I could be wrong, but for a lie to stick, there has to be some appearance of truth to it. You had some democratic mayors jump on the defund bandwagon. At least 13 cities with democratic mayors have cut funds for the police. That number has risen to over 20.https://www.forbes.com/sites/jemima...heir-police-departments/?sh=70582d2929e3
With that in the news, even if the Democratic Party itself, if most Democrats didn't support defund, it's easy to see and understand why those who pay little attention if any at all to politics would come to believe its the whole Democratic Party that wants to defund the police.
When it comes to these coach potatoes, at least political wise, they'll base their votes on their own perspective of the situation. Do mayors and their cuts represent any congress critters and their stances? when these swing voters hear that New York City.
Washington, D.C.,Baltimore, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Atlanta, Minneapolis etc..all with democratic mayors have cut funding for the police, it isn't much a leap to think electing a democrat to congress would doom their own local police force.
It's not like these swing voters will research anything, they'll hear something on TV and run with it. They're not political, but they don't want their local police tampered with.
In our modern era of politics, politics is a propaganda game. Propaganda doesn't have to be the absolute truth, it just has to be a bit truthful and a whole bunch of lies to stick. It has to be believable. With 20 democratic mayors cutting funding to their police, it was believable. At least to swing voters.