Gerrymander Art

[Statistikhengst]

I covered this topic on my Clean Debate Zone thread on Electioneering, from January 8, 2014:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean-debate-zone/333884-electioneering.html

Posting no. 2:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean-debate-zone/333884-electioneering.html#post8424470

Quote:

With redistricting done at a national level with a Super-Computer with only three parameters:

-State borders
-population
-geography and „logical connectivity“

A computer, rather than the statehouses, would set the congressional district boundaries. Race, gender, age, social status and partisan breakdown would play no role in the drawing of congressional boundaries, but geographical obstacles would. For instance, if at all possible, a district would not be drawn with a mountain chain splitting it into two halves. Additionally, Gerrymandering would never ever happen again. And for this reason, the Census should be changed from a once in a decade occurence to always be set to be one year before a Presidential election year.

That would take care of the problem for good.

I wouldn't willingly give the Federal Government one tittle more power than it already has...in fact, we need to take a good bit of it back.

I never said the Federal Government should do the redistricting. The states should, but using a supercomputer, as I indicated.

Learn to read for discernment.

 

[Missourian]

I covered this topic on my Clean Debate Zone thread on Electioneering, from January 8, 2014:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean-debate-zone/333884-electioneering.html

Posting no. 2:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean-debate-zone/333884-electioneering.html#post8424470

Quote:



That would take care of the problem for good.

I wouldn't willingly give the Federal Government one tittle more power than it already has...in fact, we need to take a good bit of it back.

I never said the Federal Government should do the redistricting. The states should, but using a supercomputer, as I indicated.

Learn to read for discernment.

"With redistricting done at a national level with a Super-Computer"


Learn to remember what you posted.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I wouldn't willingly give the Federal Government one tittle more power than it already has...in fact, we need to take a good bit of it back.

I never said the Federal Government should do the redistricting. The states should, but using a supercomputer, as I indicated.

Learn to read for discernment.

"With redistricting done at a national level with a Super-Computer"


Learn to remember what you posted.

Meaning, all 50 states do it, not just a select few.

Learn to read for comprehension.

Or go pack your beloved militia munitions and wait for the ZOG to come getcha!!!

 

[Missourian]

I never said the Federal Government should do the redistricting. The states should, but using a supercomputer, as I indicated.

Learn to read for discernment.

"With redistricting done at a national level with a Super-Computer"


Learn to remember what you posted.

Meaning, all 50 states do it, not just a select few.

Learn to read for comprehension.

Or go pack your beloved militia munitions and wait for the ZOG to come getcha!!!

This may come as a shock to you, but words have meaning.

"At the National Level" means (drum roll please) at the National Level.

Whatever meaning you WISH it had conveyed is meaningless.

If you are unable to use English to clearly communicate your ideas, that's your problem...don't take it out on those of us who understand what "national level" actually means.

IOW the clarity of your posts is your problem until such time the rest of us develop psychic abilities to determine what you REALLY meant.

 

[Statistikhengst]

"With redistricting done at a national level with a Super-Computer"


Learn to remember what you posted.

Meaning, all 50 states do it, not just a select few.

Learn to read for comprehension.

Or go pack your beloved militia munitions and wait for the ZOG to come getcha!!!

This may come as a shock to you, but words have meaning.

"At the National Level" means (drum roll please) at the National Level.

Whatever meaning you WISH it had conveyed is meaningless.

If you are unable to use English to clearly communicate your ideas, that's your problem...don't take it out on those of us who understand what "national level" actually means.

IOW the clarity of your posts is your problem until such time the rest of us develop psychic abilities to determine what you REALLY meant.

Oh, my, yet another butthurt Rightie who is unwilling to discern, cuz he thinks the word "national" may be ebbil.

Carry on with our fine talk on Gerrymandering, which is indeed the topic of the OP. I presented a solution and you went all Bilderberg over it.

 

[whitehall]

The only time democrats complain about Gerrymandering is when they lose the majority. The N.C. district 12 was created by the 1992 democrat majority. It remains as the most notorious example of Gerrymandering in US history stretching a hundred miles and barely wider than a highway lane in some areas.

 

[Statistikhengst]

The only time democrats complain about Gerrymandering is when they lose the majority. The N.C. district 12 was created by the 1992 democrat majority. It remains as the most notorious example of Gerrymandering in US history stretching a hundred miles and barely wider than a highway lane in some areas.

Which is exactly why a Supercomputer, programmed only with population data (not demographic data) and geographical data, should do the redistricting, completely independent of all political parties.

It's really that simple.

Because redistricting should only be about:

a.) simple math
b.) basic geography

In this way, neither the Democrats not the Republicans would even be able to tip the scales again.

 

[Missourian]

Meaning, all 50 states do it, not just a select few.

Learn to read for comprehension.

Or go pack your beloved militia munitions and wait for the ZOG to come getcha!!!

This may come as a shock to you, but words have meaning.

"At the National Level" means (drum roll please) at the National Level.

Whatever meaning you WISH it had conveyed is meaningless.

If you are unable to use English to clearly communicate your ideas, that's your problem...don't take it out on those of us who understand what "national level" actually means.

IOW the clarity of your posts is your problem until such time the rest of us develop psychic abilities to determine what you REALLY meant.

Oh, my, yet another butthurt Rightie who is unwilling to discern, cuz he thinks the word "national" may be ebbil.

Carry on with our fine talk on Gerrymandering, which is indeed the topic of the OP. I presented a solution and you went all Bilderberg over it.

I gave you my opinion of the proposal you presented.

You got upset.

You continue to be upset.

I am posting facts, you are posting personal attacks.

I'll tell you what, you go on believing whatever you wish to believe.

 

[Statistikhengst]

This may come as a shock to you, but words have meaning.

"At the National Level" means (drum roll please) at the National Level.

Whatever meaning you WISH it had conveyed is meaningless.

If you are unable to use English to clearly communicate your ideas, that's your problem...don't take it out on those of us who understand what "national level" actually means.

IOW the clarity of your posts is your problem until such time the rest of us develop psychic abilities to determine what you REALLY meant.

Oh, my, yet another butthurt Rightie who is unwilling to discern, cuz he thinks the word "national" may be ebbil.

Carry on with our fine talk on Gerrymandering, which is indeed the topic of the OP. I presented a solution and you went all Bilderberg over it.

I gave you my opinion of the proposal you presented.

You got upset.

You continue to be upset.

I am posting facts, you are posting personal attacks.

I'll tell you what, you go on believing whatever you wish to believe.

See post 107.

 

[Missourian]

The only time democrats complain about Gerrymandering is when they lose the majority. The N.C. district 12 was created by the 1992 democrat majority. It remains as the most notorious example of Gerrymandering in US history stretching a hundred miles and barely wider than a highway lane in some areas.

Which is exactly why a Supercomputer, programmed only with population data (not demographic data) and geographical data, should do the redistricting, completely independent of all political parties.

It's really that simple.

Because redistricting should only be about:

a.) simple math
b.) basic geography

In this way, neither the Democrats not the Republicans would even be able to tip the scales again.

GIGO.

The most powerful super-computer in the world is totally dependent on inputted data...where is that data coming from?

 

[Statistikhengst]

The only time democrats complain about Gerrymandering is when they lose the majority. The N.C. district 12 was created by the 1992 democrat majority. It remains as the most notorious example of Gerrymandering in US history stretching a hundred miles and barely wider than a highway lane in some areas.

Which is exactly why a Supercomputer, programmed only with population data (not demographic data) and geographical data, should do the redistricting, completely independent of all political parties.

It's really that simple.

Because redistricting should only be about:

a.) simple math
b.) basic geography

In this way, neither the Democrats not the Republicans would even be able to tip the scales again.

GIGO.

The most powerful super-computer in the world is totally dependent on inputted data...where is that data coming from?

Oh, that's simple:

from the US census bureau, whose job it is to take a census, per US Constitution.
And the data from that census goes down to the local level.

BTW, the political parties that draw those maps right now use that same data. Only, they also use demographic data and electoral history data to tip the scales.


Accurate geographical maps of each state can come from a number of sources, all of which are very good.

A county map of each state would also be not a bad idea, for it's not a terrible idea to, when possible, have CD boundaries run concurrent with county boundaries. Is not a must, but also not a terrible idea.


I give an easy "for instance".

You have a state of 5.4 million people, with a river dividing most of the state, and approximately 2.7 million people on one side, 2.7 million on the other. That state has 8 CDs, so logically, ca 4 of them would be on on side of the river, 4 on the other, with boundaries that are as smooth as possible.


The state I am talking about: Minnesota

A supercomputer, armed only with population data + geographical data and programmed to create a CD no larger than ca 736,000 people would be able to draw boundaries completely irrespective of

a.) race
b.) creed
c.) electoral history.

The would be a complete re-set for the congressional map of the United States for any state with more than one CD.


It really is that simple. It's about simple math and simple geography.

 

[natstew]

My County District is Gerrymandered to guarantee a black gets on the County Commission.
If it was Gerrymandered to guarantee a white get's on the County Commission it's be called racism.