no message shaped ...

... for them.

In 2008 we had a poster of Obama and the the word Hope

What was the image of Biden?

Me neither

[uponit7771]

94. RIGHT !!! We can have quick hard response and attack lines not sit back and let "Biden Hates

... Beef" fester for more than a couple of hours

[KPN]

77. Obama didn't blame the election results on

Defund the Police. What he said was it wasn’t helpful. It didn’t win more votes. There’s no evidence it took votes away from Dems.

[TraceNC]

81. The OP doesn't have a problem with the

slogan at all, beyond some unstated idea about how to improve the “messaging and branding.”

President Obama absolutely recognizes that it’s a bad slogan.

[KPN]

85. It's not our slogan. We can't control activists anymore than we can cointrol rightwing nut jobs.

Like Obama said, it's not helpful. He didn't condemn it and its use like many here seem to do. I agree with the OP -- it's not why we lost seats in 2020. Yeah, it didn't help, but it's not why.

[TraceNC]

86. I haven't seen anyone arguing for

controlling what protestors say. Our elected Dems can lead on this, and I hope they do. Not only because we do need police reform, but then they can have actual legislation to point to that demonstrates it’s about reform, not defunding, and let the activists defend their signs and chants as they see fit. If those activists want to distance themselves from the Democratic Party’s official stance and actual legislation, they’re free to do so.

[uponit7771]

97. The idea on improving branding and messaging is to have one, in 2020 we didn't and voters

... said as much through minimum 3 polls.

This went especially in PoC area's

[LetMyPeopleVote]

143. Do you tire of being wrong?

This idiotic meme killed a ton of good candidates. We lost a ton of races that we should have won.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[LetMyPeopleVote]

142. Who is surprised by this?

The article cited does not support the OP's sad claims

[TraceNC]

195. It's very strange.

The dismissive attitude toward the opinions of President Obama (yes, even his clarification) and Representative Clyburn is astounding. For some reason, the trust and loyalty is all in some report.

And apparently the fact that this single stupid slogan is still hotly debated months after the election is totally lost on some.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

197. The article cited by the OP does not support the claims made by the OP

I have posted exit polling on this and other threads that the OP has misread or told falsehoods about. The exit polling is clear that the idiotic "defund the police" slogan hurt down ballot Democratic candidates and the OP has attempted to misread this material and even tell falsehoods about such material

The OP is heavily invested in defending the "defund the police" slogan including attacking all real Democratic candidates who had the courage to run in 2002 and who lost due to this slogan. According to the OP, these candidates are bad Democrats and deserved to lose. It is clear to me that the OP has never worked in an actual campaign and does not realize how campaigns work in the real world. I have friends who ran for both a congressional seat and two state house seats who lost in 2020 when the GOP was able to use "defend the police" slogan very effectively. These ads featured members of the squad who were making very broad statements that were easy to use in attack ds.

Real Democratic candidate who lost in 2020 are not mad democrats who deserved to lose. The claims being made by the OP as to these candidates are simply wrong and offensive

[TraceNC]

219. Yep. Another unexplained aspect of

this is the OP trying to argue that it wasn’t the slogan, but a messaging problem. Well, if that’s true — and it’s not clear that it is — that messaging problem was the inability to defend the stupid slogan.

I agree with you in that we are debating someone who is, for some reason, totally dedicated to this slogan. Even to the point of admitting that President Obama is correct when he said it hurts us, but to the OP as long as it’s not a “game changer,” it’s fine, just hurt us a little or a lot or whatever, no big deal. Bizarre.

[everyonematters]

10. We have to be more than the party that loves everybody.

We have to convince people that we are the party that will promote a growing economy with a strong middle class.

[uponit7771]

16. +1, ... while contrasting the GQP record. I don't mind stating GQP is bad but we need to state...

... what we're good at in the simplest of terms.

We need better branding and messaging, after two reports we can't burry our heads in the sand

[LetMyPeopleVote]

144. Why 'Defund The Police' Attacks Were So Potent Against Democrats

I personally support reforms to the police. I worked hard and we got a good Democrat elected as District Attorney in my county two years ago and this cycle we got a good man elected as sheriff of my county. Our new DA has made a tremendous amount of difference in my county and I believe that the new Sheriff will also help. However, it is clear that we lost races that we should not have lost Defund the police was used very effectively by the GOP in down ballot races. A good number of races that Democrats should have won were lost due to this issue.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

The GOP ran a ton of ads using this issue

Sure enough, Republicans saw an opportunity. Painting Democrats as supporters of “defunding” the police became the focus of campaign literature, TV and digital ads, and live televised debates. That forced Democratic candidates to divert resources that might otherwise be used discussing COVID-19 relief, health care or education to be used disavowing themselves from the slogan and otherwise defending themselves.

Out of 31 broadcast TV ads that Trump and other allied campaign groups used to attack Biden and other Democrats for being soft on law and order, 11 spots ― that aired a total of 77,647 times ― explicitly mentioned “defund the police,” according to an analysis Kantar Media/CMAG conducted for HuffPost. And out of 216 Republican broadcast TV ads in congressional races blasting Democrats, 157 spots that aired 103,000 times used the phrase.

I was disappointed to seen Susan Collins re-elected. It seems that Collins was able to use the "defund the police" issue very effectively

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and the GOP’s Senate campaign arm hit her Democratic opponent, Sara Gideon, in a TV ad for links to a “defund the police” billionaire. The basis for the ad was Gideon’s attendance at a fundraiser hosted by an environmental coalition that includes NextGen America. NextGen, funded by liberal billionaire Tom Steyer, supports defunding the police

[uponit7771]

165. From your own post "Skopov nonetheless endured relentless claims that she supported "defunding" ...

... the police"

That's TEXT BOOK bad campaigning to allow that attack to sit in the ether !!!

She should ... NOT ... have let those attacks go unanswered and have clearly set her stake on the issue FIRST ... she did not.

The 2nd report says the candidates that were defined won ... that's simple.

Same with Warnock Same with Ossoff, those attacks didn't work because they defined themselves on the issue.

From the 2nd report page 30, some democrats did not respond AT ALL to dtp

[LetMyPeopleVote]

198. Read the material again or have someone read the material and explain it to you

You have made repeated statements that are not supported by the articles being cited including the article cited in OP I have posted exit polling that you have also made false statements about that I have had to correct.

[TraceNC]

11. Not a good idea to give the opposition

one of the dumbest slogans in the history of slogans to work with. All we did was make it easier for them.

[uponit7771]

14. Disagree, cudgels don't work if branding is strong and message is prevalent. There are multiple

... reports with facts backing this up, we need to face the music that GQP is going to make shit up no matter what.

We need a strong brand and messaging to defeat it.

[TraceNC]

18. Strong branding and messaging

means not coming up with slogans that do the opposition’s work for them. That’s what “defund” did. We were stuck trying to make the argument that “defund” didn’t mean “do not fund.” Ridiculously stupid slogan.

I agree that branding and messaging is everything in political campaigns. But you seem to be arguing that a slogan that was easily wrapped around the neck of our candidates wasn’t part of messaging and branding.

[uponit7771]

20. Dems didn't come up with DTP that's GQP branding that affects that conclusion and ...

... an inadequate repsponse that allows it to be pushed.

I think your post is part and parcel what I'm trying to get across; we need better branding and messaging that has proven to beat false cudgels.

Two different reports suggest strong branding and messaging beats false cudgels any day, we need to listen.

[TraceNC]

23. Doesn't matter who came up with it.

When we didn’t run away from it, it was ours.

And again, a messaging and branding problem is precisely about slogans. We can’t separate the two.

[uponit7771]

27. "When we didn't run away from it," then we agree in part ... our RESPONSE to this cudgel ...

... was the bigger issue not the cudgel (cause they'll make one up if they don't have one) itself.

We agree that dems didn't come up with the cudgel some protestors did, if it wasn't for DTP it wuold've been Biden Hates Beef .. the slogan here doesn't have to be true.

And again, a messaging and branding problem is precisely about slogans. We can’t separate the two.

Then we need better messaging and branding for ourselves and not allow one to be ascribed.

[TraceNC]

29. Agreed on the last sentence.

And that could have easily been done by denouncing the dumb slogan.

[uponit7771]

34. WE AGREE !! Or even owning it or parts of it like the AZ candidate did here recently and like ...

... Ossoff and Warnock did to some degree.

But not responding at all was a killer beyond not defining ourselves first and often.

[TraceNC]

38. Our candidates *did* respond.

The response was not very effective. But who can blame them? They were forced to argue that the word “defund” did not mean “stop funding.” Just a ridiculously stupid position to be put in.

Hopefully by the midterms, and for damn sure by 2024, we find a way to kill that slogan. I think at this point the only way to do that is to pass REFORM (not “defund” bills) so our candidates can point to actual legislation and say, “THIS is what we’re for. Not defunding.”

[Happy Hoosier]

69. STRONG BRAND AND MESSEGING!!!

Sounds like you work for a consulting firm.

So... what exactly do you think that means? WHAT constitutes a strong brand. WHAT message?

[uponit7771]

99. I don't, I used to work for 1 of the big search sites so I know how to heat map and what words

... to use to push and the GQP does this down to a science.

So... what exactly do you think that means? WHAT constitutes a strong brand. WHAT message?

I think I asked someone upthread but do you remember Obama 08 poster?

The world does ...

That's branding; tagging yourself with perspective look and a forward message in the political rhelm

[Happy Hoosier]

115. Okay, that helps a bit, I guess....

... but it still feels empty and unshaped to me.

[uponit7771]

118. Did you work as an engineer or doctor or in a more left brained job? tia

[Happy Hoosier]

119. LOL yes.

I am an engineer.

A systems engineer in fact. Precise language with actual meaning is a big part of my job.

[uponit7771]

120. LOL !! Same but integration architect, I'm married to a marketing guru so after 20 years I somewhat

... understand lizard brain in humans.

Yeah, one word slogans work for non politicos BIGGLY

[Happy Hoosier]

134. Cheers! NT

[LetMyPeopleVote]

145. Once again you make it very clear that you have never worked on a campaign in the real world

I am amused in that you clearly have never worked on a campaign in the real world. A ton of good democratic candidates lost races that should have won in 2020 due to this moronic slogan. The GOP was happy to take quotes or video of members of the squad and other prominent progressive types and use these statements in these ads. That is what is done in the politics. Here are some of the ads used in 2020

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

You accusations that the good democrats who lost in 2020 deserved to lose and that these democrats were bad democrats is really sad and disgusting. Again, I am friends with two state house candidates who lost and the GOP ran ads accusing all Democrats of being socialists and supporting defund the police.

There is great exit polling that shows that these ads were effective https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=15391238 and https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=15391364

The GOP will be using the same stunt again in 2022 unless we can shut the squad up and stop defending this ignorant slogan.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

256. Democrats have begun advocating more police funding.

The autopsy report held that defund the police was an effective weapon in the last election

Link to tweet

These trends have alarmed Democrats at all levels — from the White House, where Biden recently delivered his first major speech on fighting crime; to voters, who are rallying behind crime-focused candidates in early primaries; to U.S. House members who are bluntly warning liberal colleagues to tone down their attacks on law enforcement.

“ ‘Defund police’ is a phrase that I wish had never been uttered,” said Rep. Cheri Bustos (D-Ill.), who ran the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee when Republicans picked up 13 House seats over the two-year 2020 election cycle. “We’ve got to do a better job of talking about what we do want to do.”

A post-election analysis from House Democrats concluded that the “defund the police” slogan, embraced by Black Lives Matter protesters, gave Republicans an effective weapon in the last election, even though most Democrats, including Biden, consistently rejected the message. Republicans are continuing to produce ads featuring the slogan, depicting angry protesters and blaring sirens as they seek to tie rising crime to police overhaul efforts......

But for now, the strongest anxiety is voiced by Democrats who worry that the impassioned voices of the few in their party who embrace “defund the police” will drown out the far greater number who don’t.

“I think it’s critically important that we explain this in a way that doesn’t label us in a way that is inaccurate,” Bustos said.[/div

[SharonClark]

36. This was interesting...

Quentin James, the president of the Collective PAC, said it was clear that “some of the rhetoric we see from coastal Democrats” had been problematic. Mr. James pointed to the activist demand to “defund” the police as especially harmful, even with supporters of policing overhauls.

“We did a poll that showed Black voters, by and large, vastly support reforming the police and reallocating their budgets,” Mr. James said. “That terminology — ‘defund’ — was not popular in the Black community.”

[uponit7771]

47. This is why DTP needed a response and not be ignored by 1 too many down ballot candidates in

... 2020.

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/2020-postelection-analysis/871b6e27d1b7c544/full.pdf

page 30 goes on to how some dem down ballot candidates didn't respond at all.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

146. Again, you are wrong

The "defund the police" slogan was a very ignorant and stupid slogan that was only used due to some progressive members of the party who were in very safe blue seats. This slogan was stupid and hurt down ballot candidates who were in swing seats. I live in the real world and I have worked on campaigns and have been active on party issues for a long time. I saw first hand the GOP use this slogan against good Democratic candidates who did not deserve to lose. The polling clear that this was a very stupid slogan to use and that this slogan hurt candidates https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/03/07/usa-today-ipsos-poll-just-18-support-defund-police-movement/4599232001/

Support to redistribute police department funding has decreased among Americans since August after a summer of protests had erupted across the country against racial injustice and police brutality, a recent Ipsos/USA TODAY poll found.

The call to redistribute police budgets stemmed from Black Lives Matter activists and protesters who called to "defund the police" after the deaths of unarmed Black Americans at the hands of police, such as George Floyd and Breonna Taylor.

While some believe defunding the police is a call to get rid of law enforcement completely, many activists behind the slogan intended to make a more nuanced argument for police budgets to be steered toward community social programs so officers were less often required to take on roles better suited to social workers.

The party can be for more than anti-trump but we cannot be stupid and use slogans that are ignorant

Your continued attacks on good Democratic candidates who lost in 2020 is sad and disgusting. Why are you defending this ignorant slogan. The polling is clear and the exist polls that that this slogan cost Democrats seats they should had won. Why do you insist on attacking and defaming good democratic candidates who lost due to this slogan? Is this stupid slogan so important to you that you feel the need to insult good candidates who lost due to this slogan?

[SharonClark]

51. The "problem" with Dem messaging is that we're up against right-wing talk radio, Fox lies, and

evangelical churches who constantly push emotional messages about abortion, culture, safety, military, etc.

To the GQP-persuaded, Dems hate America, will take away your guns so you can't defend your families, want to give money to lazy poor people, will ban your religious-beliefs, will force your daughter to use a bathroom with a big and menacing man, leave cities in the hands of gun-toting rapists, arsonists, and murderers, open the borders to thugs and murderers who take your jobs, and indoctrinate your children in public schools and universities. Did I miss anything?

Dems, who do not use as much emotional and fear-laden language, always hope to persuade using logic. Dems spend a lot of time trying to persuade every alphabet-soup constituency to join us but those constituencies hear the same right-wing garbage as the rest of the public. Some are low-information and infrequent voters.

With voter-suppression, GQP obstructionism, and the inherently anti-democractic electoral structure at the federal-level and in some states, it will become increasingly difficult for Dems to win elections regardless of any brilliant message they may develop.

[uponit7771]

60. +1, their infrastructure is 100% more effective than what we have but we still have outlets ...

... that will allow for the BS to cut through for now.

Our repetition has to be higher while theirs doesn't

Its on page 30 of the 2nd report on why some dems didn't respond at all to DTP, I think that was a mistake seeing the GQP was sinking nearly 15 times the DNC amount into that message.

Dems, who do not use as much emotional and fear-laden language, always hope to persuade using logic. Dems spend a lot of time trying to persuade every alphabet-soup constituency to join us but those constituencies hear the same right-wing garbage as the rest of the public. Some are low-information and infrequent voters.

+1/

This is another point the 2nd report made; we need more emotional based branding vs logical "see what we have done for you" outreach.

People tend to remember the emotional more in order to gain trust

[Happy Hoosier]

53. Whenever I hear someone say something about "brand"

I know I’m gonna get some airy, vague, bullshitty pronouncement with lots of buzzwords and very few concrete ideas.

[uponit7771]

62. You're fact biased, I don't think most humans are initially. Do you remember the poster for down ...

... ballot dems in 2020 was?

What about 2008?

[Happy Hoosier]

68. All I am saying is....

That is someone is going to talk up "brand" they had better have some idea of how to achieve the "brand" image they want. I hear lots of people talk about the subject and very, very few offering concrete ideas on just how to do it. And oh yeah, please pay our $500,000 consulting fee as soon as possible, please.

But you are correct that I HATE this kind of soft-thinking. I guess it's why I went in to a technical field.

[uponit7771]

100. There are plenty of concrete ideas of how to do it and, just follow the GQP path for the last

... 10 yrs.

1. Define your opponent as something bad even if its 100% false like "Biden Hates Beef"
2. Define yourself as a way to beat that something bad and something else forward looking
3. Repeat in a myriad of mediums, including radio, TV and Social media with a feedback loop.
4. Wait for democrats non response ... < I made that one up.
5. Repeat

[Happy Hoosier]

112. Ya mean like "defund the police?"

It sounds like we had a brand. And I certainly heard that slogan over and over again from a sector of our party.

It's just that is was a shitty brand that didn't sell well.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

147. Attacking good Democratic candidates who lost due to this slogan is offensive and wrong

Again, your false claims that any real Democrat who lost their race due to the moronic "defund the police" slogan are really bad democrats and deserved to lose. Such a claim is both ignorant and offensive. I had two friends who ran in state house races in my county who lost after the GOP ran another of ads using socialism and defund the police. These ads quoted or featured members of the squad (who are not popular outside their deep blue districts) and were effective. Both of my friends are actual members of the Democratic party and ran campaigns that should have won but the negative ads used.

These ads were effective. For example these attacks were used in the Maine Senate race which Susan Collins won

Link to tweet

This line of attack was used in South Carolina against Jaime Harrison

Link to tweet

President Obama is clear that this line of attack cost Democrats down ballot races

Link to tweet

Former President Barack Obama drew criticism from progressive Democrats this week for suggesting that “snappy” slogans like “defund the police” are alienating voters and making it harder from a political standpoint to enact “changes you want done.”

In an interview with Peter Hamby, who hosts the Snapchat political show “Good Luck America,” Obama said “you [lose] a big audience the minute” a slogan like “defund the police” is used, making “it a lot less likely that you’re actually going to get the changes you want done.”

“Defund the police” refers to the reallocation or redirection of government funding from police departments to social services for minority communities. As Rashawn Ray of the Brookings Institution noted, defunding does not mean the abolishment of police departments but instead “highlights fiscal responsibility” and “advocates for a market-driven approach to taxpayer money.”....

Obama ― echoing other centrist Democrats who’ve similarly taken issue with “defund the police” and what they’ve decried as radical messaging ― told Hamby that Democrats could benefit from adopting softer rhetoric when talking about police reform.

“If you instead say, ‘Hey, you know what? Let’s reform the police department so that everybody’s being treated fairly. And not just in policing, but in sentencing, how can we divert young people from getting into crime?’” he said.

Joe Biden is clear on this also That is how the real worls works Here is a good explanation https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/huge-catastrophe-democrats-grapple-congressional-state-election-losses-n1248529

The Biden campaign's goal was to make 2020 a referendum on Trump's chaotic term, and it succeeded, but the results were far worse down the ballot.

In leaked recording, Biden says GOP used 'defund the police' to 'beat the living hell' out of Democrats
Republicans barraged swing districts with ads linking moderates to the most far-left voices in the party, which has led to bitter recriminations between the factions.

"When you're Joe Biden and you have 47 years in public life and you have a billion dollars behind you, you can build your own brand," said Matt Bennett, executive vice president of the centrist think tank Third Way. "But when you're down-ballot, it's hard to outrun that brand in red and purple districts."

I saw this in two down ballot races in my county where the GOP ran a ton of defund the police and soclialsim ads

I have forwarded you polling that showed that the defund the police was toxic and the fact that you are unable to understand such polling is another source of amusement to me. The fact that you do not understand the polling does not mean that it does exist. Clearly the GOP understood this polling and used such polling to win some races

Again, I trust the polling posted and I trust Presidents Obama and Biden on this issue. Your claims are false and offensive

[kentuck]

55. Defund the police coupled with the continued rioting in Portland and the lack of response...

...was primarily the turn-off for many voters, in my opinion.

[SharonClark]

59. Boom!

[uponit7771]

61. both reports basically say it was dem LACK of response to "we'll take away police" vs the efficacy

... of the slogan that hurt the most.

The 2nd report outlined why some down ballot dems didn't respond at all to DTP attacks.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

255. That is not true

Read the material and quote it accurately

[Treefrog]

125. This!

[underpants]

63. 👀

Thanks. Reading later.

[themaguffin]

72. Bullshit, the slogan is a gift to the GOP

[uponit7771]

101. The 3 polls say different, it wasn't the efficacy of the slogan it was the lack of Dem response

[themaguffin]

113. In politics, if you're explaining, you're losing.

[Treefrog]

124. Excellent point!

Boom!

[LetMyPeopleVote]

263. The moronic defund the police slogan lost yet again

Link to tweet

[MineralMan]

73. "Defund the Police" was used by Republican Candidates

Last edited Thu Jun 24, 2021, 11:10 AM - Edit history (2)

in swing districts to bend the vote in their favor. It had little other impact, really. As a slogan, it was a poor one. Sensible people recognize that the police are needed in our society. In a few places, the constant use of DFT by Republican candidates was enough to swing the vote their way. That, despite the fact that Democratic candidates in those places made it clear that DFT was not their goal.

Democrats tend not to use inflammatory slogans to attack Republicans. Republicans, on the other hand, are quick to use any slogans they thing will influence an election, whether those slogans have any truth in them or not. In doing so, they are appealing to that segment of the voting public that does not think about things very much, and simply reacts.

Democratic candidates need to recognize such slogans and dismiss them clearly and often. Like this: "My opponent says I want to 'Defund the Police.' That is a lie. I want no such thing. Don't listen to my opponent. When you need the Police, they will be there. I promise you that."

We should not resort to using inflammatory slogans. Instead, we should counter such slogans with sensible language and promises.

[orleans]

80. practically perfect!

"Democratic candidates need to recognize such slogans and dismiss them clearly and often. Like this: "My opponent says I want to "Defund the Police." That is a lie. I want no such thing. Don't listen to my opponent. When you need the Police, they will be there. I promise you that."

short sentences. easy to remember.
'i promise you that' is absolute and reassuring.
calling a lie a lie is powerful--lets people know you are being forthcoming and not bullshitting around.

it drives me crazy when i hear dems use the word 'fabrication' or 'untruth' or some other nice little replacement for that plain and simple three letter word: lie.

the only thing i might cut is the 'don't listen to my opponent' line. (imo it throws the attention back to opponent; opponent was already given attention at the beginning of statement. it also tells listeners what not to do and i'm not sure listeners want to be told what not to do or even what to do when it comes to listening to or believing when it comes to this topic)

[uponit7771]

103. +1, the 1 bend the 2 reports recognize was turn out of GQP not a true game changer for ...

... middle, PoC, democrat and first time voters.

We need a brand and a message for those voters similar to Obama 2008

. That, despite the fact that Democratic candidates in those places made it clear that DFT was not their goal.

Page 30 of the 2nd report outlines dems, for the most part, didn't respond at all to DTP or had the wrong response and polling was off on the issue.

The democrats who DID define themselves on policing DTP attack was of little to no effect despite the money spent on campaign from the GQP.

Democratic candidates need to recognize such slogans and dismiss them clearly and often. Like this: "My opponent says I want to 'Defund the Police.' That is a lie. I want no such thing. Don't listen to my opponent. When you need the Police, they will be there. I promise you that."

BINGO !!

This would've gotten us 2 more senators at the least imho, not responding to the DTP attack was acken to Kerry 04 and swiftboating; the GQP attack didn't have to be true or even rational the non response was killer.

[sarisataka]

74. Tomato- tomahto

Basically it is saying it wasn't Democrats saying defund the police, it was Republicans saying Democrats will defund the police- and Democrats were not able to counter that.

It brings why two questions-

One, if the accusation is untrue why could a candidate not simply point out the lie. Was there a potential negative effect to saying 'I am not in favor of defunding the police'? Biden was able to say exactly that and still win.

Two, a much more concerning question, is why were Democratic candidates unable to establish an identity that they are a better choice than a candidate from the party that is giving unquestioning support to the worst President since Warren Harding?

[uponit7771]

104. Democrats ... WERE ... able to counter DTP attacks but didn't. Page 30 of 2nd report ...

... goes on for some democrats they said nothing at all and there was bad polling on the issue.

The democrats who branded themselves early and often won dems who didn't lost.

That's not saying DTP was the game changer, there's no polling supporting that, it was lack of democratic branding that didn't bring people out.

One, if the accusation is untrue why could a candidate not simply point out the lie. Was there a potential negative effect to saying 'I am not in favor of defunding the police'? Biden was able to say exactly that and still win.

We could but didn't, Page 30 says polling was off on the issue. I think they didn't poll enough and didn't know the lack of branding was hurting our down ballot candidates.

Lack of branding didn't hurt the top of the ticket because he was already branded ... Biden is a known commodity.

[NurseJackie]

76. Lulz.

[uponit7771]

110. Really ?! 2 different reports saying basically the same thing is a sleeper?

[Drunken Irishman]

78. Biden is likely the only reason we won the White House...

And it's because he came out and emphatically said no to Defund the Police. Others attempted to muddle the waters by saying that defund the police means blah, blah, blah.

Had Bernie been the nominee and I think he'd have been attached to the movement and would have had little daylight between his campaign and it, even if he came out against it. But because Biden already had a built up image as a moderate, he could do just that.

In any other scenario, Democrats lose the suburbs and Trump ekes out wins in PA, MI, GA, AZ & WI, winning reelection.

What people fail to get is that Defund the Police was a non-starter in non-urban areas of the United States. Who gives two shits if it's not a liability in an extremely urban congressional district that is going to go blue no matter what?

What about those moderate districts Biden won and the Democrats barely held in suburban PA and Wisconsin?

That's the boom right there.

[uponit7771]

105. +1, "But because Biden already had a built up image as a moderate, he could do just that."

Both post mortem reports bottom line says something similar; the candidates that defined themselves won ... the candidates that didn't have a brand or message lost.

DTP wasn't the game changer for democrats it was lack of branding and messaging or allowing GQP attacks to define them.

Page 30 of the report also says some of the polling was off ... I wonder how much.

If I was the GQP dem polling would be the tool I'd attack to make it look like we were in the clear.

[Cha]

106. Exactly.. Pres Biden came out & said "NO"..

to DTP.

TY for the rest of it, too.

[BGBD]

79. Bullshit

The report is a polite way of telling certain Democratic politicians that their defend the police blather was a problem.

Certain high profile Democrats were yelling it and inevitably the ones who weren't got tied to them. If you have to spend half your time in NC defending yourself against something a representative in NY is saying then that's going to hurt you.

[uponit7771]

108. The 2 reports basically have dems not bringing out there base due to lack of branding and ....

Last edited Thu Jun 24, 2021, 05:54 PM - Edit history (1)

... messaging.

Were democrats didn't brand or message republicans did it for them, that's not stating the efficacy of whatever culgel from the GQP it highlights we didn't have a offense.

DTP wasn't a game changer to the left, middle, PoC and non / first time voters ... there's no polling supporting that.

From the 2 reports it was lack of branding / messaging was the game changer not DTP

[Treefrog]

126. Please look over that post and perhaps correct some things and rephrase.

I really can’t understand it as written, especially the last sentence.

[uponit7771]

127. Fixed, "From the 2 reports it was lack of branding / messaging was the game changer not DTP"

[LetMyPeopleVote]

149. You are misquoting these studies and you are wrong

You are misquoting the exit and other polling that has been posted I read the poll and the key thing is that I actually understood the material. Did you even read the article? I am amused that you are misquoting the article by leaving out a key passage. Here is the passage that you clearly did not understand

SCR’s survey findings also suggest that most voters did not see a clear Democratic agenda; moreover, Democratic candidates were hurt by their party’s associations with far-left attitudes and movements—in particular, the movement to defund the police.

Here is the link and relevant passage that show that it was the lack of a clear message was due to the Democratic Party's "associations with far-left attitudes and movements—in particular, the movement to defund the police."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/dougschoen/2020/11/17/new-post-election-poll-reveals-how-democrats-leftward-movement-cost-the-party-in-the-2020-election/?sh=403ab6b4675f

SCR’s survey, which sought to gain insight into the attitudes of voters in order to lend an explanation to Democrats’ relatively disappointing election performance, reveals that a plurality (39%) of voters already believes the Democratic party’s agenda is too left-wing. Yet, less than 3-in-10 (29%) voters believe the Republican agenda is too right-wing, and a plurality (43%) believes that the Republican agenda strikes an appropriate balance.

Though party identification in both SCR’s survey and in national exit polls are close to evenly split, the ideological balance of the electorate tilts conservative. Indeed, a plurality (37%) of respondents in SCR’s survey self-identified as conservative, and a similar share considered themselves to be moderate (36%). Yet, less than one-quarter (24%) self-identified as liberal.

Our survey also found that respondents strongly preferred that the candidates who were elected this year pursue right-leaning policies (45%), rather than left-leaning policies (31%) once they take office.

These findings may be unsurprising, given the Democrats’ disappointing election performance, notwithstanding Joe Biden’s likely victory. Contrary to pre-election predictions, which showed a demonstrable Democratic advantage, the Senate is likely to remain evenly divided with perhaps a narrow Republican advantage, and perhaps with no party advantage. Further, the Democrats also lost several seats in the House, including seats that were thought to be secure.

The last sentence is important. Democrats lost a number of seats because of left wing polices such as the rather ignorant Defund the Police slogan pushed by the Squad and progressives. Read the material. Your characterization of this polling is simply false.

You either did not read the article or you did not understand this article. Again, here is a key passage that you are ignoring or do not understand

SCR’s survey findings also suggest that most voters did not see a clear Democratic agenda; moreover, Democratic candidates were hurt by their party’s associations with far-left attitudes and movements—in particular, the movement to defund the police.

By a 12-point margin, 35% to 23%, respondents said that the movements across the country to defund the police made them less likely to vote for Democrats. Likewise, by a 12-point margin, 32% to 20%, respondents also said that these movements made them more likely to vote for Republicans.

Read the material. The fact that the Squad and progressives pushed rather stupid policies such as defund the police is what hurt the Democrats. The unclear agenda was due to the squad and the progressive types pushing defund the police.

Defund the Police is a stupid policy that hurt us. I saw ads using this theme and socialism used in Texas and the socialism attacks evidently worked very well in Florida where Joe should had have a chance due to trump's poor treatment of Puerto Rico.

In Texas we have looked at why trump did better with Hispanic voters and according to the Continuing Legal Education courses put on by the Harris County Democratic Lawyers Association and the Texas Democratic Lawyers Association (witht the state party numbers cruncher) I have also attended trump was benefited with Hispanic voters due to law and order/defund the police issues and claims of socialism.

I have been working hard in the real world to turn Texas blue. We went from 49 Democratic seats in the Texas house after the 2010 elections (out of a total of 150 seats) to having a good chance of flipping the Texas state house. It hurt like hell to see the GOP retain control of the house due to issues like defund the police. There were a number of seats where Beto beat Carnival Cruz in 2018 that the party hoped to pick up. Now, I and other Texas Democratic lawyers are gearing up to fight bad redistricting maps and GOP voter suppression law

You really should consider reading all of the article. Misquoting an article is not a good idea when dealing with someone who actually read the article

[themaguffin]

116. Exactly

The GOP could not pick a better slogan if it tried.

[uponit7771]

121. They already did, Google ... "Biden Hates Beef". They're going to run with it or CRT ...

... here soon

[themaguffin]

130. You don't get it. "Biden hates beef" doesn't work outside of the cult, as for CRT

that's still more Southern Strategy bullshit.

That may work on some people, but that's not a Dem created thing. We can already see who is triggered by it - typical racist white aholes who already are solidly in the GOP.

These deflections and comparisons to defend a dumb ass slogan like "defund the police" doesn't make the slogan any less dumb ass.

[uponit7771]

131. We agree it doesn't work outside his cult and neither did defund the police as the reports say

... it was lack of branding that stemmed turnout.

The slogan could be "I'm koo koo for coco puffs" but if dems have no brand or messaging we'll most likely get the same result

[cinematicdiversions]

183. Defund the police worked great outside of the cult. That is why it was a problem.

Show that with the dramatic increase in crime and riots in the news and you have a potent mix.

None of us would actually live in a place without an effective and active police force. Why would we suggest this for others?

[uponit7771]

188. There's no data indicating DTP was a game changer on getting out dem votes, it wasn't.

There is data showing democratic party lack of branding and messaging down ballot is what stemmed dem votes.

[betsuni]

150. +1

[gulliver]

129. DTP hurt the party's brand, because DTP is a classic wedge issue.

Dems couldn't be strongly against DTP (brand themselves strongly against it) without risking a sliver of lost votes. Given the importance and closeness of this election, I'd say we picked the right poison. Let the candidates themselves be against DTP, but don't try to make it part of the "brand."

We need to be loyal to the Dem Party and what it stands for. The core Dem principles are what matter. There should be no question whatsoever that they are better than Republicanism. There should be no question whatsoever that our voters will vote Dem as a united bloc no matter what paltry wedge issues are brought up to distract and divide us. That's how you get a brand.

[uponit7771]

132. Two reports are saying it wasn't DTP that hurt dems but lack of branding and messaging. Dems

... did even come up with the slogan or even make it part of the platform save one or two new comers that weren't made national.

The reports are pretty clear; we didn't brand or message well down ballot and there's little proof DTP worked outside of MAGALund.

We need to brand better
We need to message to PoC better

[LetMyPeopleVote]

148. New Post-Election Poll Reveals How Democrats' Leftward Movement Cost the Party in the 2020 Election

This the polling that you misquoted on another thread. You were wrong then and you are still wrong Again, I remain amused by your lack of experience in working on campaigns in the real world. Thank you for the laughs

It took less than a half of a minute to find another poll that proves your uniformed claims are wrong. https://www.forbes.com/sites/dougschoen/2020/11/17/new-post-election-poll-reveals-how-democrats-leftward-movement-cost-the-party-in-the-2020-election/?sh=403ab6b4675f

An in-depth post-election poll, which was conducted among 1,000 national respondents on November 8th - 9th, 2020 by my firm, Schoen Cooperman Research (SCR), suggests that the Democratic Party is seen as too left-wing and out-of-touch, while the Republican party is seen as striking a more appropriate balance, and as ideologically closer to the electorate.

Ultimately, the election results taken together with our survey findings show that it was the Democratic party’s movement to the left that represents a clear drag on their level of support and a potential problem going forward for the party both in governing and in the 2022 midterm elections. Accordingly, a majority (62%) of SCR’s survey respondents take Joe Biden’s likely victory as a mandate for centrist policies, compromise, and coming together with Republicans; as opposed to a mandate for Biden to pursue progressive policies (28%)......

Not only did Biden’s narrower-than-expected victory not coincide with the blue-wave that Democrats anticipated in down-ballot races, but our findings also suggest that Donald Trump would have been reelected, most likely easily, if not for the coronavirus pandemic and the economic downturn that followed. Trump actually overperformed in most battlegrounds and ran close margins in lean-Democrat states like Wisconsin and Michigan, where Biden held wide polling leads in months prior.

SCR’s survey findings also suggest that most voters did not see a clear Democratic agenda; moreover, Democratic candidates were hurt by their party’s associations with far-left attitudes and movements—in particular, the movement to defund the police.

By a 12-point margin, 35% to 23%, respondents said that the movements across the country to defund the police made them less likely to vote for Democrats. Likewise, by a 12-point margin, 32% to 20%, respondents also said that these movements made them more likely to vote for Republicans.

Again, the polling shows that the GOP use of attack ads featuring Defund the Police were very effective. Your attacks on good Democrats who lost due to these ads are truly sad and disgusting. The polls prove that you are wrong and you need to apologize to the good members of the Democratic Party who lost elections that they should had won but for these attacks

[uponit7771]

159. "... most voters did not see a clear Democratic agenda..." Or brand

Yep two different reports and your own poll indicate vagueness from Democrats hurt them more than a slogan

[betsuni]

166. How did they not see a clear Democratic agenda or brand?

Republican voters know that Democrats are for heath care, higher minimum wages, equality, social safety net, regulating businesses, higher taxes for corporations and the wealthy, civil rights, government, environmentalism, green energy, etc.

Who doesn't know this?

[uponit7771]

168. Easy, in 08 dems had a poster with a word that even REPUBLICANS tried to ascribe to late in the

... 08 campaigning not in 16 and 20.

Obama had a branding a messaging campaign that was kick ass but didn't keep it up after he was elected.

Obama 08 was supposed to be the STANDARD of messaging and branding for democrats not the pinnacle.

Who doesn't know this?

Per the report and the poll upthread it was an agenda that wasn't branded to voters simply ... and ... some Hispanic voter issues weren't addressed at all.

Also in the 2nd report democrats depend on left brain messages too much vs right brain association with a brand or message.

[betsuni]

170. A poster wasn't the reason the Democrat won.

It was because the Republicans destroyed the economy.

[uponit7771]

173. I agree, the poster was great branding and association and to this day is part of pop culture ...

... it wasn't the poster alone it was the message of hope also which.......... was on the poster.

Obama 08 campaign is the standard of great campaigning but too many dem consultants sound like its nearly impossible to repeat.

I disagree with that notion, in the 2nd report it says democrats depend less on association and feeling ads where as republicans outspend us in 2020 on that.

I don't know how we were outspent down ballot though, that's a question neither report answers

[LetMyPeopleVote]

260. Defund the police is a truly stupid slogan

Link to tweet

[Pompoy]

133. It all boils down to certain groups with their own outlook and agendas

"In part, the study found, Democrats fell short of their aspirations because many House and Senate candidates failed to match Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s support with voters of color who loathed Mr. Trump but distrusted the Democratic Party as a whole. Those constituencies included Hispanic voters in Florida and Texas, Vietnamese American and Filipino American voters in California, and Black voters in North Carolina."

My wife is Filipina, I see all her friends on Facebook who praise Duterte like a hero, how would you expect them to vote here?
Never mind Cuban-Americans in Florida and whatever is happening in Texas.
Something else, I generally admire Robert Reich, have been a fan for decades but even he gets on my nerves big time on his Facebook posts lately, blaming the Democrats as a whole just because two of them, Sinema and Manchin are sabotaging the Democrat agenda.

[uponit7771]

176. We need messaging for these groups too IMHO, we can't homogenize our messaging so much

... we don't reach the coalition of voters needed.

It looks like Hispanics on the border of Texas and in Florida weren't addressed until late in the game and we couldn't come to them with the same message given to blacks in South Chi and South LA.

Dems have a wider swath to communicate to

[Laura PourMeADrink]

135. Totally agree. How can we possibly have a better messaging

system though??? We have the exact same leaders and exact same head of the DNC? Same people who had no creative plan against Dipshit?

[uponit7771]

162. +1, DCCC leadership has changed to Maloney, he has the data staring him in the face...

... and I pray they don't do the same thing on a different day expecting different results.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

228. I was really optimistic when I heard Bloomberg

Was going to use his crack team even after he lost. Say what you want about him, he assembled the right people to deal with Trump. I read it was a comedian, a psychiatrist, speech writer, etc

I always thought the Dems should it go on a retreat and invite people just like that. I would also include the best ad men and some Hollywood big money donors. Figure out how to deal with these crazies and how to communicate with them more importantly since nobody listens to CNN or MSNBC or any other media outlet except Fox.

[uponit7771]

235. +1, we need it !!! The thing about blaming DTP for down ballot losses is its lets dem bad messaging

... and branding of the hook and puts the focus were it doesn't belong.

MOST everyone understood defund the police as sentiment and not policy, no one wants to fuck Trump but FUCK TRUMP.

We need a more concrete messaging and branding especially to PoC and take that to heart.

We need your suggestion, go away with the experts and get things done

[LetMyPeopleVote]

136. Do you tire of being wrong?

This article explains why Democrats did poorly in the 2020 elections.

Link to tweet

3. Moderate Democrats got slammed by “defund the police” and “socialist” and “Medicare-for-all” ads. These were the predominant ads that Republicans ran in competitive House and Senate races. Some of it was fearmongering and inaccurate. In retrospect, a number of Democrats, especially moderate ones, don’t think the party took those attacks seriously enough.

Here’s what Rep. Harley Rouda (D-Calif.), who lost, told The Washington Post: “Many [voters], I believe, bought into the message that Democrats are marching in that direction [of socialism], and that was a false narrative. I would tell you, the Democratic Party, in my opinion, is more moderate than it has ever been. We did not combat that message as effectively as we should have.”

“My opponent only talked about three words: Defund the police,” Democrat Cameron Webb said on a private call this week, Politico reported. He lost what Democrats hoped was a winnable race in Virginia.

“I’m not sure that as a party we took that attack head on, and provided our counter narrative,” Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-Fla.) told Politico of “socialist” attacks resonating with Hispanic voters in Florida, costing Democrats two House seats. “It’s not enough to say what you’re not, you have to define what you are. And we have to define it in a way that doesn’t scare the American people.”

“[T]he [liberal] rhetoric and the policies and all that stuff — it has gone way too far,” Rep. Conor Lamb (D-Pa.) told the New York Times. “It needs to be dialed back. It needs to be rooted in common sense, in reality, and yes, politics. Because we need districts like mine to stay in the majority and get something done for the people that we care about the most.”

[uponit7771]

164. Two different reports on Democrats vagueness and your own poll ...

.... says I'm right.

From your own poll

"... ***MOST*** voters did not see a clear Democratic agenda..."

Democratic vagueness was the game changer not defund the police.

It's up to you to do something with the information of reality in front of you

[betsuni]

167. Republicans are the vague ones.

They have no policies, have no clear agenda except for lower tases for the wealthy.

[uponit7771]

169. True, I think it was the 2nd report that outlines dem messaging is too left brain (logical etc) vs..

... the republican messages get into the associations and feelings.

Most voters aren't politicos and the association feeling messages are more impactful.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

151. The OP is very invested in this moronic slogan

This is not the only thread where the OP has defended this slogan and has stated that Democratic candidates who lost due to this slgoan deserved to lose. I am disgusted by the comments made by the OP that any and all Democratic candidates who lost in 2020 due to this slogan are all bad democrats and deserved to lose. I worked on several campaigns and I saw the GOP use this slogan to great effect. All of my friends who ran are good democrats and it is sad that the GOP was able to use this moronic slogan against them.

There are a ton of good Democrats who lost in 2020 due to this slogan and these Democrats are good people and did not deserve to lose. I wish that the OP would volunteer to work in a real campaign in the real world.

I wonder why the OP is so invested in this ignorant slogan. It was clear that in the NY mayor race that this slogan was a loser and the winning candidate repudiated this ignorant slogan. I do not believe that my friends who ran and lost in 2020 are bad democrats and I find the attacks on these good democrats by the OP to be sad and wrong

[betsuni]

153. I agree.

[betsuni]

155. Yes, the myth that the majority of Americans are just like them but don't know it yet.

The diabolical powers of The Democratic Establishment will stop at nothing to defeat them because they are bribed. When The People understand this, they will rally together and the revolution/movement will begin.

It's really getting old.

[uponit7771]

157. ...and there are too many people vested in lazy thinking of allowing GQP to define us with lies

[LetMyPeopleVote]

203. Obama: You lose people with 'snappy' slogans like 'defund the police'

It has been clear to me for a long time that you have never worked in an actual campaign in the real world. I trust President Obama's opinion on this

Link to tweet

Former President Obama said political candidates lose support when using “snappy” slogans like “defund the police,” in an interview scheduled to be released Wednesday.

Obama told Peter Hamby, who hosts a Snapchat political show “Good Luck America,” that those who use the slogan could jeopardize their goals of enacting meaningful reforms for police.

"You lost a big audience the minute you say it, which makes it a lot less likely that you're actually going to get the changes you want done," the former president said in the interview scheduled to go live at 6 a.m. on Wednesday, according to Axios.


"The key is deciding, do you want to actually get something done, or do you want to feel good among the people you already agree with?" Obama added.

The former president’s comments align with other top Democrats who have considered the phrase to be damaging to the Democratic Party.

House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) told NBC News’s “Meet the Press” last month that he believed the slogan hurt some Democratic candidates, like Rep. Joe Cunningham (D-S.C.) who lost to Rep.-elect Nancy Mace (R-S.C.).

[uponit7771]

205. Ignore even your own data but accept anecdotes ?! REALLY ?! Come on man, we're

... supposed to be the reality based party.

Even your own poll say ***MOST*** voters thought dems were too vague and that stemmed turn out not most dem voters stayed home because of DTP.

I don't mind saying people I respect are wrong or I disagree with them, the data is more concrete than anecdotes.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

209. Why is this ignorant slogan so important to you-you are wrong in your claims

You either did not read article cited in OP or did not understand that article. You have repeated misrepresented the exit and other polling posted on this on other threads. The polling does NOT support your claim. I have actually read the polling and your claims about that polling are so false as to be offensive Reread these materials and stop misrepresenting these materials

Why are you repeatedly attacking good Democratic who had the courage to run in 2020. It takes a great deal of courage to run as a candidate in the real world. Why do you hate these candidates? These candidates lost in part because the GOP was able to use statements from the Squad to make these very effective ads

I trust President Obama and Rep. Clyburn. The data back these real Democrats and your misreading or inability to understand such data will not change this. Again I have both read and more importantly understood the polling data. Your claims are NOT supported by such polling data

[uponit7771]

211. Its not, reality is important the reality is DTP wasn't a game changer as much as vagueness

... (from your own polling) and lack of branding.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

213. Why are you attacking real Democrats who ran and lost due to this slogan?

Your attacks on real candidates who lost in 2020 in part due to this moronic slogan is sad and disgusting. Why do you hate real Democrats who had the courage to run for office?

I trust Presidents Obama and Biden and Rep. Clyburn. They live in the real world and have won race in the real world where it is clear that you have never worked on a campaign

[uponit7771]

215. Link and quote a candidate that ran on DTP and lost, I'll wait ...

[LetMyPeopleVote]

241. Do you ever tire of being wrong? I am amused at how you are never right on any issue

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Susan Collins was re-elected due to this stupid slogan

Link to tweet

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and the GOP’s Senate campaign arm hit her Democratic opponent, Sara Gideon, in a TV ad for links to a “defund the police” billionaire. The basis for the ad was Gideon’s attendance at a fundraiser hosted by an environmental coalition that includes NextGen America. NextGen, funded by liberal billionaire Tom Steyer, supports defunding the police

Link to tweet

As of June, just 27% of Americans supported “defunding the police,” compared with 57% who opposed it, according to a HuffPost/YouGov poll. At the same time, more moderate reforms ― such as banning chokeholds by law officers, creating a federal registry for complaints about police misconduct and developing a national use of force standard ― all had the support of large, bipartisan majorities of Americans.

“What other movement would take a set of policies that an overwhelming number of Americans support and slap an unpopular label on it?” asked Danny Barefoot, a Democratic consultant who worked on some Senate and state legislative races.

Sure enough, Republicans saw an opportunity. Painting Democrats as supporters of “defunding” the police became the focus of campaign literature, TV and digital ads, and live televised debates. That forced Democratic candidates to divert resources that might otherwise be used discussing COVID-19 relief, health care or education to be used disavowing themselves from the slogan and otherwise defending themselves.

Out of 31 broadcast TV ads that Trump and other allied campaign groups used to attack Biden and other Democrats for being soft on law and order, 11 spots ― that aired a total of 77,647 times ― explicitly mentioned “defund the police,” according to an analysis Kantar Media/CMAG conducted for HuffPost. And out of 216 Republican broadcast TV ads in congressional races blasting Democrats, 157 spots that aired 103,000 times used the phrase.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

243. What Eric Adams Shares With Joe Biden

The NY mayor's race again proves that the defund the police slogan is a stupid slogan

Link to tweet

Indeed, in the closing days of the campaign, as crime increasingly became the issue in primary voters’ minds, Adams seized on two recent horrifying episodes: the shooting of a 10-year-old through his front door in Queens and a sidewalk shooting in the Bronx that nearly took the lives of two innocent bystanders, a 10 year-old girl and her 5-year-old brother.

Even before these incidents, Adams rejected the progressive “Defund the Police” sloganeering that cost the Democrats several winnable House seats last fall. He favored a narrow use of the stop-and-frisk policy to curtail gun violence. And he pledged to restore the NYPD’s recently abandoned gun-collecting anti-crime unit.

The coalition that Adams put together — including an estimated 43% of the Black vote in a multicandidate field that included two other Black candidates — isn’t too dissimilar from the one that led to Biden’s victory. A look at voter turnout shows that Adams swept the southeastern Queens neighborhoods dominated by middle-class Black families that have been supporting moderate Democrats for decades.

How much did Adams’s apparent victory resonate? Well, one day later, Biden unveiled a plan to address rising crime that includes allowing states to draw from the $350 billion federal stimulus to hire new police, among other crime-fighting measures. Defund the police? How about refund the police?

Last year, pragmatic, temperamentally “conservative” Black voters — their party’s most loyal bloc — ensured that Democrats nominated the candidate best suited to vanquish Donald Trump. This year, New York’s pragmatic Black voters appear to have nominated the Democrat best suited to revive the city most ravaged by Covid-19 — by making it once again a place where law and order helps the economy flourish.

Both Adams and Joe Biden focused on the true base of the party which are moderate African American voters.

[TraceNC]

171. Good post. What's really odd is that this

is the only phrase/slogan that’s still, months after the election, being debated in terms of its affect on the election. There’s no thread like this on whether “Medicare For All” or “Cancel Student Loans” or “Fifteen Bucks An Hour” were smart messaging. It’s just this one, just “defund the police.” And yet some are still saying: Nope! This wasn’t a problem at all!

President Obama and Rep. Clyburn see it as a problem. I’m with them.

[betsuni]

172. +1

[uponit7771]

174. Multiple polling and reports are saying "nope, that wasn't the problem" and the reaction

... overall to those reports seem to be facts and polling don't matter.

Multiple democratic reports are reporting DTP wasn't the game changer democratic party vagueness and lack of branding was.

Its not even rational to think the GQP is NOT going to come up with a slogan and attribute that to dems going forward.

We can't control them, we can control our own branding and messaging though and it should be Obama 08 level strong for down ballot candidates.

in 2020 it wasn't and we paid the price.

[TraceNC]

175. We've been through this multiple times

in this thread. Of course they’re going to try to brand our party. Nobody disagrees with that. So why help them by continuing to use this stupid slogan?

And I’ve asked this before: why do you insist upon these cherry-picked (and as someone else pointed out, misquoted reports) instead of trusting President Obama and Rep. Clyburn? (Clyburn is my Congressman. Full disclosure.) Aside from the obvious (you’re invested in this slogan so you’re only going with bits of data that support your position) why dismiss out of hand the opinions of these two great Democratic leaders?

[betsuni]

177. +1

[uponit7771]

186. "...So why help them by continuing to use this stupid slogan?..." Come on ...

...

Per the report and polling the DTP slogan WAS NOT the game changer in 2020 for democrats bad branding and messaging that kept votes on the couch was.

There was no "help" from the slogan, it WAS NOT the factor people are claiming it was.

And I’ve asked this before: why do you insist upon these cherry-picked (and as someone else pointed out, misquoted reports)

Please point out the data that was "cherry picked" or misquoted that doesn't support the conclusion of the reports?

I copy and paste the reports conclusions, so point it out were the reports say something different than I'm claiming.

instead of trusting President Obama and Rep. Clyburn?

Obama never said DTP was a game changer just that it hurt and I respect Clyburn but the reports and the polling show DTP was ... NOT ... the thing that LOST the down ballot races it was bad branding and messaging.

Dems don't worship men so we can disagree with them based on facts.

Aside from the obvious (you’re invested in this slogan so you’re only going with bits of data that support your position)

This is false, I'm not vested in the slogan I'm vested in winning and we're not going to do that blaming a slogan for losses vs MULTITUDE OF DATA showing dems had inadequate branding and messaging.

[TraceNC]

194. You're not invested in this slogan

but your OP starts with “BOOM!!” That comes across as some kind of celebratory cheer. These selected “reports” are obviously very important to you.

As I said, I’ll stick with President Obama (who, as you yourself acknowledge, said it hurt us) and Rep. Clyburn and other leaders who know very well what they’re doing.

So obviously our leaders are making some effort to approach this issue intelligently this time, and those who insist upon using this slogan can distance themselves from the Democratic Party over this one issue if they wish and they can field all the questions about it, including explaining why “defund” doesn’t mean defund.

The poster who mentioned your misquoting handled that issue.

[uponit7771]

196. The celebratory cheer is the confirming report that we were too vague down ballot. I'm MORE vested

... in proving we need better messaging / feedback and messaging distribution infrastructure, something I've been advocating for 1.5 years.

When I heard people I respect blame down ballot losses on DTP I pulled the short amount of hair I do have out of my head knowing 90% it was dem messaging that lost those winnable races.

The Republicans messaging infrastructure includes heat mapping political forums something dem consultants stay away from like its the plague.

This allows them to float concepts and get feedback within HOURS that's how they knew DTP could draw out their voters.

Also, dem consultants dismiss Obama branding as a once in a lifetime deal where it should be the STANDARD going forward.

I do agree with the SENTIMENT of DTP but not the concept, but the thing that lights me up is the overwhelming dismissal that we need the Obama 08 standard every election to defeat the GQP ability to just make shit up about us.

The poster who mentioned your misquoting handled that issue.

I go on to point out to that poster that their own data states ***MOST*** democratic voters said the democratic agenda was vague. That's not too far away from dems having lack of branding or lack of messaging.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

204. No these polling reports do not support your claims

You are mis-quoting or do not understand what these reports say. Here is an example I read the poll and the key thing is that I actually understood the material. Did you even read the article? I am amused that you are misquoting the article by leaving out a key passage. Here is the passage that you clearly did not understand

SCR’s survey findings also suggest that most voters did not see a clear Democratic agenda; moreover, Democratic candidates were hurt by their party’s associations with far-left attitudes and movements—in particular, the movement to defund the police.

Here is the link and relevant passage that show that it was the lack of a clear message was due to the Democratic Party's "associations with far-left attitudes and movements—in particular, the movement to defund the police."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/dougschoen/2020/11/17/new-post-election-poll-reveals-how-democrats-leftward-movement-cost-the-party-in-the-2020-election/?sh=403ab6b4675f

SCR’s survey, which sought to gain insight into the attitudes of voters in order to lend an explanation to Democrats’ relatively disappointing election performance, reveals that a plurality (39%) of voters already believes the Democratic party’s agenda is too left-wing. Yet, less than 3-in-10 (29%) voters believe the Republican agenda is too right-wing, and a plurality (43%) believes that the Republican agenda strikes an appropriate balance.

Though party identification in both SCR’s survey and in national exit polls are close to evenly split, the ideological balance of the electorate tilts conservative. Indeed, a plurality (37%) of respondents in SCR’s survey self-identified as conservative, and a similar share considered themselves to be moderate (36%). Yet, less than one-quarter (24%) self-identified as liberal.

Our survey also found that respondents strongly preferred that the candidates who were elected this year pursue right-leaning policies (45%), rather than left-leaning policies (31%) once they take office.

These findings may be unsurprising, given the Democrats’ disappointing election performance, notwithstanding Joe Biden’s likely victory. Contrary to pre-election predictions, which showed a demonstrable Democratic advantage, the Senate is likely to remain evenly divided with perhaps a narrow Republican advantage, and perhaps with no party advantage. Further, the Democrats also lost several seats in the House, including seats that were thought to be secure.

The last sentence is important. Democrats lost a number of seats because of left wing polices such as the rather ignorant Defund the Police slogan pushed by the Squad and progressives. Read the material. Your characterization of this polling is simply false.

You either did not read the article or you did not understand this article. Again, here is a key passage that you are ignoring or do not understand

SCR’s survey findings also suggest that most voters did not see a clear Democratic agenda; moreover, Democratic candidates were hurt by their party’s associations with far-left attitudes and movements—in particular, the movement to defund the police.

By a 12-point margin, 35% to 23%, respondents said that the movements across the country to defund the police made them less likely to vote for Democrats. Likewise, by a 12-point margin, 32% to 20%, respondents also said that these movements made them more likely to vote for Republicans.

Read the material. The fact that the Squad and progressives pushed rather stupid policies such as defund the police is what hurt the Democrats. The unclear agenda was due to the squad and the progressive types pushing defund the police.

Defund the Police is a stupid policy that hurt us. I saw ads using this theme and socialism used in Texas and the socialism attacks evidently worked very well in Florida where Joe should had have a chance due to trump's poor treatment of Puerto Rico.

In Texas we have looked at why trump did better with Hispanic voters and according to the Continuing Legal Education courses put on by the Harris County Democratic Lawyers Association and the Texas Democratic Lawyers Association (witht the state party numbers cruncher) I have also attended trump was benefited with Hispanic voters due to law and order/defund the police issues and claims of socialism.

I have been working hard in the real world to turn Texas blue. We went from 49 Democratic seats in the Texas house after the 2010 elections (out of a total of 150 seats) to having a good chance of flipping the Texas state house. It hurt like hell to see the GOP retain control of the house due to issues like defund the police. There were a number of seats where Beto beat Carnival Cruz in 2018 that the party hoped to pick up. Now, I and other Texas Democratic lawyers are gearing up to fight bad redistricting maps and GOP voter suppression law

You really should consider reading all of the article. Misquoting an article is not a good idea when dealing with someone who actually read the article

[uponit7771]

206. Your data is outdated, you've been told this before why continue to push invalid data? tia

[lapucelle]

270. The reporrt, in fact, confirms that the slogan hurt Democrats.

It adds additional reasons and nuance, but the report emphasizes that major factors in "ineffective branding" were the toxic "defund the police" slogan and the "socialist" label.

In essence, the report says that Democratic branding was ineffective because candidates were obligated to spend time, money and resources messaging about who they were not (socialists who want to defund the police, according to the report) rather than messaging about policy goals.

Saying

BOOM!! Inadequate Dem Brand is what hurt *NOT* Defund Police!! 2nd Dem 2020 Report to say so

without adding that a major part of the inadequate branding involved voter concerns that the Democratic Party was the the party of "socialists who want to defund the police" isn't particularly cogent.

You can read the report here:

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/2020-postelection-analysis/871b6e27d1b7c544/full.pdf

[betsuni]

152. I don't think Democratic messaging and branding and slogans matter that much.

I see "Hope and Change" held up as good messaging but remember criticism that the slogan was vague, could mean anything. Obama won the election because the economy was destroyed, war, Republicans deeply unpopular. Not because of a slogan. The country has changed (in the case of Republicans, dramatically) since then.

Who doesn't know what Democrats stand for? Who doesn't know their "brand"? Yes, they do. The problem is the never-ending noisy anti-Democratic propaganda coming from all directions. People get confused and start thinking they don't know. Then Democrats are blamed for not having the just the right messaging that will magically fix everything.

The ones with the most slogans, who really only have slogans, aren't doing so well. Repeating the same slogans no matter what. Especially Defund the Police. Defunding the police means defunding the police ... . Ugh.

Comedians have been destroying Republicans for many years. Putting everything wrong with them into concise jokes, like slogans. That is excellent messaging. Has it made a difference? No. Words aren't as powerful as they used to be. It's more complicated.

[uponit7771]

158. Hope and change was vague to politicos but was golden for non political people. Messaging and Brandi

... matter.

Do you remember the poster for biden's 20/20 campaign in the word that went along with it?

Neither does 95% of people who were very interested in that campaign

[betsuni]

163. Build back better. Same as always with Democrats, together. Stronger together. FDR.

The vagueness of Hope and Change allowed people to project ridiculous great expectations onto the Obama administration -- the ones so disappointed that they called him a Trojan horse Republican, used car salesman POS, obsessed about him starting World War III, killing innocent children with drones for fun. Morons.

[treestar]

182. +1

When we win, we never hear how the messaging and brand are right.

[pnwmom]

156. Defund the Police was part of the inadequate brand. n/t

[uponit7771]

160. DTP came from protesters we can't control, we can control our own brandy though...

If we don't define ourselves our opponents will define US for the voters

We need to best, first we need to be hard and often in messaging, in 2020 we weren't.

This is from a poll from a poster two responses up
".... most voters did not see a clear Democratic agenda..."

It can't be any more clear that Democrats or not clear with an agenda down ballot.

No, stopping Republicans from chanting a slogan will not allow us to win congressional seats going forward we need a clear message a clear agenda.

That's what the data is saying was missing in 2020 down ballot.

[pnwmom]

199. No, we can try but we can't really control it. We thought we controlled branding

of Social Security, when we called it an Entitlement -- as opposed to charity. It was something we were entitled to.

For a while that worked, but R's managed to take that brand and turn it into an insult.

[uponit7771]

210. Correct, dem branding and messaging needs to be better. That's the long and short of the article

... backed up by reports and data that our messaging needs to be better.

My issue with blaming DTP is it lets our branding and messaging off the hook and these reports states that dem "message" was vague and the branding was non existent.

[pnwmom]

216. Hillary's slogan was "Stronger together." How is that less "vague" than Make America Great Again"?nt

[uponit7771]

221. 2020 2nd report delineate the top of the ticket from the down ballots so I'm thinking top of the ...

... ticket with Biden was really defined

There are some anecdotes on page 23 of the second report

As a former Member of Congress described the issue, Democrats focused on arguing that Trump was bad, not why a Democratic majority would help voters, “It was the lack of an economic plan that really hurt”

[LetMyPeopleVote]

200. Why are you making statements that are false?

The squad pushed the Defund the Police slogan heavily and the squad were very upset with President Obama due to President Obama pointing out the harmful effect of the moronic "defund the police" slogan https://www.mediaite.com/news/squad-members-clap-back-at-obamas-defund-the-police-clapback/

Members of the self-styled Democratic “Squad” responded to President Barack Obama’s criticism of the slogan “Defund the Police” — which also prompted a mixture of strong reactions from other political and media figures on Twitter.

President Obama’s comments — published in part Tuesday night, but aired in full Wednesday morning on Peter Hamby’s Good Luck America show on Snapchat — included a pragmatic critique of the slogan, along with support for the reforms its adherents promote.

“If you believe, as I do, that we should be able to reform the criminal justice system so that it’s not biased, and treats everybody fairly, I guess you can use a snappy slogan like ‘Defund the Police,’ but you know you’ve lost a big audience the minute you say it. Which makes it a lot less likely that you’re actually going to get the changes you want done,” Obama said in one portion of the interview.

Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar clapped back at Obama by explaining that the slogan is “not a slogan.”

Link to tweet

The statements made by the squad pushing this stupid slogan were easy to use in attack ads in the real world

Again, you should consider working in an actual campaign in the real world to see how things work.

[uponit7771]

217. WOW !! Now you're pushing bullshit from Foxnews ?!!? They're they ones claiming the squad

Last edited Fri Jun 25, 2021, 01:42 PM - Edit history (1)

... pushed DTP heavily.

Here's their bullshit false article claiming they pushed DTP hard and you're repeating it ...

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/aoc-defund-police-squad-private-security

WOW !!

Really ?!

Telling no?


tia

[Autumn]

181. The faithful will argue to the death that defund the police is what hurt the party. I agree

a big part of the problem is an absense of branding.

[uponit7771]

189. +1, I don't know why they'll argue that in the face of the data though.

I'm thinking 2 different reports and polling showing DTP wasn't the game changer would encourage us to define candidates down ballot earlier and often.

There's so much "fuck data" in this thread its gob smacking

[Autumn]

192. Data is easy to ignore if it goes against ones narrative.

Well not only easy but it's required by some. Thanks for the article it was very interesting.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

201. The article cited in the OP does NOT support the claims made by the OP

[uponit7771]

208. The quotes in the OP are from the article, your arguments so weak you gotta make stuff up now?

[LetMyPeopleVote]

212. It is sad that you do NOT understand the material posted

I have been very active in party politics in the real world and I can read and understand the material. You should consider working on campaigns in the real world

[uponit7771]

214. Blame DTP as the gating factor vs "vague" messaging all you want if that makes you feel better.

Maloney has DCCC report and has allowed consultants from the left into the fold for down ballot candidates now.

Sounds like Maloney's listening to the data and understanding the short comings in polling and branding and not doing the same thing over and over expecting different results.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

224. Read the polling data or have some read the data and explain it to you

Your claims are NOT supported by that data I have worked on campaigns in the real world and I understood the data. Your are misrepresenting the data because you dot understand such data

[uponit7771]

226. You're pushing fox news bullshit, that's what I read. You claim the squad pushed DTP hevily and

... that's false on its face.

Go back to the factory with that winger bullshit, its broke and most if not all the google search articles on "squad pushed defund the police" is right wing sources.

Fuck that ... I'm done

[LetMyPeopleVote]

229. Again you are always wrong

I find your continued claims that any real Democratic candidate who lost in 2020 are really bad democrats and candidates who deserved to lose. Your continued attacks on good Democrats who lost races that they should had won is sad and disgusting. I am friends with one congressional candidate and two state house candidates. Each of these candidates had GOP PACs run ads using members of the squad touting the concept that defund the police was the real policy of the Democratic Party. These ads were very effective in the real world

Look in the real world the Squad and Just Us Democrats have little real power in the party. However given the amount of press these persons received, many voters believed these ads and good Democrats including my friends lost races they should had won. Heck, members of the squad are still defending this stupid policy of defunding the police. This is a dumb policy but you are committed to defending this policy. You have misrepresented or failed to understand the polling data cited if you tried to use these misrepresentations in court you would not be happy.

I want Democrats to win next cycle. The New York mayor’s race shows that defunding the police is a dumb idea that was rejected yet again be Democratic voters. Next cycle with Joe Biden and Jaimie Harrison in charge, the party will be aggressive in attacking this dumb program/slogan. I am sad that you are committed to defending this ignorant slogan but the party and voters have rejected “defund the police” as a part of the Democratic platform

Working on a political campaign can be hard work and it hurts when your candidate loses. However, Texas will turn blue and no one will be using the ignorant “defund the police” slogan in the upcoming campaigns.

[uponit7771]

233. "The squad pushed the Defund the Police slogan heavily .." That's from your *OWN POST* and its right

... wing bullshit and you know it.

A google search of "the squad defund the police" tops MOSTLY winger sources, Screw that man

and gas lighting sucks too, I don't think that is needed around here

[LetMyPeopleVote]

236. Do you even tire of being wrong-I saw the ads used in my district

These ads used members of the squad talking about defunding the police.

I live in the real world. Here is an analysis from Charlie Cook (he is an expert in polling and people who live in the real world and who work on real campaigns know about him). https://cookpolitical.com/analysis/house/house-overview/five-takeaways-our-2020-house-forecast-and-three-resolutions-2021-and

4. Republicans' attacks on "socialism" and "defund the police" were potent - and Democrats didn't do enough to blunt them.
Throughout the cycle, Democrats rolled their eyes at Republicans' incessant ads on these themes. After all, a minuscule number of House Democrats actually identify as "democratic socialists" or have advocated reducing police funding.

But in a presidential cycle with plenty of voters who aren't immersed in the policy weeds, these attacks worked. In one ad, former GOP Irvine Mayor Beth Van Duyne was flanked by seven police officers and accused her opponent, Democrat Candace Valenzuela, of siding with "radicals" who want to "defund the police, end cash bail and release criminals."

Van Duyne ended up beating Valenzuela, who ran as the progressive in the Democratic primary, by a point - even though non-whites are now a majority in the suburban Dallas seat and Biden carried the district at the top of the ticket. Although Valenzuela's ads played up her advocacy of school safety on the school board, the damage was too much to overcome.

Relatively few Democratic challengers aired ads inoculating themselves against these attacks. Most chose to stay on "offense" on healthcare and COVID in their messaging. And, many paid the price. Says one GOP consultant, "In 2018, Dems were seen as normal. But after the rise of AOC, the primaries and 'defund the police,' it was easier to paint them as radical."

Democrats' genuinely progressive challengers fared the worst. Medicare-for-All proponents Kara Eastman and Dana Balter lost to GOP Reps. Don Bacon (NE-02) and John Katko (NY-24) by five and ten points respectively, despite Biden carrying both districts by seven points. The DCCC/HMP spent a combined $9.8 million on these two races.

Very few non-incumbent Democrats ran ahead of Biden in their districts, but one was Cameron Webb (VA-05), who touted support from sheriffs in his ads and flipped the script by accusing his GOP opponent of voting to cut police funding. He took 47 percent, two points better than Biden's 45 percent. Had all Democrats outperformed by that much, they would have gained a dozen seats.

The GOP used AOC to paint the party as being in favor of "defund the police" and this tactic worked

The real world is a nice place and it is hard work working on a campaign. Howver the experience of working with the party and on campaigns is a good thing and your complete lack of such eperience is sad

[LetMyPeopleVote]

238. GOP Launches Ads Highlighting 'Defund The Police' To Target Vulnerable 2022 Dems

The GOP used ads featuring the squad to great effect I like living in the real world. Do you ever tire of being wrong?

Link to tweet

https://thepoliticalinsider.com/gop-launches-ads-highlighting-defund-the-police-to-target-vulnerable-2022-dems/

The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) has begun running digital ads targeting Democrats for “defund the police” policies and rhetoric in districts they have deemed “vulnerable” in the upcoming midterms.

The ads will run in five Democrat-held districts the GOP hopes to flip in 2022 on their way to a House majority.

The ad highlights left-wing calls to defund the nation’s police departments, and highlights ‘Squad’ member Rep. Rashida Tlaib‘s demand to abolish prisons.

From Yahoo News, NRCC Spokesman Michael McAdams said of the ad push,

“We are going to ensure every voter knows Democrats want to Defund the Police. Whether it’s Rashida Tlaib demanding an end to policing and incarceration, or Maxine Waters encouraging rioters to engage in violence, Democrats can’t be trusted to stand with law enforcement and keep Americans safe.”

.....The content of the ads comes by way of nationally-recognized Democrats.

In the aftermath of the tragic shooting of Daunte Wright in Minneapolis, far-left Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MN) proclaimed the shooting wasn’t an accident and demanded abolition of policing and incarceration.

[Autumn]

240. Now that's amusing. Since I can read I will 100% disgree with you.

You can interpret data how you chose and believe it but making up facts iand pushing old debunked data is very GOPish. I think I will trust the current article since the older data was wrong to begin with and has already been kicked to the curb.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

244. None of the data support your silly claims

Read the material or have someone read it and explain it to you You evidently skipped this section

Maloney laid out how Democrats simply underestimated the number of hardcore Trump voters and, with more Trump voters in the voting booths, the Republican attacks against the “defund the police” movement proved more potent than Democrats ever anticipated.

“The lies and distortions about defund and socialism carried a punch, but the Republicans think it got them over a 10-foot wall, when Trump’s turnout gave them a seven-foot ladder,” Maloney said in 45-minute interview, exclusively outlining what he calls the “Deep Dive” into the election.

Here is a better and more thoughtful analysis that focuses on the content of the ads. The GOP was more effective in using negative ads and the Democratic candidates focused on the wrong issues https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/27/can-democrats-avoid-pitfalls-2020-new-analysis-offers-striking-answers/

The analysis also finds that Republicans spent a lot more money on casting Democrats as extremists than Democrats did in making the case against Republican extremism.

Democrats, of course, lost a net dozen House seats, underperforming victorious Joe Biden all over the place. The findings suggest Democrats need a rethink of their approach to those conundrums, the analysts conclude.

This is also more pressing now that Republicans are radicalizing in a way that poses a threat to future democratic stability, raising questions about how Democrats can highlight this to the public.

The study by Way to Win — a group distinguished by its big expenditures on turning out the Democratic base — attempts a comprehensive look at all the TV ads that ran in House races in the 2020 cycle. Some findings:

Democrats spent three times more than Republicans on ads that touted bipartisan outreach. Democrats spent $21.8 million on ads about “bipartisanship” or “working across the aisle,” while Republicans spent $6.2 million on them.
Democrats spent six times as much on positive ads than Republicans did. Democrats spent $18.6 million on positive ads that also happened to mention Republicans (say, by touting the ability to work with them), while Republicans spent $2.9 million on positive ads mentioning Democrats.
Republicans spent more than 10 times more on ads with the words “extremist” and “radical” than Democrats did. Republicans spent $51 million on such ads, while Democrats spent $3.4 million.
Overall, Republicans spent more than $87 million on ads with one or more of the following words in it: “AOC,” “Ocasio,” “Pelosi,” “socialism,” “socialist,” “defund,” “radical,” “extremist,” “extreme.”
GOP ads were more likely to use words with “emotional punch,” such as “taxes,” “radical” and “jobs,” while Democratic ads featured words like “insurance,” “voted” and “work.”

Jenifer Fernandez Ancona, the vice president of Way to Win, said that, in sum, Democrats in 2020 sent mixed messages: They touted their willingness to work with Republicans, even as Republicans called them socialists and extremists.

Negative ads such defund the police and socialism work and the GOP focused on these ads instead of more positive ads. Defund the police was a very effective line of attack according to the other polling on this thread

[LetMyPeopleVote]

261. Defund the police is a truly stupid slogan

Link to tweet

[Politicub]

191. The right-wing echo chamber takes a word, phrase or concept and

ceaselessly repeats it. If it wasn’t defund the police, it would be something else. Republicans are baby birds, mouths agape, hungry for the next ear worm.

Flogging CRT is a two-fer: They can criticize education and be racist in one breath.

It’s irritating and highly effective. It makes right-wing media sound like gibberish to those outside of it, but they thrive on simplicity and clear delineation of the other.

Liberals, otoh, don’t have a uniform definition of “other.” And I’m glad about that.

It is hard to be a well-rounded citizen but easy to be an ignorant tool. Shallow people take the easy route.

[uponit7771]

193. +1, the 2nd report suggest dems not be so left brained in the messaging but more associative

... in messaging for branding sakes.

It wont get more GQP votes but I suspect will help us define candidates

[LetMyPeopleVote]

202. Again you have not made true statements about the data

You are misquoting the exit and other polling that has been posted I read the poll and the key thing is that I actually understood the material. Did you even read the article? I am amused that you are misquoting the article by leaving out a key passage. Here is the passage that you clearly did not understand

SCR’s survey findings also suggest that most voters did not see a clear Democratic agenda; moreover, Democratic candidates were hurt by their party’s associations with far-left attitudes and movements—in particular, the movement to defund the police.

Here is the link and relevant passage that show that it was the lack of a clear message was due to the Democratic Party's "associations with far-left attitudes and movements—in particular, the movement to defund the police."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/dougschoen/2020/11/17/new-post-election-poll-reveals-how-democrats-leftward-movement-cost-the-party-in-the-2020-election/?sh=403ab6b4675f

SCR’s survey, which sought to gain insight into the attitudes of voters in order to lend an explanation to Democrats’ relatively disappointing election performance, reveals that a plurality (39%) of voters already believes the Democratic party’s agenda is too left-wing. Yet, less than 3-in-10 (29%) voters believe the Republican agenda is too right-wing, and a plurality (43%) believes that the Republican agenda strikes an appropriate balance.

Though party identification in both SCR’s survey and in national exit polls are close to evenly split, the ideological balance of the electorate tilts conservative. Indeed, a plurality (37%) of respondents in SCR’s survey self-identified as conservative, and a similar share considered themselves to be moderate (36%). Yet, less than one-quarter (24%) self-identified as liberal.

Our survey also found that respondents strongly preferred that the candidates who were elected this year pursue right-leaning policies (45%), rather than left-leaning policies (31%) once they take office.

These findings may be unsurprising, given the Democrats’ disappointing election performance, notwithstanding Joe Biden’s likely victory. Contrary to pre-election predictions, which showed a demonstrable Democratic advantage, the Senate is likely to remain evenly divided with perhaps a narrow Republican advantage, and perhaps with no party advantage. Further, the Democrats also lost several seats in the House, including seats that were thought to be secure.

The last sentence is important. Democrats lost a number of seats because of left wing polices such as the rather ignorant Defund the Police slogan pushed by the Squad and progressives. Read the material. Your characterization of this polling is simply false.

You either did not read the article or you did not understand this article. Again, here is a key passage that you are ignoring or do not understand

SCR’s survey findings also suggest that most voters did not see a clear Democratic agenda; moreover, Democratic candidates were hurt by their party’s associations with far-left attitudes and movements—in particular, the movement to defund the police.

By a 12-point margin, 35% to 23%, respondents said that the movements across the country to defund the police made them less likely to vote for Democrats. Likewise, by a 12-point margin, 32% to 20%, respondents also said that these movements made them more likely to vote for Republicans.

Read the material. The fact that the Squad and progressives pushed rather stupid policies such as defund the police is what hurt the Democrats. The unclear agenda was due to the squad and the progressive types pushing defund the police.

Defund the Police is a stupid policy that hurt us. I saw ads using this theme and socialism used in Texas and the socialism attacks evidently worked very well in Florida where Joe should had have a chance due to trump's poor treatment of Puerto Rico.

In Texas we have looked at why trump did better with Hispanic voters and according to the Continuing Legal Education courses put on by the Harris County Democratic Lawyers Association and the Texas Democratic Lawyers Association (witht the state party numbers cruncher) I have also attended trump was benefited with Hispanic voters due to law and order/defund the police issues and claims of socialism.

I have been working hard in the real world to turn Texas blue. We went from 49 Democratic seats in the Texas house after the 2010 elections (out of a total of 150 seats) to having a good chance of flipping the Texas state house. It hurt like hell to see the GOP retain control of the house due to issues like defund the police. There were a number of seats where Beto beat Carnival Cruz in 2018 that the party hoped to pick up. Now, I and other Texas Democratic lawyers are gearing up to fight bad redistricting maps and GOP voter suppression law

You really should consider reading all of the article. Misquoting an article is not a good idea when dealing with someone who actually read the article

[uponit7771]

207. Please link and quote "false data" otherwise you're lying. You've done this trolling shit ...

... too many times and now you're pasting data that you've been told before is invalid and outdated from last year.

Go ahead and link and quote my "false data" (where I posted info that was opposite of what my sources say) or stop trolling.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

225. You calling someone a liar amuses me

I have posted the actual polling data numerous time and have shown where you either did not u derstand such data or you are the one misrepresenting such data Thank you for proving that you have never worked on a campaign in the real world and do not understand how such campaigns work

[fescuerescue]

220. I would say that the motto "DEFUND THE POLICE"

is a form of brand in itself.

btw - What are the acronyms DTP and GQP?

[uponit7771]

223. Correct, I see its a branding that couldn't happen if we defined ourselves first with branding that

... was strong and often repeated.

DTP - Defund The Police

and

GQP - Grand Q Party

[LetMyPeopleVote]

230. It is a brand that voters in the real world have rejected

Why use a brand that loses races. The exit polling is clear that this “brand” loses elections in the real world

[fescuerescue]

231. Oh I agree

I guess I was trying to point out that it doesn't make much sense to say it was "Defund the Police" and then say it was just bad branding.

It's same damn thing.

[uponit7771]

237. Democrats didn't brand themselves adequately and most polled said dem message was "vague" ...

... that's the point here.

The reason we were branded with DTP was our message was too vague and so was the brand, that ALLOWED DTP.

There's little showing DTP was the deciding factor in votes but there is evidence showing a "vague message" was a factor on stemming dem votes especially in areas were PoC lived.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

242. Do you tire of being wrong?

The article does not support your claims. I would encourage you to either read the article cited or have someone read it and explain it to you. You evidently skipped this section

Maloney laid out how Democrats simply underestimated the number of hardcore Trump voters and, with more Trump voters in the voting booths, the Republican attacks against the “defund the police” movement proved more potent than Democrats ever anticipated.

“The lies and distortions about defund and socialism carried a punch, but the Republicans think it got them over a 10-foot wall, when Trump’s turnout gave them a seven-foot ladder,” Maloney said in 45-minute interview, exclusively outlining what he calls the “Deep Dive” into the election.

Here is a better and more thoughtful analysis that focuses on the content of the ads. The GOP was more effective in using negative ads and the Democratic candidates focused on the wrong issues https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/27/can-democrats-avoid-pitfalls-2020-new-analysis-offers-striking-answers/

The analysis also finds that Republicans spent a lot more money on casting Democrats as extremists than Democrats did in making the case against Republican extremism.

Democrats, of course, lost a net dozen House seats, underperforming victorious Joe Biden all over the place. The findings suggest Democrats need a rethink of their approach to those conundrums, the analysts conclude.

This is also more pressing now that Republicans are radicalizing in a way that poses a threat to future democratic stability, raising questions about how Democrats can highlight this to the public.

The study by Way to Win — a group distinguished by its big expenditures on turning out the Democratic base — attempts a comprehensive look at all the TV ads that ran in House races in the 2020 cycle. Some findings:

Democrats spent three times more than Republicans on ads that touted bipartisan outreach. Democrats spent $21.8 million on ads about “bipartisanship” or “working across the aisle,” while Republicans spent $6.2 million on them.
Democrats spent six times as much on positive ads than Republicans did. Democrats spent $18.6 million on positive ads that also happened to mention Republicans (say, by touting the ability to work with them), while Republicans spent $2.9 million on positive ads mentioning Democrats.
Republicans spent more than 10 times more on ads with the words “extremist” and “radical” than Democrats did. Republicans spent $51 million on such ads, while Democrats spent $3.4 million.
Overall, Republicans spent more than $87 million on ads with one or more of the following words in it: “AOC,” “Ocasio,” “Pelosi,” “socialism,” “socialist,” “defund,” “radical,” “extremist,” “extreme.”
GOP ads were more likely to use words with “emotional punch,” such as “taxes,” “radical” and “jobs,” while Democratic ads featured words like “insurance,” “voted” and “work.”

Jenifer Fernandez Ancona, the vice president of Way to Win, said that, in sum, Democrats in 2020 sent mixed messages: They touted their willingness to work with Republicans, even as Republicans called them socialists and extremists.

Negative ads such defund the police and socialism work and the GOP focused on these ads instead of more positive ads. Defund the police was a very effective line of attack according to the other polling on this thread

[LetMyPeopleVote]

249. The GOP has the benefit of a small segment of the party providing great ad material for the GOP

Again, you misread the autopsy, We need clear messaging and that means not handing the GOP ready made attack ads where members of the Squad provide great material for use in such attack ads. If you read the autopsy, we need better messaging which includes not having groups promote dumb policies such as defund the police and providing material to be used in attack ads

I saw attack ads in my county where GOP PACs took statements from the Squad about defunding the police and used such statements to imply that this was Democratic policy. Here is an excerpt from a good article on the autopsy https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/06/07/election-report-sends-democrats-warning-outreach-voters-color/7585820002/

That also gave GOP candidates a window to seize a narrative with attacks related to "radical socialists" or "defund the police" based on the series of national protests last summer around controversial police shootings of African Americans.

Congressional races that saw attack ads by Republicans pummeling Democrats with a drumbeat of "law and order" or "socialism" saw a higher share of people of color voters supporting the GOP candidate, according to the report. None of the candidates included in the report's analysis supported defunding the police, but the study says nearly all were targeted with paid attack ads claiming they did.

That issue has sparked an internal debate among Democrats for months, with moderates blaming more activist-minded or progressive national figures for going too far to the left.

"Look, there are people in the Democratic coalition who think we should literally dismantle police departments and not have them," political strategist Matt Bennett, a Third Way co-founder, said in an interview Monday.

I agree with the autopsy that the party needs better messaging. Part of that messaging needs to be agreement to not promote stupid concepts like "defund the police".

[LetMyPeopleVote]

239. The GOP is already running ads using "defund the police" against vulnerable 2022 Democrat candidates

The GOP is already running ads using the "defund the police" slogan against 2022 candidates

Link to tweet

https://thepoliticalinsider.com/gop-launches-ads-highlighting-defund-the-police-to-target-vulnerable-2022-dems/

The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) has begun running digital ads targeting Democrats for “defund the police” policies and rhetoric in districts they have deemed “vulnerable” in the upcoming midterms.

The ads will run in five Democrat-held districts the GOP hopes to flip in 2022 on their way to a House majority.

The ad highlights left-wing calls to defund the nation’s police departments, and highlights ‘Squad’ member Rep. Rashida Tlaib‘s demand to abolish prisons.

From Yahoo News, NRCC Spokesman Michael McAdams said of the ad push,

“We are going to ensure every voter knows Democrats want to Defund the Police. Whether it’s Rashida Tlaib demanding an end to policing and incarceration, or Maxine Waters encouraging rioters to engage in violence, Democrats can’t be trusted to stand with law enforcement and keep Americans safe.”

The content of the ads comes by way of nationally-recognized Democrats.

In the aftermath of the tragic shooting of Daunte Wright in Minneapolis, far-left Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MN) proclaimed the shooting wasn’t an accident and demanded abolition of policing and incarceration.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

246. Defund the Police is a great way to help the GOP win races they should not win

This is not an academic exercise for me. I am active with Texas Party and we are looking at why so many Hispanic voters went for TFG last cycle. TFG had a ton of support in the Rio Grande Valley last cycle and the state party has been polling to find out what happened. The Hispanic vote is not a monolith there are a good number of Hispanic voters who hate socialism and support the police. Guess what, socialism and radical concepts like Defund the Police alienated these voters. One set of polls confirmed that socialism is a big negative for Texas Hispanic voters and I have seen similar polling as to Florida Hispanic voters. We had a party function this week and I understand that more polling will be done on police/law enforcement before the 2022 elections. It was discussed that two GOP Texas PACs were very active on using Defund the Police ads and that they PACS will be active in 2022.

I do not understand how a small segment of the party which has no legislative accomplishments get to tell the rest of the party that we have to use stupid slogans that will cost us elections. I am sure that the Texas Party will be taking some strong positions before 2022 on stupid concepts like defund the police. We were nine state house seats away from flipping control of the Texas house and avoiding issues like permitless gun carry and the voter suppression law. I am not in favor of going into 2022 and seeing candidates lose due to moronic slogans like defund the police.

If we want to turn Texas blue, we need to stop with stupid crap like socialism and defund the police. If we had picked up 9 state house seats in 2022, Texas could have a real electrical grid and a host of other policies. We are headed to a special session next month to adopt a horrible voter suppression bill If a small segment of the party gets to declare that "defund the police" is the policy of the party, Texas will never turn blue. I am confident that the state party will adopt a platform that will be clear that no intelligent Texas candidates will be supporting this moronic concept

[LetMyPeopleVote]

257. The continuing GOP fiction that President Biden supports defunding police

Defunding the police is a moronic policy that only hurts Democrats. TFG and his goons tried to tie Joe Biden this ignorant policy and failed.

Here is the link to the Washington Post fact check on this attempt https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/06/29/continuing-gop-fiction-that-president-biden-supports-defunding-police/

During the 2020 election, the Trump campaign desperately tried to claim that Joe Biden was a supporter of the “defund the police” movement advocated by some elements of the Democratic Party. But as we noted, Trump had a problem: Biden firmly rejected calls from left-wing activists to defund police and in fact said he would double funding for a community policing program that would put more officers on the street.

This did not stop the Trump campaign or the former president from falsely suggesting otherwise. On our “Bottomless Pinocchio” list, we listed 72 examples of Trump saying Biden would defund police.

Trump lost the election. But here we are, six months into Biden’s presidency, and Republicans are still making this false claim. Cruz and Banks are two good examples of this effort, though there are many others. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), for example, claimed in a tweet that Biden “went from defund the police during the campaign to now ‘refund the police,’ ” even though his position has not changed.....

The Pinocchio Test
Republicans keep trying to tag Biden with being part of the defund police movement. But that’s simply false. The flimsiness of the charge is demonstrated by the paucity of the evidence that lawmakers muster when making their hyperbolic claims.

The reality is this: Biden wants to boost federal funding to allow for the hiring of more police officers. He said that during the campaign and then fulfilled that pledge in his initial budget proposal. The president sets the policies in his administration — and he’s been entirely consistent.

Cruz and Banks earn Four Pinocchios.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=&w=916

[LetMyPeopleVote]

259. Defund the police is a very stupid slogan

Link to tweet

[LetMyPeopleVote]

262. Rejecting defund the police helped Joe win

Link to tweet

[pnwmom]

264. Hogwash. Biden's message got him 7 million more votes.

And the Senate has always been tilted toward low population, rural states; and the House has been successfully gerrymandered.

I do think "defund the police" was a very misleading message that no Democrats should have been pushing. Reform the police, yes. Defund, no.

[uponit7771]

265. "...Biden's message..." Did not establish down ballots candidates. We can ignore the data and repeat

... the same thing different day or make sure our down ballot count candidates are well-defined and have a clear message...

or
... Predefined Republican candidates as fuck ups who can't govern, violet stupid and anti-American.

This is about our down ballot candidates second presidential election in a row for the down ballot candidates have not had a clear message and this is from the voters.

Bottom line it looks like in some areas that we lost we were out spent which is head scratching. The Republicans define ***OUR*** down ballot candidates with national messages that are lies.

We need to do that to them first and often

[pnwmom]

266. The problem isn't messaging, it's gerrymandering.

They've spread out the Democratic voters so they lose even when they're in the majority.

Some individual candidates might have done better with better campaigns, including messaging. But the messages that would work would vary by district. The message that would drive voters in Seattle, for example, won't work in Joe Manchin's West Virginia.

And Trump didn't win because Make American Great Again was such wonderful branding. He won because he's willing to push hate.

[uponit7771]

267. Gerrymandering didn't play into senate races and races where we flipped districts in 18

... The second report shows where we flip districts in 18 The Republicans brought out their base the Democrats did not.

My recollection of the second with people of color especially Hispanics in flip districts where dem voters stayed home

Our message is never going to be good enough for Republicans but it should be good enough for Democrats and Democratic voters to bring them to the ballot.

Republicans flipped the districts from 2018 by bringing out REPUBLICAN voters because they had a message of lies and fear.

I agree with the author from the Atlantic who said the people who define themselves with defund the police did fine with voters while as the ones who did not respond to the trope had a harder time

Even in the second report some claimed defund the police was not on the radar, it wasn't for Democratic voters but it sure was for Republicans.

[pnwmom]

268. The Senate itself is built to favor the low population, mostly white rural states.

It's not messaging that created that situation.

Why did the R Districts do better in 2020 than in 2018? Because they had Trump at the top of the ticket. Not because of the wonderful messaging of down ticket R's.

[uponit7771]

269. We'll see how well they do without Putin's whore at the top of the ticket