Read on Twitter
Reading this NYT article is a bit strange...
It pretends a proposal that can easily be brought forward again is dead
It makes little/no mention of past reforms
And mentions a lawsuit against the city without mentioning the rightwing firm funding the suit
I'm a bit confused
It pretends a proposal that can easily be brought forward again is dead
It makes little/no mention of past reforms
And mentions a lawsuit against the city without mentioning the rightwing firm funding the suit
I'm a bit confused
I remember talking with @AsteadWesley, it was clear to me he'd already picked the story he wanted to tell
He wanted to frame a discussion that is in-progress as a definitive failure
Whatever his intent, the message of his article is clear: don't you dare try anything new
He wanted to frame a discussion that is in-progress as a definitive failure
Whatever his intent, the message of his article is clear: don't you dare try anything new
One thing I've learned in all of this is that the status quo has some unlikely champions
Minneapolis has done public safety ONE way for 153 years. Of course, reimagining that system is going to take more than a few months
A 'collapse'? That's absurd. An embarrassing assertion
Minneapolis has done public safety ONE way for 153 years. Of course, reimagining that system is going to take more than a few months
A 'collapse'? That's absurd. An embarrassing assertion
Mr. Herndon asked about public input and I told him that voting is public input.
Voting is one of the few ways that quiet and loud voices in a political discussion can be on equal footing
He says I 'dismissed' public input. Clearly, my answer didn't fit his predetermined story
Voting is one of the few ways that quiet and loud voices in a political discussion can be on equal footing
He says I 'dismissed' public input. Clearly, my answer didn't fit his predetermined story
The Daily episode on this same topic discusses a lawsuit against the city but doesn't mention of the Upper Midwest Law Center (UMLC), the conservative firm financially backing the suit
The same firm leading the anti-mask movement in the Midwest with suits against multiple states
The same firm leading the anti-mask movement in the Midwest with suits against multiple states
What's happening in Minneapolis is not a 'case study' for bold ideas 'faltering'
What's happening in Minneapolis is the same fight between change and the-way-things-are, with the same political actors trying to shut down discourse and erase nuance at every possible turn
What's happening in Minneapolis is the same fight between change and the-way-things-are, with the same political actors trying to shut down discourse and erase nuance at every possible turn
My constituents are repeatedly asked to endure police violence if they want anything done about crime
We endure and STILL nothing is done.
Isn't it worth reimagining *that* system, even if the fight is hard, even if the status quo gets a win or 2 against you in the process?
We endure and STILL nothing is done.
Isn't it worth reimagining *that* system, even if the fight is hard, even if the status quo gets a win or 2 against you in the process?
